Ethics Question...

I am rather new into the world of photography for hire, hence the question i have. I was just wondering if this were something commonplace or not. I have a friend whom is a senior in high school. Her mom hired another photographer to do her senior photos. This other photographer is someone I grew up with and had worked with from time to time, anyway. The senior contacted me stating she completely HATED the photos done by the other photographer and wanted me to re-shoot her photos, because she was not sending them out.

After looking at the images they weren't done to my taste. I prefer making people look like themselves rather than mannequins with faces (plastic look), but to each his own.

I spoke with the senior's mom this morning at the gym in regards to doing the re-shoot. She stated there were some things that seemed odd to them. She said they were not permitted to wear her own clothes for the shoot, that other photographer provided all of the clothing for the shoot from a local boutique. She went on to explain that the photographer is working for consignment with the boutique to provide clothing for the shoots. She stated that the senior did not like the posing which was used for the shoots and the fact that she could not even see her class ring in any of the photos. The senior is not by any means an overweight girl. But due to current outside pressures on that age group to be a "certain way" she would not fall into their classification.

The mom was then able to provide all of the images from the shoot. After looking at them I could see that the poses were done in a way which showcased the clothing rather than the senior. A lot of stuff was wider angle, with odd arm contortions. After going through them there was only one photo that you caught a glimpse of the class ring.

Just after gathering all of the information that I have, I've come to the conclusion that the photographer is selling the images from the senior shoots back to the boutique for advertisement. That this is causing an impact on the images she is providing the seniors, sorta that the boutique is taking priority over the senior, whom is also a paying customer. Just wanted to get some outside input.

Sorry for the long post.

flipcrab85 wrote in post #16441740
I've come to the conclusion that the photographer is selling the images from the senior shoots back to the boutique for advertisement

Well, you've come to that conclusion, but do you actually have evidence of it?

onona wrote in post #16441752
Well, you've come to that conclusion, but do you actually have evidence of it?

No, just the totality of the circumstances. The fact that she told the senior that she was not allowed to wear her own clothes, at all, kinda strikes as peculiar with me.

So where is the ethics question? You vented but didn't ask anything.

I guess lets just break down from a theoretical stand point. If the conclusion I have come to is accurate. would this situation be correct.

cdifoto wrote in post #16441759
So where is the ethics question?

To have one client hire you to do work. and you create images not to the liking of that client, but with the means to provide them to another customer.

flipcrab85 wrote in post #16441760
I guess lets just break down from a theoretical stand point. If the conclusion I have come to is accurate. would this situation be correct.

I'd have to see the contract.

It's not really unethical, IMHO. It would be awesome with the right execution but weird if done poorly.

flipcrab85 wrote in post #16441764
To have one client hire you to do work. and you create images not to the liking of that client, but with the means to provide them to another customer.

I don't think that was the intent, but I'd have to see the contract and get the photographer's side of this.

I'm not sure what the question is. So here's my input:

The photographer may or may not be selling the photos. If the senior signed a model release that allows this, then there is little they can do about it and there is nothing wrong with it. If they did not sign a model release, then they have grounds for a lawsuit but they would need to find the advertisement with the photo in it to prove it. If the parent is suspicious of this, then they may want to check into it. But you need to stay out of it. It's really none of your business.

If the parent or senior has asked you to re-shoot her pics, then by all means take the job. There's nothing unethical about taking the job. If they don't like yours they are free to move on to someone else, over and over and over if they want to spend their money that way. Whether or not they can get a refund from the other photographer has nothing to do with you. Don't get involved in anything to do with the other photographer. Take the money, shoot the set, make them happy with their photos, move on.

Regarding the practice of shooting a job for one person and using it for something else, there really isn't anything "wrong" with it as long as the expectation is set properly. To say in your contract that their images may be sold to 3rd parties to be used in advertising is perfectly fine. A smart photographer however would shoot what the primary customer wants and then IF someone else wants to buy them, then they are a secondary customer. To use a person as a model for another customer and charge them as if you were shooting them as the primary customer is tacky, unethical, and ultimately will lose customers.

flipcrab85 wrote in post #16441740
Her mom hired another photographer to do her senior photos.

