We recently got a request for a wedding this fall where the clients wanted to know if they can edit the footage themselves. They basically want to book us for the ceremony and reception and then get the footage. This is not something we've done before, and not something I prefer to do at all, but just wondering if anyone out there does?

We do give the option to buy all the original footage, once the edit is done for those who want to see what we've cut out, but we price it ridiculously high so that people are less inclined to do so. If we do this, wondering what people might suggest as to charging for it...I'm mostly inclined to just say "no" knowing that it would basically mean giving up copyright, etc...but just thought I would see what others' thoughts were.

Hi Katie,

This is not something we've done before, and not something I prefer to do at all...

What is your reasoning?

I've done it.. I maintained copyright though and only gave them limited rights to edit their footage and to display it privately.. I charged $900 for the day of shooting and delivered all the footage to them on a drive later that week.

I think that the only issue with agreeing to give all the footage is some of it maybe even a lot of it will look like crap. It was very reassuring for me a while ago that Vincent Laforet's posted on his blog raw unedited clips from a project & they were all just as rough around the edges as mine i.e. wobbles at beginning or end of a clip, focus off then nails it then out of focus again. In fact pretty much all the stuff that gets left out of the finished edit. If the clients appreciate that raw footage can be very raw then that is OK but if they think that all they need to do is drop all the clips into iMovie & export to a DVD then they may be very unsatisfied with what they get.

Nigel, I completely agree with your point. Clients who aren't professional editors do not know how to look at raw footage. As a result, the chances are 100 percent that your work will be criticized if not outright slammed when a client sees it. The other issue I have with this is that selling only the raw footage takes the 'leverage' out of your work. The bottom line is that you will be criticized for your work and get paid next to nothing for it!

Some of the best videograpers take a lot of chances to get some really good footage. I'm talking about those shots that turn out badly most of the time but when you get a good shot, it can be spectacular. Your client won't understand that concept. They will just look at the clips that didn't work out and roundly criticize you for it. No thank you very much!!

Have done it once. Never again. Endless problems with explaining codecs, why I did this, why I did that. You become their defacto 'editor on call' when anything needs explaining.

Do it only if really really desparate for cash... hand over copyright with it, and get a written agreement that (a) your good name isn't attached to it and (b) no editing support is offered.

My reason for not offering RAW footage only and letting them edit is generally they have no idea how to edit and generally do a pretty bad job but when the show it to their friends and the friends aren't smiling but ask "hey, who shot your wedding?" the couple answers "Oh, (insert your name here)" and then the friends think (thought bubble here) "No way in hell would we use that guy!"BAM! More business lost because then go go out for an evening with some other friends who are getting married and they talk about going to the other friends house and watching their wedding video which was terrible, see I told you we don't need to waste the money on video, and how it was (insert your name here) who did the job so now you just lost another potential client. And no the original couple never told anyone that they took perfectly good footage and screwed the pooch when they triedto edit it. Trust me that will never come up in the conversation.

Hi Katie

I did it just once too and like most others never again!!! The clients really have no idea what raw footage is!!! I take one camera at the reception and do a round the tables session.. to make editing easier for me I shoot all the tables in one clip and as I move from table to table I point the cam at the floor which means as soon as I see downward motion on the footage a cut is coming up...might seem silly but I can edit say, 12 tables very quickly this way.....NOW the client had the footage and came back to me and said "This is total rubbish..half the time you are filming the carpet!!!"

If you are going to submit to raw footage then rather give them "trimmed" footage...at least take out the wobbly bits and any out of focus shots before handing it over!!!

I do find that the magic words "Panasonic AVCHD MTS files" usually scare them off nicely too!!!! Give them a sample camera file and see if they can actually read it on their computer..if they can't you might also be wasting even more time transcoding footage into something their computer can handle!!

Chris

Wow, thank you for all the opinions...they have further solidified my inclination to just say NO.

