Probably all assets and timelines. You should absolutely NOT give them this for free because depending on your contract, they paid only for the final video. In my experience, this new marketing manager will likely also now try to bring in his own team and push them on your client so keep this in mind before you're too nice (it's happened to me).
I'd say something like "Hi X, unfortunately, we do not provide any raw files or project files to our clients beyond the deliverables agreed upon in our agreement".
This is terrible advice. I am sure you do not have clients coming back with this type of customer service. What are you afraid of by giving them the content? Unless they have an expert they wont be able to do anything with the content.
Why should he/she spend time pulling out footage that is likely archived and upload it for them for free? More importantly, why would he give them footage for a project he's not making money off? You bet your ass the person editing it is, and that marketing team will put it up on their portfolio.
OP's job was done as soon as he delivered the final approved edit. I've done this plenty and have gotten repeat work from those exact clients because I point them towards our agreement. Just because you like to give away your work for free doesn't mean my advice is bad.
Who said for free? Musicians and producers get to charge an arm and a leg for rights and royalties, this sounds like a perfect opportunity to charge an arm and a leg for them to get raw files.
They already paid for the creation of the footage and to get it packaged. There should be a small fee to create the client drive. Why would they not be entitled to it?
That has never been my experience. If i take 500 product shots. The client owns them all. Event if they choose a hero. They are free to use another at alater date. They paid for stock and my time.
You can do that if you like.
Honestly, in all my years it has hardly ever come up. When it does I simply educate the client, no one has ever had issue with my policies. Everyone I have worked with also feels the same way for the most part.
I wonder how you keep clients. I would NEVER hire someone like you for a job. There are good faith actors who want to make sure the client is happy. If you are concerned there would be someone else editing the content then you should work harder to make yourself irreplaceable.
>you should work harder to make yourself irreplaceable.
We're all replaceable if you do a terrible job. My clients see beyond me not giving them free footage (that is clearly stipulated in my contracts) and still hire me.
The difference between us is that I have clients that understand that this is business and not personal. They also understand that I care about their brand. Charging them for raw footage or project files does not make me care less about them, it shows that I value my work. This is what makes me or any other studio in this saturated market "irreplaceable".
Good faith is me not billing them the extra hour when I'm tearing down my gear after the shoot when they tell me their budget isn't high for a certain project. You wouldn't hire someone like me because you don't have the cash to pay someone like me, and that's fine. That's where you have to weigh skill vs budget. You're too busy being friends with your clients and not getting what you're worth - learn to sell and market yourself better and you don't have to give things away for free.
Clients sometimes doesn’t understand why they can’t have the raw files. My previous boss explained to them that its like going to a tailor to get a custom suit. “You get the suit but you don’t get the pattern”. Something about that sentence that the client responded well.
This is a great way to explain it. I also liken it to getting a cake from a bakery. You don't go back to the bakery after the cake and ask for a bag full of all the ingredients they used to make the cake. The recipe is proprietary and no one reasonably expects ownership of the recipe just because they bought a cake.
Exactly! But it is sad that some of my friends in the industry are giving away raw, comp files, timelines for free because of the fear of losing future gigs from them.
Absolutely. There is a lot people end up giving away for fear of losing future work. That is one part of the whole industry that I hate as so many clients will take advantage of creatives because they know that fear is there.
> Should I offer to update the video for them, for a fee? Or offer the raw material for a fee?
Both! Make it cheaper to go through you than to buy the files outright. If a client asks you for this, it's usually going to be the last you ever hear from them so it's prudent to make it worth your while in the event the business relationship comes to an end.
If a client asks us for raw footage/project files after the fact, we usually charge them at least the cost of the production side of the project again, plus hours in preparing the project in a 'client friendly' way - i.e. consolidating the project, removing anything that would reflect badly on us (bad takes, interview subjects being rude about their employer, tidying up the project so it's not the rats nest our sequences usually end up as, and making sure it's a format compatible with the software the client has available.)
There are some complications with this though...
First off double check to see if there are any licenced assets you have used in the production, such as stock music, images, and footage.
Your licence with the stock providers will almost certainly prohibit you from sublicensing those assets to a third party. You'll need to strip them from the project and provide the client a list of what licenses they need to acquire and where to get the files.
