# "GIve me your raw files!"



## CowgirlMama (May 23, 2013)

How would you respond if someone told you to hand over your raw files? In this case, it's a relative asking for the raw versions of pictures that I took of her kids while babysitting. I gave her final, processed images because she's family and this was just for fun. Besides, I got some great shots and she might as well have the freedom to enjoy and/or print them. I wouldn't have given files to a client. 

Apparently, post processing is evil.  I didn't do anything big. Just very basic polishing on the images. Like I do to every single shot that actually makes it as far as anyone seeing it.  So, whatever. Don't like it. I'm still going to do it.  Since I only gave her polished images, she's decided that she needs the raw files for her husband to process right. I said no. I told her I can give her the "original" jpgs. As in, I'm going back and undoing the adjustments and doing a straight conversion.

But, for the sake of discussion, I'd like to see how you would respond to such a demand. If she'd been anyone else, it would have been a resounding "H*** NO!" but I didn't have time for a lecture on swearing.


----------



## 480sparky (May 23, 2013)

I would respond with giving them the price I charge.


----------



## CowgirlMama (May 23, 2013)

I'm not a pro, so I don't have a price. Would you just make it up? I don't have actual clients at this point. Just friends that I bribe with free FB pics or ice cream to take pictures for practice.


----------



## MK3Brent (May 23, 2013)

I would give them the raw files, and let them do it the right way.
Also add their watermark and signature of their professional photography business on facebook.


----------



## runnah (May 23, 2013)

Tell her to back off or find a new babysitter. She got a problem with they way you did the photos then cut her off. No photos, no copies, no babysitting, nothing.


----------



## Designer (May 23, 2013)

I think you should still do babysitting for her, just leave your camera in the car.  

Or at home.  

If they want pictures, they can buy a camera of their own.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (May 23, 2013)

Say no, in 43 different languages. Confuse her and then judo chop her. She's family. She'll understand.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 23, 2013)

I would give her the old GFYS.


----------



## Benco (May 23, 2013)

A straight no.


----------



## Vtec44 (May 23, 2013)

I don't give out my RAW files.   If you don't like it, that's not my problem.


----------



## frommrstomommy (May 23, 2013)

Yeah.. negativo on that one. lol


----------



## TATTRAT (May 23, 2013)

runnah said:


> Tell her to back off or find a new babysitter. She got a problem with they way you did the photos then cut her off. No photos, no copies, no babysitting, nothing.


 Boda bing, boda boom, bon jovi.

that's about it.


----------



## snowbear (May 23, 2013)

I wouldn't even give them unedited jpgs - just let her hubby work with what they have.


----------



## CowgirlMama (May 23, 2013)

He can't exactly undo what I did. Of course, he can't duplicated it from the unedited files, either.  I figure, if she wants to hang crap, that's her choice. A straight conversion from raw with no adjustments is flat and ugly. Oh well. She'll very likely regret it when she sees the originals, but, again, her choice.


----------



## Derrel (May 23, 2013)

I'd make them uncompressed 16-bit .TIFF files, just for the storage hassles.


----------



## kathyt (May 23, 2013)

Nobody sees my unedited raw files, touches my raw files, or would EVER get copies of my raw files. If they want raw files of their child, (since they are not happy with your edits), then they need to purchase a camera, learn how to use it, and then do their own damn crap with it.


----------



## Vtec44 (May 23, 2013)

Derrel said:


> I'd make them uncompressed 16-bit .TIFF files, just for the storage hassles.



hahahahaha!!!!


----------



## texkam (May 23, 2013)

Good grief. It's family. Just give her the gd raw files and charge it up to lesson learned the hard way. Handle situations differently from the start the next time. You state that you're not a pro and that you were shooting these for practice, so there's a fair chance your post processing may indeed suck. If this sort of thing is that important to you, and it sounds like it is, then you need to have a contract. Don't burn family bridges over a few images that either way raw or jpg, can still end up getting butchered after they're handed over.

