Every once in a blue moon, I will get a request to schedule a photoshoot and I am told that they only want us to send them the raw images rather than edited jpegs. Most of the time this is requested because the potential client is hoping to save money and not pay as much, thinking we will discount our services. Other potential clients say that they want to edit the images themselves (rather than select a photographer that fit’s their style). Releasing raw files, however, is NOT something that we offer, and this is why:

RAW files are ugly. Have you seen them? Even though they hold a ton of data, they are typically flat and usually not as flattering to look at prior to being edited.
Having possession of the raw files is like having the negatives (if related to film photography). It is the base file, or the ‘owned’ file from the producer (the photographer). It is not standard practice to ever give these files away as their possession is a way to protect the photographers copyright.
The photographer’s metadata and copyright are typically embedded into each raw file, which stays with the image indefinitely if it is handled correctly, ethically and legally. This metadata is meant to show anyone the creator of the image. If someone changes the aesthetic of the image with their own editing, they have compromised the integrity of the image and have infringed on the ownership and rights of the image.
Asking a photographer for raw images is like asking a painter (artist) for their paint, canvas and the painting to be half complete already.
Raw files are HUGE and do not easily transfer. We would spend an exuberant amount of time and money just trying to transfer all of your raw files to you.
If raw files were sent to a client, it is not common that they would have the software to even open up the images on their computer, leaving them unusable. Spending money on the necessary software could be the money they tried saving from the professional photographer in the first place.
It is very unlikely that everyone has the ability to store or fit raw images onto their computers due to a mere lack of storage space (again, did I mention these files are HUGE?).
Photography is art and the way that the photographer edits their images signifies their trademark or brand. Their artistic style is how they market their business, and the edited images are how they represent their style and look to the world to be recognizable as theirs. By releasing raw images to a client to edit them for themselves is saying ‘Do whatever you want to these images, I don’t care about my business or my work!’. I, personally, would never run the risk of someone else editing, representing as their own or posting my images in an unprofessional or trendy manor as they are an extension of my business and my reputation. Snarky i.e.: have you seen some of the work out there? lol

Now that you understand why raw files aren’t released, let me show you examples of raw vs edited images. these are just cheesy screenshots of some before and after’s on my computer to show a quick example but, this difference is astounding. Could you even imagine having the raw images on the left? If this doesn’t bother you, then you might as well use your cell phone to take pictures. The two backdrop images at the bottom are even more intense. Even through they’re not the same image (I’m being too lazy to go pull the raw file on the last image and had the first handy within the same gallery of pics), the last image shows the extra steps one would have to take to bring it up to speed. Why in tarnation would anyone want to do that on their own?