Excellent thread! Thanks to all who have responded.
Quick question: If I took random photos of a carnival or whatever in a public park/place, including the strangers wandering around, etc, can I sell these photos, or do I need a release for each person prior to uploading them to SM for sale?
I used to do a lot of concert photography in private venues and sold the images on SM....all without a release. According to this thread I screwed up 6 ways to sunday... need to rethink this photography thing.
Thanks LiquidAir, I appreciate it! We did get permission from the paid photographer before I told her that I would do it. I'm not advertising her photos. Although they can be found on my website, they're not in my portfolio, homepage, or anything like that. I'm not sure if that matters or not.
I suppose that my business has gotten to the level that I should get a contract signed before booking events such as weddings. Do you know where I can find some good examples?
I am afraid I don't have a good source for a sample wedding contract. On and off I have been looking for one, but I haven't found anything useful yet.
Excellent thread! Thanks to all who have responded.
Quick question: If I took random photos of a carnival or whatever in a public park/place, including the strangers wandering around, etc, can I sell these photos, or do I need a release for each person prior to uploading them to SM for sale?
I used to do a lot of concert photography in private venues and sold the images on SM....all without a release. According to this thread I screwed up 6 ways to sunday... need to rethink this photography thing.
Thanks again for the info!
Rick
Generally, you can sell photos from public events without releases from your subjects. One thing I try to explain to people is that there is a cost involved in shooting and posting the photos-- some folks expect you to give them copies of images for free when they see you shooting them.
Explain to them you're happy to provide photos to them, but they'll need to pay the cost of shooting, downloading, uploading, etc (the expenses in other words). So while it might sound crazy to some to charge $5.99 for a 5x7 print when Wal*Mart will print 'em for 49-cents, Wal*Mart also isn't out there shooting, downloading and uploading those prints.
Another reason to explain prices like this is that technically you can argue that you're NOT using the photos commercially or profiting off a photo of someone-- you're just offering prints to cover your expenses. I'm happy sometimes just breaking even on events-- covering the gas and parking and all that-- sure, it would be nice to turn a profit, but to break even on shooting something you love (I shoot a lot of fashion shows) is pretty cool too!
Work something up with the organizers too if you can-- maybe a mention in the flyer or email announcement about prints/downloads being for sale on your site. That will help drive traffic to your site and make you look a lot more legit than the typical dude with camera.
And one more tip-- market yourself while you're at events. Talk to people, hand out your card-- they may not buy any photos from that event but I've had people hire me for something different all together simply because they met me at an event.
You probably can't really get anything from her for posted the photos on MySpace, but if you contact MySpace directly, they will remove her whole page pretty quickly. THey can't afford to mess with copyright violations once they are aware of them. That's an ugly thing to do, and doesn't really help you, but it is an option. For some people, their MySpace page is more valuable than the cost of some web images.
I agree, I think she oughta be comped some images in exchange for a model release. Heinous of her to use them without expressed permission and wiping out the watermark. If I was the official shooter it would disturb me to have someone else selling to the happy couple unless I'd frontloaded my fee so that prints were merely a bonus.
Larry Jacobs has a nice wedding tutorial that includes a model contract, probably web-searchable.
I'm going to take your friends side on this one: She's doing you a favor to promote your business on her special day and you could at least give her a print or two. After all, your shots are going to look real nice on you website at her expense (hall, dress, cake etc.)
If you play your cards right, you may even be able to sell prints to the guests and/or wedding party since she could easily refer people to your website.
On the other hand, she does have the right to have you take down the pictures on your site since you don't have a model release and you are trying to promote your business.
Any solution not to use printscreen?
Hi there,
These days, one of my client asked me how to print images from my site.
And they did it on a photo editor. She explained how she did. That was a print screen. I actually don't want to set a big watermark on each photo. But if not any solution, I have to do.
Does anyone have an idea?
Hi there,
These days, one of my client asked me how to print images from my site.
And they did it on a photo editor. She explained how she did. That was a print screen. I actually don't want to set a big watermark on each photo. But if not any solution, I have to do.
Does anyone have an idea?
Thanx in advance.
I use a very obnoxious WM on my photos....I get very bitches about it and those I do get all come from the forums Ipost on.....on the other hand I have been given KUDOs by some publishing companies: 1- for not giving my work away on the royalty free stock sites selling work for a few pennies and 2 for trying to protect my work with my bright and bold PROOF going across my work.....most of my work the WM doesn't go thru the real important parts some it does.............
