palomino wrote:
My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing? Thanks.

C

If You are paying a Photographer then You should have control of the images (the right to pick and choose).

TF, which addresses the title of Your thread, is a collaboration, a trade of service.  Therefore You should also have control over which images from the set You receive.

If a Photographer is paying You then the Photographer retains control over the images and You may, or may not receive any.

All of this should be spelled out in any written agreement (release)


As far as image editing goes most Photographers have their own style,  choose a Photographer whose style You like.

palomino wrote:
TFP: Neither are paid, ideas are mutual, and both have all access to images, selections, editing and distribution.

Please tell me your perspective, similarities or differences to mine on these terms.

My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing? Thanks.

C

I think all photographers are different.  The key is talking out expectations before the shoot.  The best photographer in the San Joaquin valley did me a favor and did a headshot of me for free (The Art of Eric James - https://www.modelmayhem.com/EricJames).  I had no say in which of the many photos he took and he gave me one. Of course I was very grateful.

When I do a shoot, I take hundreds of photos.  Most models don't care to see anything except the ones I chose and send to them.  I would very much like to have a model who wants to see the raw shots and pick the ones she likes.

Idyllic  wrote:
For me it's this:
TFP: Neither are paid, ideas are mutual, and both have all access to images, selections, editing and distribution.

That's your definition. A thousand other people may have a thousand different definitions.

Please tell me your perspective, similarities or differences to mine on these terms.

My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing?

When you make an agreement that allows you to have some choice over selections and editing.

Idyllic  wrote:
For me it's this:

I am paid (model): it is their project, they hire me and my skill. They can give some direction. I do not expect to get any photos. They have all access to selections, editing and distribution.

They are paid (photographer): It is my project, I hire them for their skill. I can give some direction. Again, they have all access to selections, editing and distribution, and I have access to their final products.

TFP: Neither are paid, ideas are mutual, and both have all access to images, selections, editing and distribution.

Please tell me your perspective, similarities or differences to mine on these terms.

My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing? Thanks.

C

I think that your understanding is a good basis from which to build a workable and fair agreement but I have to point out a couple of things you need to take into consideration.
1-Under copyright law in the U.S. (and I believe Canada's law is essentially similar) the photographer is the de facto creator of the picture and therefor retains all reproductive, commercial  and artistic rights unless and until he assigns part or all of them to someone else.
2-An agreement to shoot, such as a model release, does not assign those rights (it could, if it is in writing and agreed to by all parties, serve to assign some of those rights to the model but   few  photographers will change their releases (even more important in this MeToo age) so you might need a separate agreement to nail down which rights  the photographer has assigned to the model and the extent of that assignment especially if you intend to make any commercial use of the pictures.
3- The only safe way to do all this would be to hire a lawyer and that process can be very expensive and  even more cumbersome than this reply and a big pain in the butt for everyone concerned, so my suggestion is to make sure that all parties are in full agreement on all such questions, preferably in writing.  If you can't reach agreement, then you either suck it up or don't do the shoot.  Just remember when your negotiating, that you'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

All IMHO as always, of course.

Ivy Wild wrote:
This is what I think TF should be:

In a four hour shoot, two hours are used getting the images that the photographer wants for his portfolio and two hours are used getting the shots that the model wants for her portfolio.

The model retains the copy right and all creative control over the images gained in "her" time. She can sell the images, alter them however she likes, and use them however she likes. She should, of course, credit the photographer where he wants to be credited.

Generally, I find TF shoots to be: the photographer sets the concepts and then hands the model 10 images of his choosing to use in her portfolio.

Essentially why I almost never do TF.

I agree with you to a point, however using the images as you want means that they could end up being used for snapchat with the stupid filters like a dog's nose and ears.  Why would a photographer who has invested his time learning, shooting, editing etc. want his images dumbed down to stupidity?

MarkGerrardPhotography wrote:

I agree with you to a point, however using the images as you want means that they could end up being used for snapchat with the stupid filters like a dog's nose and ears.  Why would a photographer who has invested his time learning, shooting, editing etc. want his images dumbed down to stupidity?

Though I wouldn’t consider my photos pornographic, mine could end up on a porn sure or be a part of someone’s spank bank. The photographer should ask not to be credited in photos with dumb animal ears. If the photographer wants complete control over the photos, he should pay the model and get a release.