I have only had a few past clients ask me for raw footage after the edited version was presented to them...one was an insane mother of the groom, who we happen to be friends with personally, but she insisted she wanted to hear EVERY bit of audio from every part of the day...no matter how choppy it was or how horrible it sounded at different times, because let's be honest, all of those audio bytes smashed up against one another is not nice audio!...since she was a family friend, I very carefully explained to her how we do not want this to be shown as what we do, and it does not represent our final product, and if she must have it please do not show it around to everyone she knows...before giving (selling) it to her.

The other was a young bride who simply wanted more dancing footage from her reception...as we can't include the entire amount of dancing footage in a DVD, I didn't see harm in this, and she ended up buying one tape --back when we used tapes!--she was happy with it, but in the end admitted that we had chosen the best stuff to include on the DVD.

As I said before, our prices are high to discourage this...I had one bride ask and quickly change her mind once she found out how much it was....and just as another note, purchasing the raw footage is also something we outline in our contract too...both that our footage is our property, AND if they do want to purchase it what the price it would be and that it would only be presented to them in a playable DVD, not raw file form.

Hmmm. Shoot and raw footage jobs have the highest per-hour profit by far. I'll take them every time. And the comments are always positive. A recent one: "We received the drive today and been sitting watching everything for hours!!! This is fantastic!!! Thank you so so much!!!!"

I have to agree with Joel that purely from a business POV a shoot only is highly profitable...you are essentially working for around 10 hours and just hand over the tape/cards/drive.

For interest, very early in my career (around the 80's actually!! in the VHS days when linear edits were very time consuming) I used Panasonic's MS4 camera which took full size tapes and I used to pre-shoot an optical title at the start of the tape and then shoot the wedding ..however it was shot VERY carefully almost doing "edit in camera" with no wobbly bits and I would actually re-cue the tape if I had a bum shot. At the end of the reception you just eject the cassette and hand it to the Mother of the Bride and hold out your hand to get paid!!! Excellent profit timeline!!!!

I think if I was doing a "shoot only" I would be a lot more careful with my shots and try to produce clips that were a little more carefully planned so when watched the client would have no comeback regarding wobbly bits and such !!!

Their subsequent "edit" would purely be assemble editing the clips together!! For interest how would a client be able to manage syncing a two camera shoot....maybe for a shoot only, a single camera shoot would be a more practical arrangement????

Chris

I think if I was doing a "shoot only" I would be a lot more careful with my shots and try to produce clips that were a little more carefully planned so when watched the client would have no comeback regarding wobbly bits and such !!!

Exactly -- if I knew that I was handing over all my raw footage, I would shoot very differently. If I'm editing it, I shoot in such a way as to make editing easier for ME, knowing that most of what I shoot will end up on the cutting room floor.

If I were asked to just shoot and hand over all the raw footage, I would be all over it. Cash money. Just have to be smart about it.

A great discussion -- and it's going to come up more with the increased ease of hard drive delivery, storage, etc. Sure, most clients don't have the codecs, the editing software, etc., so a transcode to a more ubiquitous quicktime is certainly necessary (and needs to be factored in to the price).

Copied first footage to client drive a couple weeks ago (in addition to regular, full edit). It was a learning experience, but not a bad experience. Since I wasn't only filming for raw delivery, I still filmed my way -- so this meant that the delivery of "raw" footage meant my spending a couple hours "trimming" and "cleaning up" (shh don't tell the clients it wasn't technically "raw"). The couple hours of trimming isn't a big deal, of course, though now I know what to charge for it and that it's not just a simple matter of importing and copying to a hard drive. (And don't forget transcodes).

If I were ONLY shooting for raw delivery (and I agree with the folks who say it's the easiest way to make half of our selling price), I'd still factor in a couple hours of trimming/cleaning time -- because I just ain't givin' folks who don't understand the process all of the footage I'd actually shoot raw.

p.s. then there's the question of color correcting, pairing with sound, etc. Another whole can of worms.