BTW, I state in my contract: "Unprocessed, RAW files are only released on a per quote basis." .....and they don't come cheap.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (May 24, 2013)

It's family. Just give them the RAW files, who gives a crap anyway? If my sister asked for the raw files of her son, i'd give them to her, SURE. What would she do with them? God only knows, but that's her problem now! 


Here's the thing.* WHY do you think she's asking for the RAW files???* Obviously she doesn't like the post work you did, so by NOT giving her the RAW files, you're going to come off as the pretentious cousin/aunt/whatever who thinks that they're better than art thou with a camera, when it's obvious that someone who may not be a photographer recognized just how bad the pictures are and now think they can fix it themselves. 


JUUUUUSSST SAYYYIN........Don't be a d*ck, nobody is making any money at this, they're just pictures of kids.


----------



## 480sparky (May 24, 2013)

Maybe she didn't like them because they* don't* look like crap.  By crap, I mean instagrammed, selective color, faded 50's-era cross-processed crap.


----------



## bhop (May 24, 2013)

I agree with the last two.. if it was a paying gig, then no.. but it's family.  I don't see the big deal.


----------



## texkam (May 24, 2013)

Even if they don't look like crap and they want to crapify them, get over it. You made that decision when you agreed to do a shoot with no agreement, no contract and for a family member to boot. Life is full of lessons. One of which is, no good deed goes unpunished. Life is too short. Smile and make them happy. Save your creative control for another time, then handle it by the book if you wish.


----------



## cptkid (May 24, 2013)

She is most likely not asking for the .RAW files. She wants JPEGS that have not been edited in anyway.

If someone asked me to hand over my .NEFs or .DNGs I would tell them where to shove it.


----------



## bratkinson (May 24, 2013)

Learn the following phrase well enough to become an automatic response:

"Raw?  What Raw?  I shoot in JPG only!"

Once you start 'giving in', you are stuck doing it forever.  Like one poster above indicated, let 'em buy their own camera and do the editing!


----------



## Designer (May 24, 2013)

bratkinson said:


> Learn the following phrase well enough to become an automatic response:
> 
> "Raw?  What Raw?  I shoot in JPG only!"



She can't do that because she is very proud of the fact that she shoots only RAW, and has told everybody that.  There are no JPEGs that the camera has applied any processing to.


----------



## sm4him (May 24, 2013)

I'm not a proponent of handing over original, unedited files, whether they are jpegs or raw files. However, in this case--you're not a professional, you're not doing it to make money and honestly, it's highly improbable that anything this person does is going to "damage" your reputation as a photographer much. Even her husband does an awful job on them and then she plasters them on FB, saying you took them, you can always post and say, "Well, I took them, but so-and-so did the editing on them; quite a change from the unprocessed photos!" or whatever.

Give her the raw files--at the very least, tell her to pick two or three she especially wants and give her those. Then...never, ever take your camera when you babysit for her again. 


I guess basically, for me, what it comes down to is this: What's more important to you? Your raw files? Your "photographic reputation?" Or this relationship?
If the first two, then stand your ground. No raw files, ever.
If it's the last, cave--but then discuss it so she understands that either you take photos of her kid and give her finished results ONLY, or you simply DON'T take photos of her kid.

Me? Relationship wins, EVERY TIME. NOTHING matters as much. When this woman is gone from the world, will it bother you that you had a strained relationship with her over some raw photo files?


----------



## jamesbjenkins (May 24, 2013)

Family trumps standard business practices. I'd give them to her, especially since you're not in business, you're an admitted enthusiast and not a pro, and there was no money involved. I don't understand why this is a big deal.

Now...If a client asked for my RAWs, I'd happily tell them my extremely high price and wait for their reply. Money talks.


----------



## MK3Brent (May 24, 2013)

OP is probably just embarrassed of the quality of the raw files. 

Wouldn't want anyone seeing that stuff.


----------



## csgrafix (May 24, 2013)

Just tell her you didn't shoot in raw format !


