Did shoot - But model does not want images used

[Michael_Lambert]

Hey Peoples.

So i have been putting together a new website which i hope to go live with shortly.

However my issue has come to this, i sent a link to a few of the girls i have shot who i have signed releases for ( Trying to do it right ) well three of the girls that i have on my site ( the majority of my clients) have basicly asked me not to use there pictures.

Long story short - a few months ago they wanted calenders made for there boyfriends so i had them sign my standard release saying that i can pretty much use there images for anything and everything execpt porn.

We where supose to do a series of shots over the summer to get the selection of images they wanted for the calenders. Well they came over one day stayed much longer than expected had a good time and got a bunch of different shots.. It was a themed night but they seemed to have more than one theme in mind much more than we talked about.

Well they left that night, no payment was exchanged as it was a long term thing and they would pay for the final product ( The Calender ).

Well now many months later, after many attempts to contact them and finish this they have kind of brushed me off.. They did get interenet quality shots of the shoot and that was the end of it.. nothing else from them.

So now i feel that well i will be compensated by doing what any photog would do use the pictures i took on my website as my release says.

Now - They are telling me to remove them. I replied to the one girl letting her know that i need to recoop my time and efforts and that if they want to hold up there end of the agreement fine i will finish the calender or they can pay me for my time that day. They dont want the calender they claim the images where not what they really expected and they have shown no intent on payment.

My portfolio is very small and i am trying to put something together so i can show models to try and add to it.

What should i do, What would you guys do? I know legally i am in the right i belieave.

regards

[PhotosGuy]

I replied to the one girl letting her know that i need to recoop my time and efforts and that if they want to hold up there end of the agreement fine i will finish the calender or they can pay me for my time that day. That pretty much covers it, doesn't it? Are they legal age? If so, they signed the release & received fair value in return (They did get interenet quality shots of the shoot )

I'd explain your position in a letter to each of them, return receipt requested, & leave the images up. The next step, if any, is up to them.

[Michael_Lambert]

Oh they are legal age. They did sign my release and i did make them read it and say they understood it verbally infront of myself and my wife. They signed it and then my wife witnessed it also signs.

This is a blurb off it, i kind of copied it from another release i had seen.

"For good and valuable Consideration herein acknowledged as
received, and by signing this release I hereby give the Photographer/
Filmmaker and Assigns my permission to license the Images and to
use the Images in any Media for any purpose (except pornographic or
defamatory) which may include, among others, advertising, promotion,
marketing and packaging for any product or service. I agree that the
Images may be combined with other images, text and graphics, and
cropped, altered or modied. I acknowledge and agree that I have
consented to publication of my ethnicity(ies) as indicated below, but
understand that other ethnicities may be associated with Images of
me by the Photographer/Filmmaker and/or Assigns for descriptive
purposes."

My biggest problem is i want to move from this Hobbyst enviroment and get more into serious work, make it more a part time profession instead of just for fun. And i seem to have a real issue worring if i have upset or ofended someone. Something i need to get over.

[ssim]

I would pull the shots off of my site. I've had shots displayed that I had releases for and many months later they had a change of heart and wanted them off which I did so. Mind you I was paid up front so that is different.

Legally, you are probably in the clear to put them on your site. If the community is such that word can get around about the dispute you might want to reconsider. By removing the images you show that you have some decent morals about you and this can work in your favor down the road.

If you do decide to keep the images up you might want to make sure that these releases are valid in case they decide to take you to court to remove them. Never hurts to be ready.

It kind of sounds like they are no longer with their respective boyfriends and hence no need for the calendars. The one thing about dealing with women is that they have been known to change their mind every now and then.:rolleyes::):rolleyes:

[Michael_Lambert]

Yea,

The issue is i had taken these shots in April.. No payment and infact i had put some of the shots on my facebook ( the totally PG ones ) and i had gotten request from them then not to show them.. So i removed them as it was not an issue.

Now Many months later i am looking to release a new website and only have 6 girls whom i have releases for. I have a few girls whom are looking to see my portfolio which by taking these three out cuts in in 1/2 :(

I know i am in the clear legally, but i guess like you said its more a word of mouth thing.

[AndreaBFS]

Are the shots unflattering? If the models feel that the shots show them in a poor light, I can see why they might not want to see them used. Can you put yourself in their shoes and evaluate whether that might be an issue? I only ask because you said they said they were "not what they expected" and I think that is a valid question.

I would hate, hate, hate to have unflattering shots of myself plastered all over someone's site and I would see that as a reason to fight a release... if I felt that the photographer didn't really hold up his end of the bargain enough to warrant me holding up mine.

Again, that's a question only you can answer (unless you post the shots).... but I see a lot of shots posted I consider pretty unflattering and a lot of the time it's the newer model photographers who haven't quite learned how to pose well and use good light. Ya know?

[Michael_Lambert]

Andrea,

I can understand where you are coming from, and yes over the last couple of years i have been evolving trying to better myself as a photographer. And they where completely aware of that. Infact they came to me because i had photographed a friend of there and they loved that persons shots. I think infact these ones where better and i guess you guy's can judge for yourselfs.

The friend who i first shot, She was one of my first atttempts. (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=411723)



The girl who is asking that her shots not be used. (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=511351)

I honesty think her shots are decent... what one would expect i think from a very new photographer... And she knew it. If anything i think my Post work might need some work ( Crops and White balance.)

[Ook]

(edit: mr. lambert got in before me which renders my first paragraph not applicable, but I'll leave it for posterity)

I would hate, hate, hate to have unflattering shots of myself plastered all over someone's site and I would see that as a reason to fight a release...

Yeah, if that's true, I think that they could probably claim that to be a "defamatory" use and perhaps have a good case. Mind you, if they were unflattering photos I doubt the OP would want to use them on the site anyways.

To chime in with my $0.02, what about having a less public section of your site, which you could share with prospective clients (login required or some such system), and have the girl's pictures on there? Then they wouldn't be publicly available. The fact that you would have to grant access to that section of the website would do well to back up your claim that these images are for publicity purposes only IMO.

[Michael_Lambert]

Ook,

I honesty did not think of that. I could setup my website using what i can with out stepping on toes.. and then put the shots in question on a seperate link and just have like a showcase link to share with potiental clients.

I guess the only thing that gets to me.. Is they come over, they enjoy themselfs.. they do all there own posing they stop ever few mins and review the shots on the imac setup in my studio to see if they want to redo any.. and not once did they ever question anything.

My wife says it was a bunch of girls who just wanted to experience being a model for the night and then left it at that, that they had no intentions of doing anything with the shots just wanted to have a fun night out.

[Ook]

I haven't done anything beyond fairly basic web design, and am not sure how easy a system like that would be to implement, especially since it seems your site is just about ready to go, but if it would be feasible, I hope that might solve your issue.

It does seem like these girls really took advantage of your time and hospitality. I had a look at the pictures you linked to btw, and think they are quite well done and tasteful. I didn't realize they were glamour-style shots with partial nudity, I would guess some of the hesitation might be because of that as well?

[Michael_Lambert]

Honestly,

I dont even have the glamour style on the website. When i was shooting they asked about doing doing some semi nude stuff and asked if they posed if i would not post them on my website of facebook.. I told them that i do use one online board for help and i would want to post them there.. and assured them they where all professional, and they where cool with that. Which is why i posted the glamourish shots.

The shots i was using of her are the ones where there is no implied nude.. in her underwear yes.. however non of the ones with out.. it was once they got out of there underwear is when they asked me not to post the ones i was going to take.. and i am willing to hold that end up.

And even then, i never posted the semi nude ones even on here - I anything show exposure and i have a few have never left my computer..

[DStanic]

Sounds to me like they grabbed the web-sized shots and figured it was good enough for them, so why bother paying you for bigger ones? People will sign stuff without fully understanding or careing, they will just say yes so you will shoot them. I'm sure you are in the right, just use your best judgement.

[milorad]

My advice to models is not to sign a release until they've seen the pictures.
Of course, my advice to photographers is to get a release before you start shooting.


I honesty think her shots are decent... what one would expect i think from a very new photographer... And she knew it. If anything i think my Post work might need some work ( Crops and White balance.)


I looked at that thread you linked, and I agree, they're exactly what you'd expect from a new photographer. Unfortunately, I TOTALLY understand why that girl would not want those images permanently on the internet.

The lighting isn't artistic or flattering, it's documentary. The poses are like the first few frames of a soft porn shoot. I'm sure that her intention was to have some cheeky pictures, but with those pics, I think it really looks more like she's done some cheap porn.

If I saw them with no explanation, I'd be wondering where the rest of the set was, with the various buzzing accessories.

I don't mean to be harsh, just putting myself in her shoes for a minute.

[Michael_Lambert]

You get cheap porn, By looking at those pictures?

Put yourself in her shoes, and through out the shoot knowing that these pictures are going to be used on a professional website execpt for the semi nude/nudes ones seeing the pictures as they are created as i said they where reviewing them on the mac every out fit change and never once show any sort of concern that i am making them look cheap pornish.

I could understand that point of view if they showed up, we did the shoot and i showed them the pictures after the fact and they did not like them. What you are suggesting is like going to a resturant ordering a meal eatting the whole thing and then telling the waitress you dont want to pay for it cause you did not like it. Yet you consumed it all before they had a chance to correct the issue.

If they did not like the shots they would have seen it after the first set.. You dont sit through 0ver 8 hours of shooting when with in the first 20 mins you did not like what you where getting.

[Michael_Lambert]

I pulled the images i was using my website that contained this model in question. These are the images i was using. Please share your thoughts on it... I really dont see it as a cheap porn attempt but my views may differ from others.

#1
http://www.michaellambertphotography.com/tresgirls/13.jpg

#2
http://www.michaellambertphotography.com/tresgirls/11.jpg

#3
http://www.michaellambertphotography.com/tresgirls/1.jpg

#4
http://www.michaellambertphotography.com/tresgirls/12.jpg

#5
http://www.michaellambertphotography.com/tresgirls/0.jpg

[PhotosGuy]

These are the images i was using. Please share your thoughts on it... Not bad shots & there's less there than you could see on a beach. Some people just like to control & complain?

[Michael_Lambert]

Well i mean aside from the first shot which i would have no issues removing i don't see the complaint on the other ones. Given yes they may not be perfect shots but she knew i was not perfect to start with lol.

I don't think the shots are horrible nothing that i don't think could not be cleaned up post.

[Twitch1977]

Hey Michael,

I would use the shots on your site and here's why.

Firstly you have a signed release and there's no court in the fair world that is going to negate that. Clearly the pictures are exactly what you would expect to get wearing those outfits and posing in that manner. There was no trickery here, no subtle upskirt shots or anything that would give a result other than what was expected by the model. They entered into a contract by signing your release, that release will be binding.

Secondly you need to get something from the shoot. If you spend your time taking the pictures and get no payment and on top of it can't use the pictures then you have received nothing. On the other hand they received their internet sized pictures. That is a one sided exchange and makes no sense at all. They can't expect you to donate your time to take pictures of them.

I would email them offering to let them pay you for your time and internet sized pictures you delivered in exchange you would not use them on your site. Otherwise I would put them up and not think twice about it.

Kurt

[bildeb0rg]

You've been played sukka. ;)
They had a BLAST working the camera, got some some pics for their Myspace wall, and now they're done teasin' you.
Unless yiou're twelve or reeeeeeally naive, quit the boo-hoo, grow a pair and use the shots.
Women have been doing this for eons, just get used to it.

[cdifoto]

If you pull the images off the site at their whim, it kind of defeats the purpose of a release, no? ;)

[Zansho]

Michael, I feel for your situation. It's not a good feeling when a model tells you that you can't use the images, but you have all the legal means to do so.