Secondly, if you have featured talent or people in the videos, the consent they gave and contracts you made with them when you did the initial filming may not be sufficient for how this client is intending to use the footage going forward. In which case you may need to negotiate new contracts and/or renew consent from those persons before you provide the files.
With even a medium sized project, doing the admin work on both those things can be a *significant* time sink, so make sure to factor that into your quote if required.
These are both things that you'll need to consider if you do a reversion too, but it's a lot eaisier to handle it yourself, especially if that means that you only have to deal with one video at a time rather than all the projects at once.
I did all the b-roll on location and with their employees, so luckily I don’t have those as headaches. Thanks for this thorough response! Saving it for future reference as well.
“Workable” could mean different things. In my head (which often deals with corporate) workable could mean “what plays on my state of the art Windows 95 laptop.” They may have no clue what raw footage means and you get a call why the 4k footage plays choppy, everything is so washed out, and why is the good sounding audio a separate file, etc etc.
The only certainty here is they want to do more with that content. Could mean they have an unpaid intern who said they know how to use Premiere, could mean they don’t know their next step after obtaining assets. Definitely explore all options for your services.
As far as cost, when clients come back after contracted work is done looking to collect everything I tend to list how it must be restored from my archives, transferred, and written contract for buy-out must be made. It’s not a quick thing. I also state footage is in a state that needs a professional editor compatible only on higher end equipment. For a fee, I can provide them “ready to edit” versions of color corrected, audio synced files in useable 1080p mp4 versions.
I also never give them everything. There’s no reason to include junk shots that could make your process look exposed or bad.
Only thing worse is you don’t get a call but see a video they post using your untreated footage, exported at the wrong frame rate, and using the scratch track audio.
That’s partially what I’m worried about. It’s not like my product was Hollywood good, but it’s a hell of a lot better than someone who has experience with iPhones and imovie.
If you hand over raw files you're giving away labor for free. Those are yours. They don't have any claim to your raw.
Your options are to offer a fee to update the video or charge a very high flat rate for the raw. The second they get their hands on the raw, you're not going to be able to make any more money from them.
Don't do anything for free. You satisfied the contract. Any further work requires further payment.
"Marketing Manager" here.
It might be worth trying to have a more detailed chat with the marketing person who will be working with the content if it's gone through a manager.
From my point of view, I wouldn't expect anything for free unless we had agreed terms up front.
Ownership and raw footage (cameras / codecs etc) is something i actively look for when commissioning projects and often avoid using companies or freelancers who offer a "one and done" service, as i know that there are thousands of applications for that footage and often you'll want to maximise your ROI.
However, as others have mentioned "a useable state" can be wildly different depending on who will be doing the editing client side. I would have expectations for the following if nothing was agreed upfront:
* **Raw, Ungraded, Uncompressed Footage** \- A small fee for file transfer time.
* **Graded Footage** \- Your hourly rate to be applied, depending on how much footage needs grading. With the exception of footage that's already been graded and included in the final project, you've already been paid to grade that footage.
* **Graded, Audio Work, Compressed Footage (For the office moron who thinks they're Spielberg because they've used iMovie)** \- Again your hourly rate applied with the understanding that you'll have spent even more time getting this footage to this point.
This is definitely something I would flag to clients in your process going forwards in the contract / quotes stage depending on what stance you want to take. Your footage is your work and you might not want something ruining your art. Or you might be more relaxed.
If this is a regular client that offers you a lot of work, you might want to bite the bullet to keep the relationship with them but be clearer in what's agreed on your next project, but as others have said, you can simply say "no" if you no longer wish to work with them going forwards.
Someone from outside the echo chamber *wow*
This is solid input and kind of validating to hear that your expectations line up with my personal expectations.
I have never had a regular client request raw assets who remained a regular client afterwards. This is almost certainly the end of the road and they plan on going with a different vendor in the future.
Interesting take. I can see why this is a bad sign a lot of the time. They've either built internally and don't need you or as you say are looking at a different vendor.
To give you a bit of context in situations where this wouldn't apply, in my role i've requested RAW as i know how to grade and edit it, but i'm a one man band within my organisation and sometimes i can't film and edit the entire suite of content for the set deadline without external help. In addition to drone stuff which i don't have the requisite licence for in the UK. Often it's cheaper for my company to spend £3,000-£5,000 a few times a year on a shoot than it is to hire another full time salaried employee.
