Rays Fine Art wrote:
If the answer to that is "Not very," you might be able to gain some brownie points with her agency (and her) by agreeing to withhold publication.

That, in itself, is a suggestion fraught with problems. If the photographer does reach such an accommodation - not to "publish" - and in Europe even displaying the images on the photographer's own website is considered publishing much less displaying them in the likes of FB or some other public social media site, then what is left?

What is left is what I fondly refer to as a "hollow copyright". That is the author / photographer remains the proud owner of the works and the copyright underlying them, representing from the information given above at least €670 / US$737 and change at today's rate of exchange, but can't use them... for anything... ever. And that takes no account at all of the photographer's time.

Such a deal!

Studio36

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
Shine it on.

The model was kind enough to shoot with you, kill the images, and send her on her merry way.

And yes, I have done this myself.

On more than one occasion.

Maybe there is a law of karma?

If not, who cares.

Some--many?--things in life are more important than money.

RBD

+1

crx studios wrote:
Something seems off here. I can’t imagine a modeling agency freaking out over the fact that sexy but tasteful lingerie shots of one of their models exist out there somewhere. If they are are outside the agency’s look - then they don’t put them on their site - that’s all.

(Does the agency’s website have any similar images for other models?)

I would also think it would be quite unusual for the agency’s clients to demand a moral’s clause requiring a lifetime of conservative behavior. They’re hiring a model for a few hours. Nor can I see most one-time client googling a model to see what else they’ve shot in their lifetime, and even if they did, most photographers don’t ID their models by name on their websites.

Now if the client was hiring a commercial spokeswoman, or a host of a children’s show, then big bucks would be involved, and there would be reasonable money to make certain pictures go away, at least for a few years.

My guess is she over-reacted to the agency’s comments, or they intentionally tried to scare her so she wouldn't do more, or a friend is the one who scared her with “what if’s” and she’s blaming the agency.

Tasteful lingerie shots wouldn't hurt a model even in the most conservative campaigns.
Do men's magazines/Playboy/Hustler, etc. and it changes everything.

Boudoir Fashion Photo wrote:
This is not about punishment,

You're absolutely right. This is about taking personal responsibility for one's own actions and the consequences that result from such actions.

The models payment was 150€ + 20€ for travel cost. The hotel room location was 250€. In addition I had paid about 250€ for my flight tickets. So even if she pays back her fee, it´s still a huge waste for me and I´m set back with a crippled shoot.

Then it sounds to me like the model owes you 670€. Period. Your good karma comes from you not charging her for your time for the shoot and for post. You should remind her CONSTANTLY that you are waiving such fees as a personal favor.

This girl wants to play in the world of adults and these are the consequences for such actions. I see this as being no different than someone getting behind the wheel of a car and causing a fender bender. Nobody intended for the accident to happen but she is the sole person responsible for causing it and she has to bear the financial responsibility for her actions. Plain and simple. To me, this isn't even a debatable topic...it's just common sense.

Having all this said, it´s not a matter of "life and death" for me to keep the pictures,

It's not about that at all. You paid for a product and the person who sold it to you no longer wants you to have it, even though you paid for it. Imagine buying a used camera from someone and after you use it on your first shoot, they tell you that they don't like you using it for shooting models and they want you to give the camera back to them but they won't be giving you your money back and they want you to delete all the photos you shot with this camera. You'd laugh at them, right? So why is this ANY DIFFERENT? It's not. So no, I would not take down Image 1 without getting fully compensated for your expenses. If she was kind, she would even pay you extra for your troubles.

If it will really affect her career in a bad way having those pictures published I´m willing to find a solution.

Then as a career-minded adult, she will fully understand her responsibility in compensating you, in full, for your financial troubles in this matter. It's only smart business.

Shot By Adam wrote:
...
Then it sounds to me like the model owes you 670€. Period. Your good karma comes from you not charging her for your time for the shoot and for post. You should remind her CONSTANTLY that you are waiving such fees as a personal favor.

I agree with everything Adam just said... so it must be right... I never agree with him.

But seriously, he's bang-on. Cover your costs, and lose the images, that's so fair to her it seems beyond obvious to me. You did nothing wrong, you should not have to suffer any debt from it. At the *VERY* least, she should give back the entire shoot fee, that's not even a question in my mind, but I think that's too little.

You are absolutely being "the good guy" by offering this to her.

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
Sheesh.

