Samantha B Photography wrote:
Hey,

So I've been asked to shoot a collection next year.  I'm happy to do it on a TFP basis.

What terms should I include/can I include, if any?

Is it worth saying they can only use images for two years and then license them thereafter (when more established)? Or is it best not to have any restrictions at all?

Any advice is appreciated as I'd like to be as prepared as possible.

Thanks so much!

An important one would be to make certain that you are allowed to display the images yourself. You will only want to show the very best ones and only if they are really nice but those could be a factor in getting more work. I'll leave your other questions for different posters to address.

Samantha B Photography wrote:
Is it worth saying they can only use images for two years and then license them thereafter (when more established)? Or is it best not to have any restrictions at all?

They may have their own ideas.
Find out what they want and then you will need to negotiate.

Shadow Dancer wrote:

An important one would be to make certain that you are allowed to display the images yourself. You will only want to show the very best ones and only if they are really nice but those could be a factor in getting more work. I'll leave your other questions for different posters to address.

I've covered this already. Sorry should have said! I will display them for my my own gains, and they are happy with that.

Mark Salo wrote:

They may have their own ideas.
Find out what they want and then you will need to negotiate.

Thanks, but I'm wondering how do you start this conversation. I feel like if I say "Would you like the images to be restriction-free forever?" they will just say yes.

At least if I set my stall out with what I'd like (ideally), then we can then negotiate from there. Or is that not a great way to start?

Samantha B Photography wrote:
Thanks, but I'm wondering how do you start this conversation. I feel like if I say "Would you like the images to be restriction-free forever?" they will just say yes.

At least if I set my stall out with what I'd like (ideally), then we can then negotiate from there. Or is that not a great way to start?

Start out by asking them how they are going to use the photos. Avoid offering generous hypotheticals like "forever".

What you would like is immaterial. You are fulfilling their needs.

Mark Salo wrote:
Start out by asking them how they are going to use the photos. Avoid offering generous hypotheticals like "forever".

What you would like is immaterial. You are fulfilling their needs.

I already know this info (see below).  They are happy to agree on terms, so I am asking about terms because potentially they may not be surprised I have some terms other than how I wish to use the images.

The images will be used across our website and social media, but primarily we’ll be using the images for our look book which we’ll be sending out in a few weeks’ time. We have a media list which includes some of the major fashion magazines and stylists. Happy to send across if you would prefer. We may also use the images in adverts (paid social media, or paid magazines). Very happy to agree terms with you.

Samantha B Photography wrote:
Thanks, but I'm wondering how do you start this conversation. I feel like if I say "Would you like the images to be restriction-free forever?" they will just say yes.

At least if I set my stall out with what I'd like (ideally), then we can then negotiate from there. Or is that not a great way to start?

Would you start negotiations with a paid model by offering $1,000/hour?   You may find that they just say "yes".


As a general rule, TFP is a barter situation (technically, it should be reported to the IRS on your photography business tax return).  You are providing images to the model, and she is providing modeling services.   There is a real question as to how to value your services and her services.

Obviously, some photographers are better than others.    If your photos are not that good, you can compensate for this by providing an unlimited license to the model.  If you are a great photographer whose work sells for thousands in art galleries, it may be enough to provide a single print she can hang on her wall.

Similarly, some models are better than others.  There may be more value to a model that knows what she is doing, and arrives with excellent makeup.  There may be less value to a model who doesn't know how to pose, and you provide a MUA.

If you need a model with a rare skill (such as a contortionist), that might raise the value of her services.


One idea is to research the going rate for what the model would have been paid if she was being paid for her services.   Then research the going rate for creating the envisioned images and the associated license.   Try to come up with a licensing package that has a similar value to what the model provides.  Keep in mind that the model's level of desire for the kind on images will have a value.



As a simple starting point you could just offer the model a non-exclusive license to use the images for self promotion for 5 to 10 years (after that it is unlikely the images will be relevant to the model's current look).

Michael Fryd wrote:

Would you start negotiations with a paid model by offering $1,000/hour?   You may find that they just say "yes".


As a general rule, TFP is a barter situation (technically, it should be reported to the IRS on your photography business tax return).  You are providing images to the model, and she is providing modeling services.   There is a real question as to how to value your services and her services.