----------



## albertaclipper (May 24, 2013)

I guess I'm looking at it in another prospective. Did she ask you to photograph her child,or give you Permission to photograph her child. If not then she has the right to Confiscate all photos. I would give them to her and don't photograph her kids again without permission and then in that case put your water mark on them and signature. Also charge a fee even if its family. Sometimes family can be the worst to deal with. Always cover yourself no matter what or who it is.


----------



## 480sparky (May 24, 2013)

Take the raw files, resize them to 200 pixels along the long edge, then save 'em as a JPEG.  Then rename the files back to their original proprietary raw format.


----------



## bogeyguy (May 24, 2013)

I have to agree with albertaclipper. Unless you had permission, you did wrong.


----------



## Ballistics (May 24, 2013)

albertaclipper said:


> I guess I'm looking at it in another prospective. Did she ask you to photograph her child,or give you Permission to photograph her child. If not then she has the right to Confiscate all photos. I would give them to her and don't photograph her kids again without permission and then in that case put your water mark on them and signature. Also charge a fee even if its family. Sometimes family can be the worst to deal with. Always cover yourself no matter what or who it is.



She does not have the right to confiscate anything lol. 

OP - There has to be more to the story then you are telling.


----------



## Ballistics (May 24, 2013)

bogeyguy said:


> I have to agree with albertaclipper. Unless you had permission, you did wrong.



I'm sure everyone here gets written permission to photograph a family member right? You all have model releases for every shot you've ever taken of your family?


----------



## ronlane (May 24, 2013)

Ballistics said:


> albertaclipper said:
> 
> 
> > I guess I'm looking at it in another prospective. Did she ask you to photograph her child,or give you Permission to photograph her child. If not then she has the right to Confiscate all photos. I would give them to her and don't photograph her kids again without permission and then in that case put your water mark on them and signature. Also charge a fee even if its family. Sometimes family can be the worst to deal with. Always cover yourself no matter what or who it is.
> ...



I agree there is more to this. I don't think she has the right to confiscate anything either. You were babysitting her kids, so in a since, it was a public location, so wouldn't that factor into your favor.

I've never had a family member or friend be like that for taking pictures of their Child. I send them the jpeg file and for some of them post them to their facebook page, if they have a habit of posting pictures of their own kids.


----------



## LuckyShot (May 24, 2013)

Maybe it's because I'm a complete noob, but I honestly don't see the big deal about giving her the RAWs.  It is rather insulting if she actually said that she wanted them so her husband could fix the processing (whether it's true or not), but they are still pcitures of her children and if she didn't like how they came out and wants to play around the processing, I'd tell her to have fun.  I understand not giving unedited images out if you are a professional since any image floating around out there with your name on it reflects on you even if you didn't make any of the editing choices, but if your not making money doing this and it's just a hobby then I really don't understand what the problem is.


----------



## Alex_B (May 24, 2013)

I do give out the RAWs, no problem as long as the recipient is a photographer (not necessarily a pro) and knows what he is doing. All others only get JPG.


----------



## Ilovemycam (May 24, 2013)

OP...I only care about things that go in my portfolio or have a chance at a museum.


----------



## MK3Brent (May 24, 2013)

Alex_B said:


> I do give out the RAWs, no problem as long as the recipient is a photographer (not necessarily a pro) and knows what he is doing. All others only get JPG.


I don't understand this. 

It's not like you're giving someone materials to build a bridge, and you have a concern that if you give them something without direction they'll produce something that hurts someone. In the end, it's an edit of a photo you composed and actuated. 

What's the difference between someone butchering your JPEG vs. the RAW? (Skilled photographer or unskilled photographer)


----------



## Overread (May 24, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> How would you respond if someone told you to hand over your raw files?