Laura UnBound wrote:
as a model I dont work trade with people I dont trust to be able to make the best selections and edit them the way I'd want.

This is an important point. All photographers are not equal. If a photographer with a portfolio that blows you away offers you a few beautiful edited images of their choice in exchange for posing - that could be a perfectly reasonable deal.

If an average photographer makes the same offer, you definitely need to question what, if anything, is in it for you.

Brhumy wrote:
I just think it's better to spell things out, ask if there are any concerns or questions and be flexible if warranted.

Why don't you address model release or your intended uses for the images in your information page? Are you expecting a model to sign any kind of release for the shoot? If so, what kind of release? Why would you go to the trouble of creating that page without addressing those issues?

Idyllic  wrote:
My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing?

If you want to have some choice over selections and editing then seek agreement on the compensation, in writing, in detail, with your photographer before the shoot. Frustration arises from TFP shoots where compensation is ill defined.

The short-short version of my TF* selection method, which usually pleases everyone, is to upload all of the low resolution, unedited proofs for the team to see, and then they choose which images they want edited. Of that choice pool, I edit which ones I like best, as well as any additional images I feel will be useful for my portfolio.

Whatever method you decide on, make sure the whole selection process and compensation details are documented as clear and comprehensively as possible.

Download a TFP Model Release form off the web and customise it to suit your own wants and/or needs.

Eric212Grapher wrote:
A trade shoot is whatever mutual agreements are made prior to the shoot, or as mutually modified anytime after. Neither party is assuming a cash payment, but compensation in terms of images.  The concept of the shoot and the access to any given image is by the mutual agreements made. Neither party can unilaterally change the agreement without breach of contract.

All of this needs to be discussed ahead of the shoot.

This is the closest fit to what I would consider to be TF/trade.

Idyllic  wrote:
For me it's this:
TFP: Neither are paid, ideas are mutual, and both have all access to images, selections, editing and distribution.

TomFRohwer wrote:
That's your definition. A thousand other people may have a thousand different definitions.

Exactly this. There are zero absolute rules in this sphere; it is whatever all parties agree to. Nothing more, nothing less. The OP's definition is reasonable and valid for those who agree with it. It doesn't mesh with my own way of working, so I wouldn't shoot with her. That doesn't make her definition wrong, just wrong for my needs.

Ivy Wild wrote:
The model retains the copy right and all creative control over the images gained in "her" time. She can sell the images, alter them however she likes, and use them however she likes. She should, of course, credit the photographer where he wants to be credited.

Copyright law doesn't work that way, so you'd need some pretty interesting contracts to assign copyright in this manner. (and after 35 years, the copyright would revert to the creator anyway (which is why James Cameron is making new Terminator movies) so it's not like you can control the images indefinitely.
Also, copyright is almost never transferred by photographers on shoots they are paid for (in the U.S.). They license their work to the client.
Best way to get around this is to call yourself the photographer and hire a camera operator; then the pictures are yours forever. But we assume you worked with the photographer you chose because you liked their vision. If so, please respect their creativity and don't insist on owning the art they produced.

What if the subject's favorite shot comes from the "photographer's time"? What stops the photographer from just phoning it in during "the subject's time"? Wouldn't it be better to consider the entire shoot to be under the same amicable arrangement to ensure that all parties are engaged with the work?
I am, however, of the feeling that requiring a blanket or "stock" release on a TFP shoot is a bit tacky and photographers are really misinformed (and.or predatory) about how they use releases. I haven't shot with a release on a trade shoot in a long time (but probably would for high production value shoots that I sink a lot of effort into).

Ivy Wild wrote:
Generally, I find TF shoots to be: the photographer sets the concepts and then hands the model 10 images of his choosing to use in her portfolio.

Essentially why I almost never do TF.

I usually give fewer than 10. Why on earth would you need more than (the best) one from the same look? How much are you padding your port? I do of course allow the subject to choose the image (from each look) they would like processed; what works for their port is different than what works for mine, but their choices come from a curated group of the images that I'd be comfortable putting my name on. Trust me, you don't want to see the blurry outtakes, light tests, half-blinks, etc.