While I stated that I don't shoot RAW footage only, (no edit--hand to client) I am first of all only talking about weddings. Corporate work is something different. Many clients I shoot for have their own editor and since mmost of the corporate stuff I do are seminars with a bit of B footage and some talking heads it's pretty simple to edit. I could probably teach my 3 year old granddaughter to do it. No nothing done. Pretty much load it, render it, burn it. weddings on the other hand, totally different. I will sell the client the RAW footage on DVD after the dvds are delivered and they have them for the appointed 14 days. then I'll burn to dvd and send them off. I DO put a disclaimer on the face of the DVDs and on the menu of the DVD that the footage is RAW as it came from the camera with no editing of any kind, to include; color/exposure correction or audio sweeting of any kind. I DO make a quick pass thru the footage and remove the floors, ceilings, belly buttons and boobs (my term for stuff you don't want anyone to see) but other than that, it is RAW from the camera. Any more work and I might as well be editing it again. No on your life, once was enough.

Most of my work comes from word of mouth from my brides. If they are editing it, they aren't going to be pushing my services. When they post their video on Facebook, I want my name on it and that will only happen if I edit it.

In part, the question comes down to this: are you in this for business or art?

Personally, I don't care if the client takes my footage and makes a crappy video, as long as they don't put my name on it.

I don't shoot weddings, I shoot mainly business events, so requests for "shoot only" jobs is much more common for me.

First, I meet with the client and make sure they understand how the raw footage will be delivered and that I will charge $85 per hour for *any* additional work (or hand-holding.)

The only additional concern I may have for the OP is that shooting weddings typically happens on only one or two days per week. If you've booked yourself for a $900 "shoot only" event, you may end up turning down a nice $3k "full service" event.

it would basically mean giving up copyright

Why is that a concern? Besides, you would not give up your copyright (unless that is specifically spelled out in the contract.)

Why is this a problem?

GIVE THE CLIENTS WHAT THEY WANT

Be upfront about what formats you shoot in and what it takes to edit. Make sure you understand what format they are expecting. (The tapes? A hard drive? What codec?) If they want to do the editing, there is a good chance they have done this before. Also be upfront *now* about what it will cost if they decide they want you to edit it later.

If handing over tapes is too hard for you, pass the gig on to someone else. Chris Davis made an excellent point about opportunity cost. If taking a one-day-of-work job will cause you to miss out on a multi-day project, pass it on to someone else.

Just to add to the discussion, if you do hand over raw footage that you didn't shoot with the intention of handing over raw, be sure to go through it and edit out anything that could reflect poorly on you. Others have mentioned wobbles, focus, etc. I'd suggest also listening to the audio in case you said something that you wouldn't want to be heard by the b&g, e.g. a remark to the photographer about a grumpy member of the wedding party or a technical problem.

GIVE THE CLIENTS WHAT THEY WANT

That's the rule of the game!
however I shoot without edit off season only
last time i shot for the edit by client, I did 1 location 10Hrs 4 cameras charged $1400 - easy money

GIVE THE CLIENTS WHAT THEY WANT.

Unlimited shooting hours with full broadcast equipment, no crew meals, copyright ownership and unlimited changes to the final DVD until they are 100% satisfied.... for $10 per hour.

Sure thing! I'll report back soon to let you know how it goes...

Does the client know how to edit in the codec you are shooting? If I was getting married and was on a budget it would be nice to have a pro shoot and then I edit. Who is the client? Do they have experience with working with raw? If they do then they will understand why shots suck and are out of focus. I would charge $1500-$2500 and then let them have at it. I would be very frank that I will not help them in anyway to get the footage edited and to disc. If they want my help then it's X amount of dollars for my expertise. I did this for a client and made $2K in one day and let him have the footage on a drive that WE provide.

If they have little to no experience then I would shoot the raw, convert it to 720x480 in H.264 and hand it to them.