Depends who they are (and sometimes how much they are willing to pay)



CowgirlMama said:


> In this case, it's a relative asking for the raw versions of pictures that I took of her kids while babysitting



Eh just hand em over and have done with it. It's not worth having a family feud start up over a handful of child photo negatives/RAWs. Really it isn't and I doubt that there is anything so special about them that:
1) they'll become prize winning photos in any serious competition or market

2) that you could not repeat or recreate in a staged scene if you wanted to have them for work/promotional material (and assuming you can't just get permission for that from your relative. 


Seriously as much as we like to protect our RAWs and such this just a few family photos its nothing worth getting worked up about.


----------



## BrandonLaw (May 24, 2013)

Honestly nobody is going to burn family bridges over a couple of damn pictures. Just calmly explain to your relative that you do not give your RAW files out to anyone and that includes family. Your work is your work and if you don't want other people editing photos that you took then that is completely understandable. There is a good way to go about this just talk like rational adults and everything will be fine. If she has a problem with the photos you took then tell her she is more then welcome to buy a camera and spend the time learning how to use it so she can take the kind of pictures she "wants" lol. This should be a non-issue either way it goes you guys are family!


----------



## Designer (May 24, 2013)

BrandonLaw said:


> Honestly nobody is going to burn family bridges over a couple of damn pictures.



Both sides have been adequately expressed, but under which scenario would burning family bridges be more likely?

It seems to boil down to generating and escalating family strife or turning over some electronic files, copies of which will still exist with the OP.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (May 24, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> Nobody sees my unedited raw files, touches my raw files, or would EVER get copies of my raw files. If they want raw files of their child, (since they are not happy with your edits), then they need to purchase a camera, learn how to use it, and then do their own damn crap with it.



Kathy gimmer all yer rawr files, orrr elsE~!


----------



## vintagesnaps (May 24, 2013)

Did the relative ask you to take photos of her kids? Maybe it would be better to look outside your family (or at least some of your relatives) to find ways to practice your photography skills. It sounds like they wanted the photos to look differently than what you took, so it might be better for the husband to take and edit his own pictures of their kids - or they could consider going to a photo studio, or whatever they choose to do to have photos of their family. 

I'd probably consider maybe if there are particular ones they want and provide them some hi res copies of those. Then as someone mentioned, maybe do the babysitting without your camera. Or if you're at a family function take photos just for your own personal use and let them do their own thing.


----------



## bratkinson (May 25, 2013)

In re-reading the original post, their asking for the raw images automatically indicates they have some facility to process them as such.  Presuming further, they downloaded some free software such as GIMP and expect to do whatever they would like to do with the pictures.  If they come back and want a copy of your post processing software, advise them that is a violation of the End User License Agreement for the software, regardless of its being paid or free.  

So they go and process your raw files.  Do they have a clue about white balance?  Noise correction and whatever else may be necessary?  I'm beginning to wonder if they even have a clue of what to do with the raw files?  Or that their software can even process them?  I'm guessing they will give up in frustration and simply 'go with' the JPGs you provided them.

Perhaps, a couple of days/weeks from now, casually ask how did their processing of the raw files go? (if you provided them to keep the family happy).  Inquiring minds want to know!


----------



## manicmike (May 25, 2013)

Give her a blank memory card. The pics were on there when you gave it to her.


----------



## Alex_B (May 25, 2013)

MK3Brent said:


> Alex_B said:
> 
> 
> > I do give out the RAWs, no problem as long as the recipient is a photographer (not necessarily a pro) and knows what he is doing. All others only get JPG.
> ...



... from my experience, unskilled people do more extreme edits with RAW files than with JPGs, not always leading to the better results  Also those who explicitly ask for the RAW files, are usually those who will do much more butchering 

Generally I do not care too much about people editing images I took for them, as long as they do not produce something totally horrible.

I do not care if someone does alter a portrait or a wedding shot I took, however things are totally different when it comes to those images I consider or at least pretend to be art  There I would not give out the RAW or a high res version of my edit


----------



## Designer (May 25, 2013)

Alex_B said:


> unskilled people do more extreme edits with RAW files



I couldn't have said it better.