I am so easily confused.

Do you think it's my age?

Just to make certain I have this correct, you're in Oslo, Norway, the capital of a Scandinavian nation known for beautiful Nordic girls.

Is it going to far to ask if they have Model Agencies in Oslo?

But you book a 25 year old girl you will have to fly to shoot--250 Euro for Flight Tickets?--book a  250 Euro hotel room?--and pay the model.

Pop Norway 5.08 million
Pop Germany 80.62 million

Shot By Adam wrote:
Then it sounds to me like the model owes you 670€. Period. Your good karma comes from you not charging her for your time for the shoot and for post. You should remind her CONSTANTLY that you are waiving such fees as a personal favor.

.

Yes. This.

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
Sheesh.

I am so easily confused.

Do you think it's my age?

Just to make certain I have this correct, you're in Oslo, Norway, the capital of a Scandinavian nation known for beautiful Nordic girls.

Is it going to far to ask if they have Model Agencies in Oslo?

But you book a 25 year old girl you will have to fly to shoot--250 Euro for Flight Tickets?--book a  250 Euro hotel room?--and pay the model.

I've certainly heard Scandinavians are affluent, but... I'm impressed.

This shoot was way beyond my means.

Or inclination.

Can I ask why you apparently have not gotten on the Test list for Oslo agencies?

You certainly have the sympathy of many, many Mayhem photographers.

Personally, I have doubts about your complete game plan here.

Still, judging from your portfolio, you shoot every genre, so who am I to ask?

RBD

Well, it´s not entirely true - I didn´t go to Germany just for this one shoot, I had other shoots too, so that brings down the cost of the flight ticket. But the 250€ hotel - for sure. But I can understand your confusion - I wouldn´t take this huge cost only for one shoot, that´s kind of crazy.. And you´re right - a lot of beautiful girls in Norway, but that doesn´t mean they are models...
Besides, Norwegian models are not "hungry" - I mean for work. In Germany I can pay 50€ / hour and get a very experienced model, and that fee would actually mean something to her. In Norway MM is completely dead (do a search on Oslo and you see what I mean). The best models are tied up in agencies, not so many freelancers.

Back to the topic; the biggest problem for me isn´t actually the cost, but the time I lost. For the time and money I invested, I could have booked another model  who didn´t make this drama. But lesson learned: for the future I will not book models with restrictions like "no lingerie" or "not to sexy" as this potentially can lead to problems.

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
Sheesh.

I am so easily confused.

Do you think it's my age?

Just to make certain I have this correct, you're in Oslo, Norway, the capital of a Scandinavian nation known for beautiful Nordic girls.

Is it going to far to ask if they have Model Agencies in Oslo?

But you book a 25 year old girl you will have to fly to shoot--250 Euro for Flight Tickets?--book a  250 Euro hotel room?--and pay the model.

I've certainly heard Scandinavians are affluent, but... I'm impressed.

This shoot was way beyond my means.

Or inclination.

Can I ask why you apparently have not gotten on the Test list for Oslo agencies?

You certainly have the sympathy of many, many Mayhem photographers.

Personally, I have doubts about your complete game plan here.

Still, judging from your portfolio, you shoot every genre, so who am I to ask?

RBD

Well, it´s not entirely true - I didn´t go to Germany just for this one shoot, I had other shoots too, so that brings down the cost of the flight ticket. But the 250€ hotel - for sure. But I can understand your confusion - I wouldn´t take this huge cost only for one shoot, that´s kind of crazy.. And you´re right - a lot of beautiful girls in Norway, but that doesn´t mean they are models...
Besides, Norwegian models are not "hungry" - I mean for work. In Germany I can pay 50€ / hour and get a very experienced model, and that fee would actually mean something to her. In Norway MM is completely dead (do a search on Oslo and you see what I mean). The best models are tied up in agencies, not so many freelancers.

Back to the topic; the biggest problem for me isn´t actually the cost, but the time I lost. For the time and money I invested, I could have booked another model  who didn´t make this drama. But lesson learned: for the future I will not book models with restrictions like "no lingerie" or "not to sexy" as this potentially can lead to problems.

Virtual Studio wrote:

Pop Norway 5.08 million
Pop Germany 80.62 million

Bingo.

KungPaoChic wrote:

Yeah at the very least the model should reimburse all the hard costs. What kind of message are you sending when you let someone get paid then afterwards she dictates terms and the photographer is expected to eat all the costs?

