Posted by Mike Cummings: 
I don't feel it is right to do a TFP and then sell the image without further compensation to the model.

Why? 

Posted by area291: 

Posted by Mike Cummings: 
I don't feel it is right to do a TFP and then sell the image without further compensation to the model.

Why? 

When I do a TFP it is to help me gain experience as a photographer and to give the model a few images they can use in thier portfolio. If I turn around a sell the image without giving the model compensation I feel I would be cheating the model by going beyond the scope of our understanding. To me it would be a bait and switch, even if I have the legal right to do it.

Mike

Posted by Jax: 

Posted by Mike Cummings:

Don't you get it Chris... You as the photographer are supposed to pay the model as well as let them use all the images how ever they want even if it means them reselling...  Geeeesh how old fashioned can you be. ;-)

Mike

When I am paid for a shoot, I give all rights to the photographer. I do, however, ask that they let me have a few good images to promote their work and use it in my portfolio. Is that something that maybe some photographers would work out with models?

Not to pull you up short so don't take it that way, but you don't give the photographer rights to the image. The photographer has those rights by default as the creator of the work.

Some photographers give models usage rights to images. If I paid you for a shoot I don't think I would give you usage unless you had cut me a rate deal or brought something extra to the shoot that would "buy" the image use from me.

Mike

Posted by Mike Cummings: 
If I turn around a sell the image without giving the model compensation I feel I would be cheating the model by going beyond the scope of our understanding. To me it would be a bait and switch, even if I have the legal right to do it.

Well, I don't know what your understanding is as you may just be creating images for the fun of it, but from a barter concept your nobility doesn't make business sense. 

First, the model has been compensated through the barter agreement and there is no further need for you, or the model, to extend compensation beyond the speculation of what is produced and payment of "Time" and "Prints" made on the agreement.

I recently made a barter for a a guitar.  I provided a camera.  Per your thinking, if I do a world tour and make millions would that mean I would have to extend compensation back to the party that provided the guitar?  Or them to me if they became a world famous photographer?  That is what you are saying about your barter agreement.

Secondly, if the model used the provided image (your work) and was offered assignments based on that image, would you expect the model to equal your nobility by paying you a portion of her earnings?

Why would you look at it any differently than writing a check for modeling services?  Why would a model look at payment any differently? 

In both instances, money or barter, services and goods are exchanged and the deal is done.  If the model, or the photographer, doesn't feel the payment based on "Time" and "Prints" is worth it, don't do it, or change the payment structure.

I would agree that extending the TFP process should not be used knowingly for client use, but it is, it's just called "exposure."  That's done all the time and freely advertised on places like Craig's List.  Models and photographers are given a choice whether it is worth it. 

Models should also be made aware that images may have some value in the stock photography market and could possibly be sold.  The quality of work created is provided based on a barter, not monetary payment as stock is based on specualtion for both parties.  If from that point on each accept the barter, then all is fair in creation and subsequent opportunity...for both parties.

It's a funny place this Internet and the views it presents, particularly in the photography profession. 

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
Photographers should really mention on their site if they do TFP/TFCD/TESTING/PAY MODELS/ONLY DO PAID WORK. If you ONLY do TFP say you ONLY do TFP. If you PAY MODELS please say you pay models and blah blah.

By the way, I've discovered that if I message models with a subject that reads:
(paid shoot)booking enquiry
I get answers pretty quickly.

I wonder how many of the photographers who don't get replies use subjects like:
"YOU ARE HOT"

mjr.

Posted by Mike Cummings: 

Not to pull you up short so don't take it that way, but you don't give the photographer rights to the image. The photographer has those rights by default as the creator of the work.

Some photographers give models usage rights to images. If I paid you for a shoot I don't think I would give you usage unless you had cut me a rate deal or brought something extra to the shoot that would "buy" the image use from me.

Mike

I think I used the wrong termonology, as it was stated that models expect to be paid and have shared rights to the images. I was more or less trying to say I agree to having no rights to the images if paid, as long as the photographer lets me use a few images for personal use. I always contact the photographer and ask permission if Im asked for a picture for fliers, etc, most of the time they are happy to do so.

