Doug Swinskey wrote:
best to preface this with "for TFPers"...

if i am shooting you for a client, you dont shoot and
i dont sign your voucher (you dont get paid) until you sign a release.

if i am shooting you for my artwork and i hired you, your not getting paid until you sign a release.

if you hired me, i dont need a release, i am not using those images for anything..

fwiw

Thanks Doug, Life does seem simpler when people get paid...

FabioTovar wrote:
THIS IS BY FAR THE DUMBEST ADVICE I HAVE HEARD SO FAR.

Really.
Even without a release a photographer has almost all the rights in the world to do with the work what he/she pleases except directly endorse a product for commercial use.


I do agree that all models should:
1. Check references
2. Meet beforehand (hopefully the model is a good judge of character)
3. Take all reasonable steps to be safe
4. Lastly, take all reasonable steps to get paid (whether by print, check, or cash)

But, not signing the release?! Negotiation is what it's all about, but I don't know a single photographer that would leave himself exposed to liability for a TFP model.

FabioTovar wrote:
THIS IS BY FAR THE DUMBEST ADVICE I HAVE HEARD SO FAR.

how about qualifying your observation?

in a TFP context, why is this bad advice?...

Morningstar wrote:
I have been hearing an inreasing number of complaints lately from TFP/ TFCD models who aren't getting they're thumbnails/contact sheets, CDs or prints for months after a shoot (or not at all), that I am now starting to advise them not to sign the release and/or not give the photographer permission to publish shots untill they get what's promissed to the model. Now, this is coming from a photographer who used to never start shooting untill I had the paperwork done.
Models - Photographers comments please...

Don't sign the release, watch the photos being deleted. On three occasions I did not have a release signed at the end of a shoot, twice because I forgot, once because I needed to print copies of it and the model was in a rush (Just mail it to me and I'll sign and return it!), my fault on all three. Not one of the three returned a release to me after having copies mailed to them. In each case I had a stack or prints and a DVD filled with images I couldn't use. Never again!

Don't sign the release, watch me delete all of the images in front of you.

Mary wrote:
how about a compromise.....  The model signs a realease that states the photos can only be used after she has received a cd of X number of images.  I wouldnt as a model sign most releases out there anyway not without crossing out all the stuff about being able to sale and use the shots for anything other then photographers portfolio but thats another issue and thats a business decision  between the photographer and the model but it does seem odd that everyone is jumping in their own corner on this when it would be so easy to meet half way.

Depends on what use you're putting the images to.

On the other hand if it's a paid shoot - the release is the way it is for a reason, no signature means we say the word of the day - Next!

Mary wrote:
how about a compromise.....  The model signs a realease that states the photos can only be used after she has received a cd of X number of images.

Most model releases state that the model has already acknowledged as received the good and valuable consideration promised.

The model release should not be signed until such good and valuable consideration can honestly be acknowledged as received.  To do otherwise is to lie.

(This means that you shouldn't sign a release until you've gotten your images or money.)

Brian Diaz wrote:

Most model releases state that the model has already acknowledged as received the good and valuable consideration promised.

The model release should not be signed until such good and valuable consideration can honestly be acknowledged as received.  To do otherwise is to lie.

(This means that you shouldn't sign a release until you've gotten your images or money.)

perhaps the model release needs to be reworked to accomadate the TFP world.

Mary wrote:
perhaps the model release needs to be reworked to accomadate the TFP world.

I'm sure someone's lawyer would be happy to draft a release that states that the model releases the use of her image in exchange for maybe getting a couple over-retouched pix emailed to her in a few months. 

Mary wrote:
perhaps the model release needs to be reworked to accomadate the TFP world.

The TFP world doesn't need a model release.  If imaging is worthy of commercial re-sale then a model is worthy of payment beyond just a few prints.  Equally, if a model seeks commercial viable portfolio imaging then it should be purchased from a photographer. 

The Internet world has a difficult time understanding such a simple concept of business.  Most of those whining about a model release for TFP will do nothing with the imaging other than claim ownership of something in most cases isn't worth anything.

area291 wrote:

The TFP world doesn't need a model release.  If imaging is worthy of commercial re-sale then a model is worthy of payment beyond just a few prints.  Equally, if a model seeks commercial viable portfolio imaging then it should be purchased from a photographer. 

The Internet world has a difficult time understanding such a simple concept of business.  Most of those whining about a model release for TFP will do nothing with the imaging other than claim ownership of something in most cases isn't worth anything.

good point.

area291 wrote:
The TFP world doesn't need a model release.  If imaging is worthy of commercial re-sale then a model is worthy of payment beyond just a few prints.  Equally, if a model seeks commercial viable portfolio imaging then it should be purchased from a photographer. 

The Internet world has a difficult time understanding such a simple concept of business.  Most of those whining about a model release for TFP will do nothing with the imaging other than claim ownership of something in most cases isn't worth anything.

Very, very well said...

area291 wrote:
...Most of those whining about a model release for TFP will do nothing with the imaging other than claim ownership of something in most cases isn't worth anything.

Hrm...perhaps then my newest two images in my portfolio aren't worth the pixels they're printed on.