The model got paid. The photographer put out money for the shoot. At the very least the model should incur the cost of the shoot or offer up something else to reimburse.

Anything else is just not how the real world works and creates a false sense of entitlement.

I don't know in what fantasy world you do a job and then change your mind ( so in reality you did not really do the job) and you still want to get paid?

Nonsense.

And then we wonder why there are all these people wandering around with feelings of entitlement.

What happened to the old parental attitude of, "Kid, you broke it, you fix it. And if you don't fix it, you are in trouble at home as well."

R Bruce Duncan wrote:

The difference is that you are working fashion photographer who shoots agency girls for assignments you have in hand.

When an agency sends you a model the agency knows who the client is and what is expected of the model.

You are one of our most valuable  contributors--for obvious reasons--but I believe this situation is very different from any situation you would find yourself in.

RBD

How is it different you paid someone to do a job you expect them to do it. No one forced them to do it. If they don't want to hold their end of the deal then they need to reimburse the money and pay all expenses that the photographer incurred in setting the shoot.

It's like me getting paid to shoot some photos for a client, taking the money and never delivering the images. That is fraud.

Boudoir Fashion Photo wrote:
The models payment was 150€ + 20€ for travel cost. The hotel room location was 250€. In addition I had paid about 250€ for my flight tickets. So even if she pays back her fee, it´s still a huge waste for me and I´m set back with a crippled shoot.

You spent 670 euros on one boudoir model shoot !!? That is quite substantial indeed.. I would be more inclined to vote to take legal action for that much money (not that it would be likely you could collect but, that is enough to warrant a trip to the lawyer to ask for their opinion) but I have strong doubts still the model will be able to pay that. But even then, I would say it is a stress I would rather not have because that is never a fun trip. I would still write it off, likely, because from the sounds of it she will not be able to pay that much (if only offering to pay a fraction of the costs to start with)

That is an insane amount to spend on a portfolio shoot. I have done 3 shoots today, all lifestyle, all for ad agency use.  They didn't even come to 1/10th that price to set up and do, if I was spending 670 euro out of pocket I would be expecting at least a couple grand back

crx studios wrote:
Something seems off here. I can’t imagine a modeling agency freaking out over the fact that sexy but tasteful lingerie shots of one of their models exist out there somewhere. If they are are outside the agency’s look - then they don’t put them on their site - that’s all.


My guess is she over-reacted to the agency’s comments, or they intentionally tried to scare her so she wouldn't do more, or a friend is the one who scared her with “what if’s” and she’s blaming the agency.

i had to wonder similar myself, even in conservative part of canada.. I have not heard or seen any one reacting like this. From the sounds of it ..this shoot was not even technically lingerie (boudoir is not common in oslo?) but a short skirt?

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
To recap, then:  The original poster is an Oslo, Norway shooter who booked a German agency girl and flew to Germany where he stayed in a hotel and shot more than one model.

He paid for a flight from Norway and a hotel room in Germany.

One of the German models was more than willing to shoot images that her booker took exception to.

She was paid 150 euros plus travel expenses of 20 euros.

When, on the advice of her agency, the girl wished to buy back rights to the images her booker did not like, the original poster agreed that this would be in fact possible, but she must pay for his air fare and his hotel room.

In addition to returning her model compensation.

A total of 670 euros.

The original poster's righteously indignant fellow Mayhem photographers assured him this was an equitable settlement.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Now... because I try to live in the real world--where I believe 670 euros is a whole lot of money for a 25 year old model?--I'm skeptical.

I gave up wagering on ponies a long time ago, but my guess is that the probability of the original poster getting 670 euros from the German model in question are, well, extremely long.

I also feel that he can succeed, with a high probability, in offending her booker.

It's been ages since I photographed an agency girl, but... to me, bookers have the keys to where, were I a younger photographer, I would want to be.

I digress.

I don't have a lot of money--and I'd rather get it to an amenable model--but I'd be willing, I think, to wager some small sum--with odds--on whether the original poster will, should he follow his fellow Mayhem photographers' advice, get 670 euros from the model in question.

Any takers?

RBD

At the time I made my original post the OP had not revealed that the cost of the trip could be defrayed to a certain extent by dividing it by the number of models shot.

Which seems fair, no?

So, I agree that 670 euros is a bit high.

