Why Giving Clients Raw Files Could Be a Great Idea

Why Giving Clients Raw Files Could Be a Great Idea

“My client wants all the raw images,” or, “My client wants to see the raw images. What do I do?” The general consensus seems to be a resounding no, but handing over raw files to your client might be a great idea. Here's why.

Photographers in social media groups ask this question as if they’ve just discovered a strange rash on an unmentionable body part. The most common response I see is, “Omg don’t ever let them see those files! Your camera will explode. Your computer will explode. You’ll explode! Don’t work with those crazy people.”

Maybe it’s just me, but this response always confuses me because I often show my clients raw images as I work — yes, even non-industry portraits of regular people — and will email galleries of raw images for the client to choose which they’d like edited. If they’re already happy with the way the raw images look, imagine how thrilled they are when I hand over the edited version. So, why not let your clients see or buy raw images? Is this an insecurity issue? Whenever I read through posts on this topic, these are the most popular responses I see:

  • My editing is part of my style.
  • I don’t want unedited photos representing my brand.
  • Clients who want raw images are usually difficult to work with, and if they ask for raws before you sign a contract then it’s a good sign they’re probably not your client.
  • Raw images don’t look very good.
  • The cake analogy: if I ordered a wedding cake, I wouldn’t expect the baker to give me a tray full of ingredients.
  • The client might edit them terribly.

Two disclaimers before we begin:

  1. This article doesn’t apply to artists who use photography as a tool to create a finished image that consists heavily of composites or digital art. In that circumstance, photography is only one piece of the finished image and seeing or selling a raw image would make no sense as it’s only a small piece of the final artwork.
  2. The article is predicated upon the clients being willing to pay for the images in question.

Moving on, my plan is to address the common reasons against allowing clients to see or buy raw images one at a time and give a rebuttal to each, followed by my personal reasons for allowing clients access. Hopefully the result will be a new way to think about this issue.

The Common Reasons Against, and a Rebuttal

1. The Cake Analogy

There is one big reason why the cake analogy doesn’t work: if you’re comparing the elements of a finished photograph to the elements of making a cake, then editing is putting on the decorative frosting, not baking the cake. The elements of making a good photograph — the ingredients — are not in the editing. They’re in the light, the settings, the posing, the styling, the angle, the color palette, and the hundreds of other little details that photographers control to create a photo. The only problem with handing over an undecorated cake is if the client has asked you to decorate it. If the client wants to decorate the cake themselves or if frosting is just too sweet for them, then handing over an undecorated cake makes perfect sense. The cake is made is still made and it tastes delicious.

2. My Editing Is Part of My Style

Doesn’t your style start with how you conceive an idea, how you execute the idea, how you choose to work with light, how you direct your subject, and work with your team? Removing the editing doesn’t negate your style, it simply removes the finishing touches. Of course, the finishing touches are important and that’s why we do them, but if your style is completely dependent on Photoshop, then you might want to consider yourself more of a digital artist and less of a photographer. Please do not get insulted on behalf of digital artists. Their work is is just as valuable and it's just as legitimate a job as photography, it's just not the same job.

3. Raw Files Look Terrible

If your raw files look terrible, you might way to spend a bit more time dialing in technique before you start charging clients.

4. I Don’t Want Unedited Photos Representing My Brand

My question in this circumstance would be, why? Are you relying on Photoshop to make up for a lack of experience or technique? If so, I can understand why you wouldn’t want anyone to see them. If, however, your straight-out-of-camera (SOOC) shots are technically solid, then I think you’ve got a few options in this instance.

With so many editing programs available to the average consumer, we’ve reached a point where most people understand that the finished images they see have been edited. This is why “photoshopped” is an adjective. Most clients will be able to understand the difference between an edited and an unedited photo. I have serious doubts as to whether a solid SOOC will damage your business.

If you’re concerned with SOOC images having a negative affect on your business, you always have the option of adding a clause to your contract that specifies clients not tag you or your business in social media posts.

You can also do your own preferred edits on the images to share on your platforms so that the finished version is out there in the world.

5. Clients Who Want Raw Images Are Usually Difficult to Work With or Not Your Ideal Client

I think this is a rather unfair view of the client, and brings up the issue of communication and setting client expectations. The client may be a professional artist or skilled hobbyist, or even just someone who is incredibly picky and wants control. In any case, that doesn’t necessarily make them difficult as long you set expectations from the beginning. If you make the nature of a raw image clear and the client is still willing to sign a contract, then it doesn’t seem to me that you’re in any more danger of dealing with a difficult client than with any other client.

6. Clients Might Do Terrible Edits on the Raw Files

Let’s get real for a second: clients sometimes do terrible things to beautifully edited and finished images anyway. If a client is dead set on doing their own thing to an image, they’re going to do it whether it’s a raw file or a JPG.

