Why does the request for source files leave designers frustrated, vulnerable and devalued
Being a graphic designer has its challenges—especially if you’re freelance and self-employed. The marketplace is diverse, and so is the pool of clients, each with their own preferences, expectations, and assumptions. It’s a bit of a lottery. But one request that always leaves me deflated is this: “Can you send an editable file?”
This stipulation is an important and often sensitive issue in the design profession. While requests for source files aren’t uncommon, they remain a point of deep contention. Many designers—myself included—feel strongly about this. Not out of stubbornness or unwillingness, but because of the implications. Source files are not really deliverables; they are the core of our creative process, the foundation of our intellectual property, and in many ways, our livelihood.
What are source files?
Source files are the working documents used to build a design. They contain all editable layers, fonts, images, guides, and styles that make up the final product. These files are not intended for general use—they’re like a chef’s recipe, containing all the raw ingredients and methods behind their dish.
In most cases, designers deliver final outputs (e.g. PDFs, PNGs, JPGs), not the source files used to create them (e.g. AI – Adobe Illustrator, PSD – Photoshop, INDD – InDesign).
Why designers push back
A small number of designers might agree to release source files in certain cases (sometimes reluctantly), but it’s typically handled as a separate negotiation, and rightfully so. Compensation for source files varies widely—often between 25% and 100% of the original project fee, sometimes more. It’s discretionary, and it reflects the value of handing over complete control of the work.
So why do clients request source files in the first place? Based on experience, it’s often so they can make their own amendments. That’s very convenient for the client, but for the designer, it can come at a cost. Most of us include two to three rounds of changes in our pricing. That should be more than enough for a thoughtful, organised process. But when clients want source files to bypass that altogether, the designer feels they’re trying to future-proof their spend. That usually means doing so at the designer’s expense.
Once a client has your source file, they don’t need you anymore. They have the software, they have some level of skill, and they have the temptation to adapt your work without you. Regardless of how trustworthy the client seems, organisations under pressure to save money will almost always take the cheaper option.
The real cost
This isn’t just about lost income. It can be damaging to your reputation. I once had a client who commissioned me to design their annual report. The following year, they came back expecting a steep discount to recycle the work I did the year before—a request I dismissed. They didn’t have the source file—but they had the software to tinker with the PDF I submitted the previous year.
I later downloaded their latest report from their website and it was a mess. They had used a low-resolution version of the file, so the visuals were pixelated. The layout was broken. Custom diagrams had been replaced with default Excel charts. It looked like someone had tried to recreate a professional’s work—and failed.
Worse still, I had proudly displayed the original report within my portfolio and on social media. Anyone who downloaded the new version might have assumed that was my work. What does that do to a designer’s credibility and reputation?
Another risk: the file being shared. A client may know how to open and edit a file—but do they know things like how to prepare it for print? Probably not. And so the printer steps in. Many printers now offer “graphic design services.” They now have a file they can modify or repurpose for other clients. Maybe their “designer” takes on side projects. Suddenly, your work is everywhere—and you’re the only one not being paid for it.
Here’s another scenario:
I was hired as a freelancer to produce a monthly magazine. My monthly role was to take all of the camera-ready ads, article text and images provided by the client, and lay out a 40-page magazine. My client and I are now “going our separate ways.” The client is claiming that they paid me to produce the template for the magazine, and they want ALL my working files for the past 2 years (InDesign, Photoshop, etc.), to give to the next designer for future production.
Source: https://aigasf.org
Clients don’t own the source files
There’s a common misconception that commissioning a design means you own everything. That’s not how it works. In practice, clients purchase the rights to the final outputs, not the building blocks used to create them. Unless explicitly agreed upon, source files remain the intellectual property of the designer. You wouldn’t dine at a Michelin-starred restaurant and expect the chef to hand over their recipe. But somehow, designers are expected to do exactly that. Why?
Yes, there are exceptions—logos, simple editorial layouts, or text-heavy documents. But for complex, high-value projects, handing over source files is not standard practice… and clients are not entitled to them.
