Have I been wrong all this time? Getting ID from clients for model release.

Soul Gaze Photography

I lost a client last night despite a week planning. Normally I'd have gotten deposit or full free in advance, but knew her so was allowing her to pay in person. Everything was planned and set until I asked her to ensure everyone had their ID to verify identity when they sign the release before we begin. I've never had a client uncomfortable with this before, but they cancelled the session over it. Said that they'd never heard of needing their ID before and wanted to know if other photographers did this. I explained that every photographer is different, but I do it to verify age and identity of the client signing.

My legal council had advised it. All this time, this is the first client to question it. It was for both client and my safety in case of a minor (only way to verify age since some people look older) and in case of false identity or legal issues later such as violation of copyright etc.Have I been wrong all this time? I posted in another photographer group elsewhere and was laughed at over it. I get ID because It's peace of mind for me and I feel should be appreciated peace of mind for clients. I had thought I was doing the right thing and now losing her and some of the comments is making me question myself. Trying to eliminate all risk of liability on my end. Thoughts??

ian408

You'll never eliminate all risk of liability but I don't think it's at all unreasonable to verify a signature if you plan on using the photos for commercial purpose.

mercphoto

Is it just a portrait session? If you never plan to use those images for commercial purposes I do not understand the need for a release. We've never had to do one for a private portrait session before.

jonh68

I don't see the need of getting a release unless you are going to use the pics for commercial purposes.

johng

Elaborating on the above 2 comments: think of it from a consumer standpoint. Your a customer that wants to pay for goods/services and the provider wants ID so you prove you are who you say you are. Quite honestly, if I was paying for a portrait session with my son - no way would I even sign your release - therefor allowing you to sell the photo of my son to an ad agency and my son's image (or mine) gets used endorsing a product or viewpoint I don't approve of.

So I guess that's the question - are you turning around and selling images from your sessions for stock photos or other commercial purposes? If so, do you explain that to your customers?

ian408

johng wrote: »

Elaborating on the above 2 comments: think of it from a consumer standpoint. Your a customer that wants to pay for goods/services and the provider wants ID so you prove you are who you say you are. Quite honestly, if I was paying for a portrait session with my son - no way would I even sign your release - therefor allowing you to sell the photo of my son to an ad agency and my son's image (or mine) gets used endorsing a product or viewpoint I don't approve of.

So I guess that's the question - are you turning around and selling images from your sessions for stock photos or other commercial purposes? If so, do you explain that to your customers?

I think it's fair when you say you don't want your images to be used commercially and you might want to define that so there is no mis-understanding. But what if the release were being used for a boudoir session? I would want the release to indemnify and hold harmless and the ID to prove the model(s) are who they say they are and of legal age. For a private session, you might not feel that necessary-others might. Especially if they've built a successful business.

johng

Ian,
Since the OP stated that "everyone" needed to bring ID I'm assuming family portrait. I think the only case that matters is the OPs case. Let's see what the specifics of the session were and then we can have an informed discussion on whether or not requiring a model release with ID is necessary.

johng

For what it's worth, a glance at the OPs site looks a lot like ordinary portrait sessions. I don't see anything about boudoir in her product offering. We'll have to see if she chooses to respond or not.

Soul Gaze Photography

First, apologies for not responding sooner. I've been sick and took a break to recover. I'm finally back working as I feel able. Thank you to everyone who has added their input, I'll reply to them individually.

Soul Gaze Photography

ian408 wrote: »

You'll never eliminate all risk of liability but I don't think it's at all unreasonable to verify a signature if you plan on using the photos for commercial purpose.

That was my thought...and what my legal council recommended I do. They're in a bigger city than here though and most of my locals live by the whole 'trust your neighbor' mindset.

Soul Gaze Photography

mercphoto wrote: »

Is it just a portrait session? If you never plan to use those images for commercial purposes I do not understand the need for a release. We've never had to do one for a private portrait session before.

In this case it was a family portrait session. I've always used releases to clarify where photos will and won't be used as so I don't have to track them down later for permission. This was the first time I've ever had anyone question it. The response was so unexpectedly harsh that it really made me question myself despite doing it this way for so long.