I don't really see "porn" in these images, but maybe my porn eye ain't working :P. In all honesty, you have a signed release from them, they haven't paid you anything for your time/trouble to photograph them, and I suspect in all likelihood they probably grabbed the images off your site by right clicky and save as.

You can negotiate with them. Send them an invoice for the images you shot thus far, and state on the invoice that if you're paid for your time and trouble to get these images, you will take them down and provide them a CD/DVD of all the "porn shots." Then, they can make the calendar themselves if they want from that point on. In exchange, you won't post them on your site.

One question though, when you entered into the agreement with them, did you indicate that you would get paid up front or after the calendar was delivered? If that's the case, they may be thinking that since they poo-poo'd the calendar, they don't owe you anything.

[Michael_Lambert]

The oringial verbal agreement was they wanted a calender done consisting of different shoots over the different parts of the year, Given as a gift at christmas.

The payment was.
- They pay the out of pocket expense of the Calenders when the calender is completed and we find out the total cost.
- I would shoot them for free in return i am getting the experience and the work to add to my portfolio.
- I processed the shots and put them into a HMTL weblink and sent the link with only interenet quality shots so they could share... Working with the word of mouth idea as they had hinted that other friends of there where looking for the same kind of work... So it was going to be some decent exposure for me.

3 days after they got the link i seen the images popping up as there facebook profile shots, which i had no issues with. It was not untill a couple of months later after being ignored or feeling i was ignored and got not reponses from them i decided to put a few of the shots up on my own facebook just for some exposure. It was when i did that i got a message from this one girl asking that i remove the picture and at that time i noticed they removed there copies of my pictures.

And then things have just gone down hill from here.. Back in July when she asked me to remove the pictures she stated then that there was nothing wrong with them.. but now she feels there is.

Here is the facebook conversation..

Amanda W

July 17 at 6:02pm
can u please take off the pictures that i am in
thank you
amanda

Michael Lambert

July 17 at 6:57pm
Its done,

Was there a problem with them?

Amanda W

July 18 at 3:44pm
thank you
no there wasnt anything wrong with the actual pictures. just my boyfriend didnt like the fact that they were up. thanks so much

[GyRob]

nothing makes these look like cheap porn they look like a nice set of fun shots .
Rob.

[cdifoto]

no there wasnt anything wrong with the actual pictures. just my boyfriend didnt like the fact that they were up. thanks so much
So she DIDN'T have a problem with the photos. It's the boyfriend that doesn't like it.

Boyfriends come & go. My portfolio stays.

IMHO.

[400dabuser]

I hope for your sake, that you charged her before the portfolio shoot

[Michael_Lambert]

Nope,

Thats kind of why the discussions has gone on like it has, if i had charged and was compensated then i would not be worried about it. its the fact that i was not compensated and being told not / cant use.

[cdifoto]

Nope,

Thats kind of why the discussions has gone on like it has, if i had charged and was compensated then i would not be worried about it. its the fact that i was not compensated and being told not / cant use.
Considering the fact that they used you, you don't owe them the courtesy of not using the images. If she wants to object by legal means, that's what the release is for.

[400dabuser]

Nope,

Thats kind of why the discussions has gone on like it has, if i had charged and was compensated then i would not be worried about it. its the fact that i was not compensated and being told not / cant use.


I still think the photos still belong to you, i.e. copyrighted, it is your images, not hers, if she doesn't want them, tough luck, imo

[harroz]

It's a learning curve this one.

1. you've portrayed your self as a learner, so she/they arent taking you seriously. Don't do that again, you're either a paid photographer or not. if paid then get the payment and don't explain your insecurities, be postive about the whole process.

2. you have a release form, this gives you the right to use these on your website, forget facebook or any other site that isn't photography related, use model mahyem etc, ones that they'll probably never see. If they have a problem then explain nicely that this was part of the contract that they haven't played their part fully in, with respect to them you are using the images only to portray your work and gain more.

3. Learn from this experience... NEVER do ANY job without payment first whether it be a full payment or deposit, this is a #1 rule in my book, and if you don't adhere to this it will just keep happening to you. There is 2 reasons for this, 1. you cover your time. 2. they'll take you and your contract seriously. 3. this is how 'money talks', it solidifies things and makes them more seriously business like.

It seems that you have a jealous boyfriend who doesn't want his girl scattered on various sites, thats not your problem, but by helping out in this matter you have shown respect. you don't see pros putting images up on sites like facebook. you'll defintely see them on their sites though, and thats part of the deal with shooting this type of work, this is explained and everyone I shoot from weddings to fashion to model work knows this. And the boyfriend, or anyone else, has no say in this. If I got a call from a distressed mother then I 'might' take an image down if i thought I could replace it with something else, if not it would stay with the explanation of the model being over 18 and so everyone was within their rights at the time of signing.

If it were me, I would be putting them up on my site without a second thought, If they wished for me to take them off then I would do so at their cost, I would charge them a base fee, that covers your initial shoot time and the time to write the said contract, to rewrite another contract which says the images are unable to be shown on the internet unless under password, or are only to be shown in print form. then you have still got something to show to someone in person for the future.

The calendar thing was verbal, but still has warrant. they know they're in the wrong by not continuing with this. They're being cheeky.

So use images on your site. If there is a request to remove it, explain that you are happy to do this and that there would need to be a contract adjustment and a charge as it will be breaking the first agreement. I'm sure as soon as you go to charge them you won't hear from them again.

and don't stress about it, it's only a learning curve and in a couple of years you'll look back and go, wow, glad that happened then and not now.

[400dabuser]

Considering the fact that they used you, you don't owe them the courtesy of not using the images. If she wants to object by legal means, that's what the release is for.


Exactly

[derky82]

Perhaps the crazy boyfriend would prefer to compensate you for your time then?

- Derek

[cdmonkey]

could you not ask her if she does not want to pay for your time then she could come back and do a more suitable shoot for free to replace the pics that she dosnt want you to display?

[jra]

Hmmmm....If it were me, I would take them down upon request. Although I think you would be legally right to use them, I put myself in their shoes and consider that maybe they are regreting the photos now for whatever reason (friends, family, boyfriends, whatever, etc....). I'm a nice guy and I wouldn't want to think that my photos were causing anyone grief.....but that's me :)

[Michael_Lambert]

jra,
I am kind of in the same boat as that... Yet i am in the boat where i am looking to hire models and they are asking for a portfolio. Like suggested earlier maybe i will create a secured link that has all the shots i want shared and share it when i need to.

[cdifoto]

Hmmmm....If it were me, I would take them down upon request. Although I think you would be legally right to use them, I put myself in their shoes and consider that maybe they are regreting the photos now for whatever reason (friends, family, boyfriends, whatever, etc....). I'm a nice guy and I wouldn't want to think that my photos were causing anyone grief.....but that's me :)
People regret marriage all the time too but I keep those photos up.

[jra]

People regret marriage all the time too but I keep those photos up.

Good point although I would even take down a wedding pic if the bride requested it. Now what's that saying.....nice guys finish last ;)

As for building a portfolio...maybe advertise yourself on craigslist (or similar site) as someone looking to build a portfolio. Offer your services in exchange for a few prints along with a model release. You build your portfolio and help a girl start a modeling portfolio. In that scenario, I would feel confident in displaying the photos because that was the main objective of the shoot....portfolio building. Just make sure that your model is absolutely clear on what your intentions are. Maybe someone else can give you some other portfolio building ideas.

[tonylong]

I will second the suggestion of private galleries. I do this for shoots that are personal in nature, password-protected, and you might consider your portfolio as something worth password-protecting. That way on your public site you have representative work but you could point a prospective client to your portfolio, and you save yourself the hassle of fickle models.

[milorad]

People regret marriage all the time too but I keep those photos up.

Having been married won't potentially impede your career, or cause your future mother in law to mumble 'whore' under her breath all the time.

[cdifoto]

Having been married won't potentially impede your career, or cause your future mother in law to mumble 'whore' under her breath all the time.
Anyone who thinks it might affect their career and/or family situation needs to re-think whether they should be posing in the first place....or at least use a photographer who doesn't require a model release.

The release gives the photographer permission to use the images. Period.

[milorad]

The release gives the photographer permission to use the images. Period.

I don't disagree with you, at all.

I just think that everyone running any kind of business should understand that a certain percentage of their customers are going to be foolish people.

That's why good return policies can earn a retail business a really outstanding reputation. People place high value on the ability to make a mistake, and not suffer eternaly for it.

Now if your business involves largely dealing with young attention-seeking girls with temporary exhibitionist tendencies, then what I've said above becomes that much more important.

It just depends on what kind of rep you want to build for yourself. Being within your rights, and doing the right thing are unrelated concepts. Take your pick.

[robgr85]

were they conscious when signing release? Probably yes. Did You forced them to? Probably not.

The release is signed, so You can publish/show/sell the image if You want to do it.

Few says that You shouldn't... but what about mentality of woman You shot? They told You that they want to buy the callendar, You wasted Your time for session, post processing etc and didn't get paid. I would not remove photographs from Your website unless You are paid by them for Your work. Thats a lesson for them: "do not sign anything if You do not understand what is written there".

Cheers.

[AndreaBFS]

I will say one thing... this conversation does make me a little apprehensive to ever sign any kind of release for a photographer. Photographers are so rabid about *owning* the images, the copyright, the rights... but there are real people in those photos and I would hate to know that forevermore, I lose all my rights to take that back, to choose not to show me at what I might later feel wasn't my best moment. If it's a photo some stranger took on the street, fine. I might not have that control. But in dealing with a professional, I would hope for a little more of a two-way connection.

It's just a really uncomfortable feeling and I have to say that after reading this, releases would be out of the question for me until *after* reviewing the finished photos *and* agreeing to a clause where I could revoke that release.

And yeah, if I divorced and remarried, I would probably really hate to see pictures from my first wedding still on a photographer's site, too. I think it's an important lesson for these girls to learn if you do decide not to remove their photos. Hopefully they won't get themselves into a situation like this again... but if more and more people learn this hard lesson, it's going to be harder and harder to find willing models for practice and portfolio building, for sure.

[milorad]

I'm probably going to attract a hearty flaming for this, but Andrea, I'm inclined to think that the people who most rabidly defend their ownership of this kind of picture are those who don't have very many of them.

I think that for the most part, photographers understand the fluid relationship between them and their clients or models and are very willing to keep everyone happy, because photography is such an incestuous industry that being a hard-ass about things can really hurt your future.

A few pretty girls change their mind, so you force the issue... now she's telling all her friends what an ******* you are, and all of a sudden all your local TFP opportunities are gone.

If we were talking about award winning images netting thousands in sales, I'd be singing a different tune, but we're not.

I want to add that non-payment is a serious issue, and it's an issue every service industry faces. However, if the client isn't happy with the images, your choice is to send them a bill for a reduced price, which is fair to both parties. If they don't pay that, sell the bill to a debt collector. Do recoup your costs, don't make the girls pay more (and for the rest of their lives) than they're worth, though.

[Hermes]

Treat this as a lesson.

For commercial work, get your money or a signed contract with detailed payment terms up front.

For portfolio development, work with professionals - they will have a serious attitude, an understanding of the industry and a reputation to worry about. If your work isn't of a high enough standard to attract professional models then hire them.

If you chose to do creative work with amateurs you'll just have to accept poor attitudes, stubbornness, unprofessional behaviour, e.t.c. as unavoidable in a lot of cases. Your career might mean a lot to you but they will happily abandon their foray into modelling when they find out that they can't make any serious money, or when they've got enough nice free pictures for their myspace page, or when they find something good on TV.

