studio36uk wrote:

studio36uk wrote:
Would you like lube with that?

Studio36

Problem? Oh, no, no problem. I'm not your business adviser.

Studio36

WOW what a lack of assisence to me and the OP;

JGLabs wrote:
I did a trade shoot recently and I had the model sign a TFCD contract which clearly stated, the images would be provided to her in exchange for her time and were not to be used for commercial uses or to be sold.

I just saw on social media she's trying to sell the prints for money, offering "signed prints" of my images.

I have mixed feelings about it. Is it worth mentioning to her?
The last time this happened to me, when I brought it up it burned the bridge with the model, (and it shouldn't have).

/advice?

Hi,

Maybe she thinks she is only selling her signature with the print? Is she giving you credit? However, failing to tell or ask you in advance is dirty pool.

I haven't read through yet but, if you want to salvage this relationship then she needs to gain your trust back and if you do not want to push her away it seems the best way is to acknowledge you are aware without accusing her of intentionally breaking your agreement. Maybe, 'hey good luck with your signature sales, do you need my watermark smaller?' Next time you shoot with her you will have to make her a usage rights release clearly listing what she can and cannot do.

Granted, I think she is not to be trusted and would never contact her or shoot with her again and consider it a loss and avoid her like the plague and give honest critiques to anyone who asked that she cannot be trusted.

Simple for me, unless you ask her you will never know if she is just a total air head dumb-butt who thinks she is only selling her 'signature' or, (likely,) she knows she is violating your agreement, (likely since she hid it from you.)
Jen

Mark Ruddick wrote:
Offer to do the printing for her and charge.

Yup.

Dan Saul Knight Imagery wrote:
I'm a pornographer, and I live alone in my Yorkville condo. One of the poshest neighbourhoods in Toronto. In the heart of the downtown-core. I spoke on principal alone. We turned a blind eye while magazines preyed on new photographers to give them free Editorial work. Now, many magazines are charging the photographers to hire models and photograph them and create what the magazine insists on. How long do you think it'll be until models demand photographers pay them to create photos to give to them? Oh, right....already happening....oopsies.

No matter how lazy I become, and I can get pretty lazy at times, I'll never let my principles suffer because of it. Just like I'm still a bit of a grammar nazi.

IMHO alone;

Danny
Instagram: @DBIyorkville
Diverxity: Now Banned On Emm Emm
FetLife: https://fetlife.com/users/4532524
Website: http://www.dbiphotography.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DBIyorkville

Talent Website: https://danielbetts.carbonmade.com/
       
“The vilest deeds – like poison weeds – bloom well in prison air; it is only what is good in man that wastes & withers there.”
~Oscar Wilde

I don't think your "principles" are going to stop the market from evolving.  If lots of people want to do photography for free (or even pay for the opportunity to do it) how are you going to stop it?  And beyond that...why should you?

J O H N  A L L A N wrote:
If your business model depends upon nickel and diming models for fan prints - well maybe trying to define a better business model should be more of a concern - MM photographers often seem to get worked up over the most insignificant usages.

+1 

OP, if you really think that she's going to get stinkin' rich selling prints to her "fans" then maybe you want to see if there is a way for you to get a piece of it.  But, I suspect you'd be wasting a bunch of time over nothing.

Isaiah Brink wrote:
.... in my TFCD release I deal with this specific issue.  In it, it is stated that if either one of us sells the images from the shoot that we must furnish 50% of the sale price to the other person within 30 days of the sale.  An idea you may want to incorporate.  Much easier than the legal route.

Usual guidance is the release should be a separate document from other documents such as 2257, usage license, etc.  I assume this was the situation for the OP, as they mentioned a TFP contract versus a release.  Given your opinion of the model (very good) I'd mention in a non-confrontational manner that what she is doing is against the contract she signed, and offer to work something out that is mutually beneficial to both of you.   If it was an honest mistake, she should be willing to do this.  If intentional, you'll have to decide how you want to proceed.

photoguy35 wrote:

Usual guidance is the release should be a separate document from other documents such as 2257, usage license, etc.  I assume this was the situation for the OP, as they mentioned a TFP contract versus a release.  Given your opinion of the model (very good) I'd mention in a non-confrontational manner that what she is doing is against the contract she signed, and offer to work something out that is mutually beneficial to both of you.   If it was an honest mistake, she should be willing to do this.  If intentional, you'll have to decide how you want to proceed.

Well, in my case, no need to even worry about 2257, it dosn't apply to my work.  No nudity involved.  I know, I must be the only photographer here on MM who dosn't do nudes, but that's just my own decision, and I don't regret it.  Well, a model release is a contract.  I've had 2 different lawyers go over my release forms with a fine toothed comb and they couldn't find anything wrong with it.  Ok, some people may not like the 50/50 split on my tfcd form, but the reason I went that route is because the idea is that it's a calobratie effort, and nobody is payingg the other person, so if there is to be money involved, split it down the middle to avoid any problems.  If you want to get more money, pay the model up front for her time, retain the copyright, and watch the money roll in.  But this is just my take on things, take it, leave it, I can only make my suggestions and it's up to you to listen or to take it.

JGLabs wrote:
I did a trade shoot recently and I had the model sign a TFCD contract which clearly stated, the images would be provided to her in exchange for her time and were not to be used for commercial uses or to be sold.

I just saw on social media she's trying to sell the prints for money, offering "signed prints" of my images.

I have mixed feelings about it. Is it worth mentioning to her?
The last time this happened to me, when I brought it up it burned the bridge with the model, (and it shouldn't have).

/advice?

It this were me, I'll just let it go. It's not like she is going to make a lot of money (from my images). And if she could make a few $bucks here and there, power to her.

Unless she is selling the image right to a third party entity for their own commercial gain, meaning the third party will benefit financially. Then it would be a different reaction from me.

crx studios wrote:
The photographer should offer to write the model a $50 check for every print she sells. When she reaches 10 prints sold, he should give her his camera equipment. If she reaches 100, he should give her his house.

It's the least he can do to repay her for the priceless gift she has given him.

Come on, ... if you are really going to do the deal you'll have to put something on the table.

Studio36

I agree with the comment above from MR -

JGLabs wrote:
I did a trade shoot recently and I had the model sign a TFCD contract which clearly stated, the images would be provided to her in exchange for her time and were not to be used for commercial uses or to be sold.

I just saw on social media she's trying to sell the prints for money, offering "signed prints" of my images.

I have mixed feelings about it. Is it worth mentioning to her?
The last time this happened to me, when I brought it up it burned the bridge with the model, (and it shouldn't have).

/advice?

It's simple. It's illegal. Send her a nicely worded cease and desist letter. If that doesn't work, have your lawyer send her a not so nice letter

crx studios wrote:
The photographer should offer to write the model a $50 check for every print she sells. When she reaches 10 prints sold, he should give her his camera equipment. If she reaches 100, he should give her his house.

It's the least he can do to repay her for the priceless gift she has given him.

Photographers are rich and stupid, that's why they deserve 2 DIE:)