Jarrett Porst wrote:
How'd I do?

Pretty generous to provide 20 finals, but then, I process my images a bit intricately so there's a big time commitment there.

Ivy Wild wrote:
So many TF agreements are skewed in favor of the photographer. I really don't like the concept.

TLDR Version: No one is going to build your business for you, except you. When the existing approaches you've been using are no longer working, look at what you can do to fill in those holes yourself and have greater control over situations that influence your work.


Long Version:
Yes, but many models are starting to find that this can be circumvented by investing in buying some photography equipment and starting to shoot one's own content, rather than relying solely on trade arrangements for images. Were it not for self-created content, I'd never be able to keep up with the need for constant postings on social media. Photographers shooting trade with models simply aren't going to turn over 20 images to you, so that you can keep up with your IG posting each morning, or whenever IG traffic is highest for your target market. And it's no one's responsibility to do that, except for your own. Copyright laws are copyright laws, and no one owes anyone any support with helping your build your business and marketing approaches - except for yourself.

So, when these issues start becoming burdensome, it's time for folks to learn to shoot and self-create. This puts the power directly into your hands, and allows you full control over how you market yourself. That way, when you do agree to a TF* session, it can be enjoyable and productive, but the outcome of that shoot is not the end-all-be-all for your marketing approach that month. You can have the images from several self-created shoots in the cue, ready to be self-edited as you need them, and posted where and when you need them.

With internet based freelancing, many photographers you work with are going to book you simply because they like the experience of shooting. Shooting with a ton of folks feels productive and is enjoyable, but it doesn't guarantee you will have work displayed in places other can see it and find you. It doesn't mean anyone will ever submit your work for publication opportunities. It doesn't guarantee anything in the larger scheme of opportunity creation. Those are things you have to find ways to do - for yourself.

While it's nice to ponder what it would be like to have a world where literally every work-related situation is absolutely equal and 100% mutually beneficial, that's not the world we live in. Instead, we can take what we know we love doing, and use that passion for our work to develop approaches that benefit us directly. Without waiting on others, or depending on anyone else. We can continually build our skill sets to include more and more different and varying skills - which is what keeps people relevant and working in ANY field - as markets change and needs shift.

Alexandra Vincent wrote:
Long Version:

Truly some of the best advice I have read in these Forums to date.

Updated: Jan 15 19
I was asked by a young want-to-be model and ballet dancer to shoot TFP on her project to get some images for a temporary comp card. She was going to GB to pursue her modelling and dancing careers, so saving money for her trip was important and more professional images could follow once she had settled OS.

This young model organised absolutely everything to do with her shoot - Photographer, Hair Stylist, Makeup Artist, Wardrobe, Accessories, Props and the Storyboards for all her concepts. I’m sure if she could have been in front of and behind the camera at the same time ... she would have been.

Ivy Wild wrote:
So many TF agreements are skewed in favor of the photographer. I really don't like the concept.

There are terms under which I will do a trade shoot. There are terms under which you will do a trade shoot. If they happen to be significantly different and no agreement can be reached, there doesn't have to be (and won't be) a shoot.

Alexandra Vincent wrote:

TLDR Version: No one is going to build your business for you, except you. When the existing approaches you've been using are no longer working, look at what you can do to fill in those holes yourself and have greater control over situations that influence your work.


Long Version:
Yes, but many models are starting to find that this can be circumvented by investing in buying some photography equipment and starting to shoot one's own content, rather than relying solely on trade arrangements for images. Were it not for self-created content, I'd never be able to keep up with the need for constant postings on social media. Photographers shooting trade with models simply aren't going to turn over 20 images to you, so that you can keep up with your IG posting each morning, or whenever IG traffic is highest for your target market. And it's no one's responsibility to do that, except for your own. Copyright laws are copyright laws, and no one owes anyone any support with helping your build your business and marketing approaches - except for yourself.

So, when these issues start becoming burdensome, it's time for folks to learn to shoot and self-create. This puts the power directly into your hands, and allows you full control over how you market yourself. That way, when you do agree to a TF* session, it can be enjoyable and productive, but the outcome of that shoot is not the end-all-be-all for your marketing approach that month. You can have the images from several self-created shoots in the cue, ready to be self-edited as you need them, and posted where and when you need them.