Good Luck

[cdifoto]

I will say one thing... this conversation does make me a little apprehensive to ever sign any kind of release for a photographer. Photographers are so rabid about *owning* the images, the copyright, the rights... but there are real people in those photos and I would hate to know that forevermore, I lose all my rights to take that back, to choose not to show me at what I might later feel wasn't my best moment. If it's a photo some stranger took on the street, fine. I might not have that control. But in dealing with a professional, I would hope for a little more of a two-way connection.

It's just a really uncomfortable feeling and I have to say that after reading this, releases would be out of the question for me until *after* reviewing the finished photos *and* agreeing to a clause where I could revoke that release.

And yeah, if I divorced and remarried, I would probably really hate to see pictures from my first wedding still on a photographer's site, too. I think it's an important lesson for these girls to learn if you do decide not to remove their photos. Hopefully they won't get themselves into a situation like this again... but if more and more people learn this hard lesson, it's going to be harder and harder to find willing models for practice and portfolio building, for sure.
The solution is to not sign a release, and compensate the photographer for his inability to use your images for promotional purposes. My contracts have a statement of release in the terms & conditions section, but if someone wants me to cross that out, no problem...they just have to pay extra, because of potential lost income from not having the images to show. If you don't think there's lost income from not having portfolio images, you're not thinking like a business. One less image or set isn't going to hurt much, but what if everyone had the same idea? What if EVERYONE wanted to eliminate that line? Then you have nothing to show the next potential client.

It's really a simple concept, and it has nothing to do with the photographer's morals.

[robgr85]

I will say one thing... this conversation does make me a little apprehensive to ever sign any kind of release for a photographer. Photographers are so rabid about *owning* the images, the copyright, the rights... but there are real people in those photos and I would hate to know that forevermore, I lose all my rights to take that back, to choose not to show me at what I might later feel wasn't my best moment. If it's a photo some stranger took on the street, fine. I might not have that control. But in dealing with a professional, I would hope for a little more of a two-way connection.


Andrea - if I am to sign anything, I consider what will be the effects of that move. No one forces model to sign a release.

Model release is quite easy to understand, and there are no hidden points. By signing a release model gives all rights for deciding about future usage/distribution (without asking models permission) to the photographer, and that is usually cleraly written.

The photographer can send photographs to stock agency like Corbis or Getty. The image is sold for some nice money, and suddenly the person who signed the release changed its mind. Who cares about that?

Lets say You are buying a house. The contract is signed. Half year later the man who sold You that house, knocks to Your doors and says: "I want that building back, I made mistake selling it". What will You do?

[DStanic]

I think this whole situation boils down to a few things.

1. If you wanted to be paid something, should have at least taken a down payment. How many wedding photographers say "just pay me the whole amount AFTER the wedding" ? I know you just did it to get some experience and add content to your portfolio (ie your website) and the models should be clear that this is the reason why you are shooting them. If they don't want that, then pay for something.

2. Have to be careful with first time/beginner models as they may not be mature and do not care about contracts. Make sure they fully understand the release and that you intend on posting the pictures on your website. If they are weary of this perhaps offer a fee for them to own the pictures, or just sell them prints.

3. Models- make sure you understand realeases! Think carefully about what your jealous boyfriend might think so you don't make a big fuss. If I were in your shoes this whole situation would have me pretty pissed off. I would write them a long letter explaining how they wasted your time and the least they could do is buy the calender.

[PhotosGuy]

releases would be out of the question for me until *after* reviewing the finished photos *and* agreeing to a clause where I could revoke that release. This is a good point, but the girls didn't dislike the images when they reviewed them during the shoot. So, let's not forget post #22 which seems to be at the bottom of the problem?
no there wasnt anything wrong with the actual pictures. just my boyfriend didnt like the fact that they were up.

[Michael_Lambert]

Guys,

I am very new to photography, Please understand a couple of points.

- If they truly did not like the images, i would not want to be using them. The fact is she had no issues with the images she had an issue with her boyfriend which is why i am more than happy to remove and not use anything that i could see as a compromising image for her. However she wants everything off including the headshots which i love and my family and friends love! Which i think is a great addition to my work.

- I was not paid a monetary value because it was made clear in the many conversations we had that i had no portfolio and that she would be working for services for services she is getting the calendar and images at cost nothing paid to me and i would be getting the opportunity to shoot them for my portfolio, My release made that very clear!

- Before we started shooting i made all three of them read the release, explained once again my release and my intentions.

- They reviewed all the shots as they where going and loved them, it was when they decided they wanted much more personal images done that they ask that they not be published i said i would not and i have not. I made it clear to them any of the images that show any "Nudity" would never leave my computer and to this date they have not and i really wish i could but morally i can't!

- I removed the images when asked; I have made several attempts to complete the assignment.
- When told to not use the images i explained my position made it clear what i had was limited and they where primarily my work i could use ( lack of model releases ) and that if they did not want me using the images i would need to be compensated for my time and for what they had received.

Simply put, I am not an Ahole and I am not Desperate while yes I would love to use them if they are going to cause that much hard ache I agree they are not worth the effort. I honesty have no issues not using them, I have no issues waiting a few more weeks before releasing my website in order to hire a pro and fill in the gaps.

I am just pissed because what as photographer can we do if every model we shoot changes there mind after the fact.

[cdifoto]

I am just pissed because what as photographer can we do if every model we shoot changes there mind after the fact.
What you (we) can do is grow a spine and remember that making someone mad doesn't make us immoral. We do NOT have to tip-toe around in order to maintain our morality...especially when the other party is being unreasonable.

[HappySnapper90]

Your mistake was not getting payment for your time and then trying to stir up the business again months later. There's also a chance these girls now have a different boyfriend and may not want to give a calendar of that type to the new one or they've been with this new boyfriend too short a time for that type of gift.

A better business approach would have been to get the full payment up front. Then the girls would have been encouraged to complete the process with you and get her calendar.

Plus the girls have the right, unless you state it in your signed agreement, to not have their image on your website for your advertising/portfolio work.

[cdifoto]

Your mistake was not getting payment for your time and then trying to stir up the business again months later. There's also a chance these girls now have a different boyfriend and may not want to give a calendar of that type to the new one or they've been with this new boyfriend too short a time for that type of gift.

A better business approach would have been to get the full payment up front. Then the girls would have been encouraged to complete the process with you and get her calendar.
Please read the entire thread. This horse has been beaten mercilessly.

[DStanic]

Guys,

I am very new to photography, Please understand a couple of points.

- If they truly did not like the images, i would not want to be using them. The fact is she had no issues with the images she had an issue with her boyfriend which is why i am more than happy to remove and not use anything that i could see as a compromising image for her. However she wants everything off including the headshots which i love and my family and friends love! Which i think is a great addition to my work.

- I was not paid a monetary value because it was made clear in the many conversations we had that i had no portfolio and that she would be working for services for services she is getting the calendar and images at cost nothing paid to me and i would be getting the opportunity to shoot them for my portfolio, My release made that very clear!

- Before we started shooting i made all three of them read the release, explained once again my release and my intentions.

- They reviewed all the shots as they where going and loved them, it was when they decided they wanted much more personal images done that they ask that they not be published i said i would not and i have not. I made it clear to them any of the images that show any "Nudity" would never leave my computer and to this date they have not and i really wish i could but morally i can't!

- I removed the images when asked; I have made several attempts to complete the assignment.
- When told to not use the images i explained my position made it clear what i had was limited and they where primarily my work i could use ( lack of model releases ) and that if they did not want me using the images i would need to be compensated for my time and for what they had received.

Simply put, I am not an Ahole and I am not Desperate while yes I would love to use them if they are going to cause that much hard ache I agree they are not worth the effort. I honesty have no issues not using them, I have no issues waiting a few more weeks before releasing my website in order to hire a pro and fill in the gaps.

I am just pissed because what as photographer can we do if every model we shoot changes there mind after the fact.


I don't know what other advice you seek, it seems that you know exactly what you are doing. I guess if I were in your shoes, I would tell them that they agreed and unless/until they compensate you (BUY THE CALENDER!!!!!!!) the images will be displayed on the website as per the agreement. Tell them they even approved what images were suitable for public viewing!

If their BFs have a problem with that you can meet them in person and show them the release with their signature on it. It's only fair!


Maybe it's too late now, you already agreed to take them down and putting them back up would THEN make you the "ahole". Lesson learned time to move on.

[cdifoto]

I wouldn't even give the boyfriend the time of day. As rude as it sounds, he's nobody as far as the transaction/agreement goes. It isn't as though Michael even wants to display the racier shots.

[argyle]

I will say one thing... this conversation does make me a little apprehensive to ever sign any kind of release for a photographer... but there are real people in those photos and I would hate to know that forevermore, I lose all my rights to take that back, to choose not to show me at what I might later feel wasn't my best moment...

These young women knew full well what they were getting into ahead of time (racy calendar for their boyfriends). Bottom line is...if you think that you'll regret it later, don't do it. They signed a release and reneged on an agreement. By using what pictures they were given, they have been unjustly enriched and the photographer should be compensated. If that means keeping the images on his website, its only fair. Unfortunately, I've noticed that this behavior is becoming more and more typical these days...absolve themselves of any and all responsibility, forget contractual obligations, then let others deal with the aftermath. Hate to say it, but maybe these "models" need to be given a dose of reality.

Next time, when giving out sample pics, splash a watermark across them...this will prevent unauthorized use (Facebook and MySpace).

[daduls]

Quite the mucilaginous situation.

Looks like you're on your own, you don't want to be an Ahole, and these girls don't want to compensate you.

They thought they would get over but you have the last word.

What are you going to do?

I say offer them a price not to post the pics, or a bigger price for rights to the pics.

You did work in good faith and deserve remuneration.

[argyle]

For that matter, the OP could notify Facebook and inform them his copyrighted images are being used without his permission...they will most likely honor his request and have them removed, thus preventing the "models" from any usage. If they want to post them, they'll have to pay the photog. Like I said previously...sometimes a little dose of reality is necessary.

[Michael_Lambert]

Plus the girls have the right, unless you state it in your signed agreement, to not have their image on your website for your advertising/portfolio work.

Happy.

This is not the issue, Legally i know now i can do whatever i feel i want to do. She asked me to remove them from facebook which i did.. and then told me she did not want them on my website.

What am i going to do. I am going to do this.

- I am going to pick out my 10 favorite shots from that shoot with her. I am going to email her a letter explaining everything in detail about the release she signed, about how i have no been paid for a project they started and how i wish to recoop my loses and it can be done one of 3 ways.

1) She can pick which 4 images of the 10 i can use and i will only use those 4 images.

2) She can come by and work with me and we will reshoot and use the 4 she choses from that shoot.

3) She can pay for the time they used, she can get 3 written qoutes from other professional photographers for a 3 hour session (even though ours was much longer ) however i have learned from it, and she can pay me the amount of the cheapest qoute. This is will give her the chance to relise what kind of a deal she really got out of it.

and i will make it clear that i am being fair with this and i will with hold the use of her images untill October 31st 2008 and if she can not agree to one of the above or ignores my email i will use her images as intended which is in full legal rights of my agreement.

This here is pretty much the body of my release.

"
or good and valuable Consideration herein acknowledged as
received, and by signing this release I hereby give the Photographer/
Filmmaker and Assigns my permission to license the Images and to
use the Images in any Media for any purpose (except pornographic or
defamatory) which may include, among others, advertising, promotion,
marketing and packaging for any product or service. I agree that the
Images may be combined with other images, text and graphics, and
cropped, altered or modied. I acknowledge and agree that I have
consented to publication of my ethnicity(ies) as indicated below, but
understand that other ethnicities may be associated with Images of
me by the Photographer/Filmmaker and/or Assigns for descriptive
purposes.