I have never asked to work with a photographer, usually they come to me because I offer more than just a regular model, that is my extreme appearance and way in front of a camera. I have almost 80 photographers waiting to work with me, but all are TFP, so its pretty much what do they have to offer ME? Lol, so I guess I can understand the other side of it;]

Posted by area291:

Well, I don't know what your understanding is as you may just be creating images for the fun of it, but from a barter concept your nobility doesn't make business sense. 

First, the model has been compensated through the barter agreement and there is no further need for you, or the model, to extend compensation beyond the speculation of what is produced and payment of "Time" and "Prints" made on the agreement.

I see what you are saying

I recently made a barter for a a guitar.  I provided a camera.  Per your thinking, if I do a world tour and make millions would that mean I would have to extend compensation back to the party that provided the guitar?  Or them to me if they became a world famous photographer?  That is what you are saying about your barter agreement.

Your analogy is a bit off base. A closer analogy would be if you and I got together and wrote a song for practice. The song is mine because it was my pen, paper and music. You on the other hand  composed the words and sang them. Our understanding is we will use the song to show our individual talents. Someone hears the song and wants to buy it. If I sell the song without giving you your "half" I have cheated you. (yes I know my analogy is not "legally" correct)

Secondly, if the model used the provided image (your work) and was offered assignments based on that image, would you expect the model to equal your nobility by paying you a portion of her earnings?

Not at all because that is the intent of the shoot.

Why would you look at it any differently than writing a check for modeling services?  Why would a model look at payment any differently? 

In my mind my "checks" are not worth much at this point. Your "checks" may be worth the face amount, but mine are worth about 10 cents on the dollar. I am not doubting myself I am just being realistic about my current skill level. Face it I know a small portion of what I need to know to be a "photographer" heck the only thing that seperated me from a GWC is I want to learn and I am not in this to get some young thang nekkid.

In both instances, money or barter, services and goods are exchanged and the deal is done.  If the model, or the photographer, doesn't feel the payment based on "Time" and "Prints" is worth it, don't do it, or change the payment structure.

I would agree that extending the TFP process should not be used knowingly for client use, but it is, it's just called "exposure."  That's done all the time and freely advertised on places like Craig's List.  Models and photographers are given a choice whether it is worth it. 

Models should also be made aware that images may have some value in the stock photography market and could possibly be sold.  The quality of work created is provided based on a barter, not monetary payment as stock is based on specualtion for both parties.  If from that point on each accept the barter, then all is fair in creation and subsequent opportunity...for both parties.

It's a funny place this Internet and the views it presents, particularly in the photography profession. 
 

My model release does state that I can do whatever I want with the images, and I never give up or share copyright.

Mike

Posted by Udo R Photography: 
Hey Amber;

I would say it's relatively simple... if you approach a photographer... expect that YOU should pay him!

Don't approach him/her and say "you can shoot me if you pay me."

Personally... I think that this bad form, others may disagree.

However, if a photographer approaches YOU, either he offers you to pay or shoot TFP and you can decide if you like his work and think it's beneficial for your own portfolio.

Agreed!

Posted by Leila: 
It really helps if people, models and photographers, can be as specific as they can on their profile regarding the type of work they do, what they wont do, and what they are interested in. It would save people a lot of time.

Sorry...But I find that a lot of models do not read and send me emails that reflect that they did not spend ten seconds to read a profile.

Posted by Nicole P: 
Im fairly new but if they dont specify what they want to do in their profile then why not contact them to see if you at least can work a deal?
Sometimes if dont ask youll never know. I personally would hate to wait around tapping my thumbs together waiting for a photographer to call/email for a shoot. Why not present some ideas and new things with them and at least make it a 2 way street - not just I just emailed you and you pay me for X amount of time. 

Hear Hear....I'm liking you more and more....