Is your friend more important or that she screen copied some of the pictures.
If you want to keep your friend, just get over it. Never shoot for friends or family.
People do screen prints on your Smugmug stuff, that is how they steal them.
These days, one of my client asked me how to print images from my site. And they did it on a photo editor. She explained how she did. That was a print screen. I actually don't want to set a big watermark on each photo. But if not any solution, I have to do.
You need to balance your need to protect your photos with your need to have your clients view their photos online. An obtrusive watermark might keep someone from easily stealing a clean image - but a hacker will still be able to grab your photo with a screen print and remove the watermark.
In any case you should be very careful in designing your watermark.An obtrusive watermark always stops me from viewing photos. I understand that they are needed in some circumstances, but you need to balance your need to protect the images with your need to sell to your clients. Will your clients still be able to see enough of the image through your watermark to entice them to purchase?
To clear up some gaps here, her parents had already hired another photographer (the wedding was about 2.5 hours from where I live). I asked if I could take pictures for my website and she said yes, she wanted me to take pictures. When she asked for 'a few' originals, I told her they were for sale. I don't expect to make money off of the four hours I spent photographing her wedding, but I do for the six hours of editing and making collages for her (if she wants them, that is).
I don't know... I'm kinda still stuck on the fact that you want her to buy the files from you in the first place. If I ask a friend if I can bring my camera and shoot alongside the hired photographer, that's my choice. No one is hiring me for that. I would give him/her the best from that day without a second thought, but I agree that they would have to pay for prints.
Even if a friend asked me to bring my camera and shoot alongside the hired photographer, I still wouldn't make them pay for the digital files... I mean, it's just not what friends do. I'd just work on a few of the best and hand them over. You could say no, you don't have to do it - especially if they have a hired photographer.
If they asked me to be the hired photographer, well, that's a different story. But if I'm there as a guest with a camera and want to take photos just to work on my skills or whatever, that's not grounds for making the couple pay for the files, in my opinion.
I think you should back off and not go through with getting an attorney or deal with MySpace. As others have said, chalk it up to a lesson learned and forget about it.
I did not realize you went to the wedding as a friend just to take a few pics.
You are being a jerk now trying to make her pay for them. If she is really your friend then act like one and let her have the pictures no charge.
You just can't mix family and friends with business. If you are going to photograph family or friends you really need to do it for free.
Yeah i would never ask a friend or family member to shoot their wedding for my own personal benefit and then force them to buy digital copies. I would probably give them a CD with a very small watermark in the corner. If she's printing a bunch from Walmart for .07 that might be different. If it were me i would almost expect my friend to let me post some of them.
As a side note if you're really that upset just ask her to link to your gallery so that if other people look they know you did the work.
All kinds of different responses here. This is what I would do.
Give her the 6 photos without watermarks but your copyright/link on the bottom in a 'Web' size. Tell her she can use them on my space but she has to leave them the way you give them to her.
From everything I've read (IANAL), if you put the photos on your smugmug site to show your work you do not need a model release. You can even sell the photos to strangers. No issues.
Canon Gear: 5D MkII, 30D, 85 1.2 L, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 17-40mm f4 L, 50 1.4, 580EX, 2x 580EXII, Canon 1.4x TC, 300 f4 IS L, 100mm 2.8 Macro, 100-400 IS L Other Gear: Olympus E-PL1, Pan 20 1.7, Fuji 3D Camera, Lensbaby 2.0, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Alien Bees lighting, CyberSyncs, Domke, HONL, FlipIt.
~ Gear Pictures
From everything I've read (IANAL), if you put the photos on your smugmug site to show your work you do not need a model release. You can even sell the photos to strangers. No issues.
That's my understanding as well. You need a model release when the usage of that person's clearly identifiable image is associated with an idea or endorsement.
I don't believe using photos that I took of people for promotion of my business creates that. A reasonable person is unlikely to believe, browsing through a wedding gallery, that the people pictured are endorsing my business. Likewise with street photography -- unless I put a thought bubble above their head saying "Boy, Tom sure does take the best photos!"
Heck, you can sell pictures of a bride and groom to a billboard company without a model release if you like -- it's the responsibility of the publisher to ensure they have the necessary releases for their usage. No billboard company would buy an image which doesn't have a model release along with it, but I don't believe you would have an liability if they didn't.