I agree that I have no rights to the Images, and all rights to the Images
belong to the Photographer/Filmmaker and Assigns. I acknowledge
and agree that I have no further right to additional Consideration or
accounting, and that I will make no further claim for any reason to
Photographer/Filmmaker and/or Assigns. I acknowledge and agree
that this release is binding upon my heirs and assigns. I agree that this
release is irrevocable, worldwide and perpetual, and will be governed
by the laws of the Province of Ontario, Canada.

I represent and warrant that I am at least 18 years of age and have the
full legal capacity to execute this release."

[opus13]

I haven't done anything beyond fairly basic web design, and am not sure how easy a system like that would be to implement, especially since it seems your site is just about ready to go, but if it would be feasible, I hope that might solve your issue.


it's actually quite easy. any web host that give you 'cpanel' (which is most all) lets you do it with 3 clicks (look for password protecting a directory)

but.... if someone:

A. isn't paying up
B. is asking you to chop your portfolio in half
C. fully understands the release

then why is this even a question? they are your images. do what you want. if someone doesn't want their image out and about after the 3 aforementioned considerations, give them an opportunity to buy back the images.

obviously they aren't interested in working with you ever again. your responsibility to them is done.

[imahawki]

Didn't read the whole thread but my guess is they 1) wanted the shots for the boyfriends, 2) either changed their minds or used your proofs to make their own calendar and then 3) don't want those shots on the web for daddy or a coworker to see.

[SlowBlink]

I think you should pick the shots you like and feel are your best work from that day and use them. This is why a release is drafted in the first place. It's a legal document which the model is required to understand when she signs it.

Being flaky or immature isn't a sound reason for breaking a contract male or female. For her it's a life lesson and considerably less embarrassing than a back tattoo or a girls gone wild tape. She showed her level of maturity in her explanation. If she wants to be taken seriously as an adult she'll have to honour the contract.

I'd ignore any further communication since for you the event is over. Take what you got from the shoot and make the best out of it. Second guessing yourself isn't going to get you anywhere if you think someone might change their mind constantly. A model release is so you don't have to suffer the whims and moods of a subject. It's not a jumping off point for negotiation.

[AndreaBFS]

This is a good point, but the girls didn't dislike the images when they reviewed them during the shoot. So, let's not forget post #22 which seems to be at the bottom of the problem?
no there wasnt anything wrong with the actual pictures. just my boyfriend didnt like the fact that they were up.

My thought on that is that I too would try to find some "good excuse" if I perceived that my previous reasons weren't good enough for the photographer or I realized that my polite request to remove the photos was going nowhere. We can't know if that's really the truth or if she felt that the statement would carry more weight coming from someone else.

It sure helps me if my customers allow me to feature their finished sites on my front page or in my site directory. It's great for potential customers to see what they can do with my service. But even when people have given me permission to feature their sites, if they come back to me later and decide that they no longer want their sites publicly accessible for whatever reason, I remove them immediately. I can't imagine doing anything different. Just can't imagine it. If *everyone* you work with does that, then there is obviously another issue that you need to work out somewhere... but that's not what we are talking about here.

[cdifoto]

My thought on that is that I too would try to find some "good excuse" if I perceived that my previous reasons weren't good enough for the photographer or I realized that my polite request to remove the photos was going nowhere. We can't know if that's really the truth or if she felt that the statement would carry more weight coming from someone else.
And I would politely tell you that there is no "good excuse" - I have a release. It's sole function is to allow me to legally supercede your wishy washy mind games. If you want me to pull the images that you signed a release for me to display, that's fine. You don't even need to make up a reason. You just need to give me money.

The chances of EVERYONE requesting me to pull the images isn't very high, but it could happen. If one asks and you acquiesce without a spine, you have to be consistent and lay down like a rug for everyone else that asks. If you want to pull images upon request, that's fine. You may as well save your ink though and not print out the releases in the first place. You don't really need them when the content of your portfolio is at the whim of your clients.

[AndreaBFS]

I really don't know why you're apparently angry with me? I didn't do anything wrong here. :lol: OK, true, you got me... I don't think that an agreement between two amateurs over work that probably wasn't worth any money in the first place (judging by the fact that it was a portfolio building practice shoot) is really all that earth shatteringly important.

I don't think you need to take it personally since you aren't in the same place in your career. If I felt the shoot were really worth money in the first place, maybe I would feel differently. In this case, it feels like a wash. He gets nothing, she gets nothing. She isn't profiting from the photos, he's gotten some value from them thus far, but now he'd be getting nothing... seems like it's all even and they should both just walk away instead of making it seem like this is as important as buying a house (heh.. seriously??) or other contracts that weren't built around practicing and learning (both of which he received in the deal, either way).

Personally, I wouldn't be risking my business reputation over a pretty meaningless dispute with one client regardless of any agreements (and I routinely put my money where my mouth is). If it becomes a pattern with large numbers of clients, I would address it then.

[cdifoto]

Who's angry? I'm just saying there's no excuse in the world that supersedes a mutually agreed upon & signed legal document. Standing by policy isn't risking reputation. It's standard procedure.

What you fail to understand is that I do NOT take it personally. You're the one taking it personally by letting your feelings and fear of making someone mad dictate how you run your business. I'm able to separate the two. The policy of my business is, when I have a signed release, to use any and all images for promotional and/or display purposes per aforementioned signed release. The policy of my business is that, in order to cancel said release, an exclusivity/privacy fee must be paid, upon which time said images will no longer be used for promotional and/or display purposes.

My policy doesn't vary based on how I feel about the situation or what reasons a client has for not wanting the images displayed or what type of images are in question, or even whether I was paid for the shoot or not. It applies to everything and everyone under all circumstances.

It's not personal. It's business.

[AndreaBFS]

Well, I guess you and I are just fundamentally different people... I tend to let a little bit of human emotion and maybe even some of that dreaded feeling and compassion enter into my business decisions. I'm totally OK with building my business on that foundation. I truly and honestly want my customers to be happy and sometimes I do bend my policies to appease a customer even if I think her reasons for wanting something are ridiculous.

I don't cling desperately to legal agreements unless I feel it's a fight worth fighting. In this case, I simply don't think the fight is worth it.

[cdifoto]

I'm not cold-hearted. And I do care about people and my business. However, circumstances have to be quite extreme for me to break my policy. Killing a release is breaking policy, not just bending it, and whims are not extreme circumstances.

[harroz]

interesting how this thread is still going!. of course there's going to be discrepancies between photographers as we're all at different places, but I think it comes down to learning from experience.

We have all found out one way or another that when you don't charge up front for your time and something like this happens it hurts because it almost becomes a waste of time(although it isn't), When you learn this simple rule all the little things don't matter so much because you've been paid in some way for your input.

AndreaBFS, I don't think it is a matter of it being a retorical fight, just simply being able to have some postitive outcome would be fine for both parties, especially the OP. And it's worth it for him to know he can rely on his contract if all hell breaks lose.

Although I am happy to bend some rules to keep my customers happy, I'm with cdi on the contract basis, but still know that every client is different and any problem must be dealt with in accordance to the situation. The main thing is learning that if you cover all of your bases before you shoot the shoot then there are no discrepancies later on, if you go through the contract prior to using your camera and smooth any problems out then everyone knows the score.

When something is done for 'free' it becomes free and clients are no longer clients, but people who think everything that comes with it is free, ie, time, prints, cd's, etc etc. Not only that, but the human psych also see something that is free as being 'not worthy', as soon as it is paid for it is worth something. It is simply human nature.

The easiest way is in the future to learn from the mistake and charge a fee prior to shooting, everyone wins. In the meantime get away with what you can with a touch of honey on the tongue.

[SlowBlink]

Everyone's entitled to run their business their own way. I think both models will work for they're intended markets. If you want to grow as a business it pays to be professional and honour your contracts. If a client finds out you regularly wave binding agreements they'll think twice about offering you one.

[argyle]

...The friend who i first shot, She was one of my first atttempts...

Basic rule...never do business with friends.

[bohdank]

#1 and #3 could affect some people's morals, in that they would not want those up on the web for the whole world to see...

[Michael_Lambert]

Basic rule...never do business with friends.

Not a friend of mine, a friend of her's. It was the shoot i did of her friend which sparked her interest with me.

[AdamLewis]

Well, I guess you and I are just fundamentally different people... I tend to let a little bit of human emotion and maybe even some of that dreaded feeling and compassion enter into my business decisions. I'm totally OK with building my business on that foundation. I truly and honestly want my customers to be happy and sometimes I do bend my policies to appease a customer even if I think her reasons for wanting something are ridiculous.

I don't cling desperately to legal agreements unless I feel it's a fight worth fighting. In this case, I simply don't think the fight is worth it.

Oh get out of here with that, "I guess I just have feelings" BS.
The only thing you have here is no clue how to properly run a business. :rolleyes:
I cant stand that.

CDI is offering straight-talk facts about how the business should be ran and here you are acting as some bleeding heart for some "poor girls".

They were adults. They can read. They know what they signed when they signed it. I think Lambert should use the shots if they are really that good and if the girls want them taken down, they need to pay for them to be taken down.

That being said, if the pictures arent really that good, then there is something to be said about cutting off your nose to spite your face. If your work can speak for you, you dont really have a problem. However, if youre getting jobs based on reputation, it may be something to consider.

Thats a decision that youre going to have to make on your own though.

[AndreaBFS]

Oh get out of here with that, "I guess I just have feelings" BS.
The only thing you have here is no clue how to properly run a business. :rolleyes:
I cant stand that.

Wow. Could you be any more condescending? I didn't say the other more rigid way was wrong, just that I personally don't run my business that way. You really never know who you're talking to or what they know, so I find it's best to speak for yourself rather than just assuming that you know what someone does and doesn't "have a clue" about.

I do find it pretty hilarious that I would be considered a "bleeding heart" when most people would consider me a rabid capitalist with a pretty aggressive focus on what needs to be done to build business and make money. In *my* business, I've found that the less I slam people in the wall the less people feel they need to fight. And the more I work with people, the more they are willing to work with me.

[cdifoto]

I'm one of the easiest persons on the planet to work with to get a contract that makes everyone happy. However, once it's signed, that's it. Negotiations and resulting contracts are based on give & take. The client gets something out of it, and I get something out of it. It's not take take take...the client can't get everything while the service provider gets nothing. And in every single contract, what the client gets depends entirely on what the service provider gets. When the client wants to change what I get, it changes what they get, and vice versa..

In other words, the time to negotiate is before the contract is written up, not after it's signed and the services are rendered and done.

Ignoring your own contracts/terms/policies/releases defeats the purpose of having them in the first place.

[Trauma]

You get cheap porn, By looking at those pictures?


Some people see cheap porn because that what they WANT to see.

[turbo212003]

I don't understand why people are arguing whether it's right or wrong.


She signed a release, she approved the images to be used for promotional purposes.
Once you start to "bend" the rules, where does it end? There is no need to flip-flop on your policies
If the girl doesn't like the pictures on your website, she can pay for your time or her boyfriend can pay.


End of story.

[harroz]

I think this should be the end of this thread really.

It's very simple business ethics... this is how it is. Ofcourse there are some very hardnosed business photographers, I came up against one the other day that blew me away with how she was so willing to walk over anything and anyone to get things. but I don't see one here, just someone with good business sense and morals.



I'm one of the easiest persons on the planet to work with to get a contract that makes everyone happy. However, once it's signed, that's it. Negotiations and resulting contracts are based on give & take. The client gets something out of it, and I get something out of it. It's not take take take...the client can't get everything while the service provider gets nothing. And in every single contract, what the client gets depends entirely on what the service provider gets. When the client wants to change what I get, it changes what they get, and vice versa..

