Troy D Photography wrote:
Is it critical that I see/copy a drivers license?

Other than model release, contract/written agreement?

Any other helpful tips you'd like to share?


Thanks!!

If you are shooting questionable material then yes, verify age with a drivers license.  Other than that if you are shooting for your portfolio's, the only critical thing you need to do is not forget your camera. A model release or anything else isn't needed.

If you are selling the images or submitting them for publication, then yes, you need to inform the model of your intentions and compensate her accordingly, and get a model release which shows the publication you have her permission to do so.

A contract/written agreement is only needed if you are an unethical person who doesn't feel like you can handle the responsibility of living up to your end of the bargain.  Otherwise discuss beforehand with the model how many images she gets from the shoot and then after the shoot actually give them to her.

Don't forget to have fun too.

Troy D Photography wrote:
Is it critical that I see/copy a drivers license?

Other than model release, contract/written agreement?

Any other helpful tips you'd like to share?


Thanks!!

The most important step is to make sure that prior to the shoot both you and the model have a common understanding of what is expected form each of you, and what can be done with the images.

There are so many different ways of structuring a trade situation, that you want to make sure you both have the same thing in mind. 

Make sure you agree on whether either of you can sell or license the images.  How can each of you use the images?  If she is allowed to promote herself, does this include printing posters with her picture?  Does it make a difference if she sells or gives away the posters?  If she has a real estate business on the side, can she use the images to promote that business?   Is your use limited to putting it in a printer/online portfolio?  Can you use the images on a business card or advertisement?  Can you sell a calendar including her image?  Can you sell the images as stock?

I'm not trying to tell you how you should answer those questions, only that you both should agree on the answers.  it's helpful to write down the answers to these questions in order to confirm the mutual understanding, and cut down on later misunderstandings.   A year from now, the model may have shot multiple TF arrangements.  It may no longer be clear to her which terms applies to which shoot.  Having a written document allows the model to review the terms that applied to your specific shoot.   Some people refer to this document as the TFP contract.  In many circumstances, I don't think the agreement needs to rise to the level of a formal contract.

Typically, the photographer is the natural copyright owner.  If the model is allowed to make prints from the images she may need a usage license (sometimes called a "copyright release").  If she asks a lab to print images that look professionally shot, the lab may ask to see the copyright release from the photographer (even Costco and Walgreens will do this).  I suggest the usage agreement be an independent document, separate from any other documents.


If most states you need a model's permission in order to use her likeness to promote goods and/or services.  If you will be using the images to promote your photography business, then I would suggest getting a model release.  I strongly suggest that you not draft your own release.  A release that looks correct to the average person, may not be useful in a court of law.   Many photographic professional associations (like the PPA) offer carefully crafted model release forms to their members.  I recommend keeping the model release an independent document, separate from any other documents.

If you are worried that the release will be contested, then you may wish to take a photo of the model holding the signed release.  This documents that the model pictured actually signed the document.  My understanding is that the release is binding, even if she signed a false name.

If you are getting a release, you should verify that the model is over 18.  If she isn't, you should have a parent/guardian sign the release.   Looking at her driver's license is a good way to check age.  You don't need to copy the license as proof of age.  If she is over 18, then you have nothing to worry about.  If she is under 18, then a copy of a fake license doesn't make the release binding.



If you will be shooting pornographic imagery, a driver's license is not sufficient.  You must meet the paperwork and record keeping requirements of  18 USC § 2257A.   It is not easy to meet these requirements.  If the images are for private use, and will never be published, you may be able to avoid many of the requirements.   If the model is under 18, then it is illegal to shoot pornographic images of her, no matter what paperwork you have.   Keep in mind that nudity is not required in order for an image to be pornographic, and that nudity does not automatically make an image pornographic.


Good luck with your TF shoot.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
...  You don't need a model release in many cases, but having one eliminates some problems.
...

Keep in mind that the need for a model release varies from state to state.  In some states oral permission is sufficient, and in other states the model release must be in writing.  Even the exact circumstances where you need a release varies from state to state.

You will find a lot of posts from photographers who neglected to get a release, and a few years later, the model changed her mind.  If you are in a state where a written release is required, you may be liable for monetary damages should you find yourself in this sort of situation.

Personally, I tend to be on the conservative side.  Before I use a model's likeness to promote my photography business, even if it's only a sample image on my web site, I obtain a written release.   Other photographers disagree.  The right decision depends on what state you are in, and what level of risk you are willing to take.

I also suggest getting a written release if the model is not fully clothed.  You want to avoid a situation where the model later claims she thought you were practicing technique, and the images would never be made public.

It all boils down to making sure that everyone knows what to expect, and documenting those expectations.  As others have pointed out, expectations to document include:
- Does the model get all images, or only selected images?
- If she gets only selected images, who makes the selection?
- Does she receive images straight from the camera? retouched images? or some combination?
- Is the model free to retouch (or have retouched) any of the images?
- How quickly will the model receive her images?
- If the model will not be fully clothed, but doesn't want certain body parts to show, how will mistakes be handled?  What happens to images where certain body parts unexpectedly show?   

The best advice I can give is to make sure that you and the model agree on the issues before the shoot.

Flex Photography wrote:
Never heard "TFT" used. There is TFP, TFCD or just TF to indicate "Trade" shoots. (TFT = WTF  lol)

TFT = Trade For Time

Melissa Kat wrote:
Why would you want to risk it? Just ask for the license and save yourself from potential disaster.
And who cares what TFT stands for.

It is a good idea to be clear in communicating in business deals and personal conversations.  Why bother to cover yourself by getting the license, if you don't cover yourself in defining the terms?

Hunter  GWPB wrote:

It is a good idea to be clear in communicating in business deals and personal conversations.  Why bother to cover yourself by getting the license, if you don't cover yourself in defining the terms?

