@Tony – I’ve had no problem working in archiving costs since I started using Amazon Glacier for “cold” data storage. $0.01 per GB …Yea the retrieval costs can be high for a large double or triple digit GB archive file…but if you know how to work it and spread the retrieval over a couple days its sensible and if I do I just build it into the cost of the re-edit.

Back in the day I can remember entering a bride’s home and discovering a 24×30 portrait hanging over the fireplace. The problem came into focus immediately. It was our image but not our print. A check of the records showed that the client had purchased an 5×7 and had it blown up by a local, dishonest retailer. One of the Great programs that Kodak had for professional photographers was to constantly harp on the retailers who sold imaging services. Your Kinkos (Now Fedex Office), Costco, Sam’s club. Etc. Back in the day if you were asking for prints from an “obviously commercial” image you had to get a written release from the copyright owner, namely the studio. (all of our negative sales came with a copyright release letter.) And Kodak defended professional photographers with all the force of the 800 lb. gorrilla that they were. Times have changed. Sad.

And as to that client with the dark, contrasty blurry family portrait? Well let’s just say we didn’t go the extra mile to create any of their wedding images…
Alan

Thanks for sharing Tony. Great point about archiving footage. I think one way one could handle both raw footage and archiving costs is just to charge more up front. I know some wedding photogs do that. They charge enough for their shooting fee that it’s no big deal to give the clients the negatives/RAW files. No reason filmmakers and videographers can’t do the same.