In other words, the time to negotiate is before the contract is written up, not after it's signed and the services are rendered and done.

Ignoring your own contracts/terms/policies/releases defeats the purpose of having them in the first place.

[neil_g]

my 2 peneth..

legally as she/they signed the release you can continue to use the images on your site. if as a good will jesture you took the images down do you think youll get any referals through her? if not then i say use the pics. at the end of the day it sounds like she/they kinda hoodwinked you with the talk of a paying to do a calendar and then ran off with the web quality images.

[S-S]

i saw a case on tv (USA) where a young girl had been in the sex industry and had signed a release to have her photos used on an escort website. years later she had cleaned herself up and was no longer a sex worker, and wanted the images removed from the website. she was offered a bill and told that with full payment her images would be taken down and destroyed. her lawyer advised her that the pictures belonged to the site and she would have to pay to retrieve them, so she raised the money and slowly bought back her rights.

i'm all for considering the feelings of a client and if there was a personal safety issue or the girl was worried that she might have career issues with immodest internet photos around, i might consider the matter as a courtesy... but as these ladies breached your verbal agreement with them, cancelled an order which would have involved payment and don't seem to have (from what you have shared) reasons like the above - i would simply offer them a reasonable bill and say that you undertake to remove the images permanently when payment is received.

and perhaps include in future contracts that a model release can in certain circumstances be bought back by the model (where the images have remained in your control - obviously not if they have been used as stock photos or for advertising etc) but there would be a set fee per image or collection, for example (but purchasing a model release back would not automatically entitle them to actually receive the photos themselves, only that you would not use them publicly)

[milorad]

You get cheap porn, By looking at those pictures?


I missed this post. Sorry I didn't reply to it until now.

Yes, unfortunately I get cheap porn-setup shots (not the money shots, but the teasers) from this, quite heavily actually. To me there's nothing particularly classy about the images, they're all very documentary in nature, and the technique is fairly poor.

I get that you're fairly new to all this -- but a picture doesn't have your resume attached, so your "I'm trying, but I'm new" pictures, look a lot like those taken by guys with no interest in photography, and who simply want to shoot some naked chicks for a couple of bucks.

With a little luck and a lot of practice, your shots will improve, theirs will not... so try not to take it too personally, and just spit in my face by getting much better, really quickly.

I don't say these things to try and put anyone down.... we all start off taking pretty ordinary pictures, with no mood and no artistic merit. In fact, most of the shots I STILL take are like that :) ... I just don't try to publish them, and especially not if they're of a young lady wishing to preserve her modesty on the wider internet.

As I said, I'm sorry I didn't respond to this earlier, and I don't mean to drag it all up again, except that this Trauma guy has seen fit to categorize and diagnose me based on that.

Some people see cheap porn because that what they WANT to see.

Thanks for the amateur psychoanalysis, Dr Phil. I see cheap porn because I can tell the difference between good shots and mediocre ones.

Do you honestly see art here? Put your standards where your mouth is.


____________

Milorad has a downloadable PhD from CCBill university, and 15 years
experience as a pornologist. He is considered one of the foremost experts
on cheap pornography, and has been called upon by many ex-girlfriends to
testify as to the exact nature of various grades of porn which have been
found on his hard drive. When not giving lectures about pornography,
Milorad can be found carefully inspecting it, or judging wet t-shirt competitions.

[cdifoto]

Do you honestly see art here?
I don't see art in it. But then I don't see art in Playboy, Penthouse, or 99% of the G&N section of this forum, despite it being of a higher level of technical quality than some of OP's images. Your artistic yardstick doesn't really apply, IMHO.

Besides, not everyone's aim is to create images that should be in an art book in a Public Library.

By the way, where's your porn? So we can compare...

[SlowBlink]

Yes, unfortunately I get cheap porn-setup shots (not the money shots, but the teasers) from this, quite heavily actually. To me there's nothing particularly classy about the images, they're all very documentary in nature, and the technique is fairly poor.

That isn't a critique. It's an insult to his work and uncalled for.

I get that you're fairly new to all this -- but a picture doesn't have your resume attached, so your "I'm trying, but I'm new" pictures, look a lot like those taken by guys with no interest in photography, and who simply want to shoot some naked chicks for a couple of bucks.

I don't say these things to try and put anyone down....

Ya, your work looks like cheap porn but I mean that in a good way. :p

[neil_g]

didnt realise this was the critique section.. ???

;)

[milorad]

I don't see art in it. But then I don't see art in Playboy, Penthouse, or 99% of the G&N section of this forum, despite it being of a higher level of technical quality than some of OP's images.

Right, which is exactly my point. There's plenty of reason for someone to ask for the removal of non-artistic and pedestrian images of them with their tits out.

Of course, as has been stated, there's also no reason to grant that request when there's a release... unless maybe one learning photographer recognises that his best work is yet to come, and it's not really worth taking a dump on a girl's future, just to make a point of principle.

IMO, take better photos, then argue for your rights.


Your artistic yardstick doesn't really apply, IMHO.

Really? I was under the impression that I was asked a direct question, to which I gave a direct answer. You can keep your nose out of that if you like, or by all means insert yourself wherever you want, because clearly your opinion matters, even though mine supposedly doesn't. :rolleyes:

Grow up.


By the way, where's your porn? So we can compare...


I don't have access to G&N, but when you see me post a thread asking for opinion on my porn, or my nudes, or whatever, you can bet I'll be much more gracious about accepting everyone's opinion (good or bad), than they are about hearing mine.

Thanks for your unsolicited input on my conduct.... now if only you afforded me the same freedoms you afford yourself.

[milorad]

That isn't a critique. It's an insult to his work and uncalled for.

Actually, I think it's very much called for, by the fact that he asked me a direct question. How do you define 'called for'?

Also, it's *extremely* important to balance the value of these images to the OP, vs the value of them to the chick with her knockers out, on his website, that doesn't want to be there.

Legally? there's no balance I agree... but I think there's a human element missing in that equation.

[cdifoto]

Right, which is exactly my point. There's plenty of reason for someone to ask for the removal of non-artistic and pedestrian images of them with their tits out.

Well I haven't seen any from the OP showing tits, and he's clearly stated that he did not and will not use those images, so you're argument is invalid. OP has a release for the "safe" photos. Artistic merit has nothing to do with whether OP has the right and/or reason to display his work.

Of course, as has been stated, there's also no reason to grant that request when there's a release... unless maybe one learning photographer recognises that his best work is yet to come, and it's not really worth taking a dump on a girl's future, just to make a point of principle.
No one is "dumping on a girl's future" by displaying images that cover her more than any beach attire would.

Remember, SHE requested the photos and SHE posed for the photos - and again, OP has explicitly stated that he will NOT use the risque shots.

IMO, take better photos, then argue for your rights.

Yep. Your opinion. However, rights and quality are mutually exclusive. To suggest that someone's rights aren't worth defending just because they're new is absurd! And that's putting it nicely.

Really? I was under the impression that I was asked a direct question, to which I gave a direct answer. You can keep your nose out of that if you like, or by all means insert yourself wherever you want, because clearly your opinion matters, even though mine supposedly doesn't. :rolleyes:

Grow up.

You're dumping on OP's images as if you're the end all be all of quality. I believe you're showing less maturity here.

I don't have access to G&N, but when you see me post a thread asking for opinion on my porn, or my nudes, or whatever, you can bet I'll be much more gracious about accepting everyone's opinion (good or bad), than they are about hearing mine.

Thanks for your unsolicited input on my conduct.... now if only you afforded me the same freedoms you afford yourself.

[cdifoto]

Actually, I think it's very much called for, by the fact that he asked me a direct question. How do you define 'called for'?

Also, it's *extremely* important to balance the value of these images to the OP, vs the value of them to the chick with her knockers out, on his website, that doesn't want to be there.

Legally? there's no balance I agree... but I think there's a human element missing in that equation.
You're not even on the same page as everyone else. Understand the facts before you try to debate them.

I hope you're not a lawyer...it'd be a travesty.

[SlowBlink]

Cane toads, all I gotta say :)

[milorad]

cdi, I've seen your posts in this thread, and you've been just as (if not more) one-eyed about it as I have.

I'm not a lawyer, but so what if I were? this is personal opinion not defending a case. All I've suggested is that the guy balance the worth to him, vs the worth to her, because that'd be decent.

Lawyers are prohibited from being decent people outside of hours, are they?

Anyway, 'nuff said, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just trying to answer a direct question -- which of course you guys saw as an invitation to dance.

Also, mate, please don't talk to me about all things 'unsolicited' as you've done nothing but spew your unsolicited opinions without regard for anyone else either, so how dare you suggest I pull my head in, when yours is sticking right out there?

I'm done, you guys can stoke the bonfire all you like, I've said my bit :)

[cdifoto]

cdi, I've seen your posts in this thread, and you've been just as (if not more) one-eyed about it as I have.

I'm not a lawyer, but so what if I were? this is personal opinion not defending a case.

Folks like you shouldn't be lawyers, because you argue points that aren't even relevant. You'd be trying to get someone who's been charged with DUI acquitted of murder.

All I've suggested is that the guy balance the worth to him, vs the worth to her, because that'd be decent.

Actually, you said OP's rights don't matter because his images suck.

Also, mate, please don't talk to me about all things 'unsolicited' as you've done nothing but spew your unsolicited opinions without regard for anyone else either, so how dare you suggest I pull my head in, when yours is sticking right out there?
OP asked for advice on how to proceed. I gave my opinion on that. I stick by my opinion on that. I did NOT trash his images as being cheap, thoughtless, and not worth defending for a place in the portfolio.

[milorad]

Actually, you said OP's rights don't matter because his images suck.


I said I was done, but this gross misrepresentation of what I said has got to be addressed.

I never said that his rights don't matter. I simply think he should be encouraged to weigh this particular instance, in light of the fact that his images do suck, and so serve very little objective benefit to his portfolio.

Do you disagree with that? Do you think those pictures will win him customers at record rates?

You're stuck on the legality here, which there's no argument about. He's entitled to do whatever he wants. Should he though? That's the part you seem to have trouble even talking about.

Without wanting to insult you (honestly), someone who thinks that having rights absolutely necessitates using them, is probably a sociopath. I'm just not sure why you think your opinion counts more than mine.

There. I think I've explicitly stated pretty much everything twice now. That should be enough.

[AndreaBFS]

This thread just really strikes a chord with me because lately I've been thinking so much about the direction this country is moving in and wondering where we lost sight of everything but legality, policy and governmental mandate.

It's perfectly legal for every person who passes me to refuse to allow me into traffic, but it's sure nicer if they do. There is obviously a large group of drivers who feel that like a contract, their rights must be exercised or my merging will destroy the entire traffic pattern. The reality is that if you just tap your brakes and let that person in, the traffic actually moves more smoothly. Yeah, it's kind of like a metaphor. ;)

A store is perfectly within their policy to refuse me an exchange after X number of days, but it's sure better for me and for their business if they don't. I'm within my rights to allow my dogs to bark and disturb my neighbors as long as it's not between the hours of 10pm and 8am, but I bring them in anyway.

Do I think that bringing in my dogs even though I don't have to will cause my neighbors to walk all over me? Of course not. I HOPE it will make them also want to bring in their dogs out of mutual respect. And you know what? It does!

Do I think that putting a customer in collection even if I can tell they never used the service is within my rights? Yes, absolutely... do I do it? Absolutely not. I'm not the cable company. I choose to run a small business because I want to be able to give my customers that kind of personal case-by-case consideration instead of being bound by the big SOP book of the corporate life I once lived.

[cdifoto]

I said I was done, but this gross misrepresentation of what I said has got to be addressed.

