Cascading Falls Photogr wrote:
BOTTOM LINE:

Photographer and model signed contracts.
Photographer fullfilled contract.
Model wants more and throws a fit when she doesn't get it.

Photographer is right
Model is wrong.

It isn't complicated.

Let me paraphrase a quote from an old episode of House: There's no such thing as I in team. There's me, if you jumble up the words. Sorry OP, you mhave no one but yopurself to blame for this situation. I'll make it easy for you!



Blaming MM for your situation is blaming Kyle Busch for all traffic accidents in our country. There comes a point in life where you have to look in mirror and realize that you are your own worst enemy. Finally, those images were from a test shoot. From my understanding, not all images from test shoot are images of value. No one wonder so many people are upset with the tf=free shoot mentality. Another example of why you never build bridges with sticks of dynamite!

Death of Field wrote:
I agree, what OP did was a dick move, deliberately dangling that slideshow of finished images then telling the models they can't use them was pretty low.

He might have been better off not showing them the slideshow, or giving them a dvd of it, or creating a more fair contract.

What I want to know is in OP's image "valued at 350.00" line does he in fact sell WATERMARKED image for this price?

Agree:
"Hay look what I did with that test that we shot a ton of pictures of you for.  Hope you love the little picture.."
"Glad the video brings you to tears/  That will be $$$$."

Just looks a little like baiting to me.


Yes business thrives on reputation.   A contract is a contract and you seemed to have negotiated very well for yourself. 
But then following it up with flaunting it to them, to get money from them (after they likely see they did something on the cheep). This likely, really made them feel taken advantage of.

Of course this is your side of the story.   There is always the other side.

So this conclusion is from what OP wrote.

Art of the nude wrote:
Not to really defend the OP overall, but there's nothing wrong with trying to make money from photography.  Really.

Wow one image for hours of work plus a slideshow that will be obsolete by the time this couple has grandchildren... I understand that you want to make money off of this couple by selling the images to them- you're already making money off of them by using them to advertise for your business. Who does Tf for one image??? Sounds like you made suckers of them and now you are trying to further exploit them. Why are they so pissed? Probably because it's their wedding you are exploiting for personal gain. I hope they hired someone else to do photos. Based on your perception of the experience- I wouldn't hire you for my wedding because you sound a bit unreasonable, no matter how good your work is. Maybe you treat your paying clients better idk.  Seriously who does hours of Tf for one image??

Death of Field wrote:
Not exactly, OP did a shoot, gave the models ONE watermarked print, then processed and retouched a dozen more images and used them in an advertising campaign. He THEN showed the couple the campaign and refused to deliver anything else. (even though the images were finished)

Everyone screwed up.

The models should never have signed his contract, he should have been more fair.

So I come to this great restaurant, ordered a sampler (take it a slice of pizza for simplicity). Tasted good, so I asked for the full plate where my previous slice of pizza was taken from without paying. After all, the pizza plate was displayed for promotion with those yummy-looking pizza and mouthwatering smell, minus the slice where the sampler is taken from. The restaurant refused, and you threatened to write negative Zagat review, expecting to get the full portion. Because it tasted sooooooooooooo good why don't you just give me the full plate???? You even sliced it from the full plate!!!! OMGWTFBBQ?

If you find such restaurant, tell me. I'll bring lots of friends to dine there
And yeah... What's wrong with giving me the whole plate? It's going to expire within hours anyway... I don't need to wait to have my first born son for it to expire. Why not? Why not???

SweetPea wrote:
Why are they so pissed? Probably because it's their wedding you are exploiting for personal gain. I hope they hired someone else to do photos. Based on your perception of the experience- I wouldn't hire you for my wedding because you sound a bit unreasonable, no matter how good your work is. Maybe you treat your paying clients better idk.  Seriously who does hours of Tf for one image??

I don't know how you get such information, but it's a *mock* wedding from what I read.

OTOH, I disagree completely with OP regarding MM model. Just because he's having 1 bad experience with 1 model doesn't necessarily mean the entire model in MM are bad.

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
so you didnt pay them and you are using the images for your marketing...nice..lose the arrogance, give em the fucking pics...

pullins photography wrote:
a contract is a contract. There's no need for the OP to give into these people's wanting to unring a bell they rung

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
there's a real good reason, he said his business was word of mouth...

well that works both ways...good and bad.

got a counter point?

First let me ask you this, Doug. Do you let people re-write your consulting agreements AFTER you've provided the agreed upon service? I highly doubt it.

Not to mention, at what point are people suppose to be held accountable for their actions? On the assumption that the models did indeed read the contract/agreement with full understanding of what they were going to receive along with what was involved with the shoot, why should they be rewarded with more just because they whine like a couple of 2 year olds? These were adults fully capable of understanding or asking questions before signing. I don't think the OP held a gun to their head and forced them to sign. They did it on their own free will.

