Chris Adval wrote:
- Is it typical to allow lifetime usage to the agency, lifetime of the agency? And I assume its never negotiable?

- In my very minimal experience working with agency models, they tend to be extremely strict with what images you're allowed to edit and release publicly. Do you have that same experience, is that common practice as photographers have minimal creative control with what can be released?

I think it would be useful to provide more specifics about how you are defining work and what you are attempting to do:
-hire agency models for your own shoots?
-trade/test shoot w/ agency models? 
-get paid portfolio/headshot work from agencies with their new models?

If you are talking about trades/test/TFP with agency models, I would not expect either you or the model to sign any kind of release or license. I would expect you to be able to display the work in your portfolio (whatever form that takes) and possibly limited editorial (though not in every case, better to at least have a discussion with model and/or agency). Similarly I would expect that the model and their agency to be able to display the image as a representation of their look and experience on their portfolios and websites.

Not being a lawyer, I can't point to specific laws, but it has been my observation and practice working with agencies for 25+ years regarding this relationship and workflow. While there have been exceptions to this, the overwhelming majority of paid and non-paid testing experiences have fallen into those parameters. If there has been any change to that practice it has, in my opinion, come from negative experiences from un-/under-informed amateurs making demands for documents. But again that is just my opinion.

As for hiring agency models, there are many elements that surprise amateur photographers or photographers that have only worked with freelance or amateur models. Two of the biggest shocks are variable rates and conditional model releases.

Agency models have different rates set for different types of projects. Additionally models within an agency will have different tiers of rates according to their experience and demand. The most dramatic contrast is between editorial, catalog and advertising projects. It can be the difference in a rate for a whole day for an editorial being the same $$$ figure as the rate for an hour of advertising with catalog falling somewhere in the middle. Amateur photographers might even be surprised at how low some editorial rates are for full day shoots ($150-350) but they have to understand that the model release will state editorial usage only. To the surprise and anger of many photographers here, there are generally higher rates for lingerie projects and even higher rates for nudity which have absolutely nothing to do with stripper rates and everything to do with a model and agency maintaining control of a model's career and image/brand.

Photographers likely stress or fear negotiation with agencies on advertising rates and usage fees for models on ad shoots. The model's rate might at first appear reasonable until a usage fee is added on top of it for broader usage parameters which can easily be flat chunks of $5,000-10,000 on top of the hourly rate depending on the project. What I have personally found is that when a catalog or advertising project is booked on an hourly or day-rate basis it comes with strict parameters on the media usage and duration of time the usage is allowed.

That leads into conditional model releases. The use of all-rights/all-usage model releases is generally rare with agency models. In reality few images need releases that cover all conditions and uses. The problem is that many images have potential or unanticipated usage needs and it is nearly impossible to know the future conditions of all shoots and all images making all-rights model releases popular with photographers (and virtually a requirement with stock photography agencies). Demonstratively fewer agency models work on stock photography shoots. Getting and all-rights/all-usage (stock) model release from a popular and experienced agency model is generally either forbidden or very expensive

Your questions lead me to believe that you have not fully investigated or considered these practices and might not be sure about how they would impact your goals. The parameters I described might and likely do have exceptions when it comes to shooting with individual models, especially if they are non-exclusive with their agencies. Just like models, there are different tiers of quality and professionalism among agencies. My description would broadly apply to recognized, legitimate model agencies in major markets. It think that it is better to arm yourself with this information and understanding of how numerous agencies operate within the established industry in order to avoid potentially costly mistakes.

Dan Howell wrote:
I think it would be useful to provide more specifics about how you are defining work and what you are attempting to do:
-hire agency models for your own shoots?
-trade/test shoot w/ agency models? 
-get paid portfolio/headshot work from agencies with their new models?

It was more trade/test and possibly build up to getting hired for headshots/portfolio with the relationships I would build with agencies. Granted I doubt I would get hired right away as having zero official experience working with agency models (excluding non-exclusive and working directly with the few models I met in NYC).

I did speak or was approached by very very small agencies in NYC but I always ask about license to usage. They say 50/50 basically. In my mind, which may be wrong with my lack of experience in this sector, 50/50 maybe if you keep the model signed sure, but once they leave, no more usage license seems more fair to me, right? I doubt any agency would let that happen but I wanted to see what is normal in the agency world working as a photographer with agents.

Dan Howell wrote:
If you are talking about trades/test/TFP with agency models, I would not expect either you or the model to sign any kind of release or license. I would expect you to be able to display the work in your portfolio (whatever form that takes) and possibly limited editorial (though not in every case, better to at least have a discussion with model and/or agency). Similarly I would expect that the model and their agency to be able to display the image as a representation of their look and experience on their portfolios and websites.

