FoxiWhat a proofing gallery should actually show a client
A proofing gallery is not a smaller version of your delivery. It is a decision-making instrument, and most arguments about selects come from a proof that was built badly — too many images, too finished or too raw, at a resolution that either flatters or misleads. The choices you make here quietly define what you owe the client later, because a proof is a promise about the final. This is how to build one that helps the client choose and does not hand you unpaid work.
How finished should a proof be?
The useful standard is developed but not retouched. Correct exposure, correct white balance, your look applied, cropped to your intended framing. No skin work, no object removal, no per-frame local adjustments. This shows the client what the picture is without spending your retouching hours on frames that may not survive selection.
Proofing genuinely raw and uncorrected files is a mistake in most commercial contexts. Clients are not trained to read a flat raw and mentally add the grade — they see a dull picture and reject a good frame. If you must proof unprocessed work, say clearly in the gallery description that the colour and contrast are not final.
Proofing fully finished images is the opposite mistake. It costs you retouching time on every frame including the rejects, and it sets a level of finish you now have to match across the whole delivery. If your proofs are all beautifully retouched, that is the standard you have implicitly quoted.
Proof quality sets the expectations you then have to meet
Whatever the client sees at proof stage becomes their mental image of the final. This cuts both ways. If a proof looks unfinished, they will assume the final needs heavy work and start asking for it. If a proof looks perfect, they will assume perfection is the baseline and any frame that falls short of it will get flagged.
The safest position is consistent. Every proof at the same level of finish, so the client is comparing content rather than polish. The moment one frame in a proof gallery is noticeably more finished than the rest, that frame becomes the reference and you have created a standard by accident.
This is where the AI temptation bites. It is very easy to run one cluttered proof through an editor to make it presentable. Do it and you have just shown the client a level of background cleanup you now have to deliver on every frame they select — and with a per-image tool there is no way to apply that treatment to a whole gallery at once.
The one place a quick AI preview genuinely helps
There is a legitimate version of this, and it is a conversation rather than a proof. When a client cannot picture a direction — the product on a clean background instead of the shelf, the portrait against something other than the office wall — showing them one edited frame is faster and clearer than three paragraphs of description.
Foxi AI is reasonable for this: upload a frame, apply a look or describe the change in words, get something back usually in under a minute, at a cost of around 5 credits for everyday looks. The point is that it is a sketch to align on direction, not an item in the delivery.
Label it as such, explicitly and in writing. This is a mock-up of the direction, not a proof of a deliverable. Keep it out of the proofing gallery itself, send it in the email thread, and make sure the client understands that reproducing that treatment across a set is separate work with its own quote.
Watermarking and resolution
Serve proofs at a size that supports judgement and not much more. Big enough to see expression, focus and framing on a laptop; small enough that the file is not a usable substitute for the delivered image. Do not serve full-resolution files at proof stage as a courtesy — courtesy at proof stage is how images end up in use before they are paid for.
Watermarking is a business decision more than a technical one. A discreet mark protects against casual misuse; a heavy diagonal bar across the frame makes it harder for the client to actually judge the picture, which defeats the purpose of the gallery. If your client relationship and contract are solid, a light mark or none may serve you better.
Whatever you choose, apply it consistently, and check how your gallery platform handles downloads, right-click protection and expiry. Those behaviours change between platforms and between plan tiers, so confirm the current settings on your own account rather than assuming last year's behaviour still holds.
Fewer images proof better
The instinct to show everything comes from a fear of hiding the frame the client would have loved. In practice, a large proof gallery produces worse selections and more work. Decision fatigue is real: past some point the client stops evaluating and starts skimming, and skimming favours the obvious frame over the good one.
A tighter proof also protects your own judgement. You culled for a reason. Putting near-misses back in front of the client invites them to overrule decisions you made with the brief in mind, and you will spend the next email defending a frame you already rejected.
If you are nervous about cutting deep, keep the near-misses accessible but not shown. Hold them in a separate folder and offer them only if the client asks for more coverage of a specific moment or setup. That gives you the safety net without the noise.
- Proof at developed-not-retouched, consistently across every frame
- Serve a screen-appropriate resolution, not full-size files
- Keep direction mock-ups out of the proofing gallery and label them clearly
- Show your culled set, not your near-misses
- State in writing what level of retouching the final delivery includes
Frequently asked
Should proofs be retouched?
Usually not. Developed but not retouched is the standard that shows the client the picture without committing your retouching hours to frames that may be rejected, and without setting a level of finish you then have to match across the whole set.
Is it a problem to show an AI-edited version of one frame at proof stage?
Inside a proofing gallery, yes — it becomes the reference standard for every other frame. As a clearly labelled direction mock-up sent separately, it is genuinely useful, provided you state that reproducing the treatment across a set is separate work.
What resolution should proofs be?
Large enough to judge focus, framing and expression on a laptop screen, and no larger. Serving full-resolution files at proof stage makes the proof a usable substitute for the paid delivery.
How do I stop a client asking for retouching I did not quote?
Define the included level of finish in writing at booking, show a sample before-and-after of your standard finish, and keep your proofs at a consistent level so no single frame accidentally raises the bar.
Try it on your own photo
Foxi runs this kind of edit in about a minute — upload a photo, pick a look or describe the change you want, and see the result before you pay for anything.