Soul Gaze Photography

jonh68 wrote: »

I don't see the need of getting a release unless you are going to use the pics for commercial purposes.

I always get one just in case. In the past, I didn't and if their photos showed up on my website for advertising purposes or even just my portfolio or shared as 'session previews' via Facebook, they'd freak out. I use a release to clarify where photos will and won't be used so there is no later issues or chasing down for permission.

Soul Gaze Photography

johng wrote: »

Elaborating on the above 2 comments: think of it from a consumer standpoint. Your a customer that wants to pay for goods/services and the provider wants ID so you prove you are who you say you are. Quite honestly, if I was paying for a portrait session with my son - no way would I even sign your release - therefor allowing you to sell the photo of my son to an ad agency and my son's image (or mine) gets used endorsing a product or viewpoint I don't approve of.

So I guess that's the question - are you turning around and selling images from your sessions for stock photos or other commercial purposes? If so, do you explain that to your customers?

I honestly don't mind showing my ID for identity verification. In fact, I'd feel better if all business did so considering the way of the world. The thing is, I never even got as far as the release or anything in person. The session was planned, scheduled and ready. They'd not yet seen the release which they do get to read before hand (online or in person) and decline at anytime. I don't force the release regarding image usage. They can opt out of sections. Images are only used on my website, social media and similar advertising. As soon as I requested ID to verify identity for the release, as I've always done, I was told I had too many 'rules' and they were cancelling the whole thing. The one time I didn't get deposit in advance. Irony.

Soul Gaze Photography

ian408 wrote: »

I think it's fair when you say you don't want your images to be used commercially and you might want to define that so there is no mis-understanding. But what if the release were being used for a boudoir session? I would want the release to indemnify and hold harmless and the ID to prove the model(s) are who they say they are and of legal age. For a private session, you might not feel that necessary-others might. Especially if they've built a successful business.

I definitely want to define how the images will and wont be used to prevent misunderstandings. I got tired of the drama. The release had until now been a drama-free way to ensure everyone was comfortable on both sides and prevented problems. It's not as serious as with boudoir obviously, but some people are so serious with their privacy even fully clothed, it's just not a risk I wanted to take. I felt that it was best to start early being thorough than to have to go back and find clients.

Soul Gaze Photography

johng wrote: »

Ian,
Since the OP stated that "everyone" needed to bring ID I'm assuming family portrait. I think the only case that matters is the OPs case. Let's see what the specifics of the session were and then we can have an informed discussion on whether or not requiring a model release with ID is necessary.

Yes, it was family session. VERY large family session. One family member was acting as primary client and relaying information to the rest of the family. I was to take one entire family group shot, image of each separate family in a group and some individual images too.

Soul Gaze Photography

johng wrote: »

For what it's worth, a glance at the OPs site looks a lot like ordinary portrait sessions. I don't see anything about boudoir in her product offering. We'll have to see if she chooses to respond or not.

There's a lot of my content removed or not yet online. I've been in the process of re-branding so am starting over in some areas to better reflect my current skills. Part of why it's so important that I change the way I do things if I've been wrong all this time. I just don't see how there's been no complaints until now. I actually have to make most of them read the release. They just want to sign and begin. Yikes. I do offer boudoir, but limited as most of the people locally are a bit...well...old-fashioned so I've not yet been sharing publicly, but plan to start advertising the service soon. As for choosing to respond, apologies but I have been sick and out of office.

jonh68

Soul Gaze Photography wrote: »

I always get one just in case. In the past, I didn't and if their photos showed up on my website for advertising purposes or even just my portfolio or shared as 'session previews' via Facebook, they'd freak out. I use a release to clarify where photos will and won't be used so there is no later issues or chasing down for permission.

Just ask after the session is done, "may I use the pictures for my blog and website?"

It is what I do. Maybe I'm living dangerously but most of my clients say yes and are happy to share the blogs on their FB pages etc. If they freak out just remove the pics.