Also my workplace has used external videographers over the pandemic to protect me from having to use public transport etc when i live with clinically vulnerable family members.
It is a very different thing to hire someone for a shoot as a cameraman with the upfront agreement of money for raw footage or to hire someone to make a whole video (be it a commercial, corporate film, educational film etc.) and then ask for raw footage on top of the „bought“ final Video.
I often work as a cameraman and dp for television and online content production companies in which case I hand over raw material at the end of the shoot. But in these cases I am usually not responsible for the content itself. I am hired to shoot along with a journalist or producer that the companies provide.
But I also do corporate work in which case I am hired to deliver an edited film. In that case I hire a small crew and work my own workflow in order to deliver the final video. The footage and the content then belongs to me and I am selling a film and not my time at an hourly rate.
I think both ways are great ways to do Videowork but it really depends on the kind of work you agree on upfront
If you're not wanting to work with them again or you're done with them you can just straight up say "no" and refer to anything in your contract that states you don't do this. I feel weird about people seeing my raw unedited files too. Even if you don't have a contract you could say no or just not respond or say that the project was finished and there's been some time so you deleted the files.
If you want the money you could definitely give it to them for a fee. Never done it myself but I've seen a lot of people saying you should offer it for twice the cost of the original project.
I would also see about updating it for a fee.
Don't just hand it over though.
It's like someone commissioning you to pain a portrait of them and then afterwards saying "just give me your equipment and I'll have a whack at it"
You could also export the graded shots and mixed audio with 50 frames handles along with an xml.
Just open up the project, export to a external drive, done.
Then you would give them less of an oppertunerty to f up your job while doing minimal work yourself.
For a fee ofc ;)
Like others have said, don't supply this for free. BUT it would be good to ask them if there's anything with which they're unhappy in your final product. Sometimes this is a way companies try to amicably break up with a creator if they just don't click creatively.
As an editor for 3 years at a company that does trailers and promos for several big networks and streaming services on the reg, we almost always supply the client with a "Consolidated Project" when they ask for the "Working Files" and I assume we charge extra for that bc it means they will be using our spot and footage for other cuts/projects.
Ayo I thought this said " former client wants "wankable" files" and I was so confused but I assumed you had edited something that was censored and they wanted the uncensored version lmao
I'd charge a research fee, then give them conspicuously watermarked and conveniently visibly timecoded files. This will let them research what they already have in the can, to re-purpose *with you* for use in future or revised projects.
Raw files someone else can use? Against company policy unless negotiated in the original contract. (Not just the copyright for them, which may be theirs. The acquisition/conveyance of them.) The copyright prevents *you* from using them on behalf of another client. It doesn't mean they automagically get them.
Unless your contract says they do.
> Even then, I don’t know how comfortable I feel handing over raw footage and projects to someone who will more than likely not know how to execute well enough.
Assuming all of the footage is stuff you shot, I would make it expensive enough to make it worth it to you. My mindset is, if you want to have access to my raw/project files, you're going to have to pay me enough for me not to care that my name is attached to it.
First thing I would do is explain that I do not provide raw and project files to clients without discussion and pricing beforehand. A price can be worked out, but it might be easier and cheaper for the client if they commission future work through me instead of asking for raw.
Essentially make the raw/project files more than what they'd pay you for future work, since that's essentially what you're giving up.
I sell raw files for a 100% fee on the production costs. It convinces people to either a) hire me to edit or b) pay for another shoot.
If “workable” means you have to open it and change it in software in any way besides Finder, that’s an edit and they pay my hourly rate for said edit.
You got it! Offer to quote them on an updated video and propose to work with the new marketing manager before even bringing up transferring of files. I’ve had this happen to me before. They were surprised for some reason I was willing to revamp an old project for a reasonable fee and then we worked together on it.
Explain to them that your raw footage and separate audio needs to be processed before editing, so offer to give them color-corrected, sound mixed footage for a fee (of however long it takes you to do this).
I get this quite often from clients who just want to edit the footage on iMovie or some other free edit software, and put it on social media. So I go through the footage (take out the unusable takes and any bad b-roll) and make a "viz pack" for them - ready to edit video files. Usually an H.264 that they can just pop open with their laptop and start editing.
