# Does this seem right? Photo Shoot Result



## BigMike1911 (Feb 2, 2013)

My SO paid for a make over and photo shoot and she bought 10 pictures on CD for about $150. 

She sent them to me and I was a bit shocked at the resolution / file size.

As an example:

0.2MB JPEG file with a resolution of 1463*2048 @240 DPI.

The images seem to blur with pretty much any level of zooming in.

All 10 images are about 3MB altogether - I was expecting about 3 or 4 mb per file!

Does this seem right/normal or are my expectations too high?

Thanks.

Mike


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 2, 2013)

If you were given low-resolution copies of the originals, that may well be SOP for the photographer........ to keep you from violating copyright laws.


----------



## BigMike1911 (Feb 2, 2013)

She was told that she could make prints of the pictures that she paid for, so I would expect better resolution that that right?


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 2, 2013)

Do you have any written contract, especially one concerning the images you received?


----------



## bunny99123 (Feb 2, 2013)

Yes! You got riped off.  You should have received sharp high resolution photos.  Take the disk back to the person, and have her look at the disk in front of you if possible.  When, I give a disk to someone, it is their's to do as they wish, and they print very well.  That is why you bought the disk.  To me that is a lot of money, so I would demand money back, because a conflict with photographer does not lead to a good reshoot, IMO.  Good luck


----------



## BigMike1911 (Feb 2, 2013)

Not as far as I know, I'd have to check with her.


----------



## KmH (Feb 2, 2013)

1463*2048 is the pixel dimensions. The 240 PPI can be changed by the lab that makes a print.

But at 240 ppi a print would be 2048 pixels / 240 ppi = *8.5 inches* on the long side and 1463 pixels / 240 ppi = *6.09 inches* on the short side.

At 100 ppi it would be a 20.48" x 14.63" print.

I charged $750 for 10 high resolution portrait files on a disc.


----------



## jake337 (Feb 2, 2013)

KmH said:


> 1463*2048 is the pixel dimensions. The 240 PPI can be changed by the lab that makes a print.
> 
> But at 240 ppi a print would be 2048 pixels / 240 ppi = 8.5 inches on the longe side and 1463 pixels / 240 ppi = 6.09 inches on the short side.
> 
> ...




So the images on the disk will print just fine by a lab but the photographer made sure that they couldn't be used for any other purposes?  Correct?


----------



## jake337 (Feb 2, 2013)

bunny99123 said:


> Yes! You got riped off.  You should have received sharp high resolution photos.  Take the disk back to the person, and have her look at the disk in front of you if possible.  When, I give a disk to someone, it is their's to do as they wish, and they print very well.  That is why you bought the disk.  To me that is a lot of money, so I would demand money back, because a conflict with photographer does not lead to a good reshoot, IMO.  Good luck



Just because you give the client the right to use the images on the disk as they want doesn't mean every other photographer should.


----------



## pixmedic (Feb 2, 2013)

all the pertinent information should be in the contract. it should have detailed exactly what the client was getting on the disk, the quality of the images,  and what they were allowed to use it for.


----------



## KmH (Feb 2, 2013)

jake337 said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > 1463*2048 is the pixel dimensions. The 240 PPI can be changed by the lab that makes a print.
> ...


They could be used for other purposes.
The PPI value is meaningless for electronic display. My 22" computer display is 1600 x 1200 pixels.

The client can change the PPI too, and print the photos themselves.

Another issue is going to be the aspect ratio of the image on the disc and the aspect ratio of the desired print size.

2048 x 1463 is a 7:5 aspect ratio. 2048/1463 = 1.4
5x7 is a 7:5 aspect ratio - 7/5 = 1.4

8x10 is a 5:4 aspect ratio - 5/4 = 1.25
Most DSLRs deliver a 3:2 aspect ratio image - 3/2 = 1.5


----------



## jake337 (Feb 2, 2013)

KmH said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > KmH said:
> ...



Ok.  So what might the reason be for small file size?  To negate the client from  re-editing to their own tastes(spot color perhaps)?

I am pretty clueless on the subject so I am just asking.


