midnightblue69 wrote:
I was wondering who uses and who doesn't use a model release for a TFP shoot?

I get a release on everything I shoot.

SLE Photography wrote:
I do.  Depending on the terms we agree on I have no problem agreeing to limits on the release such a a "publicity/promotional only" clause.

Given the variances in state laws & emerging laws on privacy and image rights and the overall litigious nature of our society it seems wise to have my ass thoroughly covered even if the images will only be in my physical and various online portfolios.

(As another poster noted, this's when dealing with NON AGENCY models.)

it seems to be a bit of a power trip to me.

i mean, i have yet to hear a photographer say, "oh jesus, dude! you won't believe what happened... etc... etc... thank god i got that model release!"

if it's a paying job then, yes, clients want a release then you sure as hell make sure you get one. but if it's a test... i don't know... i mean, unless you're planning on doing a coffee table book or stock or something official... in which case i think that legally you want to pay the talent at least $1 anyway...

people will quote all sorts of statutes to you though.

midnightblue69 wrote:
I was wondering who uses and who doesn't use a model release for a TFP shoot?

I always use one.  You can always just "not use it" if you don't intend to sell the images commercially.  However, if you decide later you want to sell, then having it on file already saves you a lot of headache.  Nothing like trying to track down a model from last year who has moved and/or changed phone numbers.

ddtphoto wrote:
it seems to be a bit of a power trip to me.

i mean, i have yet to hear a photographer say, "oh jesus, dude! you won't believe what happened... etc... etc... thank god i got that model release!"

if it's a paying job then, yes, clients want a release then you sure as hell make sure you get one. but if it's a test... i don't know... i mean, unless you're planning on doing a coffee table book or stock or something official... in which case i think that legally you want to pay the talent at least $1 anyway...

people will quote all sorts of statutes to you though.

Power trip?
I cannot sell my work if there is no release. Why would I trip the shutter if I don't have a release?

FC Multimedia wrote:
Never let anyone in front of your camera without a release!

in case what? you're model dies while giving a blowjob to brad pit so that you can sell the photo to people magazine?

i mean, really... what are you planning on doing with the photos in your port that isn't inherently covered via creative license and self promotion?

Zopilote wrote:

Power trip?
I cannot sell my work if there is no release. Why would I trip the shutter if I don't have a release?

if your intent is to sell the work, then you should pay the model at least $1 and have her sign a release.  i mean, why should she work for free when you've got cash intent?

that is not a "test"

Zopilote wrote:

Power trip?
I cannot sell my work if there is no release. Why would I trip the shutter if I don't have a release?

ummm, maybe because you are a photographer?

do you think diane arbus traveled around with a bunch of model releases?

ddtphoto wrote:

if your intent is to sell the work, then you should pay the model at least $1 and have her sign a release.  i mean, why should she work for free when you've got cash intent?

that is not a "test"

True... it is not a "test", but it could be a rather reasonable TFP/CD.

ddtphoto wrote:

if your intent is to sell the work, then you should pay the model at least $1 and have her sign a release.  i mean, why should she work for free when you've got cash intent?

that is not a "test"

TF and tests are two different things. If I do a TF with a model, she gets images she can use to market herself, I get images I can sell. A trade of services.

ddtphoto wrote:

if your intent is to sell the work, then you should pay the model at least $1 and have her sign a release.  i mean, why should she work for free when you've got cash intent?

that is not a "test"

Uh, no.  The "trade" that is referred to on this site is a photographer's service for the model's time.  When a model gets photos (in whatever format is agreed upon) from the photographer, the trade is complete.  The photographer should not be under any further obligation to "pay" the model, even if the photographer gets paid for the publishing of said photos.  A model doesn't pay a photographer further if s/he gets paid work as a direct result of a portfolio of images from that photographer.

ddtphoto wrote:

ummm, maybe because you are a photographer?

do you think diane arbus traveled around with a bunch of model releases?

Diane Arbus worked in a completely different world, a time with less legal complications

R Michael Walker wrote:

I get a release on everything I shoot.

Same here. No sense shooting stuff I don't have legal CYA to use.

Zopilote wrote:
TF and tests are two different things. If I do a TF with a model, she gets images she can use to market herself, I get images I can sell. A trade of services.

a "tf" and a "test" are the same goddamn thing. unless you think a "test" means that the talent has shown up just to basque in the glory of your presence.

"tf" is just an internet concoction. it's a damn acronym for christ sakes. that first letter "t" stands for "test". so let's not get bogged down in semantics.

Taylor Photography wrote:
To the OP:  not getting a release for every shoot (whether you intend to do anything with the photos or not) is about as "cover your @ss" as buying a large screen tv and not getting a receipt.

Sure, you may not ever need the receipt.  However, in the event you DO need it, it's nice to have it available, wouldn't you say?

i think that is a fair analogy.

HEY! my 1,000th post!

WooT!

ddtphoto wrote:
it seems to be a bit of a power trip to me.

i mean, i have yet to hear a photographer say, "oh jesus, dude! you won't believe what happened... etc... etc... thank god i got that model release!"

if it's a paying job then, yes, clients want a release then you sure as hell make sure you get one. but if it's a test... i don't know... i mean, unless you're planning on doing a coffee table book or stock or something official... in which case i think that legally you want to pay the talent at least $1 anyway...

people will quote all sorts of statutes to you though.

Oh JESUS dude, you won't believe what happened to me!  A few years back I shot with a model who was separated from her husband.  She'd sought me out thru mutual friends.  We shot with a limited release that specified no internet use, no magazine sales, etc.  Two shoots, with 2 releases.  I used the images to promote myself around town & in a few gallery shows.

