Changing the brief after the quote

If you change your mind mid-commission, a small clarification before recording costs nothing, but a real change of register, length or scope after the quote is accepted is a new job with a fresh quote. The quote is the line between refining what you asked for and asking for something else.

What counts as a clarification

Adding one more detail to respond to. Clarifying which of two things you meant by an ambiguous line. Confirming a length preference the judge asked about.

These sharpen the brief the judge already quoted; they do not change its size or shape. A judge reading one of these treats it as normal pre-recording back-and-forth, the same conversation that happens on any well-written brief before work actually starts.

What counts as a new commission

Switching the register - worship to honest, playful to SPH - after the quote was priced for the first one. Asking for twice the length. Adding a scenario, a prop, or a setting that was not in the original ask.

Any of these changes what the judge planned their time around, and a quote reflects the specific job as described - change the job and the number that was fair for it stops being fair. This is not a technicality a judge is enforcing to be difficult; it is the same reason a contractor re-quotes when the scope changes mid-project. Consumer law applies similar logic to services stopped partway: under the EU Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU), a consumer who withdraws after asking for a service to start pays an amount "in proportion to what has been provided" up to that point. Platform terms and local law differ, so the terms of the service you actually used are what apply.

Why saying it yourself matters

The easy way to handle this badly is to let the judge discover the change on delivery, or worse, to describe the new thing as though it were always what you asked for. Neither is fair to someone who planned and priced against an earlier version of the brief.

The better move is naming it plainly: "actually, I'd like to change this to a different register - happy to take a new quote for it." That single sentence turns a potential problem into an ordinary re-scope, and a judge who limits revisions for a good reason will treat an honestly flagged change very differently from one they have to catch themselves. It is also the same courtesy Rate Cock's quote-and-accept flow is built to expect - a fresh charge for a fresh scope, not a silent swap on the original one.

Why this has no equivalent on the automated side

An algorithm has nothing invested in your first request, so changing your mind before submitting costs nothing and needs no announcement - there was no plan to disrupt. The same is true of retaking a measurement with the standard method: do it again, no one to inform. A judge's time is the variable a commission is built around, and that is what changing your mind mid-job actually spends, in a way running a photo through a scoring tool a second time simply does not.

A worked example

You accepted a quote for a two-minute honest read. Partway through, you realise what you actually want is something warmer - closer to reassurance than a blunt assessment.

That is not a clarification; it is a different register, and the honest move is a short message: "Actually, thinking about it more, I'd rather have a reassurance-leaning read than a strictly honest one - happy to take a new quote if that changes things." The judge might requote at the same price, since the two registers can be similar effort, or might requote higher if reassurance is more demanding for them specifically - either way, you have given them the chance to answer honestly instead of discovering the swap after the clip arrives and wondering whether you were ever clear about what you wanted.

Contrast that with simply telling the judge, after the fact, that reassurance was what you meant all along. That version puts the judge in the position of guessing whether they missed something in the original brief, when the truth is simply that you changed your mind - a normal thing to do, and one that costs nothing to say plainly.

The short version

Small clarifications, any time, no big deal. A real change of register, length, or scope, once a quote has been accepted, is a new commission - flag it yourself, expect a fresh quote, and the judge will treat the whole thing as ordinary professional adjustment rather than a problem.