High resolution wedding photos

Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by oh_noes, Nov 25, 2013.

  1. oh_noes

    oh_noes Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Messages:
    991
    Location:
    Australia
    Hi OCAU, just quickly and without prejudice, is it normal when you purchase the original high resolution images from your professional wedding photographer that they are sent to you as .jpg? Not knowing much about photography, I was half expecting the raw uncompressed files? These range from 20MB (2744 x 5616) to white heavy 2MB (4368 x 2912).

    The photos were amazing. The main reason why we bought them was so we had the true original forever and didn't need to rely on a third party for canvas or prints in 30 years time. I'm curious and concerned that in 30 years time if I wanted to blow one of them up in a 60" canvas, even these 'high res' versions won't be enough.

    Appreciate any insights.

    Cheers
     
  2. oculi

    oculi Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Messages:
    10,598
    .tifs maybe but not raws, they might send you raws if you asked nicely but most people wouldn't know what to do with them.
     
  3. ints

    ints Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    366
    Location:
    NSW
    They will be enough, if shot well. Don't sweat over it.

    Edit: i wanna quantify that by saying, you're not going to look at a 60" print 30cm away anyway, EVEN if the resolution wasn't enough. Which it is.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2013
  4. pogue_mahone

    pogue_mahone Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Messages:
    554
    Location:
    Ocean Reef, Perth
    If the photographer sent you the RAW's unless you knew how to process them, you wouldn't print from them anyway as they are usually the 'unprocessed' version of the file.

    The jpg's (dpi depending) should be fine and that is what I send to my clients - I send 300dpi.

    I have blown a 300dpi jpg file to 5.5' x 4' on canvas without quality issues.

    As the other poster said, tif files may also be given as these will be processed too.
     
  5. azz

    azz Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    3,862
    Location:
    Heidelberg, Melbourne
    They may have given .jpeg over .tiff because some instant print machines do not read .tiff.

    You could try asking for the .tiff files at least, if you want the best quality for printing.
     
  6. hdkhang

    hdkhang Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,231
    Location:
    Sydney
    How do you mean 300dpi? At what size is the output?
     
  7. Vladdo

    Vladdo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    8,525
    Location:
    Laverton, Melbourne
    I think you'll find that in most cases, the bigger the print the larger the DPI..

    If the jpgs are amazing I wouldn't sweat about not having the RAWs.. Usually, the jpgs have the same amount of pixels as the RAW files unless they've been cropped.

    That said, if you are after the RAWs specifically, just bear in mind that these will (usually) be unprocessed and will need a good deal of work to massage them into the finished jpgs. Most photographers are hesitant to give away their RAWs as you could edit them yourself and it might then be a poor advertisement for their work.
     
  8. Squeezer

    Squeezer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2002
    Messages:
    6,856
    Location:
    Adelaide
    It would be most unusual for you to get RAWs from a Wedding Photographer unless you specifically agreed to it prior.

    I once did a wedding for a work colleague that was also a photographer ( Architectural ) and he insisted that I give him the RAW files. When he got the DVD with the .CR2 files he rang me and said he couldnt open them/view them..:lol:

    He always shot JPEG and didnt even know what a RAW file was. What he really wanted was full size. He did get a Free explanation from me as to what a RAW file was and I suggested he read up on them and maybe start shooting RAW
     
  9. Power47

    Power47 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,328
    Location:
    Melbourne
    jpeg is full res, simple as that. All my prints are from jpeg, all the print houses and album printers i deal with ask for the print files in jpeg form.

    It doesnt mean its bad quality, it just means its optimized for use by the general public.
     
  10. Deftone2k

    Deftone2k In the Darkroom

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Messages:
    15,435
    Location:
    Sydney
    Yep ^

    And this is something I always communicate to my clients.

    Whenever we send albums off? JPG
    Whenever we send prints off? JPG

    It is not like we are doing things greatly different to what people can do with their own delivered photos.
     
  11. OP
    OP
    oh_noes

    oh_noes Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Messages:
    991
    Location:
    Australia
    Thanks for the replies gentlemen.
     
  12. Pinkeh

    Pinkeh Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    10,936
    Location:
    Sydney
    My last job for a marketing company for some products i shot, the girl demanded RAWs so i gave them the RAW and she didnt know how to open it. :lol:
     
  13. ^catalyst

    ^catalyst Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    11,882
    Location:
    melbourne
    Those files sizes are A-OK. I get nervous when I see stuff closer to 1000px. The 'dpi' in a file is just metadata really- you've still got the same amount of pixels.