Reasons Why Letting Your Client Have Access to Seeing or Purchasing Raw Files Could Be a Great Idea

1. A Bigger ROI

If you’re running a photography business, you’re a business person first and a photographer second. Giving clients raw files is a solid business decision — as long as they’re willing to pay for them — because it requires the minimum amount of time and effort on your part. You won’t have to spend the additional time retouching the images or paying to outsource the retouching, and if you charge more for raw images (which you absolutely should) then it’s basically pure profit.

2. More Money

When I see this question come up in photography forums, I’m often left wondering why so many photographers are content to leave money on the table. If a client asks if they can have the raw files, you can always say, “sure, but the raw files will cost xxx because I no longer have the ability to control the quality of the image attached to my name,” and client will either say, “that’s more than I’m willing to spend,” or “I’m totally happy to pay xxx.” In either case, the situation is taken care of and, if the client is willing to pay, you’re walking away with more money.

3. People Love Getting What They Want

If you can give your client what they want (you are in the customer service business, remember) and still get what you need from the transaction, then you’ve got a happy client who will more than likely talk to their friends about how their photographer cared about their wants and needs and was willing to work with them, and the additional money to spend on a new lens or more marketing or personal shoots where you control the output 100 percent. Remember that giving the client raw files if they pay for them doesn’t take away your ability to edit and share the finished images on your website and social media platforms.

4. Seeing the Images Gets People Excited

Some people take the “no raws” idea to the extremes in that they don’t even let their clients see the back of the camera or the laptop if they’re tethered. This one is nuts to me simply because of the reaction I get from clients when I show them what a great shot we just got. It gets them jazzed for the final product and keeps the energy high during the shoot. It also shows them that I understand how hard it can be to wait to see the photographs, and lets them know that if the raw image looks good enough to get them that excited, the finished image is going to be amazing.

What it all comes down to in my eyes is that while clients pay me most often for my vision, and rarely ask for raw files in any capacity, my job is primarily to make my clients happy. That begins with good communication and setting client expectations, but ends with finding ways I can both make my client thrilled they worked with me and profit from my ability to do so. If I let a huge chunk of money walk away because I’m overprotective of my art, then I’m doing my business and my client a disservice, and I might consider whether I want to be a business person or a professional artist. If I'm a professional artist, then the result is always controlled by me. If I'm a business person, then I’ve got a client who needs to be made happy, and if I can do that for less work and more money, that seems like a win to me.

What have your experiences been with clients and raw files, and what are your reasons for choosing whether to allow clients to have raw files or not?

Nicole York's picture

Nicole York is a professional photographer and educator based out of Albuquerque, New Mexico. When she's not shooting extraordinary people or mentoring growing photographers, she's out climbing in the New Mexico back country or writing and reading novels.

Log in or register to post comments
54 Comments
Previous comments

«…transfer the copyright…. …add a line to the contract that these images cannot be shared publicly.»
Curious as to what country you live in.

Here, USA, if I hand over raw (or TIFF, JPEG JFIF, OpenEXR, et al), I will give the client a license for limited use per their needs. I will hold on to copyright. Once copyright is handed over, they have the right to copy anyway they see fit….

…Unless the laws in your country grants you moral rights to decide how the copyright owner uses the images, preventing them from external publication.

right, I meant sharing with your name on it should be disabled

A few things…

① The back of the camera or a tethered view is NOT a raw image. They typically have a white-balance, demosaicing, a colour-profile, denoising, and sharpening applied at the very least, often more.

② Many non-commercial clients do not really know what a raw file is, and what they really want is the non-retouched JPEG JFIFs, (the thing they saw on the back of the camera or on the tethered computer). I have had one client pay extra for the raw, (after I explained what the raw was, and asked if what they would rather is a 16-bit TIFF or PNG), then wanted a refund because they could not open the raw files. Nope, they did not get a refund.

That was made absolutely clear in the contract, prior to delivery; no refunds of any kind, once the raw files were delivered. You can un-give me a negative, but you cannot un-give me a digital file. In some cases, the mere act of viewing them —or attempting to view them— on your computer may be more than enough to guarantee copies were made.

③ Commercial photographers have a vastly different clientele than wedding/portrait/event/ photographers; one set is almost guaranteed to be knowledgeable on imaging/graphics, the other usually is not.

The author makes some good points, but it varies with the market.

The main thing for me is that RAW files are tools for me. When I take a photo, I set out to capture and preserve as much information as possible. Often times that means the photo won't look "properly exposed", but it will have the necessary data I need to manipulate the image as I need to. If the kind of clients that are asking for RAW files 90% of the time actually saw my raw files, they would flip. I aim for correct technique only in terms of that technique being what works for me. So it's always a hard no for me.