The reason I might like to process them is personal preference, they did a great job but it doesn't mean I would not like a different perspective on a photo, which I now have the ability to do myself. To me as a customer that is a bonus.
On archival - it is a very good feeling of having the best quality possible for posterity. I'm pretty OCD with my digital backups. Redundant copies in the house and offsite copies in case of a disaster. In this case I definitely trust my ability to keep these safer than the studio. Not being derogatory to them in this respect, it's a simple fact that I have more interest in keeping my wedding photos than they do in years to come.
It wasn't a cheap job, they did process them and we bonded very well. I really liked the result and gave both the studio and the photographers on the day great feedback. We are now currently picking the shots and the layout for the printed album. Our choice of photographer was based on previous experience. They did the photos for my wife's sister's wedding. We did spend a lot of time discussing what we wanted, what kind of shots, who in them, etc. etc. No complaints there.
I'm sorry but I don't buy the loosing control argument. People could do worse damage with the jpgs alone. What is to stop anyone from doing a lovely collage job in MS Paint with them?
I think if you have chosen to give away digital copies, you are already running that risk and the argument is rather moot.
On the commercial aspect I totally agree with you, hence I was rather surprised that they said yes right away. The copies of the pictures (digital and prints) are up on a portal for sale. I expected a conversation on the RAWs and/or JPGs after a period of time only so they could canvass any expected sales.
My POV as a customer? I must admit is that If I was to do it again, I would go with someone that gave me a choice over those that flat-out just said no for artistic reasons.
Not trying to annoy you guys by the way, honestly interested in your professional point of view.