About 2 years later I get a letter from an attorney advising me that I was illegally using pornographic images of his client (these were Playboy style topless nudes, which she'd requested) without a release.  There was a cease & desist injunction and a claim for damages in the amount of $20,000 plus legal fees.

Seems she'd gotten back with her uber-Christian husband and he'd found out what she'd been up to & demanded she erase all traces.  So she found a lawyer who was a family friend and lied about the pics being unreleased to go after me.

Even though I clearly had releases it still cost me $2000 for an attorney to deal with all of it and he said if I hadn't had releases I'd have been royally screwed.

So it's not a power trip, I'm covering my ass.

Please notice, BTW, that I never said (back to my first reply) I demand a full release.  I'm more than happy to limit it to things like "publicity only.
I also plainly acknowledged that there's a HUGE difference in working with agency models & working with the type of newbies one's likely to find here or on MySpace or OMP.

An agency "test" is FAR different than those circumstances.

ddtphoto wrote:
a "tf" and a "test" are the same goddamn thing. unless you think a "test" means that the talent has shown up just to basque in the glory of your presence.

"tf" is just an internet concoction. it's a damn acronym for christ sakes. that first letter "t" stands for "test".

If that is how you wish to operate, that is fine.
Most here will agree that the "t" stands for "trade" or "time". Most will also agree that as long as there is no agency involved in the transaction they would like to get something from the deal... often that something is a signed release.

SLE Photography wrote:

Oh JESUS dude, you won't believe what happened to me!  A few years back I shot with a model who was separated from her husband.  She'd sought me out thru mutual friends.  We shot with a limited release that specified no internet use, no magazine sales, etc.  Two shoots, with 2 releases.  I used the images to promote myself around town & in a few gallery shows.

About 2 years later I get a letter from an attorney advising me that I was illegally using pornographic images of his client (these were Playboy style topless nudes, which she'd requested) without a release.  There was a cease & desist injunction and a claim for damages in the amount of $20,000 plus legal fees.

Seems she'd gotten back with her uber-Christian husband and he'd found out what she'd been up to & demanded she erase all traces.  So she found a lawyer who was a family friend and lied about the pics being unreleased to go after me.

Even though I clearly had releases it still cost me $2000 for an attorney to deal with all of it and he said if I hadn't had releases I'd have been royally screwed.

So it's not a power trip, I'm covering my ass.

Please notice, BTW, that I never said (back to my first reply) I demand a full release.  I'm more than happy to limit it to things like "publicity only.
I also plainly acknowledged that there's a HUGE difference in working with agency models & working with the type of newbies one's likely to find here or on MySpace or OMP.

An agency "test" is FAR different than those circumstances.

did this actually go to court?

ddtphoto wrote:
a "tf" and a "test" are the same goddamn thing. unless you think a "test" means that the talent has shown up just to basque in the glory of your presence.

"tf" is just an internet concoction. it's a damn acronym for christ sakes. that first letter "t" stands for "test". so let's not get bogged down in semantics.

No.  The "t" stands for "time" or "trade" "for print/pictures."

"Test" implies work between an established commercial or fashion shooter with a model who's aspiring to an agency or is with an agency.

TFP generally, as used here, means a hobbyist or art photographer or someone working on a personal project who's shooting with a part time model or wannabee who wants something pretty for her MySpace profile or who is looking to promote an independent career outside an agency system she doesn't qualify for.
In those cases the photographer often trades ability to use those images for things beyond portfolio for images the model might otherwise not be able to afford.

Apples & elephants.

ddtphoto wrote:
did this actually go to court?

Nope.  My lawyer was able to take proof of releases to the judge & get the case dismissed on the basis of he other model having lied.  He also attended to some other administrative issues with it to be sure my rights to the images remained enforceable.
Good thing for me I had the releases though.

ddtphoto wrote:

a "tf" and a "test" are the same goddamn thing. unless you think a "test" means that the talent has shown up just to basque in the glory of your presence.

"tf" is just an internet concoction. it's a damn acronym for christ sakes. that first letter "t" stands for "test". so let's not get bogged down in semantics.

You are mistaken. Time for has been around for a lot longer than the internet. TF and test are two different things.

NewBoldPhoto wrote:

If that is how you wish to operate, that is fine.
Most here will agree that the "t" stands for "trade" or "time". Most will also agree that as long as there is no agency involved in the transaction they would like to get something from the deal... often that something is a signed release.

you can say that the "t" stands for "tuna" or "tiramisu", for that matter. but we both know we are talking about the same thing.

SLE Photography wrote:
Apples & elephants.

Aardvarks, actually. Apples & aardvarks... elephant begins with "e" 

ddtphoto wrote:

you can say that the "t" stands for "tuna" or "tiramisu", for that matter. but we both know we are talking about the same thing.

No, we are not as a "test" with an internet model does not come with the same promise of more agency models that a test would.

ddtphoto wrote:
you can say that the "t" stands for "tuna" or "tiramisu", for that matter. but we both know we are talking about the same thing.

No, really we're not.  "Test" is a publicity/practice session between two pros or aspiring pros to the profressional commercial/fashion realms.  TFP is generally a trade with varying terms depending on the needs of the parties made by those operating at a different level & with different expectations.

SLE Photography wrote:

Nope.  My lawyer was able to take proof of releases to the judge & get the case dismissed on the basis of he other model having lied.  He also attended to some other administrative issues with it to be sure my rights to the images remained enforceable.
Good thing for me I had the releases though.

didn't think so.

i think you could have held your ground unless you were receiving income directly via sales of said work.

i'm going to assume here that you must have used said images in some commercial form for it to have even gone this far.

ddtphoto wrote:

didn't think so.

i think you could have held your ground unless you were receiving income directly via sales of said work.

i'm going to assume here that you must have used said images in some commercial form for it to have even gone this far.

Not so familiar with FL lawyers are you?