Just curious how everyone would handle this. Let's say a model took photos from your portfolio from a paid shoot and used them to promote themselves without getting your permission. What would be your response? Would you bother?
SPV Photo wrote: Just curious how everyone would handle this. Let's say a llama took photos from your portfolio from a paid shoot and used them to promote themselves without getting your permission. What would be your response? Would you bother?
I guess it would depend on:
1) Do I like the llama (working relationship)?
2) Do I want to work with her again?
3) Is she making commercial use of the image or is she just using it in her portfolio?
4) On a practical level, does her use damage me or mine in any way?
Darren Brade
Posts: 1,563
London, England, United Kingdom
Viator-Defessus Photos wrote:
I guess it would depend on:
1) Do I like the model (working relationship)?
2) Do I want to work with her again?
3) Is she making commercial use of the image or is she just using it in her portfolio?
4) On a practical level, does her use damage me or mine in any way?
This. I know some photographers don't like it but if it's already on display is there any harm?
As long as they are not asking for ones you're not using i don't see the problem
It depends. How is she promoting herself?
Is she pytting them in her portfolio (print or online)?
Is she posting them to her IG, FB, Twitter?
I don't see a problem with any of this and would think that an objecting photographer was clueless on how the world works.
But maybe she is doing something sketchy... what's the full story?
Details man.
Since a CREDITED photo could possibly bring you work, I wouldn't have a problem, per se. Unless I didn't like the image, hence I would cover myself by requiring permission to use it. You should have something in your model release form that stipulates how/if the model may use your image.
Usually I grab a photo out of a photographer's portfolio and upload it to mine, then I send a message saying "I hope that's okay."
No one has ever said it wasn't...
SPV Photo wrote: If a model wants pictures to use, she should pay someone or do a trade shoot, no?
While I see where you are coming from here and I think it's totally valid, I am happy that this does not seem to be the most popular train of thought among photographers who have hired me. I would have an empty portfolio.
I always tell models I have worked with just ask.. Say they need a head shot for something, I would rather get them a high rez than they take a low rez to use.
L2
SPV Photo wrote: Nothing sketchy. And it's not even so much the using of the photos. I would have said yes.
I just would prefer to have given permission. If a model wants pictures to use, she should pay someone or do a trade shoot, no?
Ugh.
You need to get off this site and check out the real world.
Yes, in the world of MM, she is an awful person for not contacting you and treating you like the god of photography... but she probably thinks like a normal person.
A model (and makeup artist, hair stylist, manicurist, wardrobe stylist, prop stylist, casting director, art director, etc...) will use the images from jobs for their portfolios.
We ALL get paid on these jobs and use these tearsheets to show the work we've done.
Sometimes someone will ask "can I use it" but, if they're up and online, they're basically considered fair game UNLESS there was something written that would prevent this from happening.
*Edit: sorry of I come off as a dick... this site promotes terrible business and social practices and it drives me crazy.
Well, I know how I feel. I was just wondering if it was worth causing a stink over (whatever that means). Probably not. I was just curious how others might handle the issue. It sounds like most would just let it go, which is pretty much how I was leaning.
Ugh.
You need to get off this site and check out the real world.
Yes, in the world of MM, she is an awful person for not contacting you and treating you like the god of photography... but she probably thinks like a normal person.
A model (and makeup artist, hair stylist, manicurist, wardrobe stylist, prop stylist, casting director, art director, etc...) will use the images from jobs for their portfolios.
We ALL get paid on these jobs and use these tearsheets to show the work we've done.
Sometimes someone will ask "can I use it" but, if they're up and online, they're basically considered fair game UNLESS there was something written that would prevent this from happening.
*Edit: sorry of I come off as a dick... this site promotes terrible business and social practices and it drives me crazy.
Well, I know how I feel. I was just wondering if it was worth causing a stink over (whatever that means). Probably not. I was just curious how others might handle the issue. It sounds like most would just let it go, which is pretty much how I was leaning.
Trust your instincts - they're good! There is too much bad advice on this site.
I've had a model that I'd worked with take an image I processed about 9 months later. She didn't even ask for it. I had already given her pictures from our shoot.