----------



## TCampbell (May 25, 2013)

Alex_B said:


> I do give out the RAWs, no problem as long as the recipient is a photographer (not necessarily a pro) and knows what he is doing. All others only get JPG.



Agree.  I do give out my RAWs to other photographers.

If two or more photographers are shooting at the same event and all photos are going to collectively presented together then you want uniformity.  You want all images adjusted with (just one example) matching white balance.  So this makes sense.

But realistically, most people cannot open RAW files if they aren't a photographer or have graphics software that can deal with RAWs for _your_ specific camera.


----------



## Steve5D (May 25, 2013)

Sounds pretty damn ungrateful.

I'd still take pictures of the little curtain climbers, but I'd give them nothing. It'll drive the Mom out of her mind...


----------



## Designer (May 25, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> Sounds pretty damn ungrateful.



I think it is just that they don't like the editing done by the OP, and figure that they can do better.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 25, 2013)

Take a bunch of photos of breakable household objects in raw format. 

Give those photos to your family member. 

Ask her to reimburse you for them, as they will surely break at some point. 

I would then suggest that you say "YOLO." But that part is optional.


----------



## Steve5D (May 25, 2013)

Designer said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds pretty damn ungrateful.
> ...



Doesn't matter. They're getting free pictures. They're ungrateful, and they deserve nothing...


----------



## 480sparky (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> ........Since I only gave her polished images, she's decided that she needs the raw files for her husband to process right...........




Translation:  "I think you're a crappy photographer.  Your editing sucks.  My husband, who owns nothing more than a 14-year-old Kodak point-and-shoot, is far better.  But since you've already gone to the trouble of actually _taking_ the shots (not that we can do any better, of course!), he'll be happy to pull those turds out of the toilet and make something respectable out of them."


----------



## Steve5D (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> How would you respond if someone told you to hand over your raw files?



I'd tell them to piss off.

Anything else?

:er:


----------



## Pallycow (May 25, 2013)

I read and read, then skimmed...lol  hurting my brain.  way too much overthinking.

anyone ever think that maybe dad tools around with photoshop and just wants to try something different with them, and would rather have the raw image, as we all know you can do more with a raw.  They might really like the shots and dad just wants to either play with them or even crappify them.  

bottom line.... who the F cares?  it's family, it's kids....no biggie. 

People act like their raw images are prized possessions.  It's stupid.  Unless you're a working pro, they don't have a price.  

Don't get all butthurt about it and give 'em to em.  Hell, you might even learn something.


----------



## Pallycow (May 25, 2013)

and now to add fuel to the fire of the silly ramblin....'cause it's fun...hehehe

most folks don't wanna give up their raw files 'cause they are scared for others to see how chitty their shots were before processing...embarrassed even.

There, I said it.  haha


----------



## Benco (May 25, 2013)

^We defer to your expertise in silly rambling Pallycow.


----------



## CowgirlMama (May 25, 2013)

I don't think you guys understand how my family works. If you have someone's kid, you take pictures and put them on FB with whatever camera you have. It's part of sharing what you did with their kids. That's how it works. There is no contract. It's FAMILY. I think it's stupid to have a contract for family.

As far as reputation, I'm not really concerned about it. I don't have one. Especially where she lives. However, they are MINE. And they're not bad. They're a bit cool. Otherwise, they're just boring. I fixed white balance, did a curves adjustment then did some basic work in photoshop. Very basic. (The oldest wanted some really bad acne removed, her mom apparently thinks it's good to have a giant zit on your forehead.) I don't do big editing. My aunt thinks I do because of my son's eyes. His eyes are 3 colors. She assumes I do that in post because she mostly sees him indoors with crappy light. When I take portraits, I make sure his face is properly lit. When light hits his eyes, you can see the colors. Those who know him well can attest that his eyes really are three colors. My aunt thinks they're brown. She posts on everything I share that I need to "tone down the eyes", even when it's a jpg out of my phone that was uploaded straight from the phone without ever seeing an editing program.