Posted by Studio200: 

Posted by Nicole P: 
Im fairly new but if they dont specify what they want to do in their profile then why not contact them to see if you at least can work a deal?
Sometimes if dont ask youll never know. I personally would hate to wait around tapping my thumbs together waiting for a photographer to call/email for a shoot. Why not present some ideas and new things with them and at least make it a 2 way street - not just I just emailed you and you pay me for X amount of time. 

You hit it on the head. I LOVE working with someone who has ideas and is creative but the majority of models I've worked with have not been that way. A model with creative ideas and a  little knowledge of photography is a dream to me. When someone emails me with a generic "hey I'd love to work with you, here are my rates"..its usually funny. Now IF a model emailed me and said

"Hey I thought i'd say hi to see if you might be interested in working with me, I am only looking for paid work but I can do my own looks, and here are some ideas/outfits I currently have"

and then they attached a link with snapshots of cool clothes, etc well that model would get my attention! Now my situation is different than others' in that I'm a hobbyist (gwc) who only does this because I like to try to be creative. The thing is, I think there are lots of gwc's who have money to burn (doctors, lawyers etc) who WILL pay a model, but the models have to realize there is lots of competition out there..there are LOTS of models that will shoot for free, so if you solicit someone for money, try to find ways to make yourself stand above the crowd..

I know that one time a model sent me snapshots she took with her digital cam of outfits she had to see if I could use any of the looks and that really made her stand out. That, and she wrote emails that were more than one paragraph long.

-Dennis

It really is sooo nice to get an email from a model that has her shit together...

Posted by area291: 
I really wish I could understand why a photographer would pay a model (sans shooting stock).  Clients hire models, not me.   

If I do the hiring it becomes a nightmare in paperwork and opens up all sorts of liability issues.  That alone makes me run like Hell from the hiring process.

I've completed six projects over the past two week, three of which utilized models.  Not one of them was hired or paid by me.  Each, (as I) were paid by the client.

Would photographers / models kindly answer the following:

---Photographers, why are you hiring models instead of having the client do that?  Better yet, if there is no client, why are you hiring a model when in this day and age of TFP you can get anything you want through barter?

---Models, why do you feel a photographer is a good resource for hiring you?

Just curious...   

For very specific projects that I know will become something, (Wedding dress resource book that was published) I paid models. Other than that, nop...no pay...And for models that can't smile...nop...no pay...

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
'My model release does state that I can do whatever I want with the images, and I never give up or share copyright."

I also don't get that. Why do most to all release forms say that the photographers can do WHATEVER they want with these pictures but the release dosnt allow the model to do WHATEVER they want? Shouldn't this be a fair business?

This will stir up a hornets nest but I have to tell you. Models are more or less props.

Mike

Posted by Mike Cummings: 
Models are more or less props.

Mike,
You are exactly right.  Models are hired to embellish products and services.  Photographers are hired to capture that embellishment.

The higher up the model food chain one goes, the more it is understood by the model that "it's not about them."

This is one reason tear sheets are so important.  It verifies the model's ability to sell.

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
'My model release does state that I can do whatever I want with the images, and I never give up or share copyright."

I also don't get that. Why do most to all release forms say that the photographers can do WHATEVER they want with these pictures but the release dosnt allow the model to do WHATEVER they want? Shouldn't this be a fair business?

Because the photographer is the creator of the image.

Because a model without a photographer can't be seen.

Because a photographer needs a subject, but not a model.

Bottom line is models need photographers more than photographers need models.

Some releases give a model rights. Not all are the same.

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
'My model release does state that I can do whatever I want with the images, and I never give up or share copyright."

I also don't get that. Why do most to all release forms say that the photographers can do WHATEVER they want with these pictures but the release dosnt allow the model to do WHATEVER they want? Shouldn't this be a fair business?

Its all about ownership and the law.
This is a quote from the ASMP book  Professional Business Practices in Photography, 5th ed.
"Copyrights are intangible assets which usually have monetary value. The Copyright Act of 1976 made clear that photographers are the copyright owners of their images, except when those images were made as an employee, or when the photographer has conveyed the copyright to another party in a written and signed agreement." pg.273

Because the photographer owns the image, h/she can use it in any legal way. The model release states this clearly, if the release is worth a damn.

