How long to keep wedding pictures

[prncfarquad]

I have a friend who shot a wedding in 2006. She does this just as a part time hobby but agreed to do this wedding. In her contract with the client she made the stipulation that photos would be kept for 6 months and then discarded, so all orders we to be place within that time.

She took these pictures in 2006 and they have never bought any pictures, now she has to take her computer in for some work, so she emailed the person and told them she was going to wipe her hard drive and if she wanted prints to contact her.

The couple angrily emailed her saying that if she wouldn't sell them a disc (which my friend is adimenly against) of all the pictures then she needed to archive them for eternity or they would sue her because "we may want copies in a few years"

I don't know what to tell her. I know what I would do but I am by no means a pro photog but feel if it were me I would tell them order prints or you can buy the disc for $xxxxx dollars and be done with it.

Any suggestions I can give her from my fellow tpf'rs would be appreciated.

Thanks

[mom2aidan]

and why would she not sell them a disc? that is crazy. all photogs should sell their client a disc ....not just give it to them but sell it to them with of course a written copyright release.
that is just my thing. also if it states in the contract that the files would be "wiped clean" in a number of months then the couple CANNOT sue because they signed the contract KNOWING that the photos would no longer be available after a certain amount of months

[bondarnes]

Personally to CYA I would burn them to DVDs before taking the computer in. People can bring a lawsuit for just about anything, but since the contract clearly stipulated the images would not be archived they have no legal leg to stand upon.

[mom2aidan]

well any smart photographer would burn the to DVD's or CD's for future use (what if they wanted to update their website or put up different photos, etc) but yes they have no way or reason to really "sue" since it was written in the contract

[Paulo]

It seems like she opened herself up to the unfortunate situation by being nice and letting the couple know the photos were still currently available before simply clearing them from the hard drive. If her contract already stipulated that after 6 months, it'll no longer be available, she should have just left it at that. But "hindsight is 20/20". I don't know the exact wording of your friend's contract but if it didn't included anything about the couple receiving a CD of images, then the couple doesn't get one. If she doesn't sell her digital files, she needs to stick to that policy and just wipe those images out.
From my own experience, the moment one gives in to this kind of tactic, the more they want AND they tell others of how to do the same...
I've chosen to keep mine cut and dry. You don't have to order prints now but after midnight on XXXX date, it's no longer available.

[srwatters]

The moderator staff has reviewed this thread and deleted the off topic posts.

We will re-open the thread but I want to remind everyone to keep on topic and not to get personal.

There are members here with many different opinions. A lot of those are formed with years of experience in the industry. If you disagree with someone, please try to keep your response about the subject and not the person you disagree with.

Thanks.

[HotHolly]

If her contract has a time period and she doesn't want to sell them the files, she does not have to.

Whats done is done. It sounds like she opened a can of mean worms. She could offer reduced print prices since it was so long ago. I bet she thought she was being nice. Good will doesnt go anywhere with bridezillas - they just eat it and get gassy.

[jasonhuang]

If the B&G are willing to pay, sell the disc!! Some good money right there!

[bondarnes]

Some of us don't sell a disc because our photographic reputation is more important than a few dollars. I would like to keep control over how my images are printed.

[jasonhuang]

Ahh, yes. There seems to be two distinct sides to this old battle, eh?
I'm guessing I missed the heated argument that was deleted?

So I guess I'll toss in what I do for my weddings. I provide digital negatives in my packages, but upon delivery of a finished product provided by me, i.e. album or fine art prints. The client is then extensively educated on the difference between a finished product (that they can purchase from me) and something that they can get from a local 1 hr printer. It's still a quality/reputation thing like you Don, but the client can now see the difference between what I provide as a service and the alternative. And I want clients that are willing to pay for that difference.

It definitely hasn't been an easy decision to make, but I think it was an informed and educated one on my part. It seems that the majority of clients who receive their files don't do anything with them. They're more interested in having them as personal backup than make crappy prints, in my opinion. That may not have always been the case and may not always be the case now.

I provide a finished product for two reasons, I guess. The first is stated above with the quality issue. The second is because when I first started I promised a CD of high rez images as well, but found that after my clients had their images, they did very little with it. And because they didn't have a finished product from me (album, finished prints, etc.) they essentially had nothing to show off their images. Even though they had everything they needed to create an album, finished prints, etc., they didn't and the blame actually fell on me. Conversations with friends would probably go something like this:

Friend: "hey so let's see some of those wedding pictures!"
B&G: "yea, we're still working on it."
Friend: "what do you mean? didn't your photographer give you the images?"
B&G: "yea, but there are just too many to go through and I don't want you to see all the bad ones of my flabby arms, and pimply face."
Friend: "oh, that stinks. doesn't your photographer do touchups and stuff?"
B&G: "yea, but it costs too much and I'd do it myself, but just haven't had time to get to it yet..."
Friend: "oh...."
B&G: "...but there are like 5 images on his blog!"