I never said that his rights don't matter. I simply think he should be encouraged to weigh this particular instance, in light of the fact that his images do suck, and so serve very little objective benefit to his portfolio.

No. You said he needs to take better images and THEN argue his rights. That is the same as saying his images are not good enough for his rights to matter.

Do you disagree with that? Do you think those pictures will win him customers at record rates?

Who said anything about "winning customers at record rates"? OP just wants to show some of his better images so he can show a few interested girls that he's done this type of thing before, and is improving.

You're implying that unless the portfolio is perfect, it's not worth showing. I hate to break it to you, but we ALL started somewhere and we ALL need to show what we have so we can get a little more business and work our way up. And we NEVER reach perfection. We can always improve. Every one of us.

You're stuck on the legality here, which there's no argument about. He's entitled to do whatever he wants. Should he though? That's the part you seem to have trouble even talking about.
Yes I am. I am stuck on the legality because that's what matters. If you actually read through the entire thread, you'll find that the girl actually never had a problem with the images - it's her boyfriend that wants them to not be displayed. So we're not even dealing with the issue of a remorseful girl...we're dealing with a jealous boyfriend who, quite frankly, doesn't matter.

Without wanting to insult you (honestly), someone who thinks that having rights absolutely necessitates using them, is probably a sociopath. I'm just not sure why you think your opinion counts more than mine.

That's rich. Starting out "without wanting to insult you" and then insulting someone, doesn't actually make it NOT an insult. Believe you me, if I really was a sociopath, I'd be a lot further ahead (financially) than I am. Or perhaps I'm just not good at being a sociopath. :rolleyes:

I absolutely never implied that my opinion counts more than yours. In fact, yours is perfectly valid, but it's only your opinion.

There. I think I've explicitly stated pretty much everything twice now. That should be enough.

[cdifoto]

This thread just really strikes a chord with me because lately I've been thinking so much about the direction this country is moving in and wondering where we lost sight of everything but legality, policy and governmental mandate.

It's perfectly legal for every person who passes me to refuse to allow me into traffic, but it's sure nicer if they do. There is obviously a large group of drivers who feel that like a contract, their rights must be exercised or my merging will destroy the entire traffic pattern. The reality is that if you just tap your brakes and let that person in, the traffic actually moves more smoothly. Yeah, it's kind of like a metaphor. ;)

A store is perfectly within their policy to refuse me an exchange after X number of days, but it's sure better for me and for their business if they don't. I'm within my rights to allow my dogs to bark and disturb my neighbors as long as it's not between the hours of 10pm and 8am, but I bring them in anyway.

Do I think that bringing in my dogs even though I don't have to will cause my neighbors to walk all over me? Of course not. I HOPE it will make them also want to bring in their dogs out of mutual respect. And you know what? It does!

Do I think that putting a customer in collection even if I can tell they never used the service is within my rights? Yes, absolutely... do I do it? Absolutely not. I'm not the cable company. I choose to run a small business because I want to be able to give my customers that kind of personal case-by-case consideration instead of being bound by the big SOP book of the corporate life I once lived.
That's your choice and it's fine. It's quite noble, but you're opening yourself up to the likelihood of being used.

Either way you work it, you're going to have some unsatisfied clients at some point along the line be it by standing firm the entire time, or by acquiescing some of the time (making those clients happy) and standing firm others (making those clients mad).

The only way to have 100% satisfied customers 100% of the time, is to always give them what they want, even when they're unreasonable. It's not bad to give a client what they want, and I try my best to do that, but when they're unreasonable, it's unfair to you as a business owner and as a human being.

That's why I prefer to stick to policy as a business. I have zero problem re-writing contracts though, complete with fresh signatures all the way around, and I think that's the key.

[milorad]

That's rich. Starting out "without wanting to insult you" and then insulting someone, doesn't actually make it NOT an insult. :rolleyes:


for someone who is all about rule of law, you missed a spot.

I said I didn't WANT to, not that I wasn't going to. :)

[AndreaBFS]

That's your choice and it's fine. It's quite noble, but you're opening yourself up to the likelihood of being used.

I'll let ya know when it happens. ;) 8 years self employed and 6 running a small business with customers numbering in the thousands and servicing in the hundreds of thousands and I have only come across one truly unreasonable customer. I still did my best to meet her halfway, but in the end neither one of us would budge and in that case I felt justified. The rest were more than willing to give when I gave a little and I've enjoyed tons of referral business from customers who could easily have been written off as unreasonable.

[cdifoto]

Well that's not the definition really of unreasonable at all (except that one of course). You managed some give & take. I'm willing to go along with that and I never claimed otherwise.

Unreasonable is when the client wants more more more but doesn't want to give anything in return. Kind of like the girls in OP's situation. They used him. He gets nothing out of it other than the rights to display the images for promotional purposes - and they want to take that way too!

It's standard procedure in business that what's contracted is what's delivered/produced/provided/etc. You won't see an NFL player sign a contract with a football team and then agree to changes off-the-record. A new contract is written up if changes are made. That way everyone is on the same page, and if the courts do have to intervene, it's there in writing with all applicable signatures. He-said she-said & hearsay doesn't hold a candle to a paper with signatures.

In short: Cover Your Ass.

[DStanic]

This thread just really strikes a chord with me because lately I've been thinking so much about the direction this country is moving in and wondering where we lost sight of everything but legality, policy and governmental mandate.

It's perfectly legal for every person who passes me to refuse to allow me into traffic, but it's sure nicer if they do. There is obviously a large group of drivers who feel that like a contract, their rights must be exercised or my merging will destroy the entire traffic pattern. The reality is that if you just tap your brakes and let that person in, the traffic actually moves more smoothly. Yeah, it's kind of like a metaphor. ;)

A store is perfectly within their policy to refuse me an exchange after X number of days, but it's sure better for me and for their business if they don't. I'm within my rights to allow my dogs to bark and disturb my neighbors as long as it's not between the hours of 10pm and 8am, but I bring them in anyway.

Do I think that bringing in my dogs even though I don't have to will cause my neighbors to walk all over me? Of course not. I HOPE it will make them also want to bring in their dogs out of mutual respect. And you know what? It does!

Do I think that putting a customer in collection even if I can tell they never used the service is within my rights? Yes, absolutely... do I do it? Absolutely not. I'm not the cable company. I choose to run a small business because I want to be able to give my customers that kind of personal case-by-case consideration instead of being bound by the big SOP book of the corporate life I once lived.



So you think that it's perfectly fine for those girls to have taken up 6hrs (or whatever it was) of his time, get the web-sized pictures, and not compensate the OP in any way? I guess he did all that work just for fun?? You are treating the GIRLS as if THEY are the victims or something!

[AndreaBFS]

So you think that it's perfectly fine for those girls to have taken up 6hrs (or whatever it was) of his time, get the web-sized pictures, and not compensate the OP in any way? I guess he did all that work just for fun?? You are treating the GIRLS as if THEY are the victims or something!

Most of the time when we are practicing, it's just for fun. A lot of the time we don't really get much of anything out of it, other than the learning experience. When working with professionals, I expect a different level of service.

Like I said before, in this case it sounds like she isn't using the images anymore and she would rather just terminate their agreement. For whatever reason. Whether her boyfriend came to her and said, "you know hon... these images of you... gosh, they just really don't flatter you" or whether she felt that later feedback from friends was negative or whether she just decided she had to find something to say because she no longer wanted images of her used to sell his work. It doesn't really matter WHY. We know that he is within his rights, who is disputing that?

Walk away, make it a wash. He got what he really intended, which was practice and experience, he also was able to use the images for what sounds like several months. I think both parties have probably received an equal benefit at this point and could stand to walk away or work out something amicably to address not only his wants and his contract but also the desires of the person who gave her time to allow him to practice on her.

We're not talking about professional time, again, just to be clear. You can print agreements from the internet, but it doesn't automatically mean your time is worth professional rates. What takes an amateur 6 hours to fumble through might have been one hour of professional time... and it was a practice shoot, so we're not talking about a stunning finished product that is worth alienating someone who helped you out.

You better believe I'm grateful for anyone who allows me THEIR time to practice on them knowing they might not really get anything great out of the shoot. It's as much a risk on their part as it is on mine.

[cdifoto]

Whether her boyfriend came to her and said, "you know hon... these images of you... gosh, they just really don't flatter you"
Come on. This is BS. You of all people should know that no man who values his life would say a thing like that to another woman. Hell it's a straight shot to sexual independence for responding in the affirmative to "do these pants make my butt look big?"

[DStanic]

Walk away, make it a wash. He got what he really intended, which was practice and experience, he also was able to use the images for what sounds like several months. I think both parties have probably received an equal benefit at this point and could stand to walk away or work out something amicably to address not only his wants and his contract but also the desires of the person who gave her time to allow him to practice on her.

We're not talking about professional time, again, just to be clear. You can print agreements from the internet, but it doesn't automatically mean your time is worth professional rates. What takes an amateur 6 hours to fumble through might have been one hour of professional time... and it was a practice shoot, so we're not talking about a stunning finished product that is worth alienating someone who helped you out.



He "probably received an equal benefit" ? How so? I guess if he choses to use the images regarless of what the "client" says about it, then fine.

I agree this isn't "professional" work, I'm not saying that it's entirely the photographer to blame (I don't think the girls were particularly attractive "models" anyways..). Besides the point, the girls (aparently) liked the images.


You better believe I'm grateful for anyone who allows me THEIR time to practice on them knowing they might not really get anything great out of the shoot. It's as much a risk on their part as it is on mine.

This statement just makes you sound like you have a high opinion of yourself. You make it sound as if they are victims or something. There really are no victims here- just a model wanna-be and a amature photog working for free and getting jerked around.


I know you probably disagree with me. That's fine and I respect your opinion. This thread has been beated to death and should be locked soon anyways.

[Zansho]

Andrea, while I respect your right to your own opinion, I have to disagree with your stance.

The boyfriend is definitely a non-player in this particular contractual agreement between Michael and the girls he shot. They agreed to a specific thing, had it all in writing, and everything along those lines. I guess you think it's OK for me to break my contracts with my clients because at my whim (at a later point in time)because I think they're ugly clients and won't do me any good to have them in my portfolio?

Regardless of Michael's perceived skill and quality of work, and the debate of whether he did output professional quality work WORTH paying for, he had an agreement in place, and it should be enforced. I'm sure Michael showed the client some of his previous examples before he photographed them, and they had an idea of what to expect, so I doubt there's any intent to "mislead" them into thinking he's a total pro.

I can understand terminating contracts over extenuating circumstances, like life and death, medical issues - things like that. But ignoring a contractual agreement (yes, a model release IS a contract) just because your boyfriend feels that your boobies shouldn't be out on the internet and on someone's portfolio is fallacious, imho.

[Michael_Lambert]

7 pages later and i think we have kind of lost sight of what happened or is going to happen.

Facts of this are

- They signed a release which clearly stated i could do what ever with the images expect for porn or anything derogatory
- They read and understood on that release that they also had no claim to the images.
- They reviewed the images as the shoot went along and not once had an issue with it or questioned my abilities.
- They knew i was very new to shooting models (People) so my skill with the camera was lacking and my knowledge of photographing models ( poses and such ) was lacking.
- They knew i was not charging them for this shoot as i was using it as a learning experience and that i was in the process of extending / adding to my portfolio.

And the big kicker is,

I have gotten an message from her stating that there is nothing wrong my the physical images, she just wanted them removed from face book as her boyfriend did not like them there, which was honored and removed.

She has now said she did not want me using the images on my website, she has not said why and she has ignored repeated request for a reason. Just because does not cut it when she is only of my primary people who i have shot.