Shooting raw: She knows I do it because she knows what camera I have. Her daughter has my old one and now shoots raw. (Upon close examination, her daughter does saturation, curves and exposure adjustments on her raw files, but doesn't admit as much to her parents.) I could shoot the jpg, too, but why bother? Raw gives me more room for adjustments when I want them. And lots of room for fixing if I'm just chasing little kids and taking candids without paying as much attention to settings. Planned shots are already properly composed and lit. White balance is my biggest enemy, which, of course, is a one-click fix in any raw program.

My uncle does graphic design and has since before I was born. He has photoshop. Processing is not an issue for them.

There's no "keep family happy" in this. This is a competition between me and my cousin that I don't want to be caught in. They push her to be better than me at everything I do. I go about my daily life, take my pictures, play piano and any number of other things I enjoy. They push my cousin to try each skill as well, then push her to be better than me. When she's not, they need a way to prove she really is. On this, it's that I "have to" edit and use autofocus and she doesn't. Oh, well. She'll be this good when she has as many years behind her. It takes practice to reach a certain skill level. I've practiced. And I'm still learning. I don't claim to be the best, but I do know a lot. I'm a hobbyist. Eventually, maybe I'll be ready to go pro. Maybe. Maybe not. For now, I am what I am.


----------



## CowgirlMama (May 25, 2013)

TCampbell said:


> Alex_B said:
> 
> 
> > I do give out the RAWs, no problem as long as the recipient is a photographer (not necessarily a pro) and knows what he is doing. All others only get JPG.
> ...



I see this differently. I did exchange RAW files once with a fellow photographer following an event. Of course, he was also a friend and we were sharing content we both needed for different purposes. We couldn't be everywhere at once, so we took a divide and conquer approach. 

Hadn't thought about the specific camera angle. I think they're running an older PS, so likely can't open my files. I had to upgrade just to be able to open what comes out of the 6D.


----------



## Pallycow (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> I don't think you guys understand how my family works. If you have someone's kid, you take pictures and put them on FB with whatever camera you have. It's part of sharing what you did with their kids. That's how it works. There is no contract. It's FAMILY. I think it's stupid to have a contract for family.
> 
> As far as reputation, I'm not really concerned about it. I don't have one. Especially where she lives. However, they are MINE. And they're not bad. They're a bit cool. Otherwise, they're just boring. I fixed white balance, did a curves adjustment then did some basic work in photoshop. Very basic. (The oldest wanted some really bad acne removed, her mom apparently thinks it's good to have a giant zit on your forehead.) I don't do big editing. My aunt thinks I do because of my son's eyes. His eyes are 3 colors. She assumes I do that in post because she mostly sees him indoors with crappy light. When I take portraits, I make sure his face is properly lit. When light hits his eyes, you can see the colors. Those who know him well can attest that his eyes really are three colors. My aunt thinks they're brown. She posts on everything I share that I need to "tone down the eyes", even when it's a jpg out of my phone that was uploaded straight from the phone without ever seeing an editing program.
> 
> ...



You overvalue your files


----------



## Alex_B (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> If you have someone's kid, you take pictures and put them on FB with whatever camera you have. It's part of sharing what you did with their kids.



Just a side note, I NEVER put anything family-related on FB. It would be the same as hanging prints of relatives at the local supermarket's walls. And I just don't do that. 



> This is a competition between me and my cousin that I don't want to be caught in. They push her to be better than me at everything I do. I go about my daily life, take my pictures, play piano and any number of other things I enjoy. They push my cousin to try each skill as well, then push her to be better than me. When she's not, they need a way to prove she really is. On this, it's that I "have to" edit and use autofocus and she doesn't. Oh, well. She'll be this good when she has as many years behind her. It takes practice to reach a certain skill level. I've practiced. And I'm still learning. I don't claim to be the best, but I do know a lot. I'm a hobbyist. Eventually, maybe I'll be ready to go pro. Maybe. Maybe not. For now, I am what I am.



Oh dear, poor you! Really!