Oh, and on the original issue, I agree with JohnBiggs -- I'd use the photos for my portfolio and I'd grant her personal license to use them as long as they had my name and web address attached. When one of her friends is going to get married the first thing they will do is ask their friends who shot those great pictures. Consider the lost revenue (which you aren't going to make anyway if she'd rather steal the images than buy them) a marketing expense. Sometimes a photo credit can drive far more sales than any single image would.
That's my understanding as well. You need a model release when the usage of that person's clearly identifiable image is associated with an idea or endorsement.
Precisely. If I take a street shot and someone buys it off my SmugMug site and hangs it in their living room, there is nothing the subject of the photo can do. They have no right to compensation or consultation for editorial or fine art use.
All kinds of different responses here. This is what I would do.
Give her the 6 photos without watermarks but your copyright/link on the bottom in a 'Web' size. Tell her she can use them on my space but she has to leave them the way you give them to her.
From everything I've read (IANAL), if you put the photos on your smugmug site to show your work you do not need a model release. You can even sell the photos to strangers. No issues.
That is 100% correct sure wish Smugmug could do something crazy so that could not be done! I am switching to center watermarks because of screen shots you can print a 4x6 low res photo off it if that's what they want..
Is your friend more important or that she screen copied some of the pictures.
If you want to keep your friend, just get over it. Never shoot for friends or family.
People do screen prints on your Smugmug stuff, that is how they steal them.
That is 100% correct sure wish Smugmug could do something crazy so that could not be done!
Whatever can be seen by the eyes or heard by the ears can be recorded. The absolute best way to prevent any of your images from being stolen is to make sure they are so bad nobody wants them. If that's not an option, than you need to strike the proper balance between allowing them access to view the images and not giving them so much that they can make off with it. This has a lot to do with the effort they need to put in to do so. If people can buy a 1mp download from my site for $10, they are unlikely to invest the hours of time it would take to screenshot a .7mp image from the screen and try to remove the watermark.
As nice as it would be if the Smugmug Wizards put some time into a "forced morality" feature to remove the desire to steal from viewers, I'd much rather have them working on coupons and packages -- a much taller order, it seems.
Comments
Quick question: If I took random photos of a carnival or whatever in a public park/place, including the strangers wandering around, etc, can I sell these photos, or do I need a release for each person prior to uploading them to SM for sale?
I used to do a lot of concert photography in private venues and sold the images on SM....all without a release. According to this thread I screwed up 6 ways to sunday... need to rethink this photography thing.
Thanks again for the info!
Rick
I am afraid I don't have a good source for a sample wedding contract. On and off I have been looking for one, but I haven't found anything useful yet.
However, anyone who is worried about model release issues out to read this link as a starting point:
http://www.danheller.com/model-release.html
Generally, you can sell photos from public events without releases from your subjects. One thing I try to explain to people is that there is a cost involved in shooting and posting the photos-- some folks expect you to give them copies of images for free when they see you shooting them.
Explain to them you're happy to provide photos to them, but they'll need to pay the cost of shooting, downloading, uploading, etc (the expenses in other words). So while it might sound crazy to some to charge $5.99 for a 5x7 print when Wal*Mart will print 'em for 49-cents, Wal*Mart also isn't out there shooting, downloading and uploading those prints.
Another reason to explain prices like this is that technically you can argue that you're NOT using the photos commercially or profiting off a photo of someone-- you're just offering prints to cover your expenses. I'm happy sometimes just breaking even on events-- covering the gas and parking and all that-- sure, it would be nice to turn a profit, but to break even on shooting something you love (I shoot a lot of fashion shows) is pretty cool too!
Work something up with the organizers too if you can-- maybe a mention in the flyer or email announcement about prints/downloads being for sale on your site. That will help drive traffic to your site and make you look a lot more legit than the typical dude with camera.
And one more tip-- market yourself while you're at events. Talk to people, hand out your card-- they may not buy any photos from that event but I've had people hire me for something different all together simply because they met me at an event.
Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
website blog instagram facebook g+
it's always pretty easy to just printscreen and save it.
Larry Jacobs has a nice wedding tutorial that includes a model contract, probably web-searchable.
Galleries here Upcoming Ranch/Horse Workshop
Hi there,
These days, one of my client asked me how to print images from my site.
And they did it on a photo editor. She explained how she did. That was a print screen. I actually don't want to set a big watermark on each photo. But if not any solution, I have to do.