Yes i lack skill, Yes i lack a portfolio, Yes i am looking to work with "Professionals" who have the skill at there end witch leaves me right now to worry about the skill at my end. However many of these Professionals who i have contacted have asked to see what i can or have done.. Again like others have said some people don’t want there image tarnished by bad work from a photographer so yes they want to see what i can do to ensure they do not sign up for something they don’t want.

With that in mind, the only reason i shot the girl i did was because i shot 2 other girls in her town and she was friends with one, She seen the shots i did of her friend and she wanted me to shoot her, Everyone i know agrees the shots i took of her are better than the shots i took of her friend, hell her friend has said she see's great improvement in my work.

Simply put, If she would cooperate a little more and maybe show a little maturity i would refrain from using the images. But this crap of "Don’t use my pictures on your website" just is not cutting it.!

[estisdal]

Pull them for the time being but once you do have an official portfolio, then include them if you feel they are representative of your work. Any whining/whinging at that time can be lawyered away through the signed releases. Do not make any more promises or agreements with the models regarding the existing photographs and don't work with them anymore.

Just my non-lawyer $0.05 (inflation adjusted).

[FlyingPhotog]

7 pages later and i think we have kind of lost sight of what happened or is going to happen.

Facts of this are

<Snip good job of bringing things back on point...>

If the major issue is simply an insecure boyfriend, then IMO, she doesn't have a leg to stand on.

I applaud your willingness to be a "nice guy" about it but eventually you have to learn to deal with ruffled feathers, unhappy customers (or at least customers that are difficult) and yes, probably even what it means to defend yourself artistically and legally.

Stand up for yourself, your craft and your future. If the images will help you get where you want to go and you are covered by the proper execution of releases then keep and use the images as you see fit.

If it's truly streesing you to the Nth degree, spend some quality time/money with a lawyer and make sure you're solidly in the right.

Good Luck...

[AndreaBFS]

Okie dokie. I'm done. I can see you guys live in a VERY black and white world where contracts exist in a vacuum. IMO, if the boyfriend is really her reason, he *is* certainly a player if *she* cares what he thinks. If I make a contract with a mom and then I find that her husband is freaking out because he didn't want her sharing personal information on the internet, then I'm more than happy to remove her site. The deal was with her, but do you really think I'm going to slam her up against a wall because her husband isn't "a party" to the agreement? :lol:

Obviously you guys have had some massive issues with people trying to walk all over you, but hopefully it's not because of your inflexibility or unwillingness to see the PEOPLE involved in a situation around the contracts downloaded off the internet.

[FlyingPhotog]

Okie dokie. I'm done. I can see you guys live in a VERY black and white world where contracts exist in a vacuum. IMO, if the boyfriend is really her reason, he *is* certainly a player if *she* cares what he thinks. If I make a contract with a mom and then I find that her husband is freaking out because he didn't want her sharing personal information on the internet, then I'm more than happy to remove her site. The deal was with her, but do you really think I'm going to slam her up against a wall because her husband isn't "a party" to the agreement? :lol:

Obviously you guys have had some massive issues with people trying to walk all over you, but hopefully it's not because of your inflexibility or unwillingness to see the PEOPLE involved in a situation around the contracts downloaded off the internet.

At the risk of being labled pedantic, there is a legal difference between "Boyfriend" and "Husband."

Sorry Andrea but there's 1001 things we all do in life that others may dissaprove of or be unhappy with but that doesn't release or mitigate the effects of binding legal documents.

There is a term for things happening when all parties are adults and fully aware of what they're doing at the time they're doing it (no cooercion, no misinformation and no deception): "You made your bed, now lie in it."

Beyond that, the OP wanted help with the legal ramifications .. not moral guidence. That's between him and whatever higher power in life he values.

Legally, it is Black and White.

[Michael_Lambert]

So Andrea,

Are you saying that we should just sit back when we started a job invested our own time and efforts into it but where not compensated for it as the job was not completed. Yet a 3rd party to the job has decided thats it no more the job is not to be completed.

That is what has happened here, I started a job my payment was the use of these images i am now being told the job is not going to be completed and no you are not going to get anything for your time.

[S-S]

...If I make a contract with a mom and then I find that her husband is freaking out because he didn't want her sharing personal information on the internet, then I'm more than happy to remove her site. The deal was with her, but do you really think I'm going to slam her up against a wall because her husband isn't "a party" to the agreement?...

just a question - but would you after say 10-20 hours work on the hypothetical job also refund all her payments when you take it down?

because that's what these ladies are asking this tog to do. i think if he had been paid he might feel fairly compensated and be more willing to remove the images... as it stands he's getting nothing from the deal and as an emerging player that can be a hard hit, especially as it leaves him with a reduced amount of work to show potential clients. if they had come to him originally and asked to be photographed for nothing and not to share the images i doubt he would have done the job at all... it's not like they are relatives or close friends

[AndreaBFS]

heh heh... the amount of time and money he has invested in this just keeps going up and up and up in every post! :lol: Seriously, I'm out of it. Screw that wishy washy chick and screw her as hard as you can! That is your right and you should exercise it!

[FlyingPhotog]

heh heh... the amount of time and money he has invested in this just keeps going up and up and up in every post! :lol: Seriously, I'm out of it. Screw that wishy washy chick and screw her as hard as you can! That is your right and you should exercise it!

Ok, what if the client were male?

[S-S]

thats a pretty extreme response, i dont think anyone is suggesting that is what he should do.

as you were.

[AndreaBFS]

Ok, what if the client were male?

It changes nothing. EXERCISE your right with no regard for the other party or the ridiculously low benefit to either party to do so. Screw them all. Seriously. Male or female.

There is no other option if you don't want people to walk all over you and this was such a very important shoot that the world can certainly not survive if those pictures only spend 6 months displayed on the internet.

No need to argue anymore, you've convinced me that the only acceptable course of action is not to work anything out with her because that would be inherently bad and would undermine the whole judicial system and inspire a desire in the world to run around ripping up contracts and burning them in the streets.

:lol: Love you guys and the obvious strong photographer rights bias on this board, but sometimes I just have to chuckle at ya.

[FlyingPhotog]

It changes nothing. EXERCISE your right with no regard for the other party or the ridiculously low benefit to either party to do so. Screw them all. Seriously. Male or female.

There is no other option if you don't want people to walk all over you and this was such a very important shoot that the world can certainly not survive if those pictures only spend 6 months displayed on the internet.

No need to argue anymore, you've convinced me that the only acceptable course of action is not to work anything out with her because that would be inherently bad and would undermine the whole judicial system and inspire a desire in the world to run around ripping up contracts and burning them in the streets.

:lol: Love you guys and the obvious strong photographer rights bias on this board, but sometimes I just have to chuckle at ya.

The OP has stated on several occasions that he's made attempts to contact the subject to "work things out." He's gone the extra mile so what would you reccomend he do now?

[harroz]

So have you got your answer yet Michael? After 7 pages and a fair amount of views and opinions, and the odd fire fuel for more, I'm interested to know.

Part of being a professional is knowing when to act professionally. Please tell, what is your decision?




Hey Peoples.

So i have been putting together a new website which i hope to go live with shortly.

However my issue has come to this, i sent a link to a few of the girls i have shot who i have signed releases for ( Trying to do it right ) well three of the girls that i have on my site ( the majority of my clients) have basicly asked me not to use there pictures.

Long story short - a few months ago they wanted calenders made for there boyfriends so i had them sign my standard release saying that i can pretty much use there images for anything and everything execpt porn.

We where supose to do a series of shots over the summer to get the selection of images they wanted for the calenders. Well they came over one day stayed much longer than expected had a good time and got a bunch of different shots.. It was a themed night but they seemed to have more than one theme in mind much more than we talked about.

Well they left that night, no payment was exchanged as it was a long term thing and they would pay for the final product ( The Calender ).

Well now many months later, after many attempts to contact them and finish this they have kind of brushed me off.. They did get interenet quality shots of the shoot and that was the end of it.. nothing else from them.

So now i feel that well i will be compensated by doing what any photog would do use the pictures i took on my website as my release says.

Now - They are telling me to remove them. I replied to the one girl letting her know that i need to recoop my time and efforts and that if they want to hold up there end of the agreement fine i will finish the calender or they can pay me for my time that day. They dont want the calender they claim the images where not what they really expected and they have shown no intent on payment.

My portfolio is very small and i am trying to put something together so i can show models to try and add to it.

What should i do, What would you guys do? I know legally i am in the right i belieave.

regards

[FlyingPhotog]

So have you got your answer yet Michael? After 7 pages and a fair amount of views and opinions, and the odd fire fuel for more, I'm interested to know.

Part of being a professional is knowing when to act professionally. Please tell, what is your decision?

A very fair question to ask...

[Michael_Lambert]

I got my awnser after post #2. However we did have 7 pages of decent conversation :D

[Mark_Cohran]

For all of you "discussing" this so vehemently. There are professional guidelines for photographers published by ASMP and other organizations, and it's certainly not considered unprofesssional or unethical to observe the legal attributes of the release. Whether it is, in a business sense, appropriate for the photographer to comply with the model's wishes shouldn't a point of contention either from an ethical or professional stand point, regardless of the quality of the images.

One could make an argument for acquiesing to the model's wishes from a purely personal aspect (whether you would do it or not), but that does not change the standard business practices.

[robgr85]

long long thread...

As long as You have releases, You can use the pictures...

;)
but... wait a minute... take the photographs down and ask the girl to delete all her copies of the photographs from everywhere (modelmayhem, etc, even her hard disk).
;)
Wait a year or two, go to tineye.com, put Your picture there and check if it is still being used somewhere... if so... sue her for violating Your © rights.
;)

Cheers,

[harroz]

Tineye.com....

Thanks for that!

long long thread...

As long as You have releases, You can use the pictures...

;)
but... wait a minute... take the photographs down and ask the girl to delete all her copies of the photographs from everywhere (modelmayhem, etc, even her hard disk).
;)
Wait a year or two, go to tineye.com, put Your picture there and check if it is still being used somewhere... if so... sue her for violating Your © rights.
;)

Cheers,

[SlowBlink]

I've found four links to people using my images from the awstats on my cpanel. Tineye had no luck on their search. I imagine that will get better in time though.

[Alleh]

Keep the photos on your site. You don't even need a model release to use images for your website or even editorial work. You could send the photo into the newspaper and have it printed and they still don’t have a legal case against you. It just sounds like they have jealous boyfriends that are trying to control them.

As for the reputation thing goes your not going to lose anything. It is not often that people that want free photos will ever refer you paid business you just end up with everyone wanting you to work for free.

If they want the photos taken down send them a bill for your time and the loss of promotion you would gain from using it in your portfolio.

[Moppie]

This is certianly a long and interesting thread, and lots of interesting points have been raised and disucussed.

But, I am amazed that no one has raised one very simple saying in business: "The customer is always right".

It is the corner stone of trillions of dollars worth of retail trade, and multi billion dollar coperations exist based on that simple belief.

The Customer Is always right.


Yes, there might be a legal right to display the photos, and yes it might make good business sense to display the photos in order to try and re-coup the time spent taking them.
But, that needs to be weighed up against the possiblity of negative referals from a now upset customer.
Sometimes you have to take a bit of a loss, in order to think of the more long term goal.
It is no good building a great portfolio and becoming a great photographer if no one will pay you because they think you are a prick.

There will always be bad customers, but they will always be out weighed by the good ones, and if you can't take a hit from the odd bad one, then you need to re-think your business model, or go and learn some basic sales and customer service skills

[Mark_Cohran]

This is certianly a long and interesting thread, and lots of interesting points have been raised and disucussed.

But, I am amazed that no one has raised one very simple saying in business:

It is the corner stone of trillions of dollars worth of retail trade, and multi billion dollar coperations exist based on that simple belief.