One piece of advice, just do not take photographs of those relatives and their kids. Never ever. Tell them she should do it, and that is it. You will have plenty of other chances to photograph other people and grow skill-wise.


----------



## Alex_B (May 25, 2013)

Pallycow said:


> You overvalue your files



Wrong. If you read, this is not about files here in the end. 

It is a family problem, and we cannot help her with that at all.


----------



## Pallycow (May 25, 2013)

Alex_B said:


> Pallycow said:
> 
> 
> > You overvalue your files
> ...



Opinions are never wrong.  I stand by my opinion.


----------



## kathyt (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> I don't think you guys understand how my family works. If you have someone's kid, you take pictures and put them on FB with whatever camera you have. It's part of sharing what you did with their kids. That's how it works. There is no contract. It's FAMILY. I think it's stupid to have a contract for family.
> 
> As far as reputation, I'm not really concerned about it. I don't have one. Especially where she lives. However, they are MINE. And they're not bad. They're a bit cool. Otherwise, they're just boring. I fixed white balance, did a curves adjustment then did some basic work in photoshop. Very basic. (The oldest wanted some really bad acne removed, her mom apparently thinks it's good to have a giant zit on your forehead.) I don't do big editing. My aunt thinks I do because of my son's eyes. His eyes are 3 colors. She assumes I do that in post because she mostly sees him indoors with crappy light. When I take portraits, I make sure his face is properly lit. When light hits his eyes, you can see the colors. Those who know him well can attest that his eyes really are three colors. My aunt thinks they're brown. She posts on everything I share that I need to "tone down the eyes", even when it's a jpg out of my phone that was uploaded straight from the phone without ever seeing an editing program.
> 
> ...


I would try to get on the Dr. Phil show, because this is over my head. You are spending way too much time worrying about what your family thinks of your images. Who gives a sh*t. Go shoot and continue to improve. That is all I can tell you.


----------



## vintagesnaps (May 25, 2013)

Never mind...


----------



## CowgirlMama (May 25, 2013)

You know what? I'm going to ask that this thread be closed. This wasn't supposed to be about me. I said "just curious what you would do" meaning what would you do if it was asked of you. Since you'd all rather try to decide what to do about my family, I'm done. You don't know my family. You don't know how it works. No one's freaking out that they're online. They WANT them online and they WANT them set public so they can share. So, SHUT THE HELL UP and *MODS PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD*.


----------



## kathyt (May 25, 2013)

You gave us the information. We didn't ask you about your family issues. Just sayin'. You might want to PM the mods to request them to close the thread. Lose the attitude. It will not help your situation either.


----------



## Steve5D (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> You know what? I'm going to ask that this thread be closed. This wasn't supposed to be about me. I said "just curious what you would do" meaning what would you do if it was asked of you. Since you'd all rather try to decide what to do about my family, I'm done. You don't know my family. You don't know how it works. No one's freaking out that they're online. They WANT them online and they WANT them set public so they can share. So, SHUT THE HELL UP and *MODS PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD*.




Surely no other family in history has been as dysfunctional as yours, right. Hell, my family put the "fun" in "dysfunctional".

But, just to be clear, here's my advice to you with regards to them demanding the RAW files: Politely tell them to go piss up a rope.

Now, howzabout you lose that big ol' chip on your shoulder, mkay?


----------



## Steve5D (May 25, 2013)

CowgirlMama said:


> I don't think you guys understand how my family works. If you have someone's kid, you take pictures and put them on FB with whatever camera you have. It's part of sharing what you did with their kids. That's how it works. There is no contract. It's FAMILY. I think it's stupid to have a contract for family.



If you truly believe that you have some sort of obligation to do anything with the images, then you cannot be helped, and you cannot be reasoned with...


----------



## Overread (May 25, 2013)

Ok people lets bring this to a close - each family is its own thing and lets not get caught up in flame wars of "Your family is more/less dysfunctional than mine.

Furthermore it is expected of users to be able to share their viewpoints without resorting to vulgar language or sniping insults at others.


----------