Obviously, some photographers are better than others.    If your photos are not that good, you can compensate for this by providing an unlimited license to the model.  If you are a great photographer whose work sells for thousands in art galleries, it may be enough to provide a single print she can hang on her wall.

Similarly, some models are better than others.  There may be more value to a model that knows what she is doing, and arrives with excellent makeup.  There may be less value to a model who doesn't know how to pose, and you provide a MUA.

If you need a model with a rare skill (such as a contortionist), that might raise the value of her services.


One idea is to research the going rate for what the model would have been paid if she was being paid for her services.   Then research the going rate for creating the envisioned images and the associated license.   Try to come up with a licensing package that has a similar value to what the model provides.  Keep in mind that the model's level of desire for the kind on images will have a value.



As a simple starting point you could just offer the model a non-exclusive license to use the images for self promotion for 5 to 10 years (after that it is unlikely the images will be relevant to the model's current look).

Thanks.
They have sourced the model, I'm not sure what terms they have agreed with her but I'd be happy to ask them and go from there.

Samantha B Photography wrote:
Thanks.
They have sourced the model, I'm not sure what terms they have agreed with her but I'd be happy to ask them and go from there.

Model's compensation might or might not have any relationship to photographer's compensation on any given project. So much so that comparison is useless.

If you are agreeing to doing a shoot without fee consider limiting the duration of the usage to the fashion season that the shoot is depicting. While there is sometimes some level carry over from season to season on staple items, generally fashion photos shot for one season have a limited lifespan.

Rob Photosby wrote:
You are going at this from the wrong direction.

You are the photographer and you are not employed by your client or anyone else, so the copyright automatically vests in you under UK law.

As the copyright holder, you, and you alone, have the right to decide if, and how, any other parties may use your images.

It is not the prerogative of you client to tell you how they plan to use your images.  It is your prerogative to tell them how you will permit them to use your images, for how long, in which venues, and for what payment.

Close...

Note the part below about a possible "implied license" when the work has been specifically commissioned.   And the added note about the importance of sorting out the issue with a contract.

U.K. Gov't Guidance:  https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ownership-o … ight-works
   (excerpt below)

---

"Commissioned works"

"When you ask or commission another person or organisation to create a copyright work for you, the first legal owner of copyright is the person or organisation that created the work and not you the commissioner, unless you otherwise agree it in writing.

However, in some circumstances, for example when copyright is not dealt with in the contract to commission the work, courts may be willing to find that there is an implied licence allowing the commissioner to use the work for the purpose for which it was commissioned. This does not necessarily result in a transfer of ownership. Instead, the commissioner of the work may only get a limited non-exclusive licence. This situation demonstrates the importance of establishing who owns copyright through a contract."

JSouthworth wrote:
When you say you've been asked to shoot a collection of clothing, is that on the basis that the clothes are provided but you are not being paid? If that's the case then obviously you can't easily pay models without losing money. Professional models are not likely to be interested unless they think they will gain something out of the deal in terms of raising their profile. And probably they will insist on freedom to use the pictures without restriction.

In a professional setting such as that described by the OP, models are usually engaged directly or indirectly by the client. The photographer's assistance with model selection may sometimes be invited, but often the client will already have a selection of 'brand influencers' onboard.

Also, professional models working in a professional setting are far from likely to 'insist on freedom to use the pictures without restriction'. They will be accustomed to the restrictions placed on the use of images prior to a campaign being released and they certainly won't expect to be permitted to commercialise the images.

JSouthworth wrote:
When you say you've been asked to shoot a collection of clothing, is that on the basis that the clothes are provided but you are not being paid? If that's the case then obviously you can't easily pay models without losing money. Professional models are not likely to be interested unless they think they will gain something out of the deal in terms of raising their profile. And probably they will insist on freedom to use the pictures without restriction.

The basic characteristic of the professional model is that they make a living from modelling, which means that they require payment. In certain cases a new model might be prepared to do work on a TF basis for a prestigious client, but not usually because if they did that on a regular basis, word would get around that they were working for nothing and that would undermine their commercial status and desirability, exclusivity is a factor as well. If they worked for free today, they would have a hard time getting paid tomorrow.

Top models in the fashion industry command high hourly fees, four figure sums have been quoted.