Diana Moffitt wrote:
No.  Ask and you shall receive.  If he asks you for money laugh in his face.

Unless she asks for prints and that's part of the photographes income!

However, as common courtesy, he should let you use the photo.

But that's just me.

Udo

MarkMarek wrote:
hmmm, another model who thinks everything is free.

My thought exactly.

Malchow Photography wrote:

My thought exactly.

All she wants to do is use a picture of her in her profile. How on earth could a photographer think to charge for that? I could understand being upset if she put it up without asking and gave him no credit, but putting it in her profile and linking it to him only helps get his name out there more. What would you honestly charge someone to use a picture of them in an online portfolio?

MarkMarek wrote:
hmmm, another model who thinks everything is free.

Great another photographer that thinks we whore ourselves around for free.

Cora wrote:
I might ask for prints later but for right now all I am looking for is the ability to have the picture in my online port. Would it make more sense to buy prints also?

Only if it was a major show and the shots are first class.

But, yeah, ask him for the online version of it and that he can put his stamp on it... this way, he'll get more exposure as well.

Diana Moffitt wrote:
Sending them the low res and high res image should be sent by common courtesy.  What's wrong with getting that for free?!?!?

Personally I would give it to her.  But I am puzzled by your question.  Nothing is wrong with getting it for free if the person who owns it CHOOSES to give it for free but one should not expect nor assume that it is his obigation to do so.

Cora wrote:
I might ask for prints later but for right now all I am looking for is the ability to have the picture in my online port. Would it make more sense to buy prints also?

UdoR wrote:
Only if it was a major show and the shots are first class.

But, yeah, ask him for the online version of it and that he can put his stamp on it... this way, he'll get more exposure as well.

When I shoot any local fashion show, I make a point of handing my card to as many of the models as I can contact that night telling them to email me for proofs of what I shot and let them pick 20% of what I shot for their portfolio.
As Udo said, it gives the photographer much more exposure plus it’s just damn good public relations.

Craig Thomson wrote:
But, yeah, ask him for the online version of it and that he can put his stamp on it... this way, he'll get more exposure as well.

When I shoot any local fashion show, I make a point of handing my card to as many of the models as I can contact that night telling them to email me for proofs of what I shot and let them pick 20% of what I shot for their portfolio.
As Udo said, it gives the photographer much more exposure plus it’s just damn good public relations.

This sounds like a great idea

Jeanette Thompson wrote:
I am amazed at the rude responses she's getting to this.  She ASKED instead of just copying the picture to her hard drive and uploading it to her portfolio as some people might do (and have done).  Besides, asking the photographer can't hurt a thing.  The worst thing he can do is tell you 'no'.

And, of course, one would hope that he wouldn't.

markcomp wrote:
Personally I would give it to her.  But I am puzzled by your question.  Nothing is wrong with getting it for free if the person who owns it CHOOSES to give it for free but one should not expect nor assume that it is his obigation to do so.

Right!

There's absolutely no harm in asking.  However, the answer might be "no" and if it is, you have to be gracious.  There may be reasons why he is not able to give you images even though he would like to.

RED Photographic wrote:

And, of course, one would hope that he wouldn't.

Very true.  I would think it would only help HIM if she did post it.  Heck, he may not even know who the model is for that matter.  It may even be the start of a beautiful model/photographer relationship.  One never knows.

Diana Moffitt wrote:
Sending them the low res and high res image should be sent by common courtesy.  What's wrong with getting that for free?!?!?

If it was a model like you I wouldn't give her a jack s**t just on the principle. Nothing in this world is free. If it was a different model who realizes the world doesn't spin around her, then I might give it to her complimentary at my own loss, but it's not free. Do you think that lawyers advice, just because it doesn't cost him anything to say a few words would be free? So it seems according to your logic. Sorry little girl, it doesn't work that way. Time to sober up.

Drifting Lotus wrote:

All she wants to do is use a picture of her in her profile. How on earth could a photographer think to charge for that? I could understand being upset if she put it up without asking and gave him no credit, but putting it in her profile and linking it to him only helps get his name out there more. What would you honestly charge someone to use a picture of them in an online portfolio?

You have a good point!
But the concern would be that like on many websites, or online porfolios is that the picture can be copied, saved, downloaded etc, without the photogs knowlege...

Although it would be the the mutual benefit of  both the model and photographer to have it posted, there is no guarentee that the model would use the image for other puposes as well.

So there is the copyright concern, and compensation for the right or lisence to use the image(s).

Malchow Photography wrote:
You have a good point!
But the concern would be that like on many websites, or online porfolios is that the picture can be copied, saved, downloaded etc, without the photogs knowlege...

Although it would be the the mutual benefit of  both the model and photographer to have it posted, there is no guarentee that the model would use the image for other puposes as well.

So there is the copyright concern, and compensation for the right or lisence to use the image(s).

If the photographer is worried that much about their images being copied, saved and downloaded then they should not EVER put a picture on the internet, anywhere. 

As far as no guarantee, this is a very good time to teach a new model about agreements/releases/etc.  How hard would it be to type up a very simple agreement that she will only use the image in her portfolio and for no other use?  It would take me less than five minutes to write up a legally binding document for that purpose.

Now, this isn't for you but for the others who left snide comments here for her - what purpose did it serve, really?  Here you have the opportunity to help teach someone new and inexperienced about the business.  Instead you chose to be rude.