With internet based freelancing, many photographers you work with are going to book you simply because they like the experience of shooting. Shooting with a ton of folks feels productive and is enjoyable, but it doesn't guarantee you will have work displayed in places other can see it and find you. It doesn't mean anyone will ever submit your work for publication opportunities. It doesn't guarantee anything in the larger scheme of opportunity creation. Those are things you have to find ways to do - for yourself.

While it's nice to ponder what it would be like to have a world where literally every work-related situation is absolutely equal and 100% mutually beneficial, that's not the world we live in. Instead, we can take what we know we love doing, and use that passion for our work to develop approaches that benefit us directly. Without waiting on others, or depending on anyone else. We can continually build our skill sets to include more and more different and varying skills - which is what keeps people relevant and working in ANY field - as markets change and needs shift.

This post has "Guru" status!

Idyllic  wrote:
For me it's this:

—snip—

Please tell me your perspective, similarities or differences to mine on these terms.

My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing? Thanks.

C

As I stated before, negotiations determine everything. Assuming definitions of terms is not a good idea. Spell it out for all parties to fully understand.

While I usually pay the model cash, part of my compensation is also images. I provide proofs of everything I shot. I am willing to edit the model’s selections up to a reasonable number. I also take constructive criticism on my edits for re-edits. If I cannot get the image edited to their liking, I have no issue providing the full res unedited file(s),  with the stipulation for the retoucher getting credited. I am also willing to give (non-exclusive) commercial usage rights, too.

So who pays whom does not matter, or even if done in trade.  I make this part of the offer.

The exception is when the model only wants a concept in which I have no interest or is beyond my ability to deliver. Then it is simply a no-deal.

Idyllic  wrote:
TFP: Neither are paid, ideas are mutual, and both have all access to images, selections, editing and distribution.

C

Although I welcome input from models, ideas are rarely mutual because the vast bulk of models expect me to provide the ideas.

Equal access?  Simply impractical, even ignoring the complications of copyright ownership. Also, I have yet to meet the model who was willing to sift through a whole shoot - they all expect me to do that work for them.

Idyllic  wrote:
My main concern is where can I have some choice over selections and editing? Thanks.

C

If you were to shoot with me, you would be invited to select an agreed number of photos (usually 10 to 20, but I am not rigid on numbers) from a short list prepared by me.  I edit photos in my own style, and sometimes a photo may have more than one version. Models are always invited to request an alternate treatment if they have a particular preference, and a model takes up that option about once every three years.

Abbitt Photography wrote:
TFP means Trade (or time) For Prints.  That’s all it means.   It doesn’t mean both parties equally share all aspects of the shoot.  It doesn’t mean copyright is shared and it doesn’t mean the model does half the editing.    Often when models approach me for TF it’s because they like what I shoot and want me to do what I do best.   Other times a model may have a specific goal for me to consider.   Usage rights, issues of release, how many iimages will be shared, editing, etc all need to be discussed.   

Again all TF means is both parties receive images for their time.  Assume anything else and... well you know what they say about making assumptions......

I agree wth literally everything you stated but I'm curious how the terms can be agreed upon with everyone being too busy to somehow meet beforehand and negotiate those terms?  It's been clearly spelled out numerous times that models and photographers are just too darned busy to go over things before a shoot, the photographers are supposed to produce stunning images and do all the work for nothing and provide the model with every image possible as a reward for simply showing up, gracing everyone with their presence.  It appears that the terms magically appear and there's never a need to discuss them or sign any legally binding documents.  Where do I catch the bus to Oz?

Todd Meredith wrote:

I agree wth literally everything you stated but I'm curious how the terms can be agreed upon with everyone being too busy to somehow meet beforehand and negotiate those terms?  It's been clearly spelled out numerous times that models and photographers are just too darned busy to go over things before a shoot, the photographers are supposed to produce stunning images and do all the work for nothing and provide the model with every image possible as a reward for simply showing up, gracing everyone with their presence.  It appears that the terms magically appear and there's never a need to discuss them or sign any legally binding documents.  Where do I catch the bus to Oz?

I think over half the rants and complaints posted here are a result of people making incorrect assumptions (such as making assumptions about TF that are not actually a part of TF) and/or a failure to communicate on key shoot issues.  It amazes me how many people go into shoots without having first discussed compensation, issues of release, usage, image delivery, etc.