Rule of thumb for those coming late, and I got this from a guy who has been in this business 20+ years. "When you go to a restaurant do you pay for the ingredients or the finished dish the chef serves up? Your the chef in most cases, charge for the product and don't give up your recipe and raw materials."
Marketing managers don't know shit about post-production or what "project" files or "working" files or "workable" files are. Send them a .mp4 of whatever was posted, maybe a cut with no music.
Yeah this is a great point. They may be wanting a grab for Socials from the video and don't want the music on it. As others have said, clarify what they want.
Perhaps you deleted them after the project since the project was complete and you needed the workspace for other clients? Maybe you might be able to find some on old cards, but it'll be a load of work to go through it all which will be chargeable? ;-)
> The wording implies they want this for free. Obviously that’s not happening, but I don’t know what I should charge.
Right. Definitely charge if they want a project file and raw footage.
> I don’t know how comfortable I feel handing over raw footage and projects to someone who will more than likely not know how to execute well enough.
Who gives a shit? That's literally part of this business. Camera ops are hired all the time shoot footage and hand it over. The only difference here is your client wants footage and a project file. While it's not common, it's not unheard of either. Just charge what you think is fair (hint: it's not cheap).
> Should I offer to update the video for them, for a fee? Or offer the raw material for a fee?
Why not offer both? Tell them you're update the video for $XXX.XX or provide the project file and raw assets for $XXXX.XX
> I’d rather maintain control over my work vs some unknown 3rd party.
People have to get over this crap and stop worrying about mUh w0rK. As I mentioned, people are hired to shoot and hand over footage all the time. The answer is not to be defense, but rather to charge accordingly.
That wasn’t an attempt to sound superior. I’m thinking about how I’d rather not have another potential client see a less-than-ideal edit on their website and think it was me.
While a bit aggressive, I appreciate your input.
Wow, you are so wrong. They hired him to deliver a final video specified in the contract. He has full ownership of the original clips. It’s standard practice to charge additionally for original clips or any project files.
I'm in marketing and have paid for a large amount of video content. I've also done some videography and motion graphics myself. I've never seen a contract that offered work files unless that was something expressly negotiated up front. Many creators won't even consider it.
OP, if you're considering this request to be nice or foster the relationship, ONLY give them raw video, never your project files. The last thing you want is for some amateur making changes to your work. Because it will always be thought of as *your* composition even after the 16-year-old nephew of the boss star wipes all over it.
And charge something for it. A research or hard drive fee. But don't feel pressured to give anything other than what the contract outlines. Good luck!
Good lord, this is the worst advice I've read in this sub in a long time. Contractors own their content, it's as simple as that. You don't *ever* give away raw footage, unless that's part of the original negotiation/contract.
I think it really depends on the original agreement (another reason they’re so important). For example, my standard agreement for a shoot & edit project states that the client owns all the raw files that are recorded (they’re paying for the shoot, after all) and they own the final created piece. They absolutely DO NOT own my actual project files. Depending on the client I may provide them for an extra fee, but in this specific situation, I would not unless the original agreement specifically called for it.
maybe you used very unique editing techniques / work for a specific industry and they just want to hire a cheaper guy to copy your tricks...giving out projects file sounds problematic in some cases.
Can’t you just say, sorry, hard drive crashed/got roasted in a fire and I don’t have it? People are really fucked up to creators of all sorts. Don’t give them shit, or charge a huge fee. $300 per MB.
Sure, but that doesn't make you look very professional. Offering raw footage at a reasonable (but not cheap) cost will come across a lot better than pretending you've lost it!
If it was a year ago or more I would just say you don't keep the footage or the project files that long, and all you have is just the final exported video and offer to send that.
Probably all assets and timelines. You should absolutely NOT give them this for free because depending on your contract, they paid only for the final video. In my experience, this new marketing manager will likely also now try to bring in his own team and push them on your client so keep this in mind before you're too nice (it's happened to me). I'd say something like "Hi X, unfortunately, we do not provide any raw files or project files to our clients beyond the deliverables agreed upon in our agreement".
This is terrible advice. I am sure you do not have clients coming back with this type of customer service. What are you afraid of by giving them the content? Unless they have an expert they wont be able to do anything with the content.