Because most terms used on MM are not used outside. I have never heard my agents or brands I have worked for use TF, TFT, TFP, etc., as these acronyms are not used in neither contracts nor verbalized when discussing the shoot.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
I have seen them used on Craig's List.  We don't know who else he has used the acronym with.  He isn't one of your agents.  But it isn't relevant.  He used it here.  It created confusion.  Confusion isn't helpful.

+1

Melissa Kat wrote:
Why would you want to risk it? Just ask for the license and save yourself from potential disaster.
And who cares what TFT stands for.

This raises the question what are you risking, and what are you protecting yourself from?

If your concern is whether or not the model can sign a binding release or contract, then looking at the license is sufficient.   Once you have seen that she is over 18, you no longer need the license.  If the question did come up in court, an uncertified copy of the license is not valid proof of age.

If you want to prove that the model actually signed the release, then get her signature notarized, and/or photograph her holding the signed release.  A copy of her license shows that you had her license in your possession, it does not show that she actually signed the release (in fact it shows you had a copy of her signature you could have used to forge her signature).


If you are taking sexy images, having the license doesn't help.  The issue is whether or not she is over 18, not whether or not you have a copy of the license.

If you are shooting porn, then you need to comply with the 2257 Regulations.  A copy of a drivers license is not sufficient.



There are situations where it is helpful to have a driver's license.  It provides an easy way of getting a mailing address in case you need to send photos or checks to the model.   If you don't trust the model, the license gives you a good handle on who she really is.   If she steals stuff during the shoot, a copy of her license will help the police track her down.  Similarly, if the model is paying the MUA with a check, a copy of the driver's license helps collect should the check bounce.

Troy D Photography wrote:
My God...  You people are killing me here.

Its a simple portfolio building shoot with no nudity.  All models are over 18, EVERYTHING has been clearly explained.  I'm not a moron, but I also don't want to overlook a detail that could cost me later.

I'll be sure to check with you all first before posting and using a term YOU may not have heard of.

But you may be missing the point of the forums---Questions asked are in effect asked for everyone's benefit and the answers are relative to the experience, expertise and/or practices of the respondents, which although they may seem like overkill to you could be the very answer the next newbie needs.

I'd suggest that you think of the forums as a huge church supper where everyone brings whatever he has to offer to the table and everyone samples the dishes that look good to him and just passes up anything that might cause him indigestion.  It's considered to be in very bad form to insult the good folks who have prepared these dishes--somewhat worse than farting, and the offender might get very, very hungry before anyone invites him again.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Troy D Photography wrote:
My God...  You people are killing me here.

Its a simple portfolio building shoot with no nudity.  All models are over 18, EVERYTHING has been clearly explained.  I'm not a moron, but I also don't want to overlook a detail that could cost me later.

I'll be sure to check with you all first before posting and using a term YOU may not have heard of.

The nature of your planned shoot wasn't clear form your original post.   You did ask about copying a driver's license.  This question is frequently asked by those who are planning to shoot nudes and are concerned about underage model issues.


Providing more details in your postings, will generally result in more responses that are better targeted to your situation.


Here are some simple guidelines for informal TFP shoots:

- Make sure photographer and model are both on the same page as to the nature of the shoot, and what can be done with the images.   Having a written record of this is a good idea, usually an email is sufficient.

- If the photographer will be using the images to promote his photography business, or will be using them for any purpose where a release is required, get a written release from the model.

- If you are getting a release, or shooting racy images, take a look at the model's driver's license to verify she is over 18.

- If you are worried about the signature on the release being disputed, take a photo of the model holding the executed release.

- If you are worried about the model stealing from you, get a copy of her driver's license.

Troy D Photography wrote:
My God...  You people are killing me here.

Its a simple portfolio building shoot with no nudity.  All models are over 18, EVERYTHING has been clearly explained.  I'm not a moron, but I also don't want to overlook a detail that could cost me later.

I'll be sure to check with you all first before posting and using a term YOU may not have heard of.

If there's no nudity why would you need to see their license? Your original post had almost no information, so why wouldn't people assume your shoot involved nudity?

Lallure Photographic wrote:
If you are doing anything revealing, verify age, absolutely.........before you shoot.

Keep in mind that verifying age by looking at a driver's license is a moral issue, not a legal one.

Generally, there is no prohibition against taking nude images of minors.  The prohibition is against pornographic images.

Verifying age with a driver's license is generally sufficient to satisfy a moral question if you are shooting nudes.  It is not sufficient to satisfy legal requirements if the images are pornographic.

Troy D Photography wrote:
My God...  You people are killing me here.

I'll be sure to check with you all first before posting and using a term YOU may not have heard of.

Just wait until you make a typo or simple grammatical error! It is better to be incoherent. 

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
edited for brevity

Just wait until you make a typo or simple grammatical error! It is better to be incoherent. 

A typo?  Thats laughable, I'm perfict!

Rays Fine Art wrote:

But you may be missing the point of the forums---Questions asked are in effect asked for everyone's benefit and the answers are relative to the experience, expertise and/or practices of the respondents, which although they may seem like overkill to you could be the very answer the next newbie needs.

I'd suggest that you think of the forums as a huge church supper where everyone brings whatever he has to offer to the table and everyone samples the dishes that look good to him and just passes up anything that might cause him indigestion.  It's considered to be in very bad form to insult the good folks who have prepared these dishes--somewhat worse than farting, and the offender might get very, very hungry before anyone invites him again.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Now that was cool.

Melissa Kat wrote:
Why would you want to risk it? Just ask for the license and save yourself from potential disaster.
And who cares what TFT stands for.

Simple wisdom.

You don't get a license and a release for the cases when things go as planned, you get them for when something unexpected happens.