An equitable share of total expenses for the trip plus a complete refund of the fee paid to the model seems fair to me. At the very least I would present that to the model as a beginning point in negotiations.

I would also want the name of the agency, would give the a ring and see what their story is.

If I pay somebody for something I expect to receive what I paid for.

Boudoir Fashion Photo wrote:
Hi all and thank´s for all your inputs. Time for a little update from the OP. To make it even more complicated, it turns out the her booker is a Japanese agency, but it probably doesn´t matter. So, Norwegian shooter, German model, Japanese agency - what a mess

Just to make that clear - I did not intend to ask the model to refund me all my expenses - only if I would have to give up and considerable amount of the pictures - let´s say 80-90% of them. Now, it turns out that we are only talking about 5-10 pictures which they find "offensive" because too much of her bottocks are visible. Wow. Really, that´s it? At the beginning I had the understanding that we were talking about a lot of pictures. I mean, if she just had asked me politely like "oh, I noticed that my bottocks are a little bit more visible than I´m comfortable with, could you please not publish those images?", I would just delite them - or not publish them. 5-10 pictures does not make a big difference when I have hundreds. And frankly, I don´t even know if they are any good and I would maybe not have used them for anything anyway.

The problem for the model, is that she does not have a very clear guideline with her booker - just "no lingerie". Now, if I was a model with a booker who could just make up the rules as they please from day to day, I would be very nervous shooting anything else than trousers and a turtle neck.

So much drama for nothing.

communication is essential, now you know for future

Boudoir Fashion Photo wrote:
Hi,

I recently had a shoot (pay, I paid her) with a model that now wants to buy the rights of of a lot of the images from me. The reason is - that her agency has found the images to be "too sexy" and told her that they don´t "appreciate it". Apperanty she has an agreement with her agency about not taking lingerie images. Im my opinion the images are in fact very decent and not very "sexy" at all, but they think differently - however, this is not my problem. I didn´t "push" the model to anything and the outfits were all hers.

So, to the point - she is now getting all nervous and want to buy and control the rights of the images. The thing is that she does probably not realize how much it will cost her. She is like suggesting that I can have back "part of the shooting fee" which makes no sense to me because the actual value/cost of the shoot is much more that that (hotel, travel cost and time spent) and I could have spent my time shooting another model - it would mean a complete waste of time and money. She has signed a standard model release and I would like to be able to do what ever I want with the images with no restrictions.

Now, if I decided to sell her the rights to the images anyway, what would I charge?? I guess it would be 10-20 images.

I would be thankful for any input here.

Gisle

Refunding "PART" of the modeling fee is out of the question. Refunding ALL of the modeling fee is a start.

From there you can negotiate as if the shoot was done where she hired you with the assumption that she would have the rights to the images when you are done. That means that since the scenario is now that she is paying you, she would absorb all the costs of the shoot, plus your shooting fee.

That would make things more equitable.

Boudoir Fashion Photo wrote:
Hi all and thank´s for all your inputs. Time for a little update from the OP. To make it even more complicated, it turns out the her booker is a Japanese agency, but it probably doesn´t matter. So, Norwegian shooter, German model, Japanese agency - what a mess

Just to make that clear - I did not intend to ask the model to refund me all my expenses - only if I would have to give up and considerable amount of the pictures - let´s say 80-90% of them. Now, it turns out that we are only talking about 5-10 pictures which they find "offensive" because too much of her bottocks are visible. Wow. Really, that´s it? At the beginning I had the understanding that we were talking about a lot of pictures. I mean, if she just had asked me politely like "oh, I noticed that my bottocks are a little bit more visible than I´m comfortable with, could you please not publish those images?", I would just delite them - or not publish them. 5-10 pictures does not make a big difference when I have hundreds. And frankly, I don´t even know if they are any good and I would maybe not have used them for anything anyway.

The problem for the model, is that she does not have a very clear guideline with her booker - just "no lingerie". Now, if I was a model with a booker who could just make up the rules as they please from day to day, I would be very nervous shooting anything else than trousers and a turtle neck.

So much drama for nothing.

Interesting.
Surprising that the model didn't take the time to know what she can and can not do.
That must be frustrating for both model and photographer, more so for the photographer.

Communication is key.

studio36uk wrote:
You and she were eyeball to eyeball - - - and YOU just blinked!

Studio36

Well.. it´s not a competition, and some times one has to be a bit pragmatic.