Does anyone have an idea?
Thanx in advance.
I use a very obnoxious WM on my photos....I get very bitches about it and those I do get all come from the forums Ipost on.....on the other hand I have been given KUDOs by some publishing companies: 1- for not giving my work away on the royalty free stock sites selling work for a few pennies and 2 for trying to protect my work with my bright and bold PROOF going across my work.....most of my work the WM doesn't go thru the real important parts some it does.............
If you want to keep your friend, just get over it. Never shoot for friends or family.
People do screen prints on your Smugmug stuff, that is how they steal them.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
In any case you should be very careful in designing your watermark.An obtrusive watermark always stops me from viewing photos. I understand that they are needed in some circumstances, but you need to balance your need to protect the images with your need to sell to your clients. Will your clients still be able to see enough of the image through your watermark to entice them to purchase?
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
I don't know... I'm kinda still stuck on the fact that you want her to buy the files from you in the first place. If I ask a friend if I can bring my camera and shoot alongside the hired photographer, that's my choice. No one is hiring me for that. I would give him/her the best from that day without a second thought, but I agree that they would have to pay for prints.
Even if a friend asked me to bring my camera and shoot alongside the hired photographer, I still wouldn't make them pay for the digital files... I mean, it's just not what friends do. I'd just work on a few of the best and hand them over. You could say no, you don't have to do it - especially if they have a hired photographer.
If they asked me to be the hired photographer, well, that's a different story. But if I'm there as a guest with a camera and want to take photos just to work on my skills or whatever, that's not grounds for making the couple pay for the files, in my opinion.
I think you should back off and not go through with getting an attorney or deal with MySpace. As others have said, chalk it up to a lesson learned and forget about it.
Spread the love! Go comment on something!
You are being a jerk now trying to make her pay for them. If she is really your friend then act like one and let her have the pictures no charge.
You just can't mix family and friends with business. If you are going to photograph family or friends you really need to do it for free.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
As a side note if you're really that upset just ask her to link to your gallery so that if other people look they know you did the work.
Give her the 6 photos without watermarks but your copyright/link on the bottom in a 'Web' size. Tell her she can use them on my space but she has to leave them the way you give them to her.
From everything I've read (IANAL), if you put the photos on your smugmug site to show your work you do not need a model release. You can even sell the photos to strangers. No issues.
Other Gear: Olympus E-PL1, Pan 20 1.7, Fuji 3D Camera, Lensbaby 2.0, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Alien Bees lighting, CyberSyncs, Domke, HONL, FlipIt.
~ Gear Pictures
That's my understanding as well. You need a model release when the usage of that person's clearly identifiable image is associated with an idea or endorsement.
I don't believe using photos that I took of people for promotion of my business creates that. A reasonable person is unlikely to believe, browsing through a wedding gallery, that the people pictured are endorsing my business. Likewise with street photography -- unless I put a thought bubble above their head saying "Boy, Tom sure does take the best photos!"
Heck, you can sell pictures of a bride and groom to a billboard company without a model release if you like -- it's the responsibility of the publisher to ensure they have the necessary releases for their usage. No billboard company would buy an image which doesn't have a model release along with it, but I don't believe you would have an liability if they didn't.
Oh, and on the original issue, I agree with JohnBiggs -- I'd use the photos for my portfolio and I'd grant her personal license to use them as long as they had my name and web address attached. When one of her friends is going to get married the first thing they will do is ask their friends who shot those great pictures. Consider the lost revenue (which you aren't going to make anyway if she'd rather steal the images than buy them) a marketing expense. Sometimes a photo credit can drive far more sales than any single image would.
Cheers,
Tom B
Precisely. If I take a street shot and someone buys it off my SmugMug site and hangs it in their living room, there is nothing the subject of the photo can do. They have no right to compensation or consultation for editorial or fine art use.
Save $5 on a new Smugmug Membership
Host your website for just $3.45/mo with JustHost - Rated best web host of 2010
See my profile for a gear list & more
Good stuff.
Website: www.aaronbrownphotos.com
Facebook: www.facebook.com/aaronbrownphotography
Twitter: www.twitter.com/abrownphotos
As nice as it would be if the Smugmug Wizards put some time into a "forced morality" feature to remove the desire to steal from viewers, I'd much rather have them working on coupons and packages -- a much taller order, it seems.