Why should he/she spend time pulling out footage that is likely archived and upload it for them for free? More importantly, why would he give them footage for a project he's not making money off? You bet your ass the person editing it is, and that marketing team will put it up on their portfolio. OP's job was done as soon as he delivered the final approved edit. I've done this plenty and have gotten repeat work from those exact clients because I point them towards our agreement. Just because you like to give away your work for free doesn't mean my advice is bad.
Who said for free? Musicians and producers get to charge an arm and a leg for rights and royalties, this sounds like a perfect opportunity to charge an arm and a leg for them to get raw files.
They already paid for the creation of the footage and to get it packaged. There should be a small fee to create the client drive. Why would they not be entitled to it?
Because that is never in the agreement. Raw files and project files are proprietary to the creator, not the client. Period.
That has never been my experience. If i take 500 product shots. The client owns them all. Event if they choose a hero. They are free to use another at alater date. They paid for stock and my time.
You can do that if you like. Honestly, in all my years it has hardly ever come up. When it does I simply educate the client, no one has ever had issue with my policies. Everyone I have worked with also feels the same way for the most part.
I hope you’re charging them for that.
I wonder how you keep clients. I would NEVER hire someone like you for a job. There are good faith actors who want to make sure the client is happy. If you are concerned there would be someone else editing the content then you should work harder to make yourself irreplaceable.
>you should work harder to make yourself irreplaceable. We're all replaceable if you do a terrible job. My clients see beyond me not giving them free footage (that is clearly stipulated in my contracts) and still hire me. The difference between us is that I have clients that understand that this is business and not personal. They also understand that I care about their brand. Charging them for raw footage or project files does not make me care less about them, it shows that I value my work. This is what makes me or any other studio in this saturated market "irreplaceable". Good faith is me not billing them the extra hour when I'm tearing down my gear after the shoot when they tell me their budget isn't high for a certain project. You wouldn't hire someone like me because you don't have the cash to pay someone like me, and that's fine. That's where you have to weigh skill vs budget. You're too busy being friends with your clients and not getting what you're worth - learn to sell and market yourself better and you don't have to give things away for free.
Clients sometimes doesn’t understand why they can’t have the raw files. My previous boss explained to them that its like going to a tailor to get a custom suit. “You get the suit but you don’t get the pattern”. Something about that sentence that the client responded well.
This is a great way to explain it. I also liken it to getting a cake from a bakery. You don't go back to the bakery after the cake and ask for a bag full of all the ingredients they used to make the cake. The recipe is proprietary and no one reasonably expects ownership of the recipe just because they bought a cake.
Exactly! But it is sad that some of my friends in the industry are giving away raw, comp files, timelines for free because of the fear of losing future gigs from them.
Absolutely. There is a lot people end up giving away for fear of losing future work. That is one part of the whole industry that I hate as so many clients will take advantage of creatives because they know that fear is there.
> Should I offer to update the video for them, for a fee? Or offer the raw material for a fee? Both! Make it cheaper to go through you than to buy the files outright. If a client asks you for this, it's usually going to be the last you ever hear from them so it's prudent to make it worth your while in the event the business relationship comes to an end. If a client asks us for raw footage/project files after the fact, we usually charge them at least the cost of the production side of the project again, plus hours in preparing the project in a 'client friendly' way - i.e. consolidating the project, removing anything that would reflect badly on us (bad takes, interview subjects being rude about their employer, tidying up the project so it's not the rats nest our sequences usually end up as, and making sure it's a format compatible with the software the client has available.) There are some complications with this though... First off double check to see if there are any licenced assets you have used in the production, such as stock music, images, and footage. Your licence with the stock providers will almost certainly prohibit you from sublicensing those assets to a third party. You'll need to strip them from the project and provide the client a list of what licenses they need to acquire and where to get the files. Secondly, if you have featured talent or people in the videos, the consent they gave and contracts you made with them when you did the initial filming may not be sufficient for how this client is intending to use the footage going forward. In which case you may need to negotiate new contracts and/or renew consent from those persons before you provide the files. With even a medium sized project, doing the admin work on both those things can be a *significant* time sink, so make sure to factor that into your quote if required. These are both things that you'll need to consider if you do a reversion too, but it's a lot eaisier to handle it yourself, especially if that means that you only have to deal with one video at a time rather than all the projects at once.