The Customer Is always right.


Yes, there might be a legal right to display the photos, and yes it might make good business sense to display the photos in order to try and re-coup the time spent taking them.
But, that needs to be weighed up against the possiblity of negative referals from a now upset customer.
Sometimes you have to take a bit of a loss, in order to think of the more long term goal.
It is no good building a great portfolio and becoming a great photographer if no one will pay you because they think you are a prick.

There will always be bad customers, but they will always be out weighed by the good ones, and if you can't take a hit from the odd bad one, then you need to re-think your business model, or go and learn some basic sales and customer service skills

I would agree with you, if in fact, the "client" here was actually a customer. In this case, it's clear that that relationship did not exist or if it did, the client negated that relationship.

[S-S]

I would agree with you, if in fact, the "client" here was actually a customer. In this case, it's clear that that relationship did not exist or if it did, the client negated that relationship.

seconded. customers pay... this gives them certain rights/leverage

this situation has turned into the tog being coerced into providing a completely one-sided favour to these people whom he does not know and who have no intention of compensating him now or in the future

totally different.

[cdifoto]

This is certianly a long and interesting thread, and lots of interesting points have been raised and disucussed.

But, I am amazed that no one has raised one very simple saying in business:

It is the corner stone of trillions of dollars worth of retail trade, and multi billion dollar coperations exist based on that simple belief.

The Customer Is always right.


Yes, there might be a legal right to display the photos, and yes it might make good business sense to display the photos in order to try and re-coup the time spent taking them.
But, that needs to be weighed up against the possiblity of negative referals from a now upset customer.
Sometimes you have to take a bit of a loss, in order to think of the more long term goal.
It is no good building a great portfolio and becoming a great photographer if no one will pay you because they think you are a prick.

There will always be bad customers, but they will always be out weighed by the good ones, and if you can't take a hit from the odd bad one, then you need to re-think your business model, or go and learn some basic sales and customer service skills

Sticking to a signed contract/release/policy doesn't make one a prick.

Being an ******* when delivering one's responses is what makes one a prick.

It's the people who are used to getting what they want all their life who will get mad (sometimes even throw a tantrum) when one stands firm and does NOT give them what they want, no matter how nice they are. Those people, you can do nothing about. And it's those people who use "the customer is always right" to always get what they want.

[neil_g]

people who work in retail will tell you that the customer is very rarely right.. ;)

[hollis_f]

Why not just ask the model if she'd like to buy her release form?

[robgr85]

Why not just ask the model if she'd like to buy her release form?


heh... that way of solving the problem was discussed before... what about some hardcore response ;) (after "remove them form Your site and I will not buy that release form" answer):
;)
"You can buy Your MR form for 1000$, otherwise next month I will send them to ShutterStock.com and everybody will be able to use it ultimately for just 1$"
;)

[estisdal]

heh... that way of solving the problem was discussed before... what about some hardcore response ;) (after "remove them form Your site and I will not buy that release form" answer):
;)
"You can buy Your MR form for 1000$, otherwise next month I will send them to ShutterStock.com and everybody will be able to use it ultimately for just 1$"
;)

That's extortion. A simple "You can buy your release for $1000" would suffice. Then if she passes, you ShutterStock.com and make your bucks.

[Tixeon]

people who work in retail will tell you that the customer is very rarely right.. ;)

Absolutely correct. I've got 10 yrs experience to prove it.

BTW, love your avatar. Haven't seen one of those hub caps in quite a while. Vdubs all the way. :):)

[DocFrankenstein]

I would tell them to go F themselves, and if they call me again I'd file a restraining order.

Anything less, and you're letting them walk over you.

[DocFrankenstein]

This is certianly a long and interesting thread, and lots of interesting points have been raised and disucussed.

But, I am amazed that no one has raised one very simple saying in business:

It is the corner stone of trillions of dollars worth of retail trade, and multi billion dollar coperations exist based on that simple belief.

The Customer Is always right.
Who says they're customers?

Customers PAY YOU.

[cdifoto]

I would tell them to go F themselves, and if they call me again I'd file a restraining order.

Anything less, and you're letting them walk over you.
Subtle. :)

[DocFrankenstein]

Subtle. :)
I'd tell it politely of course, but they have some nerve to demand control over image use without payment.

With my release, they'd be all over some condom packaging.

[cdifoto]

I know. It's still funny though. :D

[Moppie]

I wonder how long it will be until consumer surveys rank photographers along side lawyers and used car salesmen?

[cdifoto]

I wonder how long it will be until consumer surveys rank photographers along side lawyers and used car salesmen?
You don't have be a doormat just to get (or maintain) a good consumer rating.

[SlowBlink]

I think we have a ways to go before used car salesmen...

[Moppie]

You don't have be a doormat just to get (or maintain) a good consumer rating.


If you spend your working life worrying about the bad customers, you will miss the really great ones.



I think we have a ways to go before used car salesmen...


I love that cartoon

[cdifoto]

If you spend your working life worrying about the bad customers, you will miss the really great ones.
Exactly. So do your thing, grow a spine, and stand by your contracts.

Having said that, OP never had a customer.

[AndreaBFS]

Something to think about for those who believe that money must change hands in order to validate a customer relationship.

I serve over 100,000 people with my free internet services. I provide outstanding *customer* service to this segment of my business and always will give a great deal of care and focus to this group because they are integral and by far more important to my business than those who have already decided to pay me. In fact, it isn't just that they aren't paying me, but I actually SPEND thousands every year to provide these services.

These non customers are the sole reason my business has been profitable for 5+ years while most internet services companies die quickly. All of these "non customers" have helped me build my business by 1. talking about my services and bringing me paying customers 2. becoming paying customers 3. not bashing me all over the internet because of poor service received based on the fact that they aren't important if they aren't paying me.

No, photographers aren't as susceptible to the word of mouth campaigns that can destroy an internet based business, but it's important to realize that whenever you exchange services, as a business, with an individual, they ARE your customer. They will likely carry just as much weight in the equation as someone who did pay you, perhaps even more because potential customers may be more fearful to do business with a company that only provides good customer service when they HAVE to and not because it's part of their philosophy.

[cdifoto]

Sorry Andrea but you're missing the mark.

OP has a right to use the images. That's the only thing he gets out of the shoot. The non-customer tried to take away his rights to use the images. That would negate the exchange of services. Only by using the images does OP even have the slightest semblance of a service provider-client relationship. Without exercising his right to use the images, there is no EXCHANGE.

No one's saying the service provider shouldn't provide excellent customer service & support.

[turbo212003]

Sorry Andrea but you're missing the mark.

OP has a right to use the images. That's the only thing he gets out of the shoot. The non-customer tried to take away his rights to use the images. That would negate the exchange of services. Only by using the images does OP even have the slightest semblance of a service provider-client relationship. Without exercising his right to use the images, there is no EXCHANGE.

No one's saying the service provider shouldn't provide excellent customer service & support.

Thank you for saying this.

[S-S]

Something to think about for those who believe that money must change hands in order to validate a customer relationship.

I serve over 100,000 people with my free internet services...

that's your privilege and it's great to hear that you uphold high standards of service for these end users free of charge. i too have provided a large sector of my professional services (design & photo related, hundreds of hours of work) for no charge/compensation, and have treated these non-paying 'clients' with exactly the same degree of diligence as the paid jobs.

however, we consciously and happily enter into these arrangements with this format in place... in THIS case the OP had an existing arrangement which both parties were satisfied with, and carried out his contracted obligations to the best of his ability - but the client/customer/end user/etc has reneged on their deal by refusing to order a calendar AND are requesting further intrusions into the provider's side of the bargain. this is inappropriate and falls into the category of 'taking advantage'.

if the OP didnt really need the use of these pictures at this stage in his career you might argue that tearing up the release represents no real-world loss to him and he was just being petty by insisting on his rights... but it seems the OP does in fact need them and would be disadvantaged by their removal. so morally as well as legally he is also within his rights to uphold the contract.

IMO.

[cdifoto]

Extremely well explained, SS.

I too have entered into contractual agreements that favored the client more than myself, and gave them no less professional courtesy and service than the highest paying. No one gets inferior treatment from me. However, what they get is laid out in the contract...that's what it's for...and I do not deviate from that. If I do, then the client has their own opening to deviate from any terms they choose. It renders the whole thing moot and the contract then holds no weight with me, the client, or in a court of law if the need should arise.

[FlyingPhotog]

that's your privilege and it's great to hear that you uphold high standards of service for these end users free of charge. i too have provided a large sector of my professional services (design & photo related, hundreds of hours of work) for no charge/compensation, and have treated these non-paying 'clients' with exactly the same degree of diligence as the paid jobs.

however, we consciously and happily enter into these arrangements with this format in place... in THIS case the OP had an existing arrangement which both parties were satisfied with, and carried out his contracted obligations to the best of his ability - but the client/customer/end user/etc has reneged on their deal by refusing to order a calendar AND are requesting further intrusions into the provider's side of the bargain. this is inappropriate and falls into the category of 'taking advantage'.

if the OP didnt really need the use of these pictures at this stage in his career you might argue that tearing up the release represents no real-world loss to him and he was just being petty by insisting on his rights... but it seems the OP does in fact need them and would be disadvantaged by their removal. so morally as well as legally he is also within his rights to uphold the contract.

IMO.

Spot on...

[AndreaBFS]

I'm really not missing the mark, I just think you are still arguing a completely different mark. No one is arguing the legal rights of anyone with an agreement to uphold that agreement. It's silly to keep coming back to that point over and over as if I don't understand it. I see that mark, I've said that about 20 times now.

But no one... NO ONE who hears her story is going to care one bit whether she was a paying customer or not. She still had a valid exchange of services with him -- her time for his images. She did him a favor and gave him the practice he as an amateur needed to pad his portfolio (which he has spent 6 months building and still only has 6 subjects for, which tells me that he might be a bit unnecessarily protective of these images) and he gave her some images that are worth just about what one would expect.

I could certainly get a customer to sign all kinds of things into a contract, but if I have to objectively look at a situation and *agonize* over whether I really should uphold those things, then clearly there is an issue. Clearly I have something to think about when a customer challenges that agreement.

If I have an agreement with a client that states I get a fee equal to 15% of my contract if he's late on getting me materials, it would be nice to collect that... but he'll probably only feel that pain once before he decides to take his business elsewhere. There is only so much you can reasonably ask for in an agreement and when you are so new that you really have no business charging people in the first place, it's presumptuous to demand that you have the same consideration as the professional for which the agreement was written. LET IT GO! Three images are just.not.worth.it.

When she speaks about her experience as his customer, no one is going to dissect the finer points of the contract. They are just going to hear, "that store gave me a product that stopped working for me and they absolutely REFUSED to "refund" me." It will go like this, "I hated the pictures and I asked him to take them down off of his site, but he was a complete jerk about it and said he could do whatever he wanted... with pictures of ME... can you believe that?? So I signed this thing in the beginning, but I didn't know what they would look like and now there's nothing I can do... he said I have to pay him all this money to get him to take them down... OMG... NEVER go to him!"

For pretty much any company you can name, they are willing to break their policies over and over and over when the loss is smaller than the potential impact. This idea that the only way to be successful is to enforce 100% of your contracts all the time without fail is a completely foreign concept to this bigtime consumer of goods and services and frankly, it's just so strange to hear people argue as if they have NEVER seen a company bend on any policy and remain successful.

[cdifoto]

Well she'd be lying if she went around saying that. Liars aren't good customers and they make worse references.

PS: You keep missing one very important point. She LOVED the images. So much so that she stripped naked for him to shoot more. It's her BOYFRIEND that has a problem with the photos.