MarkMarek wrote:

If it was a model like you I wouldn't give her a jack s**t just on the principle. Nothing in this world is free. If it was a different model who realizes the world doesn't spin around her, then I might give it to her complimentary at my own loss, but it's not free. Do you think that lawyers advice, just because it doesn't cost him anything to say a few words would be free? So it seems according to your logic. Sorry little girl, it doesn't work that way. Time to sober up.

Way to be gracious and supportive, there, mark.  Impressed.

Sending them the low res and high res image should be sent by common courtesy.  What's wrong with getting that for free?!?!?

Wondering what people think of as High Res?  to me, high res is in the neighborhood of 2400x3000 pixels (8x10 at 300dpi).  The ONLY reason to have an image of this size is if you wanted to print it (which would be illegal if you didn't have the photographer's written permission).  If you just want something for an online portfolio, take a 300-600 pixel image and leave it at that.  Otherwise, just ask the photographer if you can buy a print.

Drifting Lotus wrote:

All she wants to do is use a picture of her in her profile. How on earth could a photographer think to charge for that? I could understand being upset if she put it up without asking and gave him no credit, but putting it in her profile and linking it to him only helps get his name out there more. What would you honestly charge someone to use a picture of them in an online portfolio?

.......yes.  When I shoot TFCD I exchange low res images to be used online for the service of modelling.  I consider that compensation.  If a model wants a physical print to use in her portfolio, I charge her a very reasonable fee in addition.  If you can consider it compensation, then you can charge for it.  it is intellectual property, even in digital form, and only the photographer has the right to use it unless otherwise agreed upon.  That's why TFCD is considered an exhange.

Jeanette Thompson wrote:

If the photographer is worried that much about their images being copied, saved and downloaded then they should not EVER put a picture on the internet, anywhere. 

As far as no guarantee, this is a very good time to teach a new model about agreements/releases/etc.  How hard would it be to type up a very simple agreement that she will only use the image in her portfolio and for no other use?  It would take me less than five minutes to write up a legally binding document for that purpose.

Now, this isn't for you but for the others who left snide comments here for her - what purpose did it serve, really?  Here you have the opportunity to help teach someone new and inexperienced about the business.  Instead you chose to be rude.

That is true also, teaching is part of the shoot, when working with new models.

But many new models are all about "What can I get out of this?", and not have to pay anything, or very little for it. I do have release forms and photography agreements that I have had drawn up by an attorney. But again even with signed, legally binding documents...

Malchow Photography wrote:
That is true also, teaching is part of the shoot, when working with new models.

But many new models are all about "What can I get out of this?", and not have to pay anything, or very little for it. I do have release forms and photography agreements that I have had drawn up by an attorney. But again even with signed, legally binding documents...

Yeah.  I know.  It's a chance all of us take though, isn't it?  The main problem with this being, it wasn't a "shoot" so much as he was shooting a fashion show she was in. It was hard for him to teach her then *grins*.   I just hope the rude responses she got do not stop her from getting out there and trying.

MarkMarek wrote:

If it was a model like you I wouldn't give her a jack s**t just on the principle. Nothing in this world is free. If it was a different model who realizes the world doesn't spin around her,

Mark;

You don't know Diana!

She is one of the sweetest models out there. Great to work with and a fantastic discipline.

You mistake her sense of humor that she displays in forums so often the same way how so many people mistake YOUR sense of humor as brash!

She's way cool!

Udo

Amanda Schlicher wrote:

Wondering what people think of as High Res?  to me, high res is in the neighborhood of 2400x3000 pixels (8x10 at 300dpi).  The ONLY reason to have an image of this size is if you wanted to print it (which would be illegal if you didn't have the photographer's written permission).  If you just want something for an online portfolio, take a 300-600 pixel image and leave it at that.  Otherwise, just ask the photographer if you can buy a print.

600x400 96dpi and my copyright stamp on it.

UdoR wrote:
Mark;

You don't know Diana!

She is one of the sweetest models out there. Great to work with and a fantastic discipline.

You mistake her sense of humor that she displays in forums so often the same way how so many people mistake YOUR sense of humor as brash!

She's way cool!

Udo

I take it back then. Sorry Di

MarkMarek wrote:

I take it back then. Sorry Di

Very cool!

Cora wrote:
I was recently in a fashion show and I have seen a photographer with pics of me on their profile. I am trying to find out if it would be OK if I were to ask them if I could use the same pic in my profiles. Is this done? Would I most
likely have to pay??
Thanks bunches,
Cora♥

if you are the subject of an image and the photographer is using the image for non editorial/journalistic purposes..ie: his gallery for his promotion, he needs your signed model release to use them. so offer a limited release in trade for the images.

MarkMarek wrote:

I take it back then. Sorry Di

And Mark, the original poster is asking US if it is all right for her to ASK the photographer if she can use the pictures, not if it is all right for her to take and use the pictures. I'd say she is showing plenty of respect for the copyright.

Doug Swinskey wrote:

if you are the subject of an image and the photographer is using the image for non editorial/journalistic purposes..ie: his gallery for his promotion, he needs your signed model release to use them. so offer a limited release in trade for the images.

Not at a runway show and as long as he doesn't sell them, except for self promo, release is not necessary.

I know it's different in California, but here... just imagine... I couldn't show any of my runway images from Olympus Fashionweek, or any other runway shows I am shooting.