Intimate photography question

[karenperez]

Hi everyone, I'm new. I was wondering... if you don't upgrade the package for intimate photos to at least digital film, can the pics not be blown up from 4x6? How about if you stick with the basics but pre-purchase the proofs, can they be blown up to 8x10 from the basic film proofs?

Also, are proofs available for the MK shoot?
Thanks!

 

[hiwaygal]

Hi Karen! Welcome to the DIS!!!

This is a great place to exchange ideas and information and everyone is very helpful!

One thing to keep in mind though...it seems Disney changes their policy on things quite frequently, so always confirm any information given here with your coordinator.

As for your question, the intimate package has changed just recently so you may want to check out this thread too:
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1037300

All of the information I have is based on our intimate wedding in September, so the info might be a little outdated (especially considering the changes noted in the thread above).

Disney photographers exclusively use digital film. I can't remember what our photographer told us, but the resolution on the images is VERY HIGH! They are, of course, professional grade. All of your photos will be originally in digital format.

DEFINITELY pre-order the proofs, it's the most inexpensive way to go. The proofs are just regular prints of all your images (no "PROOF" printed on them anywhere).

When you get your proofs/pictures/album, Disney will send a low-res CD of your images. They are small and I wouldn't try to print anything from them. You can email them and post them on your own website, but that's about it.

To purchase the HI-RES CD, it was $1000 at the time of your wedding (or a few weeks after), or you can wait three years and get it for about $100 (unless you are a UK bride, then you get the HI-RES CD with your photo package). I'm waiting three years (just 2 and half more to go! )

You can scan the proofs, but again, depending on the quality of your scanner, my guess is, you wouldn't be able to go too much larger than the 4x6 they provide.

With regards to the MK shoot, I'm sorry but I'm not sure about that. I would think you would be able to purchase those proofs as well, but someone else might have that answer, or, just ask your coordinator.

Hope that helps!

 

[karenperez]

Thanks for the info! I love this board. When it comes to photography, that's where it seems the $$ comes in. I wonder if they would let you use an outside vendor for the MK shoot too.

 

[hmgolden]

As far the MK shoot goes, you do get a copy of all the pictures that are taken during your shoot for no additional charge.

 

[MEME]

All of the pics are taken with a digital camera, therefore, you do not have to upgrade to digital photograpy.

The only real upgrade that I would recommend is pre-purchasing all proofs. I did this and rec'vd all of my prints (4x6) about 4 weeks after the wedding.
I paid $225.00 for these back in October, however, the cost could be slightly higher now.

I was then able to use the actual prints to enlarge and edit as I wished.

This package also includes all prints on cd, but they are in low-resolution. I will purchase the HIGH resolution cd after my three year mark as the price is reduced to $99.00.

Hope you find this information useful.

Congrats on your upcoming wedding....

 

[hiwaygal]

Thanks for the info! I love this board. When it comes to photography, that's where it seems the $$ comes in. I wonder if they would let you use an outside vendor for the MK shoot too.

You cannot use an outside vendor for the MK shoot, only Disney photographers.

You have a point that the photography part can be costly. That's probably the biggest reason I went with Disney as it's already included in the cost of the intimate. If you choose to use an outside photographer for your wedding part, it will cost you at least $500 more, and to "upgrade" the Disney portion to the MK shoot will probably cost even more (if you can even do that).

Many brides have been very happy with Randy Chapman, and there are other "outside" photographers too. Disney gets a "bad rep" because you don't get to choose your photographer before hand and their style may not be what you want. One way to get around this is to have some specific pictures/poses you want and let the photographer know. Disney photographers are professionals, and they did a wonderful job for our intimate wedding. My only regret is that I didn't ask for more pictures (I hate taking pictures anyway, so I was uncomfortable having them taken).

 

[JandJ]

One way to get around this is to have some specific pictures/poses you want and let the photographer know. Disney photographers are professionals, and they did a wonderful job for our intimate wedding. My only regret is that I didn't ask for more pictures (I hate taking pictures anyway, so I was uncomfortable having them taken).