She is an agency model and has zillions of pictures of herself already. I'm flattered actually that she liked my image so much that she used it in her portfolio and fb. It still has my logo on it so it could be a bit promotional for me. I just wish she would have asked or said thanks at least.
I have no issue with models who use my photos for any sort of portfolio work..as long as it isn't sold to anyone or plastered over the social media sites . She promotes us both.
I do have a problem when it's exclusive for a magazine, and the issue isn't out yet.. After it's published and distributed; I consider it practically public domain.
steve_ess wrote: Since a CREDITED photo could possibly bring you work, I wouldn't have a problem, per se. Unless I didn't like the image, hence I would cover myself by requiring permission to use it. You should have something in your llama release form that stipulates how/if the llama may use your image.
Not a good idea. A llama release give the photographer permission to use a llama's likeness in a specified way. A usage license gives the llama specified use of a photo. For various legal reasons, mixing them up all in one document isn't usually a good idea.
Send the model an invoice, a photographer owns copyright on their images and any unauthorised usage is breach of copyright on the model's part. Using a photographer's image without their permission is very unprofessional and besides that, their using the photographer's image to help promote themselves which has the potential to get them further paid work, if that's the case (particularly if the model has been paid), the model should have to pay the photographer for that privilege.
Rachel-Elise
Posts: 1,302
Tel Aviv-Yafo, Tel Aviv, Israel
None of the commercial jobs that I have ever done have had ANY problem with this... tear sheets, anyone?
I've only ever had one photographer get upset that I wanted to use images, when I'd been paid... I *did* ask, and I think he was only upset about it because the people on MM told him that I "shouldn't" have the images if I was paid...........
I guess it would depend on:
1) Do I like the model (working relationship)?
2) Do I want to work with her again?
3) Is she making commercial use of the image or is she just using it in her portfolio?
4) On a practical level, does her use damage me or mine in any way?
sci wrote: Send the model an invoice, a photographer owns copyright on their images and any unauthorised usage is breach of copyright on the model's part. Using a photographer's image without their permission is very unprofessional and besides that, their using the photographer's image to help promote themselves which has the potential to get them further paid work, if that's the case (particularly if the model has been paid), the model should have to pay the photographer for that privilege.
sci wrote: Send the model an invoice, a photographer owns copyright on their images and any unauthorised usage is breach of copyright on the model's part. Using a photographer's image without their permission is very unprofessional and besides that, their using the photographer's image to help promote themselves which has the potential to get them further paid work, if that's the case (particularly if the model has been paid), the model should have to pay the photographer for that privilege.
And here is that bad advice I was referencing earlier....
This advice is 100% shit.
SPV Photo wrote: Just curious how everyone would handle this. Let's say a model took photos from your portfolio from a paid shoot and used them to promote themselves without getting your permission. What would be your response? Would you bother?
I post pictures my own website and occasionally in online portfolios. These are of modest size (no more than 700 pixels in any dimension) with modest compression.
Even though I pay models, I tell them that they can use the images for self promotion on non-commercial sites (i.e. one doesn't have to pay anything to see the images). They aren't exactly competing with me or my web site, and I hope they credit me. So, I don't feel like I am hurt by such a usage.
SPV Photo wrote: Nothing sketchy. And it's not even so much the using of the photos. I would have said yes.
I just would prefer to have given permission. If a model wants pictures to use, she should pay someone or do a trade shoot, no?
If you would have said "yes" anyway, then the only problem for you is that she "didn't ask." Models not "asking" is no longer an issue for me, although it's nice if they do.
I'd just let it go, especially if I had a networking relationship going on, and it could help promote my business. Models often times are posting images of themselves for promotional use ... and "often times" without taking the time to ask. It could be a lot of reasons ... "busy and need to do it fast" "Can't get a response form the photographer" "I thought it would be ok" to the more cynical "I don't give a shit" attitude. The fact is that the Internet makes it so easy to do, and along with the need for speed online ... so desirable to upload the images themselves.
The simple act of politeness of asking before using any of the images online has become a lost act ... too few do it! Unless someone is making a ton of money off your images, it's not worthwhile to pursue them for doing so.
SPV Photo wrote: Just curious how everyone would handle this. Let's say a model took photos from your portfolio from a paid shoot and used them to promote themselves without getting your permission. What would be your response? Would you bother?