K

I've seen Craigslist ads asking for this, and I've always been curious as to their "editing skills" and never responded. Just always have a bad & skeptical feeling about the posters, figuring their just cheapskates who want 2 hour of footage to simply put a few songs in here & there and burn to DVD. Another think to think about is if they are really an "editor" of sorts, wouldn't they probably have some contacts in the video field willing to do this shoot at a reasonable rate?!


I'd liisten to what Jim Snow & John Knight stated earlier in the thread. If a couple is asking for an unedited final DVD (ie shot with the intent of no editing to be done), that's different. But when they say they'll edit it themselves I see red flags going up, proceed with caution.

I normally put off couples wanting either just raw footage or an edited DVD plus raw footage by telling them "Are you sure you have an editor that can handle Panasonic AVCHD MTS files??"
It usually goes no further but if it does I have a 1 minute AVCHD clip available for download so they can attempt to edit it...which they normally cannot either due to a slow puter or NLE that cannot input AVCHD.

I figure if the enquirer does have a fast computer and a decent NLE then he/she probably has the skills to do a reasonable edit too...(no-one would buy a pro edit package unless they were planning to edit anyway and if they have to upgrade the machine and spend 1K on software it would be cheaper to let us do the edit!!)

I must admit I have only had one client (years back) who insisted on shoot only and also wanted the same deal with the photogs (who laughed at him but still supplied) I doubt he ever managed to get around to an edit anyway..the raw footage is more than likely still on his drive along with his untouched photos!!

However if you are confident that the client DOES have the necessary skills and equipment then it is easy money!!

Chris

I filmed once as well and gave tapes after reception. Since then I only had one phone call from them asking how to import video to PC. At the end I offered them my editing service if they will struggle with editing. One thing they will learn for sure is how hard it is to make a nice wedding DVD.

The concern of giving up copyright is very simple: In the contract or not, if they have all the footage, they can basically do what they want with it, I will never know if they posted things on a personal website, or something like that...just because it's in a contract doesn't mean they wouldn't do it, and doesn't mean they would give me credit for anything...I would never know.

I understand that this is probably the easiest way to earn money in our business, but as others have pointed out, I may not want my name attached to the crap they end up with.

As for giving the clients what they want...OBVIOUSLY that is (or should be) the main directive of anyone in the business...but these clients seek us out based on our samples they have already seen, and in our case, the package and price options that are outlined on our website! Obviously if they like what they have seen so far, they have enough interest to seek out our services, and once they become a client and sign that contract, I will do everything in my power to make them happy with the final video they receive.

I am sure others are feeling the same way about this discussion...Don't make it seem like we all don't go above and beyond for each and every client we have, just because we don't want to turn over all of our raw footage to their [maybe fully capable, who knows?] hands.

Professional videographers regularly hand over raw footage to clients. We call it work for hire and charge a day rate. What the client chooses to do with the footage is entirely up to them.

Professional videographers regularly hand over raw footage to clients. We call it work for hire and charge a day rate. What the client chooses to do with the footage is entirely up to them.

Absolutely Rick. We pros regularly sign all the rights over to the client, because they're likely taking it elsewhere to edit and to use for numerous purposes. Whether it's Joe Shmo on the street or CBS, if they're paying my asking price for the footage, they get it. I'm not paranoid about who sees my raw footage. It's really not that big of a deal.

Well that may be fine for a lot of projects...but that would mean they are probably paying someone else to edit, and have some sort of budget involved...would you say you do this regularly for weddings, or what's your usual type of project?

If you market yourself as shoot for hire, then that's a great way to make a lot of money. We do not market ourselves as such.

The client's motivation behind this request was to save money, not go pay someone else to do it. "We Pros" who do only wedding videos sell ourselves based on our style of video, I would say probably half of which -- if not more -- comes from the editing stage.

I am not "paranoid" of people seeing my raw footage, anyone who has a remote understanding of the video biz knows that not every shot is useful/in focus/important. I would say most people asking for corporate/project-based videos know more about this than most people asking for wedding videos.