I was an Intimate bride last year too, and I know things have changed, but I have to agree with hiwaygal, the Disney photographer we had was excellent, I cannot say enough good things about him! I told him we wanted pictures inside the WL lobby and that I would not stand in the grass and he was fine with that. He had suggestions and we had ideas and the pictures he took matched our style and I loved all of them (I like to point out that the pic in my sig was taken by a friend, not Disney). I also regret not getting even more pictures taken, but after smiling for 2 hours I was tired and my face hurt

 

[3DisneyNUTS]

I know I am gonna get flamed for this but I am a photographer and to copy proofs by scanning methods is stealing. If you want to make enlargements at your leisure the only legal way to do this is to get permission from the photographer (copywrite release form) or to purchase the negatives (for film shoots) or a high res CD. Any other method is illegal.

 

[hiwaygal]

I know I am gonna get flamed for this but I am a photographer and to copy proofs by scanning methods is stealing. If you want to make enlargements at your leisure the only legal way to do this is to get permission from the photographer (copywrite release form) or to purchase the negatives (for film shoots) or a high res CD. Any other method is illegal.

I'm glad you brought this up...you are correct, of course. No flames here!

Unfortunately, brides who use Disney don't have much of an option. The cost of the negatives (immediately after your event) is about $1000. However, if we wait three years we can purchase them at $99.

In many cases, those costs (or the costs of reprints, through Disney) are exhorbitant, so many brides choose to wait.

I would question if it's "okay" (still "technically" illegal, I'm sure) for brides to scan and reproduce their images to use for scrapbooks, and personal frames, etc. At least until we are able to purchase the copyright ourselves.

I think it's a great idea to contact Disney Photographic Services to see about getting permission to scan and reproduce your images. Especially for personal use. Don't have a clue what they would say....

 

[3DisneyNUTS]

I'm glad you brought this up...you are correct, of course. No flames here!

Unfortunately, brides who use Disney don't have much of an option. The cost of the negatives (immediately after your event) is about $1000. However, if we wait three years we can purchase them at $99.

In many cases, those costs (or the costs of reprints, through Disney) are exhorbitant, so many brides choose to wait.

I would question if it's "okay" (still "technically" illegal, I'm sure) for brides to scan and reproduce their images to use for scrapbooks, and personal frames, etc. At least until we are able to purchase the copyright ourselves.

I think it's a great idea to contact Disney Photographic Services to see about getting permission to scan and reproduce your images. Especially for personal use. Don't have a clue what they would say....

I am sure this is a grey area. Technically you are not supposed to reproduce them at all. BUT to enforce that is impossible. What could happen and sometimes does is that the photo finishers can be fined for reprinting copywrighted images and if they get busted then they will report the customer as well who will also be fined. Plus the original images will be confiscated so the proofs will be lost.

The costs are high because of the service provided. Disney photographers capture images that are unique to them. No other photographer has the freedom to shoot as the Disney photographers do. That is why the price is high.

Also in relation to other services they are not too crazy. People under value portraits IMO. Florists charge a ton for flowers for the bride, party and tables but quote a similar price for photography and people see it as high.

Being a photographer myself I am partial. I also think that some people think it is 'easy" to shoot therefore they balk at the prices. I mean everyone owns a camera how hard can it be ?

This is where the law was created because people didn't feel the prices were justified but still wanted professional portraits. So they would pay for the minimum package and then copy the prints elsewhere.

IMO the quality of a scanned print reproduction is not worth the effort. It is called a second generation print and when held to the original it is visibly inferior. Also labs have a harder time reprinting from those types of files since it doesn't have the original color balances from the camera.

I know this sounds preachy and I am sorry. I just don't want people think that copying a pros work is legal.

 

[MEME]

You have valid points 3disneyNUTS, but I was under the impression that the photographer (Disney in this case) would have to state their copyright policy in writing and the person commisioning the photography would have to agree by signing a contract?

As an intimate bride, I did not sign a contract with photography or DFW. In fact, all I had to do was sign off on a pdf file of my wedding day events, similar to a timeline.