I would be pissed!! If you watermark your images then people will see that. Talent wants clean images.
Most of my MM-derived shoots have no intent other than testing of different ideas or basic promotional material for the participants.
It goes without saying that if the models (or makeup artists, hairstylists, etc) wish to promote themselves with the results from a test shoot, then they are more than welcome to do so. That is the overall intent of most TF* shoots. As long as the intent is non-commercial, I could care less and write it off as a very broad definition of "fair use." Besides, models grab samples of their images from the field, and throw them into their books. I doubt they asked anyone for permission
That being said... an online portfolio or zed card update without my permission is not going to break the bank.
I think I spend more time worrying about what companies do with copyrighted materials, than models (or other artists) that are looking for inexpensive ways to market themselves.
Craig Talbot
Posts: 35
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
SPV Photo wrote: Nothing sketchy. And it's not even so much the using of the photos. I would have said yes.
I just would prefer to have given permission. If a model wants pictures to use, she should pay someone or do a trade shoot, no?
If she was paid, she should at least have the decency to ask before using the photos. Did she at least credit you? Hopefully there is a silver lining and she is promoting you, too.
sci wrote: Send the model an invoice, a photographer owns copyright on their images and any unauthorised usage is breach of copyright on the model's part. Using a photographer's image without their permission is very unprofessional and besides that, their using the photographer's image to help promote themselves which has the potential to get them further paid work, if that's the case (particularly if the model has been paid), the model should have to pay the photographer for that privilege.
Just curious how you handle a real world situation. For instance, a model poses for a photographer and gets paid. The photographer publishes that photo somewhere, a magazine a book, wherever. The model cuts out her page and uses it in her portfolio. Would you still try to send the model an invoice? Digital has changed things a bit, but it is parallel. The photographer published the photo, and if she is only using it in her own portfolio, I can't see how you can justify this. She didn't use unpublished work, she didn't edit, you would have a very hard time enforcing this. It's no different than pointing to a magazine cover and saying "that's me"
I understand the photographer only published it a portfolio. But a portfolio used to be a book that you handed to someone and had limited exposure, putting it online where millions of people could see it if they so choose, It's very different than the portfolios of yesterday. If the photographer made the photo public, the model should be able to say that it is her work.
Strength Studios wrote: Just curious how you handle a real world situation. For instance, a model poses for a photographer and gets paid. The photographer publishes that photo somewhere, a magazine a book, wherever. The model cuts out her page and uses it in her portfolio. Would you still try to send the model an invoice? Digital has changed things a bit, but it is parallel. The photographer published the photo, and if she is only using it in her own portfolio, I can't see how you can justify this. She didn't use unpublished work, she didn't edit, you would have a very hard time enforcing this. It's no different than pointing to a magazine cover and saying "that's me"
This should be the resounding reply when this subject comes up. After reading the thread I noticed that only one person before me thought about tearsheets. Of course this applies to a commercial shoot, so I would think testing is less restrictive.
Tearsheets are mostly material that is being used "without permission."
If she was paid, she should at least have the decency to ask before using the photos. Did she at least credit you? Hopefully there is a silver lining and she is promoting you, too.
Yes, the story had a happy ending, but I was just curious how others handle such a situation.
Marc Damon wrote: Not a good idea. A model release give the photographer permission to use a model's likeness in a specified way. A usage license gives the model specified use of a photo. For various legal reasons, mixing them up all in one document isn't usually a good idea.
+1
Don't confuse the use of the forms by mixing them up and throwing them under one title, and don't limit your rights with extra clauses that restate rights you already have.
Mi Do wrote: Sometimes someone will ask "can I use it" but, if they're up and online, they're basically considered fair game UNLESS there was something written that would prevent this from happening.
*Edit: sorry of I come off as a dick... this site promotes terrible business and social practices and it drives me crazy.
fair game my ass. you have ZERO right to use an image unless the copyright holder gives you permission or your use of the image qualifies as "fair use".
fair game my ass. you have ZERO right to use an image unless the copyright holder gives you permission or your use of the image qualifies as "fair use".
I wonder why MM doesn't have the kind of system flickr has, in which one can set a copyright level on all of their images, and in which those images are not easily save-able by anyone viewing them.
| 
| 
| edu