What’s worse is when this expectation isn’t stated in the initial brief, the terms of reference, within the original tender or expression of interest. If submitting source files is a requirement, it should be made crystal clear upfront. Designers can then decide whether they want to bid or not. I’ve poured countless hours and days into proposals, only to be blindsided by this request at a later stage. It’s not just frustrating—it’s demoralising.
Flexibility doesn’t equal exploitation
Like many designers, I go above and beyond for my clients. I work to tight deadlines, I make myself available on weekends, and I often work during anti-social hours. While my standard quotes include 2–3 rounds of revisions, I rarely keep count—I want the work to be the best it can be, and I often do more without additional charges. That’s my commitment to my craft and the client.
But even flexibility has limits.
The emotional toll
What saddens me most is how often this situation arises—and how it makes me feel—it’s like the movie Groundhog Day. Each time, I’m forced to explain my stance, I’m made to feel awkward, uncooperative, even insubordinate—when in fact, I’m simply protecting my work, my business, and my peace of mind.
The most important aspects of a project should be the quality of the service and the value it delivers—not whether the designer is willing to relinquish files the client has no business asking for. At the time of writing this, it feels almost political. Like the ‘Orange Dictator’ applying pressure tactics to get what he wants, such as unfairly applying tariffs. Most designers don’t want to give away their source files, but unfortunately some are worn down or desperate enough to give in.
A note to clients
Here’s something clients may not always consider: freelancers depend on repeat business to survive. We have expenses—subscriptions, equipment, software, accountants, taxes—and months where no work comes in at all. Meanwhile, many clients earn a monthly salary and work for organisations with funding and revenue streams. For them, a source file might feel like nothing more than a shortcut. For me, it’s my entire business model.
Am I being paranoid? Maybe. Overprotective? Possibly. But after more than a decade of self-employment, I’ve learned—often the hard way—to be cautious. I’ve had incredible clients and fulfilling projects. But I’ve also been burned—by a lot of clients, fellow designers, and even so-called collaborators. Loyalty is rare. And trust? Hard-earned. You’re beaten and become jaded.
Clients working within large organisations or development agencies might find this reluctance puzzling. After all, in many such settings, there’s a strong culture of transparency—sharing reports, studies, raw data, or even creative assets with other teams or partners is common practice. But for freelance designers, the landscape is vastly different. Every project is a competition—against Canva templates, AI-generated visuals, other agencies, and even self-taught designers who watched a few YouTube tutorials.
While the client themselves may have no intention of misusing a source file, once it’s handed over, control is lost. The file might be passed to a colleague, a printer, or another agency, knowingly or unknowingly. That’s why designers must think beyond the immediate request. It’s not about mistrust—it’s about safeguarding their livelihood in a hyper-competitive, rapidly evolving market. It’s a kind of cold war—it’s not personal, it’s just business.
Here’s another thought, when a large organisation chooses to engage a freelancer or a small business instead of a large agency, you would imagine there are a few commendable reasons. Maybe it’s to keep costs low, maybe it’s because they want to give the ‘small guys’ a chance, maybe it’s to empower and develop those who wouldn’t normally get such opportunities. If that’s the case, why have a stipulation that has could be detrimental to their income and ultimately their livelihood?
To summarise…
All I want to do is focus on what I do best—design. But this issue keeps returning like a boomerang. Clients don’t need the source files. They get what they commissioned. Source files should be an option—not an expectation. Designers shouldn’t be penalised or made to feel “difficult” for choosing not to hand them over.
It’s worth considering: by demanding source files, clients may be unknowingly alienating some of the best designers out there. Many top-tier creatives and agencies won’t even entertain the idea of handing them over. At the end of the day, this isn’t about ego or obstinance. It’s about fairness, respect, and sustainability—for the designer, and for the integrity of their work.
Whether it’s “wrong” to submit source files depends on the circumstances. It’s a matter of good communication, clear contractual agreements, and understanding the client’s needs. But what about the designer’s needs? The submission of source files means very little to the client, but it means a lot to the designer.
Put yourself is their position.
Written by: Blue Zebra Creative