If I'm understanding the OP correctly, he did provide them with the slideshow. If not, at the very least they should be given that to use in their own promotion. To not to that would be a dick move to show them and not provide it to them. So they did receive something beyond the contract.

People talk about doing it for good will and keeping a customer happy or they'll talk ill of you. Do you people not think that they'll also tell people, "don't worry what you sign, just bitch and threaten to bad mouth them and they'll cave like a matchbox house in a hurricane!!"..  And there are people that pull that crap.

I've watched businesses cave into customers for goodwill EVEN THOUGH the customer was absolutely in the wrong. And customers know that and pull it whenever they can. Granted, there was a time business was too damn strict but it really has gone too far the other way.

If we're not going to make people honor the agreements they sign, this goes both ways, customer and business, then why the hell even have contracts? People need to be held accountable to what they willingly enter into. If they don't read what they're signing, that's their damn fault.

Tropical Photography wrote:
First let me ask you this, Doug. Do you let people re-write your consulting agreements AFTER you've provided the agreed upon service? I highly doubt it.

the OP was looking for free talent to create his marketing materials, under the guise of a "test" shoot. he created a document heavily in his favor and presented it to some noobs...so ethically, me and the OP are on different levels. I would never do anything like that.

so what i would do, is really kinda moot...if i edited the images, i would have shared them with the models if they asked for them...once again, it was no skin off his nose...it didn't cost him a thing..

but by his posting this thread, he has created an image of himself and it is for the most part, not flattering.

MO Rina wrote:
I just watched the video.  That was no test shoot.  The models did a fabulous job, and it looks like they spent a lot of time and effort shooting. 

This is one of the reasons why models here turn into "paid assignments only" pretty quick.  They see after a "test shoot" like this that they aren't really benefitting.

Pretty much everyone was at faut.

The models should not have accepted only one bullshit watermarked print as payment for an entire ad campaign.

The photographer should not have dangled bullshit "future jobs" and "more images" along with a "slide show" ten told them to pay if they wanted anything more.

Kenneth Light Studios wrote:
I am actually laughing over this and shows me to just never use this site for models, now I have in the defense of modelmayem used models on here and had a great experience, made some good friends also but on the whole the Drama has been totally silly to say the least.

You have used models from MM before and gotten great results, but then you have one bad experience with a model, and want to act like all of the models on MM are bad?

To me, that is an overreaction on your part.

S W I N S K E Y wrote:

so you didnt pay them and you are using the images for your marketing...
nice..lose the arrogance, give em the fucking pics...

+1


the contract seems highly unfair, they obviously didn't understand it, or didnt read it all before signing. yes it was a dick move of the OP to send them that video link, because obviously it would make the model's want them.

their bad for not reading it correctly
but OP's bad for showing them something that obviosuly looked tempting in their perspecitve.


I dont really understand how the contract benefits anyone other than the OP, if they didn't get paid, OP is using them for own mareting/profit, they get ONE image, for a test that the OP used douzens of others from the same shoot.


I also feel theirs somehting missing from this, but yeah, there was obviously a mis understanding or confusion.

Good Egg Productions wrote:

At this point you may as well stick to your guns. Your relationship with these people is already destroyed. No matter what you do, they won't be recommending you to any of their friends.

TF or not, you had an opportunity to make them happier than possible and have two people advertising for you. And it would have been a simple email with attachments. But you refused and tried to get money from them. Well, no money, and now you have two people telling everyone they know what a dick (their perception) you are.

For the record, I don't think you're a dick. I just think you handled this situation poorly.

I feel like there is two sides to this.  On the one hand from what I gather they signed a thing stating that they are ONLY doing this for TF.  You gave them a vid not sure if it was only on line or not but I am assuming that it was.  But its clear to me that you are not giving them the images you shot of there mock wedding.  But now they want first class treatment and actually want wedding photos for free.  Honestly I would have just gave them 1 or 2 low rez files for MM or what ever and leave it at that.  its obvious that they really liked them and they are all stuck on the idea that they don't want to pay.  but think your a dick because you are asking them to pay.  that is what I am reading. 

personally I think your in a position where you have a lot of leverage but I probably would have handled the situation a little different and told them the facts of what it would cost up front if they ever wanted the images.  or at least tell them what your rate per image is if they wanted a copy.  But its over now so as the poster said above stick to your guns.  hopefully they will pay.  but NO matter who you are shooting every person you shoot is still a potential client so treat them as such.

Angelus Complex wrote:
Did anyone notice the female model in the video? She used to be a regular poster here. point being, she should know better.

I had thought about this from the getgo... Thanks Angelus, you proved my theory, that this thread is an outing thread. All it takes is for 1 or 2 people to recognise 1 of the models...

Outing...