Oh well...back to shooting for myself.


----------

Mary, the model releases are worded as they are to release the photographer from having to track down the model in case something arises where they could use the photo to make some money.

In my personal case I haven't shot photography for stock, ever...but if someone should ask me "Hey, I like this photo, can I have a copy" or "Can I license it for stock" I don't intend to have to track down the model in the future.  It also protects me from the model coming after me for making money off my own portfolio.

-----------

By the way, though everyone is ignoring it, Yuriy was right on the money.  The photographer doesn't *need* a release.  He can do with the photographs as he damned well pleases release or no.  Commercial use is a wide term that is interpreted really very narrowly by the courts.

Doug Lester wrote:

Don't sign the release, watch the photos being deleted. On three occasions I did not have a release signed at the end of a shoot, twice because I forgot, once because I needed to print copies of it and the model was in a rush (Just mail it to me and I'll sign and return it!), my fault on all three. Not one of the three returned a release to me after having copies mailed to them. In each case I had a stack or prints and a DVD filled with images I couldn't use. Never again!

Don't sign the release, watch me delete all of the images in front of you.

This happened to me a while ago too, model said she would fax me back the release or send it with electronic sig, never heard from her again...

area291 wrote:

The TFP world doesn't need a model release.  If imaging is worthy of commercial re-sale then a model is worthy of payment beyond just a few prints.  Equally, if a model seeks commercial viable portfolio imaging then it should be purchased from a photographer. 

The Internet world has a difficult time understanding such a simple concept of business.  Most of those whining about a model release for TFP will do nothing with the imaging other than claim ownership of something in most cases isn't worth anything.

*yawn*

You're usually more interesting than this.  Are you running out of material?  I know a couple of really good joke writers who speicalize in sarcastic put-downs.

Intensity wrote:
What happens when the model does signed the TFP release  and then never receives the photographs. What do you do then????

Please any answers to that....

Intensity wrote:
thank you Ive been waiting for some photos from when  I was  17 but the potographer change  he's number and his website  is no longer there. So that means I can sue!  I just  thought of those images as lost items. But it has been two years now so i guess that enough time given to him.

Thank You

Sure, if you signed a release stating that you were to get photos in exchange for your time that day...of course you can sue.  It's just like if you went and paid for a prom dress at a dress maker's shop and they up and disappeared...closed down their shop, and never gave you the dress or the money you paid for it.

In the case of your photos you paid in time, and the return the photographer agreed to was photos.

Keep in mind that should you actually track him down, and should he respond to the court case it would be settled quickly by him actually delivering the photos to you...unless you argue that the photos were time sensitive and successfully convince the judge that they aren't worth what they were if they had been delivered on time.  Even still the judge may just say that you've gotten what you agreed to (same with the prom dress...the dress maker might get off just by handing you the finished dress, while prom has come and gone).

So, is it worth the $$ you'll spend on filing the case in small claims? Plus, the $$$ you'll spend on a private investigator to track the photographer down?

Intensity wrote:
So that means I could sue!

Yes, that's sound advice for not getting your TFP pictures.

Hire this team to file the suit...

Intensity wrote:
So us as models we just have to trust  that the photographer will keep his promise  of sending the photographs.Because even if we have the right to sue  we would be  wasting  all that money  to get  old photos that are not worth nothing anymore. That Sucks for us.

As photographers we have to trust that the model will keep her promise and show up for the shoot, because even though we have the right to sue for lost time and wages, any money we get would be questionable and most likely the model wouldn't have the money to settle the suit anyway...  So we would be wasting all the money we spent on the shoot and all the time to get nothing in return.  That sucks for us.


Moral of the story:

Shoots and model/photographer relationships, just like any business relationship, are based in part on trust.  Should the relationship go awry and the trust be broken the law is on your side, and even the threat of suit is enough usually to snap someone back in to reality.  It is often however pointless to follow through with such a threat as the money exchanging hands is less than it would cost to burden the legal system with the problem.

Trust...make sure you trust whomever you work with, and if you don't...either don't work with them or do something to back up your need for trust.

Morningstar wrote:
I have been hearing an inreasing number of complaints lately from TFP/ TFCD models who aren't getting they're thumbnails/contact sheets, CDs or prints for months after a shoot (or not at all), that I am now starting to advise them not to sign the release and/or not give the photographer permission to publish shots untill they get what's promissed to the model. Now, this is coming from a photographer who used to never start shooting untill I had the paperwork done.
Models - Photographers comments please...

Intensity wrote:
You can't sue a model for not showing up because there is nothing signed saying that she will show up

I have email after email after email that insists to the contrary...  I can... or could... but I wouldn't and we both know that

Intensity wrote:
You can't sue a model for not showing up because there is nothing signed saying that she will show up.

Has anyone ever tested the legality of email confirmations?  Sort of like having to pay some doctors and dentists now if you don't show for the appointment.

Also, if you are thinking about suing a photographer, may want to consider that his attorney will probably want to know if you've been paying your taxes from modeling.

(Brother-in-law is an attorney, loves cases where items of value trade hands but not money)

Intensity wrote:
You can't sue a model for not showing up because there is nothing signed saying that she will show up