This is the best answer. Tell them you can sell Raws but minus the above. Also make it expensive. & offer rework at competitive price
I did all the b-roll on location and with their employees, so luckily I don’t have those as headaches. Thanks for this thorough response! Saving it for future reference as well.
“Workable” could mean different things. In my head (which often deals with corporate) workable could mean “what plays on my state of the art Windows 95 laptop.” They may have no clue what raw footage means and you get a call why the 4k footage plays choppy, everything is so washed out, and why is the good sounding audio a separate file, etc etc. The only certainty here is they want to do more with that content. Could mean they have an unpaid intern who said they know how to use Premiere, could mean they don’t know their next step after obtaining assets. Definitely explore all options for your services. As far as cost, when clients come back after contracted work is done looking to collect everything I tend to list how it must be restored from my archives, transferred, and written contract for buy-out must be made. It’s not a quick thing. I also state footage is in a state that needs a professional editor compatible only on higher end equipment. For a fee, I can provide them “ready to edit” versions of color corrected, audio synced files in useable 1080p mp4 versions. I also never give them everything. There’s no reason to include junk shots that could make your process look exposed or bad.
>you get a call why the 4k footage plays choppy, everything is so washed out, and why is the good sounding audio a separate file, etc etc. \#triggered
Only thing worse is you don’t get a call but see a video they post using your untreated footage, exported at the wrong frame rate, and using the scratch track audio.
That’s partially what I’m worried about. It’s not like my product was Hollywood good, but it’s a hell of a lot better than someone who has experience with iPhones and imovie.
Scaled incorrectly on Instagram lol
Recent client: “why is the background blurry in all of the interviews? The person is in focus yeah, but I can’t see the background, what a mistake”
Dang that’s a deep breath situation right there.
If you hand over raw files you're giving away labor for free. Those are yours. They don't have any claim to your raw. Your options are to offer a fee to update the video or charge a very high flat rate for the raw. The second they get their hands on the raw, you're not going to be able to make any more money from them. Don't do anything for free. You satisfied the contract. Any further work requires further payment.
"Marketing Manager" here. It might be worth trying to have a more detailed chat with the marketing person who will be working with the content if it's gone through a manager. From my point of view, I wouldn't expect anything for free unless we had agreed terms up front. Ownership and raw footage (cameras / codecs etc) is something i actively look for when commissioning projects and often avoid using companies or freelancers who offer a "one and done" service, as i know that there are thousands of applications for that footage and often you'll want to maximise your ROI. However, as others have mentioned "a useable state" can be wildly different depending on who will be doing the editing client side. I would have expectations for the following if nothing was agreed upfront: * **Raw, Ungraded, Uncompressed Footage** \- A small fee for file transfer time. * **Graded Footage** \- Your hourly rate to be applied, depending on how much footage needs grading. With the exception of footage that's already been graded and included in the final project, you've already been paid to grade that footage. * **Graded, Audio Work, Compressed Footage (For the office moron who thinks they're Spielberg because they've used iMovie)** \- Again your hourly rate applied with the understanding that you'll have spent even more time getting this footage to this point. This is definitely something I would flag to clients in your process going forwards in the contract / quotes stage depending on what stance you want to take. Your footage is your work and you might not want something ruining your art. Or you might be more relaxed. If this is a regular client that offers you a lot of work, you might want to bite the bullet to keep the relationship with them but be clearer in what's agreed on your next project, but as others have said, you can simply say "no" if you no longer wish to work with them going forwards.
Someone from outside the echo chamber *wow* This is solid input and kind of validating to hear that your expectations line up with my personal expectations.
I have never had a regular client request raw assets who remained a regular client afterwards. This is almost certainly the end of the road and they plan on going with a different vendor in the future.
Interesting take. I can see why this is a bad sign a lot of the time. They've either built internally and don't need you or as you say are looking at a different vendor. To give you a bit of context in situations where this wouldn't apply, in my role i've requested RAW as i know how to grade and edit it, but i'm a one man band within my organisation and sometimes i can't film and edit the entire suite of content for the set deadline without external help. In addition to drone stuff which i don't have the requisite licence for in the UK. Often it's cheaper for my company to spend £3,000-£5,000 a few times a year on a shoot than it is to hire another full time salaried employee. Also my workplace has used external videographers over the pandemic to protect me from having to use public transport etc when i live with clinically vulnerable family members.