    Print size = Pixels / DPI per side, easy.
     
  14. Power47

    Power47 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,328
    Location:
    Melbourne
    also LOL handing over a wedding set in TIFF files, may as well deliver on 1TB HDD :lol:
     
  15. Kafoopsy

    Kafoopsy Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Messages:
    1,657
    Location:
    Right Here!
    Depending on the photography fee, a 1TB hdd wouldn't make much more of a dent!
     
  16. triggerpeg

    triggerpeg Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,387
    Location:
    Sydney
    I remember the days when I had to carry around two stacks of 100MB Zip disks for projects at my work. 50mb x 100 TIFF files for a marketing project and it was like 50 bloody things. Took forever to load the files.
     
  17. Power47

    Power47 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,328
    Location:
    Melbourne
    not really the point, in fact an external probly costs less than the DVD cases i use to deliver discs anyway. Its just a pointless exercise, they are of no benefit.
     
  18. Alpha2k6

    Alpha2k6 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,295
    Location:
    Sweden
    The benefit would be for future development of raw software.
    Like this new thing Prime denoising only works on raw as far as I know.
    Unless scanning a print to dng would work.

    But of course it takes some knowhow and the right software... wich probably not every client will have. But why not give jpg/png/tiff whatever and raw files if a client ask for it ? Probably only a handfull that are interessted in photography will ask anyway..
     
  19. Vladdo

    Vladdo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    8,525
    Location:
    Laverton, Melbourne
    When I got married, it was agreed that I'd get jpgs of all the photos. A month after the wedding and no photos had turned up, as per our agreement. I asked my photographer if I could have the RAWs so that I could process them myself. After a lot of kissing ass, he finally agreed, he didn't bother to process the RAWs himself and gave me ALL the photos from the day. He wasn't happy and tried to sting me another $200 for the photos but I saved him a good deal of time by not processing the photos, as he was already under the pump.

    As noted above, the real reason for wanting the RAWs was that in years to come, who knows what sort of advanced software we might get to adjust the raws.. much like Lightrooms camera calibration process from 2003, 2010 and 2012..

    I processed the photos 5 years ago, and looking back at those pics, they were pretty bad, consistency wise.. I'm going to redo them soon which will no doubt be well beyond what they were originally. I'd feel quite sad that if I had photos of my wedding day as JPGs, and that's how they ended up. But I don't expect everyone to be like me..
     
  20. Deftone2k

    Deftone2k In the Darkroom

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Messages:
    15,435
    Location:
    Sydney
    This is the thing.. why are you hiring the photographer in the first place if you dont trust their skills/artistic style/work they produce to be what you want? If you dont like what they do, then chances are they arent the right one for you. If you are booking someone based on budget alone, then you are better off trying to find someone who will agree to give you the RAW's at the time of meeting (I know one particular photographer who does it).

    What difference does it make that you can edit photos better in the future? If you are getting clean/sharp images delivered to you then what more do you want? This thread is actually a prime example of someone who doesnt know why they want RAW files, thinking they need RAW files. As it is, there is a lot of time spent communicating and dealing with clients and questions and putting to rest myths and silly things that wedding blogs get clients to ask photographers.

    Not that it particularly matters to me, but giving someone your RAW files gives them a lot more than just your RAW files.

    It gives someone the ability to (and you cant say people arent douchey enough do it) edit them and present them on a site as their own work. Put a whole lot of terrible selective colour, split toned and sepia versions online (which with metatagging will show up your name unless stripped). Not to mention being able to on sell the images to stock photo companies or other parties (which in most cases breaks the contractual agreement between the photographer + client anyway).

    A little side note from the above is that I have shot three weddings this year of photographers (who also happen to be from OCAU). I have offered the RAW files to them, seeing as though they might want to back them up and they know how my workflow works anyway. All of which were not fussed either way.

    In the case of Vladdo above, it sounds like he wasnt really that keen on what the photographer produced in the first place. I am quite surprised that they even just let it fly, just to save them editing a wedding. If you look at how hard someone like JPower works, it goes to show that a lot of people are just terrible at business. I maintain a delivery time of under 8 weeks, and that is on top of working 40+ hours a week.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2013

Share This Page

Advertisement: