- Last post
- 31 Responses
My client is argumenting that i should provide him with my psd´s and all the source files rather than just the rendered final piece, i dont want to because is my process and I dont feel like I should provide him with all my layers of work as i am sure he will use them to produce other works out of it!!!
Whats your thoughts?... i need bullets to fight him back!
really annoyed! on top, this client not even paying me a photo session worth quite a bit of money.....
First off, was there a contract signed?
Just say you made it in Fireworks
You need to be honest with your client, then, that source files are not part of the package, and give the reasons why. If they can't or don't want to understand, then simply walk away from the deal.
Alternately, tell them you can provide them, but jack up the price accordingly.
" i dont want to because is my process and I dont feel like I should provide him with all my layers of work as i am sure he will use them to produce other works out of it!!!"
There's a reason there......
I look forward to the thread a few months time 'i got screwed by a client'. Perhaps you should read the warning signs here, if the client is already getting unpaid for photo sessions and is already arguing over the delivery of source files, then as a business, is it cost effective doing work with this organisation?
If you have any misgivings then don't do it. (You're certainly not required to and this sounds like a bad client anyway; what with the unpaid photo session work...) Only in rare cases have I ever handed over source files and that's only been with clients that I really enjoy working with / have trust and respect for.
What is it that this client does? You might be able to use that in your argument. For example if they were a record company you might say, "When I purchase one of your records do I also get the source tracks so I can do my own remixes?" Something in that vein...
Anaolgies can sometimes back-fire and I have never been a fan of them.
What I am fan of is open and clear communication which frames the relationship between design studio and client which sees each party very upfront about the benefits of the relationship and what each party is getting out of it.
In that environment, saying 'Our source files are the intellectual property which you could use to produce additional work without paying a fee' That said, there should be no issue in supplying the raw design artifacts such as type, photography and illustration (depending in licensing from the various suppliers).
A conversation like that at least makes it clear where design sits in the production(i.e. the thinking, process and manufacturing) of their material and shows them what it is they're actually paying for.
And if you end up giving them the source files just flatten the layers.
A magician doesnt reveal his tricks.
thanks for your support....
The bottom line is that when you do business with anyone, you get the end product; you can't buy or get their processes along with it.
You don't get a recipe for a takeaway pizza with the pizza, you don't get a pattern for a particular shirt you buy, you don't get the schematics for your new mouse along with the mouse. Design, advertising and related work is the very same thing.
It doesn't matter that it's a service, rather than a manufactured product. And if the client can't get that through their heads, you need to bail, and bail fast.
give them a modified psd, flatten some of the layers so they get something that allows some wiggle room of modification but fuck all really.
besides, they won't have a first clue what to do with them anyway. they'll open them and suddenly realise there's not some magical 'do my work for me filter / button' and either come back to you or go fuck themselves.
"You don't get a recipe for a takeaway pizza with the pizza, you don't get a pattern for a particular shirt you buy, you don't get the schematics for your new mouse along with the mouse."
OH GOD ENOUGH OF SHIT ANALOGIES
You don't turn over a condom and re-use it!
Thats it I have told the client that if he does want the source files we need to agree a price for them...
yeah flatten the layers and put a nice subtle penis watermark over the entire thing — that'll teach him.
flatten all your layers and supply a psd. simples.
I've given clients source files in the past but only when they've paid for them as part of my contractual agreement with them.
I don't really see what the problem is. You either agreed to hand over all files at the end of the project as part of a contract or you didn't.
If you don't have a contract, that's your issue. You can either tell them to fuck off or give them what they want. It's up to you as there's no binding agreement either way.
Then keep it simple, say there's no agreement and that you'd be happy to discuss releasing them for $x or that there's no possibility per your company policy etc. It seems reasonably clear cut and that it's more your choice to release them since you're not contractually obliged to but be aware of the potential imapct on your client relationship.
I usually include a line about ownership of source files in my contracts and it might be worth updating your future contracts to cover this eventuality as well as it does crop up from time to time.