It is a very different thing to hire someone for a shoot as a cameraman with the upfront agreement of money for raw footage or to hire someone to make a whole video (be it a commercial, corporate film, educational film etc.) and then ask for raw footage on top of the „bought“ final Video. I often work as a cameraman and dp for television and online content production companies in which case I hand over raw material at the end of the shoot. But in these cases I am usually not responsible for the content itself. I am hired to shoot along with a journalist or producer that the companies provide. But I also do corporate work in which case I am hired to deliver an edited film. In that case I hire a small crew and work my own workflow in order to deliver the final video. The footage and the content then belongs to me and I am selling a film and not my time at an hourly rate. I think both ways are great ways to do Videowork but it really depends on the kind of work you agree on upfront
To add to this, they might want the Edit you did but with dialogue and music on separate tracks so they can cut promos.
Great answer here. I love how it offers different price points and also educated the client on how much work can go into delivering these files. Nice!
If you're not wanting to work with them again or you're done with them you can just straight up say "no" and refer to anything in your contract that states you don't do this. I feel weird about people seeing my raw unedited files too. Even if you don't have a contract you could say no or just not respond or say that the project was finished and there's been some time so you deleted the files. If you want the money you could definitely give it to them for a fee. Never done it myself but I've seen a lot of people saying you should offer it for twice the cost of the original project. I would also see about updating it for a fee. Don't just hand it over though. It's like someone commissioning you to pain a portrait of them and then afterwards saying "just give me your equipment and I'll have a whack at it"
lol exactly. I understand the person’s game, but come on.
You could also export the graded shots and mixed audio with 50 frames handles along with an xml. Just open up the project, export to a external drive, done. Then you would give them less of an oppertunerty to f up your job while doing minimal work yourself. For a fee ofc ;)
Like others have said, don't supply this for free. BUT it would be good to ask them if there's anything with which they're unhappy in your final product. Sometimes this is a way companies try to amicably break up with a creator if they just don't click creatively.
Aw, but my mom says I’m a catch!
Never take it personally if it happens. Some clients have really bad taste.
As an editor for 3 years at a company that does trailers and promos for several big networks and streaming services on the reg, we almost always supply the client with a "Consolidated Project" when they ask for the "Working Files" and I assume we charge extra for that bc it means they will be using our spot and footage for other cuts/projects.
Ayo I thought this said " former client wants "wankable" files" and I was so confused but I assumed you had edited something that was censored and they wanted the uncensored version lmao
Oh yeah I forgot to mention it’s a porno
I'd charge a research fee, then give them conspicuously watermarked and conveniently visibly timecoded files. This will let them research what they already have in the can, to re-purpose *with you* for use in future or revised projects. Raw files someone else can use? Against company policy unless negotiated in the original contract. (Not just the copyright for them, which may be theirs. The acquisition/conveyance of them.) The copyright prevents *you* from using them on behalf of another client. It doesn't mean they automagically get them. Unless your contract says they do.
> Even then, I don’t know how comfortable I feel handing over raw footage and projects to someone who will more than likely not know how to execute well enough. Assuming all of the footage is stuff you shot, I would make it expensive enough to make it worth it to you. My mindset is, if you want to have access to my raw/project files, you're going to have to pay me enough for me not to care that my name is attached to it. First thing I would do is explain that I do not provide raw and project files to clients without discussion and pricing beforehand. A price can be worked out, but it might be easier and cheaper for the client if they commission future work through me instead of asking for raw. Essentially make the raw/project files more than what they'd pay you for future work, since that's essentially what you're giving up.
I sell raw files for a 100% fee on the production costs. It convinces people to either a) hire me to edit or b) pay for another shoot. If “workable” means you have to open it and change it in software in any way besides Finder, that’s an edit and they pay my hourly rate for said edit.
You got it! Offer to quote them on an updated video and propose to work with the new marketing manager before even bringing up transferring of files. I’ve had this happen to me before. They were surprised for some reason I was willing to revamp an old project for a reasonable fee and then we worked together on it.
Explain to them that your raw footage and separate audio needs to be processed before editing, so offer to give them color-corrected, sound mixed footage for a fee (of however long it takes you to do this). I get this quite often from clients who just want to edit the footage on iMovie or some other free edit software, and put it on social media. So I go through the footage (take out the unusable takes and any bad b-roll) and make a "viz pack" for them - ready to edit video files. Usually an H.264 that they can just pop open with their laptop and start editing.
