|
Forums >
General Industry >
question about model release forms
Hello. I'm new to modeling on professional levels. I have done ameteur work with friends and students who were photographers, however. I wanted to ask a question that I'm sure most of you can answer. I have some up-coming shoots scheduled with more professional photographers, and I wanted to type up my own release form to ensure that I am getting whatever type of payment we aggreed on and when I will get it and so forth. I'm sure most photographers would have their own version, but I wanted to have one too just in case I come accross a photographer that is willing to take advantage of a new model so I don't get myself screwed over. I just wanted to know what excatly I should have on my form besides method of payment (cash, tfp, ect,...), how and when I will recieve the images, the date of the shoot, signatures, and if I want the raw images and/or enhanced images. Is there anything that I'm missing that I should have? I appreciate the help. Thank you so much everyone! Feb 21 06 10:16 am Link Laura Deus wrote: Laura, you seem to be already aware of all the details that you want in a release, but the main thing about the release is that you are releasing, to some degree, your control of your images, so that the photog can sell them, publish them, etc. You'll want to be sure that part reads the way you want it. Of course, remember that in exchange for him paying you, he gets some rights. If you want to model, you can't both both get paid and tightly control the rights. :-) Feb 21 06 12:05 pm Link there is a difference between a release and a license agreement...although a license agreement usually contains a release clause....speak to a knowledgable entertainment, copyright or IP attorney.....this is why I say that models need good, legit representation...... Feb 21 06 12:10 pm Link This has been discussed a number of times... What you want is a CONTRACT [terms and conditions agreement] not a RELEASE. The starting point here, for you to know about and understand, is that pro and semi-pro photographers are never going to sign something that conflicts with your [real] release of use rights to them... which is what they will have you, the model, sign. If you call what you are writing a "release" and it looks like a "license" they are not happy with most pro or semi-pro photographers [not the "friends" and "students" you have been dealing with or the GWC's that we have a few of around here] will happily tell you, in no uncertain terms, where you can shove it. I also notice that on you photos page 6 of the 8 photos there are notated "copyright: Laura Deus." I somehow doubt that unless you are shooting yourself or there is someone out there idiot enough to sign over the actual copyright to you. That's something else you will NOT be getting from any pro or semi-pro photographer. Studio36 Feb 21 06 12:20 pm Link studio36uk wrote: a licensing agreement is contractual thereby a "contract" as is a release...semantics..... Feb 21 06 12:23 pm Link Laura, A professional photographer will normally have a release for you to sign. If you have concerns about the release discuss them with the photographer PRIOR to shooting. Many pros have an emailable copy of their release so you can read it ahead of time. I'd recommend asking for a copy to be sent to you so you can read it and discuss it with the photographer. Also, discuss your terms and conditions that would need to be added in order to satisfy your requirements of the shoot. Remember though, it may not be up to you whether or not you can have RAW images, number of images to receive, etc. Personally I never let unedited images leave my studio because the images that leave the studio represent me and the model -- I want them to represent us correctly. If you couldn't live with that, it would be a showstopper for me. The key is to be reasonable in your request. I would also suggest that you make dates such as when you will receive the edited images reasonable and based on an event such as your communicating to the photographer the images you would like edited. Again, discuss it with the photographer so you are both comfortable with the requests. Hope this helps... Feb 21 06 12:27 pm Link images by elahi wrote: Not really... Feb 21 06 12:40 pm Link I'm confused ... the photographer is paying you and you want to also be paid for revenue generated ... and you dont have a real body of work experience? WOW Feb 21 06 12:49 pm Link Laura Deus wrote: all that stuff should be covered in the photographer's agreement already. If you'd like, I can send you a copy of what mine looks like (although it's just a bit atypical). Feb 21 06 12:52 pm Link studio36uk wrote: It all depends. A contract can be in the form of a Statement of Work that incorporates the terms and conditions by reference. A model release can be the same if it contains T&Cs and standard contract elements. Feb 21 06 01:01 pm Link While a release, license, and copyright ARE three seperate and distinct issues, there is no reason all three can't be dealt with in one document. The reasoning behind a document is that sooner or later, one party or the other is going to claim the other party is not in compliance with what was agreed, and having something in writing, allows a neutral third party (think judge or abitrator) to look at the document to see what was spelled out at the time. Without something in writing, everyone is free to claim various "oral" agreements, promises, representations, etc. Most states have adopted the old english "statute of frauds" which requires various contracts (especially those dealing with something of value in excess of an arbitrary figure, like $500.00) to be in writing, along with various other types of contracts, leases, etc. You first have to come to an agreement. The "document" should embody that agreement in plain, simple to understand lanquage. I have people ask me if they can "put something into an agreement". You can put anything into an agreement (so long as it isn't illegal). Getting the other person to sign it is another thing. The biggest issue most people miss is they fail to address all contingencies. That is to say, the document that gets signed fails to address a particular issue. In most cases, if you try to do "something" not specified in the agreement, you will lose. There is an old latin maxim of contract interpretation that when you specify one thing, you exclude all others by implication. So, if I give you an agreement that says you have the right to use the images for your website, and that's all it says, I have a leg up if you try to use the images for some other purpose because while specifying "web use" I have exlcuded all other uses by implication. You should always review a document from the standpoint of whether it gives you the specific rights to do what you contemplate doing. If not, add those specific issues. On the other hand, one can give an unlimited license or release which will cover ALL uses, even those not specified because by definition unlimited means any use. Copyrights are a bit more tricky, becuase the code specifically requires any transfer of image rights to be in writing (except an implied license, or oral non-exclusive license). However, an implied license, or oral-non-exclusive license can be revoked at the whim of the copyright holder. Good luck. Mark Feb 21 06 01:14 pm Link Mark Anderson wrote: For various reasons, and keep in mind I am in the UK, all of these things are on separate WRITTEN documents and formulated, constructed, written and kept separately and strictly compartmentalised. Gunfitr wrote: All my documentation for releases and licenses ALWAYS excludes implied licenses. Feb 21 06 01:23 pm Link studio36uk wrote: a release is a contractual agreement Feb 21 06 01:31 pm Link im not sure if UK has barnes and noble but any big book store go to the photography section and find "legal forms for photographers and models" in that section there is something you will want the thing i constantly (in fact so ticked at) i didnt get him to sign BEFORE shooting bc the photographer, we get a little name credit, and its a slim chance we can sell our photography until we really climb that global ladder. The model gets a wonderful image and something to show. Again we have our name. so we need rights to the images. Every photographer can write you out something binding before the shoot, like "i hereby grant _____X priveleges to print and for personal use these photos" BUT maybe one photographer doesn't want his images altered (i dont) so just keep in mind. You need contract like they said not release . You releasing your rights to the photographer not vice versa but email me more if u want to discuss since this has been a big topic on my brain this week after getting totally screwed by a little 18 year old boy model bc his boyfriend paid for the shoot, and wouldn't give me his BF's name to get the paper signed. So i embedded copyrights in all the images in photoshop if they tried to cut off my © sign. they still wont be able to legally print them. _the bottom line_ dont shoot anything you wouldn't want to be printed, mass produced, or if you have a fear of ending up in playboy, DO NOT SHOOOT NUDES once u sign the release thats that. and yes we do try to sell images. sometimes. to stock companies. really a photographer has nothing to gain w/ you coming back at them w/ contracts (unless your with a huge talent agency) but if thats the case, u wouldn't be asking i dont think? Feb 21 06 01:33 pm Link Quit being so freaking stupid and argumentative and try and help the model out the right way! Laura, For the most part, I think having your own release is NOT in your best interest. First, If a photographer wants to shoot with you, and he is a professional photographer, then he should not only have his own release, but he should be able to give it to you in advance for you to review. Furthermore, If it is a paid shoot, then normal the Release starts out with a clause similar to "In consideration for fees paid..." that basically says, IF he pays you, then he gets the rights outlined in the release. Despite the semantic argument going on, That form of release IS a binding contract, as are all the other releases which you sign. Where the disconnect appears to be is that you also want to ensure that you are granted usage rights as well, and residuals etc.... If you go to a photog and hand him a release with the Residuals and Payment and Rights clause all in there, he is liable to laugh you right out the door. Paperwork for a shoot should be done before you ever get there. He sends you the agreement (Release / contract / whatever the others prefer to call it) you review it, preferably with someone that knows what they are reading, You sign and make a copy of it, then return it to him, or bring it with you to the shoot. If for some reason you do not like the terms of the agreement (such as he will be paying in Pesos and not Dollars) then you simply call him and negotiate those terms. He rewrites it, sends it to you and you approve. BTW, This is standard for ALL businesses. If you want a room added to your house, do you expect the construction company to come out there with a crew ready to go without you signing any paperwork? Do you expect them to do all the work then have you sign? Treat this like a business, not like a hobby. Paperwork first, review, return, then go shoot. No paperwork? Avoid the photographer. Feb 21 06 01:41 pm Link Laura Deus wrote: I doubt that many "professional" photographers are going to give you RAW images. Feb 21 06 01:45 pm Link images by elahi wrote: I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on TV. Actually, I'm a paralegal (day job). You're right, Elahi, a release is a type of contract. It's often separate from other agreements, but it doesn't have to be. E.g., releases generally refer to the model's fee, but not the amount thereof, which is usually set pursuant to a separate agreement, written or oral. (The careful photographer pays by check OR gets a receipt, to memorialize the fee amount.) A global document can include terms regarding release, fee, licensing, residuals, etc. But the release is usually separate for convenience's sake...so we don't all have to have our lawyers at the shoot, reading reams of contract terms. Feb 21 06 02:22 pm Link studio36uk wrote: Feb 21 06 02:41 pm Link i messed up the last post right above this one where i replied. i accidently quoted what i was saying back.....the last 2 sentances are my response to the post earlier, just fyi. Feb 21 06 02:44 pm Link 00siris wrote: im not being paid for any upcoming shoots. i was only listing different methods of payment, such as cash or tfp or whatever....just as an example of what to put on the form. Feb 21 06 02:47 pm Link Laura Deus wrote: Laura, would you mind not interrupting our fascinating discussion on these legal issues? You know, just because you started this... JK :-) Feb 21 06 03:10 pm Link Mark Anderson wrote: There is one potential gotcha here. You can put in the contract that you should have the images by a certain date, but if there is no penalty for not following through and no way of enforcing it then it is just a bunch of words. I know a number of models who were stiffed by very well known photographers in this area. Feb 21 06 07:06 pm Link |
