RAW submission

[will jordan]

I’m a very recent convert to digital photography, I clung to my N90s and Velvia as long as possible.  

Now that I’m working with digital I’m always coming across things I’m unsure about. Here’s a question I’m hoping some of you can help out with. If a magazine’s digital photo submission guidelines call for an unedited RAW file, would you think it best to submit the .NEF file straight out of my D80? I use Elements and Adobe Raw and have noticed that a file extension option upon saving is .RAW and so I’m of course confused as to which extension the magazine would like.

Would you think that submitting a slightly processed .tiff file in this situation would be a bad idea?

Thanks for any insight!
Will

[Zach Matthews]

Will –

I know you have editorial experience yourself so I’ll skip the basics.

[John Bennett]

To answer your question directly.
I’m Canon, my understanding is that Nikons NEF fomat is a RAW format. Potato/Patato

RAW vs Jpeg submissions
I would say it depends 🙂

1) As a general rule if guidelines request a,b and c, you give them a,b and c else they may just throw the submission out without really giving the images the time of day. It’s a risk your taking by not following the guidelines as an unestablished contributor. If they ask for contact sheets, you send them…I dont feel RAW should be any different if your trying to get your foot in the door and your name in front of the AD.

However
2) As Zach noted some publishing houses will have the budgets, staff and infrastructure to edit material to their liking/needs. Others won’t.
So I would say it depends on how big the publisher is. On a couple photogrpahy based sites I frequent there have been discussions around the growing equest/demand for RAW. Many feel it’s small publishers without the where withal and possibly even the technical no how to edit RAW files requesting them for no other reason than thats the thing to do, adding to it. Is it a big house with a dozen publication or more publications that might rightfully be assumed to have the staff and artists?

3) One publication I deal with does have the resources. They wanted RAW+low res jpeg (for preview). Thats what I supplied. Over time the relatoinship with the AD has grown and he no longer wants my raw files. He trust me and he knows the quality of my work. In other words a) he may not be able to improve on my work, b) he trust that I’m not manipulating images and c) I’m saving him alot of time. See point #2. Time spent eiting dozens of RAW images from contributors, is time not spent working on the cuurent or next issue.

4) Assignments I shoot for them I will continue to provide RAW. *Technically* they own exclusive rights to the photos for one year, I can’t even upload them for

[Zach Matthews]

Many feel it’s small publishers without the where withal and possibly even the technical no how to edit RAW files requesting them for no other reason than thats the thing to do.

John’s making my point for me.

[Morsie]

I’m with you guys. Edit the Raws to how you want them to look, after all you were there at the time the image was taken and know what it was really like.

I submit large tif files and have never had a magazine complain.

Morsie

[David Anderson]

It depends.

Can you edit an image ?

Some of the mags I deal with want raws because some photographers have no idea how to do a good grade on a photo and have no understanding of how ink hits the page – they may also want to fit images from different photographers into the same spread and need them to match up.

If you send them a Jpeg that’s over sharpened, over saturated, blacks pumped to the limit and vignettes from one end to the other you might be creating a lot of work for the art director in fixing your ‘work’.

In my experience, art directors think it’s their job to put the photos on the page and it’s the photographers job to hand them over so they can get on with it – that said there has been some change in how they want photos presented and clients differ in what they want.

Ad agency’s for example now seem to ask for a fully graded & re-touched tiff AND the raw..

My view has always been to give them what they want so I get the work (and my wife gets the money ;D) – none of them seem to have time to argue with me about color cast or megapixels anyway.. 😉

PS – Zach, I thought you only shoot Jpegs ??

www.dsaphoto.com

A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.

[will jordan]

Thanks for the input, I appreciate the different viewpoints. I’m usually one to follow directions/guidelines, but I think in this case I’m going to proceed with submission of JPEGs.

I think that this particular publication may fall into the category of not having the resources to thoroughly evaluate and/or process RAW files.

I try to keep my post processing to a minimum. It goes without saying that I strive to get the proper exposure in camera. From there I do most of my processing during raw conversion and in 16 bit format.

Thanks again!

[Zach Matthews]

David –

I’ll shoot in RAW if the image is technical (sunrises, for instance) and I know I’ll be fixing it later.

[Buzz Bryson]

I’d suggest calling or e-mailing to verify that the magazine can open raw (.NEF, for Nikon) files for whatever camera you have.

[Phil Monahan]

An editor’s point of view:

We ask for RAW because we don’t trust photographers to understand our art-direction and printing processes. It’s better for the art director to have too much information (RAW) than too little (JPEG).

Another problem is image size. To turn a digital photo into a double-truck spread (across two pages), you need a big file. Rather than explaining pixels and everything to photographers, we simply ask them to shoot the biggest file the camera can produce.

Once we know that a photographer is capable of editing his own images, we readily accept jpegs (as Zach has noted). For images less than half a page, RAW is hardly ever required.

