Was told as second shooter I cant use my images

JoeyBowman wrote in post #11252516
This is just a question, but did you post an image before he had a chance to? If so maybe he is just upset that potentially people had a chance to view your (the 2nd shooters) images before his.

That kind of stuff bothers me when I let people 2nd shoot, then I never tell them to give me all the images and that they can't post anything.

I understand your point and his. But to tell me I cant use any of the 10 gigs of images I took is uncalled for. I never actually posted the two images in a high traffic site. Just my personal flickr account so I could show my family then I removed them

As a second shooter, you do need to be careful not to show up or distract from the main photographer's work. Even if the main photographer is really, really bad (as recently happened to me).

JoeyBowman wrote in post #11252516
This is just a question, but did you post an image before he had a chance to? If so maybe he is just upset that potentially people had a chance to view your (the 2nd shooters) images before his.

That kind of stuff bothers me when I let people 2nd shoot, then I never tell them to give me all the images and that they can't post anything.

I can see that being a problem. I went back and read the original post again. I can see how your friend can be annoyed IF you posted before he did and maybe now you have lost his trust (no images for you - Seinfeld)

Also I can see that maybe he did not want you to post the images through your site rather than his IF he was the paid shooter and you were working for him.

Maybe some clairty before shooting the wedding is in order. He might not mind you using the images for your portfolio but it is totally inappropirate to send a link to your site to the client if he was the photog running the show.

Legally I believe that you have rights to the images but be careful when burning bridges in this industry

rockfordhx wrote in post #11252589
I can see that being a problem. I went back and read the original post again. I can see how your friend can be annoyed IF you posted before he did and maybe now you have lost his trust (no images for you - Seinfeld)

Also I can see that maybe he did not want you to post the images through your site rather than his IF he was the paid shooter and you were working for him.

Maybe some clairty before shooting the wedding is in order. He might not mind you using the images for your portfolio but it is totally inappropirate to send a link to your site to the client if he was the photog running the show.

Legally I believe that you have rights to the images but be careful when burning bridges in this industry

I understand, but I never sent the link to the client. Just my mother and sister. LoL

How did your buddy find out then?

You may own the rights, but do you have a copy of model release from the bride, etc for you to use them on your website for promotion? Just wondering, could be an issue, not sure if you would actually need it or not...

Bad timing. He's on my contact list on Flickr and must of been ghosting my account for the few hours the images were on my page.

roszell wrote in post #11252618
You may own the rights, but do you have a copy of model release from the bride, etc for you to use them on your website for promotion? Just wondering, could be an issue.

No sir, only he does.

Nickc84 wrote in post #11252558
Yes, I am in the US. I tried talking with him about the situation several times but he refuses to let me use them. He said I was his employee but never told me this before.. just said he needed a second shooter. Our friendship was coming to a end slowly anyways. All he does is bash my work and complain I went with canon over pentax. At this point hes more of a distraction to my photography then a caring freind he once was. I am not saying this is a fact, but people have told me my work is much better than his so I don't know if jealousy is playing a part here or not.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=928428

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=928427

You need to find better "photo friends" to hang out with...

have them printed and show to your prospective clients
find friends who care about you, that's all

I. A verbal agreement is a contract... It's just darned hard to prove. If there were a witness or two to your agreement to shoot on his behalf as a 2nd shooter, then he might be able to prove it in court, if it ever comes to that.

2. You have just admitted to your verbal agreements here on the Internet, in a public forum.

3. Shooting with his camera does complicate things. When he provides the tools for you to do the work, it implies even more stongly his ownership of the copyright on the work you do, while in his hire.

4. It is not uncommon in wedding photographer for the copyright of work done by a 2nd shooter to pass to the hiring photographer. It's understandable in some respects that they might need it, perhaps to provide prints or files to customers months or years later. Simple transfer of copyright is the "cleanest" way to do this. The 2nd shooter can be given perpertual, irrevocable license to portfolio usage of the images, so long as it in no way intrudes upon or impedes the primary shooter's relationship with their client.

5. You do not need a signed model release to show images in a portfolio context. That's specifically excluded from requiring a release, under the law is treated as "editorial" usage. Just don't use them in any other "commercial" way without a signed model release. If the portfolio is online, and you are ever contacted by the persons depicted in the images, they object to your displaying them online, simply take the images in question down. No big deal.

6. This should be a big object lesson for you.... Always get it in writing! Even with friends - maybe even more important with friends, in fact - I sign a second shooter agreement... Always! All the terms and conditions must be spelled out and understood by all parties. The best way to do that is in writing, to prevent problems later. No matter which side of the agreement I'm on at the time, I won't do a 2nd shooter arrangement without everything in writing and signed in advance. It was very unprofessional of the primary photographer to hire you without a signed agreement. It wasn't your responsibility to bring the agreement to the table for his signature.

be careful what you say about him on this site or anywhere else on the internet.

Nickc84 wrote in post #11252558
Yes, I am in the US. I tried talking with him about the situation several times but he refuses to let me use them. He said I was his employee but never told me this before.. just said he needed a second shooter. Our friendship was coming to a end slowly anyways. All he does is bash my work and complain I went with canon over pentax. At this point hes more of a distraction to my photography then a caring freind he once was. I am not saying this is a fact, but people have told me my work is much better than his so I don't know if jealousy is playing a part here or not.

Look at it this way, this 'friend' just did you a favor. You no longer have to deal with them at this point. Especially if they are bashing your work, that is NO friend at all.

As for the whole employee part....did he have you fill out a W9? Are you an actual employee? He can not claim you as an 'employee' unless you filled out a W9 and you are on file as one. Also, if you are an employee, he has to pay taxes on you.

I would tell him to piss off and do your own thing. People like that just get on my nerves. They say one thing and do another.

I'd love to talk to this "friend" of yours and knock some sense into him!!!

If your work is better than his and your confident about what you do, I'd say start your own thing and use his envy, negativity, and hatred as your fuel to get you above him...

amfoto1 wrote in post #11253906
I. A verbal agreement is a contract... It's just darned hard to prove. If there were a witness or two to your agreement to shoot on his behalf as a 2nd shooter, then he might be able to prove it in court, if it ever comes to that.

2. You have just admitted to your verbal agreements here on the Internet, in a public forum.

3. Shooting with his camera does complicate things. When he provides the tools for you to do the work, it implies even more stongly his ownership of the copyright on the work you do, while in his hire.

4. It is not uncommon in wedding photographer for the copyright of work done by a 2nd shooter to pass to the hiring photographer. It's understandable in some respects that they might need it, perhaps to provide prints or files to customers months or years later. Simple transfer of copyright is the "cleanest" way to do this. The 2nd shooter can be given perpertual, irrevocable license to portfolio usage of the images, so long as it in no way intrudes upon or impedes the primary shooter's relationship with their client.

That's not true according to US Copyright law:
http://www.copyright.g​ov/circs/circ1.pdf

Notice that a written and signed document is a legal requirement. Even then, "work for hire" only applies if the work falls into those specified categories. A contracted photographer is, by definition, not an "employee."