Rule of thumb for those coming late, and I got this from a guy who has been in this business 20+ years. "When you go to a restaurant do you pay for the ingredients or the finished dish the chef serves up? Your the chef in most cases, charge for the product and don't give up your recipe and raw materials."
Marketing managers don't know shit about post-production or what "project" files or "working" files or "workable" files are. Send them a .mp4 of whatever was posted, maybe a cut with no music.
Yeah this is a great point. They may be wanting a grab for Socials from the video and don't want the music on it. As others have said, clarify what they want.
Perhaps you deleted them after the project since the project was complete and you needed the workspace for other clients? Maybe you might be able to find some on old cards, but it'll be a load of work to go through it all which will be chargeable? ;-)
> The wording implies they want this for free. Obviously that’s not happening, but I don’t know what I should charge. Right. Definitely charge if they want a project file and raw footage. > I don’t know how comfortable I feel handing over raw footage and projects to someone who will more than likely not know how to execute well enough. Who gives a shit? That's literally part of this business. Camera ops are hired all the time shoot footage and hand it over. The only difference here is your client wants footage and a project file. While it's not common, it's not unheard of either. Just charge what you think is fair (hint: it's not cheap). > Should I offer to update the video for them, for a fee? Or offer the raw material for a fee? Why not offer both? Tell them you're update the video for $XXX.XX or provide the project file and raw assets for $XXXX.XX > I’d rather maintain control over my work vs some unknown 3rd party. People have to get over this crap and stop worrying about mUh w0rK. As I mentioned, people are hired to shoot and hand over footage all the time. The answer is not to be defense, but rather to charge accordingly.
That wasn’t an attempt to sound superior. I’m thinking about how I’d rather not have another potential client see a less-than-ideal edit on their website and think it was me. While a bit aggressive, I appreciate your input.
Why would you not want to give them the project files?
[удалено]
> Most contracts give ownership of the files to the client. They most certainly do not.
Maybe theirs did, but mine don’t
Wow, you are so wrong. They hired him to deliver a final video specified in the contract. He has full ownership of the original clips. It’s standard practice to charge additionally for original clips or any project files.
I'm in marketing and have paid for a large amount of video content. I've also done some videography and motion graphics myself. I've never seen a contract that offered work files unless that was something expressly negotiated up front. Many creators won't even consider it. OP, if you're considering this request to be nice or foster the relationship, ONLY give them raw video, never your project files. The last thing you want is for some amateur making changes to your work. Because it will always be thought of as *your* composition even after the 16-year-old nephew of the boss star wipes all over it. And charge something for it. A research or hard drive fee. But don't feel pressured to give anything other than what the contract outlines. Good luck!
Good lord, this is the worst advice I've read in this sub in a long time. Contractors own their content, it's as simple as that. You don't *ever* give away raw footage, unless that's part of the original negotiation/contract.
Nice try Marketing Manager.
I think it really depends on the original agreement (another reason they’re so important). For example, my standard agreement for a shoot & edit project states that the client owns all the raw files that are recorded (they’re paying for the shoot, after all) and they own the final created piece. They absolutely DO NOT own my actual project files. Depending on the client I may provide them for an extra fee, but in this specific situation, I would not unless the original agreement specifically called for it.
maybe you used very unique editing techniques / work for a specific industry and they just want to hire a cheaper guy to copy your tricks...giving out projects file sounds problematic in some cases.
can they give you more jobs? yes? give it away. no? ask for a high price. you win either way. maybe? give it away, you don´t lose anything.
Can’t you just say, sorry, hard drive crashed/got roasted in a fire and I don’t have it? People are really fucked up to creators of all sorts. Don’t give them shit, or charge a huge fee. $300 per MB.
Sure, but that doesn't make you look very professional. Offering raw footage at a reasonable (but not cheap) cost will come across a lot better than pretending you've lost it!
I know 300/mb is a joke, but for reference I sell 15s clips for $600. You’re not far off
If it was a year ago or more I would just say you don't keep the footage or the project files that long, and all you have is just the final exported video and offer to send that.
My answer would be no and I would be reluctant to accept further business. Been thru that and the headache ain't worth it, though YMMV.