So no model release? Will I still be able to use images for my public use portfolio like my own website, and other marketing materials or will that vary if the agency/model likes the final deliverables or not?

Dan Howell wrote:
Your questions lead me to believe that you have not fully investigated or considered these practices and might not be sure about how they would impact your goals. The parameters I described might and likely do have exceptions when it comes to shooting with individual models, especially if they are non-exclusive with their agencies. Just like models, there are different tiers of quality and professionalism among agencies. My description would broadly apply to recognized, legitimate model agencies in major markets. It think that it is better to arm yourself with this information and understanding of how numerous agencies operate within the established industry in order to avoid potentially costly mistakes.

My goal is get my portfolio to the next level of looking and feeling more high end fashion cause it feels like now its heavy working with a lot of inexperienced models, which it is when you look and compare to the shots on Vogue or Calvin Klein ads. I also have zero access to typical agency model looks too around my entire region. I tried to use model mayhem to meet with others in NYC or Philly but since post covid its just been dead, even the paid only models options are just not to the level I expect at their rates for their look.

Chris Adval wrote:
I did speak or was approached by very very small agencies in NYC but I always ask about license to usage. They say 50/50 basically. In my mind, which may be wrong with my lack of experience in this sector, 50/50 maybe if you keep the model signed sure, but once they leave, no more usage license seems more fair to me, right? I doubt any agency would let that happen but I wanted to see what is normal in the agency world working as a photographer with agents.

I have never encountered that phrase when discussing testing, unless they were speaking in broad terms about both you and the model getting equal rights to display the photos as an example of past work (ie. portfolio). Resale usage on a test shoot is generally frowned upon. The times I have experienced or discussed it with peers is when a test image is seen by a third party after shoot and it happens to fit a project. Then a usage fee is negotiated with agency.

Chris Adval wrote:
So no model release? Will I still be able to use images for my public use portfolio like my own website, and other marketing materials or will that vary if the agency/model likes the final deliverables or not?

This is one of those things that 'Model Mayhem Photographers' have traditionally fought me on. I see a lot of flexing like 'I always get a model release on every shoot.' That tells me they are not working with experienced models or notable celebrities. Not sure why they want that flex. I guess I should back pedal a bit and say that none of the major modeling agencies in the NYC fashion market (or even commercial market for that matter) I have had any experience with would allow a model to sign a model release on a test shoot. This is going back 30 years at this point. I have heard of occasions where manipulative photographers got a release (through pressure or inexperience of the model) on a test shoot to later gain a highly negative reputation with an agency. And you have to remember that individual agents jump from agency to agency over their careers. Is it really worth gaining that reputation for some potential low-dollar sale down the road. For me, not.

For a specific example, last fall I did a fully planned fashion shoot with the intention of editorial submission. I booked a good, experienced fashion model from NYC agency that I had shot on a catalog project in the past. I think the results were good (working with MUA, fashion stylist and art director on the shoot) and I was ready to submit to magazine via Kavyar. When I selected a target publication, I did drop an email to the booker/agent to outline my intentions. Not only did the approve, they were excited about the possibility. I have absolutely no document signed by model for release/usage and I don't have a problem with that.

I later submitted a previous shoot with a different agency model that was selected as a cover. Since I had not shot it with the intention of editorial submission, I ran it by the model. I can't remember if I also emailed the agency because I think she had switched agencies in the interim. Regardless, I had a discussion, not a release. I don't know if anyone can point to laws or statutes that completely validate this, but it has been my observation and experience that this is the way the industry is accustomed to working.

The flex of everything/shoot getting released is a myth.

Chris Adval wrote:
My goal is get my portfolio to the next level of looking and feeling more high end fashion cause it feels like now its heavy working with a lot of inexperienced models, which it is when you look and compare to the shots on Vogue or Calvin Klein ads. I also have zero access to typical agency model looks too around my entire region. I tried to use model mayhem to meet with others in NYC or Philly but since post covid its just been dead, even the paid only models options are just not to the level I expect at their rates for their look.

A suggestion I have made to many which has mostly fallen on deaf ears is to get/find a fashion stylist. Even if that means shooting fewer better shoots, I feel like it is worth it. I have had a couple of occasions when I had a special concept or resource for a shoot that I had spent time in developing. It just didn't make sense for me to burn that match on a shoot that was limited by my own fashion styling experience and resources. On those occasions I happily gave a stylist a small budget to wardrobe a shoot. Both shoots resulted in editorial publication. It's not for every shoot. Then again, I do actually have a little experience getting wardrobe for shoots at this point.

The bigger point is that photography is limited by what is in the shoot: models, make up, wardrobe, concept/setting. It is not only about getting a good model. Additionally if you get better fashions you will have an easier time getting better models.