So, even though it wasn't necessarily my fault, my reputation is still tainted with or without images being printed. Just the fact that the couple doesn't have anything to show off their wedding day makes them bitter, upset, and at who? Me! (That may be what happened in the OP's situation...)

And I know that you, Don, and others, provide albums as well, so you are able to deliver a finished product, even without having to deliver your negatives. But, can I ask is it an a la carte item or are they included in your packages?

I include some sort of album (big or small) in all my packages so each one includes a finished product. There are definitely options to upgrade the albums, but I feel this way allows me to provide a finished product (which protects me) and also gives the client ease of mind (THEIR wedding images are THEIR responsibility and in THEIR possession.)

Anyway, just some of my thoughts and reasonings. I would appreciate an educated discussion!

[jonnydonut]

Don't let your friend delete the photos, even if the contract permits it. That's one important day to her client, even if they are cheap and won't buy any prints, one day they might come to their senses. Think about if it were your wedding. I know I'm not supposed to be personal, but if it's harddrive room your friend is worried about, tell him or her to contact me. I have server space, blank dvds and external HDs. I'm pretty paranoid about photos being lost. Everything is backed up twice for me.

[bondarnes]

Originally Posted by jasonhuang

Ahh, yes. There seems to be two distinct sides to this old battle, eh?
I'm guessing I missed the heated argument that was deleted?...................Anyway, just some of my thoughts and reasonings. I would appreciate an educated discussion!

Even when I shot film I was asked by many wedding clients if my negatives were included in the package. The answer was no, but they could purchase them if they wished. The price was not cheap, but it was enough to give value to the product. In thirty-five years and over one thousand weddings, I can count on one hand the number of couples that purchased their negatives. I always tried to point out the pros and cons.

Usually after I explained that they would have to find a pro lab to even print the film I used and if they had them they would need to rent a safety deposit box to store them, their zeal for ownership began to wain. I have replaced at least a half dozen wedding albums during that same time period. Three were destroyed by fire and one by a flood. In those four instances had they owned the negatives there is a good chance they would have also been destroyed.

Now to the digital age. We hear this question much more often, because so many of the photographers today that have come late to the party are not true professionals and they would actually rather deliver a CD than to go through all the hassles of album creation.

I have a job in house right now where we are creating an album for a client that was originally included in her package. But her photographer had spent the money and didn't have the funds to create the album she paid for. She was actually lucky to get the image CDs from him.

The most asked question today is, "Do you include a CD of ALL of our images?" Our response is that even with film we never showed ALL of our images. We don't include a CD in our packages because all couples are not interested in that and don't want to pay for it. An edited CD with a slide show is available if they would like to add it to their package.

The other question we get is, "We really don't want an album at this time, can we just get a CD of our wedding?" We answer that they can do that and the price is the same as an album. And we give it to them in a beautiful frame so they can hang it on the wall and show all their friends.

I have made the transition from film to digital, but I have not made the transition to giving little or no value to the images I have created. Many photographers that include CD or DVD collections in their package only add $25.00 or $50.00 to the package price. I think that is not nearly enough unless they are selling unprocessed images.

That's my side of the story and I respect those that see it differently.

[Michelle Allmon]

Werd, Don. *giving dap*

[prncfarquad]

Thanks for all the varying opinions. I will pass this good information on the her and let her make the decision.

I ask these types of questions on this forum to gain information for myself as well as my friends for professional and non-pro shooters alike.

I have sold digital negatives before and in other instances have not. I have recently not been selling them because of some of the reasons stated above.

again thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this subject!

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by srwatters

The moderator staff has reviewed this thread and deleted the off topic posts.

We will re-open the thread but I want to remind everyone to keep on topic and not to get personal.

There are members here with many different opinions. A lot of those are formed with years of experience in the industry. If you disagree with someone, please try to keep your response about the subject and not the person you disagree with.

Thanks.

Not to get too hung up about it, but my 'off topic' post was pointing out the standard practice of a lot of the industry, in terms of selling, not selling, keeping or not keeping negatives and digital files. That was based on my experiences with several high end wedding photographers with 30+ years of experience themselves.

Many real photographers, with real experience, provide the negatives to their clients. It isn't niche behaviour or that of non-professionals new to the digital industry. Many don't. It is a business decision. If they are sensible, the packages will be priced appropriately, either to consider the upfront profit or assuming subsequent print profits.

Many do half and half - holding the negatives for 6 months to 3 years, helping with the printing and lab interaction, then provide them to the clients - either for an additional cost or part of the package. Many do that to avoid the storage issues.

Some people have clients who'll use Walmart for printing and quite rightly want to protect their professional reputation from bad prints. Others have different clientel. Room for all the various approaches. I purchased all of the negatives that my wedding photographer took (yes they provided all of them). I worked with a professional lab to get them printed. I have them stored. All film. Not a cheap photographer. This was before I'd ever picked up a camera, so it isn't 'because I'm a photographer' either.