1. Was there a contract?
2. Was it signed by the parent?
3. Did it state that the images would be for a third party for advertising & that the daughter was not the primary customer?
4. Is the school aware of that?
5. Was there a substantial discount because of that?

Did they contact the photographer & ask for a reshoot?

kfreels wrote in post #16441983
A smart photographer however would shoot what the primary customer wants and then IF someone else wants to buy them, then they are a secondary customer. To use a person as a model for another customer and charge them as if you were shooting them as the primary customer is tacky, unethical, and ultimately will lose customers.

I agree, tacky & unethical unless the mother & daughter were aware of the situation from the very beginning.

flipcrab85 wrote in post #16441740
The senior contacted me stating she completely HATED the photos done by the other photographer and wanted me to re-shoot her photos, because she was not sending them out.

PhotosGuy wrote in post #16442065
Did they contact the photographer & ask for a reshoot?

Better question:
Do the photos match the style of photos shown in the photographer's portfolio?
Or, did they not even look at the photographer's portfolio in advance?

If the photos of the senior are similar in style and processing to what's shown in the photographer's portfolio, then no reshoot [By that photographer] is warranted.

In my opinion, it's unethical (but not illegal) for that photographer to sell or give those photos to the boutique without the senior's knowledge.
Furthermore, it's likely illegal in most of the U.S. for the boutique to use those images in their advertising, without the senior's knowledge - and a signed release.
- not illegal for the photographer to sell them to the boutique, but illegal for the boutique to use them in advertising
- contract must signed by the mom/parent/guardian, if the senior is still a minor

It's not unethical for you to offer a re-shoot in whatever style the senior likes.

PhotosGuy wrote in post #16442065
1. Was there a contract?
2. Was it signed by the parent?
3. Did it state that the images would be for a third party for advertising & that the daughter was not the primary customer?
4. Is the school aware of that?
5. Was there a substantial discount because of that?

Did they contact the photographer & ask for a reshoot?

I agree, tacky & unethical unless the mother & daughter were aware of the situation from the very beginning.

I do intend to redo the shoot.
1. there was a contract signed releasing the model to be used for advertisement. I did look at it, and it is rather vague to the degree of just stating "use of images for marketing purposes"
3. the shoot was done as though the senior was the sole customer and paid accordingly
4. most likely the school was not aware due to the setup of the shots there is no indication that it was a senior shoot (i.e. cap gown, class ring) strictly imo, commercial print type photos
5. paid as though was full shoot
they did contact her, and she told them she would have to pay full price again for a reshoot, because she (photographer) didn't have a problem with the images, so they were sufficient.

nathancarter wrote in post #16442184
Better question:
Do the photos match the style of photos shown in the photographer's portfolio?
Or, did they not even look at the photographer's portfolio in advance?

If the photos of the senior are similar in style and processing to what's shown in the photographer's portfolio, then no reshoot [By that photographer] is warranted.

In my opinion, it's unethical (but not illegal) for that photographer to sell or give those photos to the boutique without the senior's knowledge.
Furthermore, it's likely illegal in most of the U.S. for the boutique to use those images in their advertising, without the senior's knowledge - and a signed release.
- not illegal for the photographer to sell them to the boutique, but illegal for the boutique to use them in advertising
- contract must signed by the mom/parent/guardian, if the senior is still a minor

It's not unethical for you to offer a re-shoot in whatever style the senior likes.

yea, i do intend to redo the shoot.
the photographers "old stuff" fit the bill of what the customer was looking for. she recently "rebranded" herself as a different name. for whatever reason. and since then she has changed her shooting exponentially. this session was one of her first seniors since the rebrand.

im not tryin to point fingers, play the blame game or sturr stuff. im just tryin to grasp a better understanding of the business aspect of this. because i do understand there are several "understood" rights of passage with the images you create. I know there are some things that you CAN get away with doing, as long as you cover yourself in writing. But for me, from a personal standpoint. I would rather lookout for providing my customer exactly what they were looking for and have them return to me, than make the most off of each one that i can. but to each his own

flipcrab85 wrote in post #16442421
5. paid as though was full shoot
they did contact her, and she told them she would have to pay full price again for a reshoot, because she (photographer) didn't have a problem with the images, so they were sufficient.

This sounds like an issue for small claims court to me, especially since the photographers "old stuff" is not what was delivered.