That's it from me.

As I don't do weddings either - so agree with Chris and Christian. Could it be that wedding video prices are actually artificially high, and the long timescales bolster the impression that they take a very long time, and hence cost lots of money. Handing over the material after a single day's shooting means you have to settle for whatever the day rate is. I too probably edit in 1 in 3 projects. I actually like doing the job, handing the material over and moving on. There's also this weird necessity to keep control of copyright? I've done a few of the video inserts for awards ceremonies when the recipients are unavailable - famous names, but why would I want to hang onto the copyright? If you do 30 weddings a year, do you really use the material again?

Copyright can be a real pain to control anyway, so why attempt to retain something that doesn't to me, seem to have any value?

All we seem to hear are the wedding people moaning about having to pay for licenses, the organist, the choir etc etc yet they also want to retain the copyright in their own work? To an outsider - this is a case of double standards, isn't it. Damn churches wanting extra money for copyright! How dare they? .... but the video is mine, mine, mine - so what you paid all that money, it's mine!!!

If the clients want you to shoot because they know you do a good job, but want to edit themselves, I can understand that. I was doing a shoot where the client ended up doing a parachute jump. I paid for the footage and got charged the same price they charge for the edited version - because they were handing over the copyright for me to use in the finished product. I was ok with that.

In the wedding case talked about here, they just want a different product, so why not price it, do it and forget it!

The concern of giving up copyright is very simple: In the contract or not, if they have all the footage, they can basically do what they want with it, I will never know if they posted things on a personal website, or something like that...just because it's in a contract doesn't mean they wouldn't do it, and doesn't mean they would give me credit for anything...I would never know.

That's why I asked if you're in this for business or art. To me, this sounds like you consider yourself more of an artist than a business person. That's ok, as long as you understand that.

Personally, the only credit I desire is the credit in my bank account. If the client has paid a sufficient amount, I don't care what they do with the footage. I don't care if it's on a personal website, YouTube or wherever. You're worrying about nothing. The chance that your footage will be seen by anyone other than the B&G's closest friends and family is infinitesimal.

The bottom line is the wedding isn't until fall. If you're secure in the fact you can book a full package for that date, then don't book the "shoot only" event. Now if the "shoot only" wedding was a last minute booking for this weekend, and you were open, that would be a different story. BTW, after looking at your website, you're rates are reasonable enough that I'd be suspicious of someone who wants to cut them even lower...

Chris, thanks for your feedback...I am realizing more after this discussion that I am really interested in the artistic/creative aspect of it. That's not to say I don't like money, who doesn't? but I like your point about it being a last minute request versus a few months out...I would absolutely hate to turn down a full-paying gig to do this instead. Perhaps if a last minute request comes up some day it would be a good time to test out the "shoot only".

And I thought the same thing about our prices...I think we're extremely competitive for our market, so the fact that they want to pay even less is ridiculous when they could get all of the work done for them at a pretty low price to begin with.

Thanks again everyone for feed back, this has been a very enlightening discussion.

I have had a few requests for a wedding shoot only ..with the B/G wanting to do the editing. My cameras are a Canon XF305 and a Sony NX5P so trying to explain the difference of MXF and AVCHD is just not worth it and as someone stated you become their de-facto editor.

Chris you brought back memories of the VHS days and shooting/editing 'in-camera'.

So I wont do it and point those asking elsewhere.

Hmmm. Shoot and raw footage jobs have the highest per-hour profit by far. I'll take them every time. And the comments are always positive. A recent one: "We received the drive today and been sitting watching everything for hours!!! This is fantastic!!! Thank you so so much!!!!"

Now that's a business plan I could live with. If they wanted to come back later for an edit then it's going to cost them more than it would have to purchase a finished piece on the front side. But I enjoy shooting much more than editing, so yeah ... I'd do it.