----------



## KmH (Feb 4, 2013)

HowStuffWorks "How File Compression Works"

HowStuffWorks "Why are my digital photograph files so huge while photos on other Web sites are much smaller?"


----------



## bunny99123 (Feb 5, 2013)

KmH said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > KmH said:
> ...



But, why? I do agree it should be put into a contract for sure, but if you buy the disk, and the understanding it is your's to do as you please.  Then why would a photographer limit the printing size and resolution.  Let's get real...in the real world some people scan and make extra photo's in which I do not agree with. If I bought a disk from a photographer, and was told that I could print photos from it, then decent resolution photos should be on there.  I think it is greed.  I know how expensive it is to be a photographer, and the time spent in pp, but treating people decent has to be in the business, because Photography depends a lot on "Word of Mouth" for most.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 5, 2013)

bunny99123 said:


> But, why? I do agree it should be put into a contract for sure, but if you buy the disk, and the understanding it is your's to do as you please.  Then why would a photographer limit the printing size and resolution.  Let's get real...in the real world some people scan and make extra photo's in which I do not agree with. If I bought a disk from a photographer, and was told that I could print photos from it, then decent resolution photos should be on there.  I think it is greed.  I know how expensive it is to be a photographer, and the time spent in pp, but treating people decent has to be in the business, because Photography depends a lot on "Word of Mouth" for most.




Perhaps there's no written contract (that's my vote), and the OP was told the CD would be lo-rez images that could be posted on FaceSpace and MyBook... but he/she just either just didn't hear that part or refused to believe it.


----------



## pixmedic (Feb 5, 2013)

480sparky said:


> bunny99123 said:
> 
> 
> > But, why? I do agree it should be put into a contract for sure, but if you buy the disk, and the understanding it is your's to do as you please.  Then why would a photographer limit the printing size and resolution.  Let's get real...in the real world some people scan and make extra photo's in which I do not agree with. If I bought a disk from a photographer, and was told that I could print photos from it, then decent resolution photos should be on there.  I think it is greed.  I know how expensive it is to be a photographer, and the time spent in pp, but treating people decent has to be in the business, because Photography depends a lot on "Word of Mouth" for most.
> ...



your probably right...and this is EXACTLY why a contract is important. a lot of people think that they are just "getting lucky" when a photographer doesn't insist on a signed contract. in fact, it is very much the opposite. the contract defines the relationship of the deal, and should outline exactly what the photographer expects of the client, AND what the client should expect of the photographer. It protects BOTH parties, and is definitive proof as to what was promised and what should be delivered. without that signed contract, there is very little to no recourse for a client since they cannot "prove" what they were promised. it is all hearsay at that point. 

so....contracts FTW!


----------



## bunny99123 (Feb 6, 2013)

Oh, well then I get it.


----------



## Pallycow (Feb 6, 2013)

When I make cd's for customers I give them two folders on it.  One for web usage, low res files, and one for printing, high res files.  

I crop mine and prep for print based on their order.  So if they are going to want different things printed later, they can contact me to prepare such images for new order, or crop themselves and hope for the best.

I see nothing wrong here, the OP just didn't know what he had.  The photog gave them what they paid for, and those images can be printed at the sizes they ordered, just not at larger sizes they might want to order.  So when seeking out a photog, make sure you mention you'd like higher res files for possible enlargements at a later date if that is what you want.  If your  "package" includes 8x10 sizes and lower...don't be surprised when you get something like the OP got.

Too many people focus on the wrong thing.  They think every file has to be 300 for each print size.  People forget you can print a good sharp 24x36 at 72.

keith laid out the numbers and links...so for any confused...read.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 6, 2013)

BigMike1911 said:


> My SO paid for a make over and photo shoot and she bought 10 pictures on CD for about $150.
> 
> She sent them to me and I was a bit shocked at the resolution / file size.
> 
> ...


If the photographer is good, than you got a SWINGIN' deal. She's the one that got ripped off at only $150 for that.


----------



## BlairWright (Feb 6, 2013)

Yea, that's super cheap, even at 4x8" printable resolution. We charge well over that for a single file.

I never saw you comment on the quality of the shots, how do they look other than the resolution?


----------