Seefutlung

You have your rules and your almost clients have their rules. In this case their rules sorta prevailed. I suggest you discuss your release(s) prior to the day of the shoot with examples. I can see many clients objecting to you using their likeness in a commercial manner. Having your clients show ID to verify age and identity probably isn't necessary. If they, your clients are willing to commit fraud, I don't think legally you are responsible to police their illegal actions. If your client commits fraud I don't think you are libel. Did your attorney also tell you to run their driver license number to make sure the ID is valid? Where does it stop?

Gary

Glort

Given the instances of stolen identity, fraud and all other scams these days, I lie about my details wherever possible and I am not under some legal obligation to provide correct info like to the gubbermint or for legaly binding matters.
If someone started asking for information that could be misused when it was not nessacary, i'd arc up too. It's not about what you may do with it, it's about what someone else may do with it. I don't know how well someone may protect the info I provide them or how honest their employees are or anything else. You may want to cover and protect your arse but I want to do the same with mine and mine comes first.

The only time I have asked clients for ID was when shooting glamour/nude sessions and the client looked young. In that case most women are more than happy to provide ID on the assumption they look potentially under age. They don't have to sign anything though. for some that were exactly legal age I have taken copies of drivers licences and blocked some info out just leaving the pic and birthdate which was all I potentially needed. If they have a faked ID, I have taken reasonable care and due dilligence so not my problem.

I have only asked for permission to display agreed pics and never had a problem with that. I remember one woman many years ago asked me to take her pics with her ex down which was fine as they were taken years before anyway but other than that, we don't have the mentality of the sUeSA to have to worry about.
Thank god.

Angelo

Soul Gaze Photography wrote: »

...I've never had a client uncomfortable with this before...

...All this time, this is the first client to question it...

You state ^ but obsess over this incident. Kinda like the tail wagging the dog, no?

.

Soul Gaze Photography

Angelo wrote: »

You state ^ but obsess over this incident. Kinda like the tail wagging the dog, no?

.

The tone of your response was not polite....there was no kindness in kicking me while I was down. :sick
At the time, I'd not had a client speak to me as disrespectfully as they had done. Had I posted the conversation, it would've been offensive to all. I had merely wanted to prevent future issues. It is my business to run how I wish. If a client doesn't feel comfortable, they have the right to opt-out or go elsewhere. I am no longer concerned about this issue and was going to delete the thread, but see there is no ability to do so. While here, I saw I'd missed your comment so chose to reply.

Soul Gaze Photography

---

Thread UPDATE

---

I have since changed my policies. I require a non-refundable retainer prior to reserving the date. Prior to payment, clients read any applicable contracts, releases and documents. They have the opportunity to ask questions or opt-out of sections such as posting images to my social media. Payment is due upon signing. I photocopy ID for anyone posing boudoir/nudes (no-exceptions!) so there is never a future issue of assuming underage. For all other clients, I verify not a minor (such as senior would need her parents to handle documents/payment) and that ID matches credit card if paying in-person. Otherwise, the majority of transactions are handled via secure online payment gateway with seller protection and client authorization prior to payment. As for why I use contracts/releases etc: I do so because it is peace of mind for myself and my clients. They know exactly how their images will and won't be used. I know they understand my workflow such as what they'll be getting and when. They are made aware of copyright law and how they can and can't use my images and more details. If I am ever taken to court by a client or have to take a client to court for non-payment or copyright violation, I'll have a better chance of protecting my business than with nothing signed at all. Everyone does things differently.

I later found out that potential client was only being so rude because they had something happen that resulted in being financially unable to go through with our $350 family session. Rather than to request payments or say something nice such as deciding to wait until another time of year, I was verbally attacked. I don't agree with it, but understand stress can make people lose their manners. I'm over it now, just wanted to clarify the situation presented as much of the replies to my inquiry seemed a bit negative. Thanks anyway for taking the time to reply and I hope my update is helpful to someone.

Cygnus Studios

Nice update. I'm a huge believer in specific contracts and covering your butt. Big thumbs up for doing what you can to protect yourself.

The only thing that may need to addressed is your "non-refundable retainer". Language in contracts is incredibly important. Some states have different terms/meanings. Deposit, retainer, installment, etc can vary in enforcement. I would recommend that you check with your attorney to make sure that you are using the correct term for your state(s) that you work in.

As an example, our lawyers use the word "fee" in all of our contracts.