Alexandra Vincent wrote:

TLDR Version: No one is going to build your business for you, except you. When the existing approaches you've been using are no longer working, look at what you can do to fill in those holes yourself and have greater control over situations that influence your work.


Long Version:
Yes, but many models are starting to find that this can be circumvented by investing in buying some photography equipment and starting to shoot one's own content, rather than relying solely on trade arrangements for images. Were it not for self-created content, I'd never be able to keep up with the need for constant postings on social media. Photographers shooting trade with models simply aren't going to turn over 20 images to you, so that you can keep up with your IG posting each morning, or whenever IG traffic is highest for your target market. And it's no one's responsibility to do that, except for your own. Copyright laws are copyright laws, and no one owes anyone any support with helping your build your business and marketing approaches - except for yourself.

So, when these issues start becoming burdensome, it's time for folks to learn to shoot and self-create. This puts the power directly into your hands, and allows you full control over how you market yourself. That way, when you do agree to a TF* session, it can be enjoyable and productive, but the outcome of that shoot is not the end-all-be-all for your marketing approach that month. You can have the images from several self-created shoots in the cue, ready to be self-edited as you need them, and posted where and when you need them.

With internet based freelancing, many photographers you work with are going to book you simply because they like the experience of shooting. Shooting with a ton of folks feels productive and is enjoyable, but it doesn't guarantee you will have work displayed in places other can see it and find you. It doesn't mean anyone will ever submit your work for publication opportunities. It doesn't guarantee anything in the larger scheme of opportunity creation. Those are things you have to find ways to do - for yourself.

While it's nice to ponder what it would be like to have a world where literally every work-related situation is absolutely equal and 100% mutually beneficial, that's not the world we live in. Instead, we can take what we know we love doing, and use that passion for our work to develop approaches that benefit us directly. Without waiting on others, or depending on anyone else. We can continually build our skill sets to include more and more different and varying skills - which is what keeps people relevant and working in ANY field - as markets change and needs shift.

+1000

There are definitely so many different options for people to DIY things.  And even if you find that isn't for you-- it is definitely important to recognize the limitations to any work-related situation, utilize clear communication and go into any agreement with your eyes wide open so both parties are on the same page and feel it is an "equitable" (or at least "acceptable" situation)

Abbitt Photography wrote:

I think over half the rants and complaints posted here are a result of people making incorrect assumptions (such as making assumptions about TF that are not actually a part of TF) and/or a failure to communicate on key shoot issues.  It amazes me how many people go into shoots without having first discussed compensation, issues of release, usage, image delivery, etc.

Agreed.  Too many people either don't understand that portion of the process or short-change it.  It always pays to take some time before or at the beginning of the shoot to talk, get on the same page and know what each person is comfortable with.

Alexandra Vincent wrote:
...Yes, but many models are starting to find that this can be circumvented by investing in buying some photography equipment and starting to shoot one's own content, rather than relying solely on trade arrangements for images....

While I think there's some merit to what you say, spending a few thousand dollars on equipment and becoming proficient a photography to take selfies may not be worth it.   Even as a photographer with descent equipment who's been shooting for decades,  I can't do self portraits nearly a well as I can shoot someone else.

I've seen scores of models here who refuse to do TF and have only crappy images in their portfolios as a result.  The only offers they get as a result are from GWCs who want spread shots, etc.  These models typically get frustrated, proclaim all photographers are creepy and quit.  In contrast, I recently shot a newer MM model who is focusing at first on doing TF only with photographers who's work she thinks is good.  Her portfolio shows it and I'm sure when she starts charging she'll do very well as a result. 

Selfies can serve a purpose and by all means use them when they meet your needs, but I think often people fail to realize the impact better quality images can have.   

Analogy:  We have a huge blizzard coming through here now.  Sure, I could invest in a heavy duty snow blower, but why when I can get a professional service to remove the snow all winter for under $200.   Why buy thousands of dollars worth of camera gear and spend hundreds of hours learning how to use it to take selfies, if people will shoot you and give you images to use for free?  I could cut my own hair for free with scissors and shavers I already own, it doesn’t mean I should.