Also, in my pdf file sent from Disney, they have a Q & A section that includes the following question:

Q. Can we order images in printable format, (high resolution)?

A. Yes, you can purchase them three years after your event on CD for the market price, which is currently $99. If you want to purchase them now, the cost is $1,000.

~Why would they sell a cd for printing purposes if they didn't want you to print from it?

Also, in the section about the intimate folio package they even say "You will also receive a CD of low-res images to help you share your day with family and friends."

I took all of this as them basically saying...do what you wish.

I'm not a lawyer or photographer, but do know that all parties would have to agree to this copyright jargon. I never agreed or signed anything saying otherwise.

Then too, I was informed that the cd of low-resolution pics are the 'negatives' (having negatives means you can reproduce images) in the digital photography age....is this not true?

Honestly, I feel that other situations (where customers sign copyright agreements and then reproduce images) will remain hazy unless copyright laws that were written in a different technological era (1970s) are altered to reflect the digital era today.

Thanks for your insight.

 

[3DisneyNUTS]

You have valid points 3disneyNUTS, but I was under the impression that the photographer (Disney in this case) would have to state their copyright policy in writing and the person commisioning the photography would have to agree by signing a contract?

No that isn't true. The law states that the photographer (as well as all artists) have a copywright once they create the image (music, painting etc.) No matter who hired them the image belongs to the photographer. The prints are what you purchase from that photographer but the image "belongs" to the photographer. Whether it is of you, your baby or the front of your house. Of course the photographer cannot just use the image willy nilly. They have to get permission from the person who commissioned them (you in this case) So if the photographer wanted to use your picture for advertising or put it on their website then you need to offer permission. BUT you cannot just take the images and do what you want with them since the image belongs to the photographer under the copywright law. From Sears to the most professional photographers all are protected under this law. Contracts don't need to be signed.

As an intimate bride, I did not sign a contract with photography or DFW. In fact, all I had to do was sign off on a pdf file of my wedding day events, similar to a timeline.

Also, in my pdf file sent from Disney, they have a Q & A section that includes the following question:

Q. Can we order images in printable format, (high resolution)?

A. Yes, you can purchase them three years after your event on CD for the market price, which is currently $99. If you want to purchase them now, the cost is $1,000.

~Why would they sell a cd for printing purposes if they didn't want you to print from it?

They offer the low res cd beacuse they want you to spread the images around for family friends to see and then they will want to order prints from them. Most people do not want to wait for 3 years to have the wedding album made so they either order the albums/enlargements through Disney or buy the high res CD for $1000 .....Sears charges $199 for a high res CD BTW for a sitting of 6 images so $1000 for the CD of all your wedding pictures of a once in a lifetime event is not that expensive in relation or compared to a bunch of flowers. but I digress the reason they sell the CD for $99 after 3 years is because by that time the chances of you ordering from them are minimal. They cannot hold the images forever in storage so they purge the files basically. Better to make $99 then nothing.

Also, in the section about the intimate folio package they even say "You will also receive a CD of low-res images to help you share your day with family and friends."

I took all of this as them basically saying...do what you wish.

No no no They want you to share so they can upsell. It is a classic photography move to sell. Just like proofs. The more you show them around the more people are gonna say "I want one!"

I'm not a lawyer or photographer, but do know that all parties would have to agree to this copyright jargon. I never agreed or signed anything saying otherwise.

Then too, I was informed that the cd of low-resolution pics are the 'negatives' (having negatives means you can reproduce images) in the digital photography age....is this not true?

Honestly, I feel that other situations (where customers sign copyright agreements and then reproduce images) will remain hazy unless copyright laws that were written in a different technological era (1970s) are altered to reflect the digital era today.

Thanks for your insight

Whomever told you the low res are negatives misinformed you. The closest thing to negatives are the high res files. Where photographers used to sell the negatives, they now sell the images on disc . High resolution you can print from and low res are just for viewing. But like I said above you don't have to sign a contract for copywright. Just like buying a music CD those are copywrighted to protect the artist from getting their hard work stolen. Same thing with photography. Why should some 1 hour photolab make money printing images that belong to someone else? That screws the photographer out of their due payment and gives the client less than desireable pictures. Only until the $1000 (or 3 years & $99) do the images become yours to print as you wish. Just look at what happened to napster for copying and sharing of files illegally. He was fined severely and was basically forced to do it leagally and give the artists their deserved cut. Change that to photography and it is the same law being broken. It is just harder to track photography since the prints hang on a wall.