Interesting.
Surprising that the model didn't take the time to know what she can and can not do.
That must be frustrating for both model and photographer, more so for the photographer.

Communication is key.

Yes indeed!

Shadow Dancer wrote:
So the outcome is now that there is a model out there who has totally gotten away with charging for a shoot and then censoring the results?

I feel sorry for whoever else hires her.

No lesson learned by anybody involved it seems.

Another day on the Mayhem.

When you put it that way... But, the thing is that I knew about her non lingerie policy before the shoot, so I wasn´t really expecting a high level of "sexyness". Sure, the outfits were brought by the model and those poses were all her too. But as photographers we all know that the model does not necessarily know how she will appear from the camera angle, if we shoot wide or close etc. Now, if it turns out that let´s say 5 of the pictures shows too much of whatever, I don´t really mind just keeping them for my self. Okay, she is not entitled to demand anything, but what do I have to benefit to stay on my rights and piss her off? Nothing. I probably don´t even need those pictures anyway. I mean, if I really intended to to a sexy lingerie shoot - or nude for that sake, I would have booked such a model. This wasn´t supposed to be that kind of shoot. So I´m not getting all exited about a few pictures that accidently showed some bottocks. So, I have decided to give her a break and make her understand that this is her lucky day - the next photographer won´t necessarily do the same.

Boudoir Fashion Photo wrote:
Thank´s. The shoot was actually in Germany and the model release I used was a German Getty Images release.

The "German Getty Images model release" is just a translation of the standard US Getty release into German language.

This creates two minor difficulties because the standard Getty release do not fit to German law a 100 percent - which seem not to be very important for you in this specific case.

First, very, very simplified: under German law you cannot make deals regarding a model release which are as well "non-redeemable" as also valid without limit of time.

Either your release shall be non-redeemable - than is has to be limited by time. Or it shall be unlimited by time - than it is redeemable by law. (§314 BGB / civil code)

But stay calm - again very, very simplified: under German law a model release can only be revoked for a very substantial reason. "I changed my mind" is not considered a very substantial reason. "My (new) agency do not like these images" is not, either.

Second, again very, very simplified: under German jurisdiction a phrase like "the images may be used for all purposes" has limited legitimacy. Example: you shoot nude images and the model signs a release that say "may be used for all purposes". You publish these images in Playboy. Or on a "nudie website". No problem.

If you would sell an image to the manager of a brothel or an escort agency and they use it for advertisement and print a caption "Judy, tabu free horny slut who will fulfill all your pervert dreams" your model release won't help you. A German court would call this "violation of the model's general right of personality" - such a model release may allow you to publish the images "for all purposes" but it does not allow you to publicly call the model a hooker if she is not a hooker. But just a nude model. So if this should be the purpose of the images you better sign a model release which explicitely agrees to such usage.

Models who get paid for the model jobs are considered "businessmen/women" under German law. This is important for two reasons:

First: customer protection rights do not apply for this deal. The model isn't a customer regarding to this shooting. She is a businessman.

Second: because it is a contract between business people and not between a businessmen and a customer you are entitled to sign valid contracts for which German law shall not be apply but the law of another country. So you both can agree to use US law or UK law or Norwegian law for this model release. Of course you have to fix this in the release explicitely! Otherwise in case of a lawsuit you first have to clarify which countries law shall apply - German law (because the model is living in Germany and the shooting took place in Germany) or Norwegian law (because you are a Norwegian)...

This is the legal side of that problem. Whether you are willing to give up your rights or how much you can/should demand for giving up your rights... that's another topic.

My personal point of view is very simple.

We are all adults. Yes, really.

I hand out a copy of the model release well enough in advance so that every model get the chance to check it and think twice about it. I like plain, unambigious contracts. Read it, think about it. Sign it. Or don't sign it.

Apart from that there is a more than 2000 years old very wise rule invented by the Romans:
pacta sunt servanda. Contracts have to be observed.

No excuse for adult people: "Oh! I did not understand what I signed. I changed my mind. Could we please replace your name in our certificate of marriage by your cousins name? I realized he's much smarter than you. And he earns more money, too!"

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
Seems like most disagree with me.

Not again!

Go ahead and invoice the model.

Maybe she'll get help from Angela Merkel?

She's been in a generous mood recently!

RBD

And of course they have now surface images posing in a nudist camp when she was a teenager. So she may definately have a point of view