My favorite submissions come with two folders–one with RAW images, one with jpegs. The images in the two folders have the same names, just different extensions. So I preview the jpegs, and then send the RAW files of the images I like to the art department.

If you really want an editor to like you, rename all the files so that they are easy to identify. If the images are of brown trout and streamers, give them titles like monahan-brownstreamer1.RAW. Having the photographer’s name on the file helps.

Learn how to use ftp, and you’ll save a lot of time and money.

Phil

[Ben Cochran]

An editor’s point of view:

We ask for RAW because we don’t trust photographers to understand our art-direction and printing processes. It’s better for the art director to have too much information (RAW) than too little (JPEG).
Phil

To expand on this comment, from Phil, from an assignment photographer’s perspective: When I first started shooting digital assignments for publishers, they wanted the RAW files for the exact reason that Phil stated. On many of the shoots, the publisher will also send some of their reps to be on set, most often an AD or GA would be on set, even on remote location assignments. I spent a lot of time talking with the AD’s and had one publisher that set up a workstation for me in their Art department, as we had a very extensive and long shoot. What I learned from the AD’s and GA’s are as follows.

A new photographer that cannot follow direction will be an old photographer that they do not use anymore. A photographer that gives us larger unedited files is one that we may work with again, depends on quality and ability to get the shots. We are educated pro’s that studied art and the software that we use extensively! It is considered an insult when a new unknown photographer thinks that they can do our job better. Photographers do not, generally, understand proper workflows and have no idea of what CMYK profiles really are or how the printing process is so much different when we print in CMYK. We hate having to correct edited files, as many are such a mess due to the fact that the photographers do not understand the huge difference from a RGB gray scale and one in CMYK.

Like all things in life, if the photographer is willing to earn our trust we will give it. We have to have the RAW files, in the beginning, as we don’t have time to waste on cleaning the messes that they create. If they also send TIFF’s with the RAW’s and jpeg’s, we will look at some of their TIFF’s. If the TIFF”S are still in layers and done correctly, or require little correction in a particular layer, we will thank them for making our work easier and look at more of that particular photographers TIFF’s first. Caveat to this is: THE TIFF LAYERS MUST BE NAMMED CORRECTLY!!! The photographer that can post edit correctly for CMYK and provides industry protocol TIFF layers that are ready for CMYK; they are the ones that we will want to use first and most often as they make our work easier. On the same note, if they are delivered with arrogance and need a lot of work— we don’t have the time and will move on to another photographer. If the photographer is concerned about their copyright’s then they should learn how to enter it into the metadata, if they don’t know how to do that, we certainly don’t want them messing with what we consider our work.

Also, as Phil mentioned; it is easier to stretch a 16bit (Raw equivalent or DMG)TIFF or PSD than it is an 8bit jpeg with a bicubic softener. One can take the equivalent RAW file and stretch it out 700-800% before any major distortion may be noted, a jpeg will not touch that.

Bottom line here is this: Getting to hand in TIFF’s and having them excepted is a sign of respect from the AD and GA’s. It is one that MUST be earned and once a photographer has a book of published shots and a good reputation with other publishers, then they can submit TIFF”S and some even JPEG’s. As Phil stated, rename the files and folders properly as the bottom line is this: The easier a photographer makes their work, the more that they will want to use that photographer. As David Anderson put it best; it is better to get the work.

I can’t really speak for smaller publishers as they do vary from one to the next but again, I would follow their direction while giving them choice. If their publications generally print badly, move onto another publisher as the photographers reputation is vital in this industry.

[Zach Matthews]

Ben –

I think your perspective on this is a whole pay grade above the level of my comments.

[David Anderson]

Hey Ben, you forgot to mention the MOST important thing about working with an art director – how do they like their coffee ?

www.dsaphoto.com

A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.

[anonymous]

I think I have to echo Zach’s comments with regard to where the images are going and the context.

While its all fine and dandy to say the RAWS should be nailed no anything needed

[Ben Cochran]

Thanks Zach, it certainly was not my intention to make people feel that they will never be able to get published. Guess my overall message was one of stating that it is a business and as photographers, we are also sell’s people. Best to get the work, if that is what the goal is. That was the message that I was trying to convey and I certainly was not trying to say that anyone else’s approach was wrong. Just sharing some of my own experiences and acquired knowledge for anyone that it may help…

LOL On the Coffee David Anderson  ;D The GA’s are easy to get off of the set but the AD’s do get their extra respect. For the ones that want to get to involved during the shoot, make sure they get LOTS of extra coffee: It brings an even better end-of-day chuckle, on remote shoots.  😀 ;D

By the way David, did a concert shoot at the National Theater a week ago… I sure do have a lot more respect for you now mate. 🙂 My left arm for a flag or at least one solid … 😛

[Author]

Posts