 

[3DisneyNUTS]

Also MEME please don't think I am ganging up on you. I just wanted to inform. The problem lies if say you can find a lab that will print from the proofs if they get caught the proofs they had will be confiscated. I don't know what Disney charges for a proof set but that has to be a nightmare.

Also I am sure Disney will not go after people scanning at home but the quality of the secondary print should be enough of a deterrent to make worth not scanning for pics to give to family and friends.

 

[MEME]

3DisneyNUTS, I don't think you are ganging up on me. As I said, I'm not the expert and don't profess to be. .

DPS is who informed me that the purchase of cd (low or high) becomes our ownership to do what we wish (ie. print, scan, post on web etc...) so I do agree that "Disney will not go after people".....

Thanks again for your insight...

 

[MEME]

3DisneyNUTS, I don't think you are ganging up on me. As I said, I'm not the expert and don't profess to be. .

DPS is who informed me that the purchase of a cd (low or high) becomes our ownership to do what we wish (ie. print, scan, post on web etc...) so I do agree that "Disney will not go after people".....

Thanks again for your insight...

 

[karenperez]

Although true, I don't agree with the fact that pics "belong to " photographers. I am paying that photographer for the service of taking my pics, shouldn't that make the pics mine? I paid for them and I should be able to do whatever I want with them.
Napster got busted because noone was paying ANYTHING for the services they were getting, we pay photographers, and it isn't cheap. Too many stipulations in photography. I need a basic photo course just to understand the technology, and know what I can and can't do with what I've purchased. For example, I had no idea that I couldn't reproduce legally under certain circumstances. If I hadn't read this thread, I still wouldn't know!

 

[3DisneyNUTS]

Although true, I don't agree with the fact that pics "belong to " photographers. I am paying that photographer for the service of taking my pics, shouldn't that make the pics mine? I paid for them and I should be able to do whatever I want with them.
Napster got busted because noone was paying ANYTHING for the services they were getting, we pay photographers, and it isn't cheap. Too many stipulations in photography. I need a basic photo course just to understand the technology, and know what I can and can't do with what I've purchased. For example, I had no idea that I couldn't reproduce legally under certain circumstances. If I hadn't read this thread, I still wouldn't know!

The service you are paying for is to take pictures at the wedding but the image is the artwork of the photographer so the image belongs to the photographer. The prints of it is what he sells which is what you are purchasing.

My point with napster was that people were buying music cds and uploading them and giving away copywrighted material to other people for free. Therefore the artists were not getting their proper payment and their stuff was being bootlegged.

That exact process is happening with the photography when a customer buys a picture and then illegally copies it. People mistakenly think that since it is an image of them (child, pet etc) that it is theirs to do whatever they want. It is not the image is copywritghed to the photographer.

You hire the photographer to shoot the wedding, then you pay for prints and albums and such. Unless your contract specifically states that you own the digital files or the negatives then you do not own the images, the photographer still does. Technically people are hiring the photographer for his skill, time and then pay for the printed package. The images always stay as the photographers property unless the customer pays additionally for them hence the $1000 for the images on disc. (or 3 years $99).

The reason why photography is so expensive (especially wedding) is just what you stated. It is extrememly techincal and takes years to understand. Plus it is usually a 9-10 hour day at minimum for the shoot. Most photographers meet the bride and groom before the ceremony and follow them till the end of the party.

Then after the ceremony is over the production end is HUGE. It is hundreds of hours of working on the proofs and albums getting enlargements made. Meeting with the bride and groom afterwards to do the final selections of the prints and all the orders. Each wedding takes between 6-12 months from start to completion. It is more time consuming than people can imagine. So that is why photographers charge so much. It is far more than one day of work.

So forgive me if I am being blunt but people spend more on flowers but will always complain about the photography prices. They have no idea how much it entails to do a wedding from start till end. The behind the scenes is where the most time is spent.