Licensing the right to use a photograph is what the photographer gives to the model in a limited license agreement, i.e. for self promotion. Without that license the photograph can not be used by the model. To be certain and ultra-safe this license agreement should be in writing.

The reality is I bet most of the images shot between photographers and internet models are non commercial and done for the enjoyment of both parties. I bet, though I could be wrong, that very few images are in fact making money for either side. I have a hard drive filled with wonderful pictures of delightful and lovely models that have not earned me a penny.

Posted by Weldphoto: 
I have a hard drive filled with wonderful pictures of delightful and lovely models that have not earned me a penny.

Send me a CD of the images and I will send you a penny.

;-)

Mike

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
Not sure exactly where to post this!

Photographers should really mention on their site if they do TFP/TFCD/TESTING/PAY MODELS/ONLY DO PAID WORK. If you ONLY do TFP say you ONLY do TFP. If you PAY MODELS please say you pay models and blah blah.

I want to contact photographers but embarrased to ask them for paid work when they don't mention what they do on their site. So, I could be asking a photographers for paid work who may only do TFP so I would feel embarrased asking and getting shot down.

But like us models all of our sites say we only do TFP, Paid assignments only, depends on assignment. So, if you photographers can mention this on your site that would be A LOT of help.

None of it matters if people don't read and it seems that models often don't.  I frequently get responses from models quoting their rates despite the fact that my profile clearly states that my work with models is "strictly TFP/TFCD."

It's also amusing how, despite my profile's a clearly stated desire to shoot artistic nudes, models who have, at first, agreed to a shoot, later email me saying things like, "Oh, I didn't see the nude part.  I don't do nudes."  DUH?

Not to pull you up short so don't take it that way, but you don't give the photographer rights to the image. The photographer has those rights by default as the creator of the work.

Hope that's how quoting works here, but oh well if not.

That statement is actually a common misconception.  VERY common actually.

The "author" of any work of art becomes the default copyright holder unless otherwise assigned (as in a paid by the client type situation).  That means you are the only person allowed to make unlimited copies of the work of art for personal use.

USAGE rights are an entirely different matter.  You are allowed to use any image of any person taken in a public place for your own use.  If the shoot is done on private property, you may not have those same rights.  When you go to sell that image, or use it in some way that is not "personal" you are required to have the consent of all subject matter.

This generally refers to the model, but it could just as easily be the government if your picture contains property, the manufacturer if your image contains a product, or the artist if your image contains another piece of work that isn't derivitive.

The above is HEAVILY paraphrased but generally correct.  If you don't have a model release for the image, you do NOT have the ability to do anything you want with that image.  Further, if you provide a print or digital file to the model and you assume that because you didn't give them copyrights they aren't allowed to use it you're sadly mistaken.

Copyrights are just that COPY-RIGHTS.  If you make a print for the model and she wants to hang it up in a public place, there isn't a damn thing you can do to stop it...what you can prevent is them making COPIES unless you gave them permission to do so.

Andy Hamilton
Photographer

If you're a professional, learn your craft, consult an attorney, do whatever it takes but learn the law.  Don't assume you know, or you may end up getting sued because you took a christmas picture of a pretty young woman unwrapping a present and the manufacturer of the wrapping paper decides they want their share.  (True story by the way, not me but someone I know)

Posted by CO Model Amber: 
I want to contact photographers but embarrased to ask them for paid work when they don't mention what they do on their site. So, I could be asking a photographers for paid work who may only do TFP so I would feel embarrased asking and getting shot down.

Regardless of whether I indicate my preferences to TFP or paid, I appreciate when a model contacts me with interest for a shoot.  Contacts directly from models usually result in work because I know they are interested in the type of work I do.

For those professional models I've worked with and discussed the industry & related business activities that increase the likelihood of success, those of you who are more proactive get more paid work by making and developing valuable contacts. 

Interestingly, those models who have agency representation... I have never been contacted by an agency seeking to place models for work, yet always encounter models who are willing to do artistic nude content (which usually pays pretty well).  Several models I worked with who concentrate on fashion, print, or runway often supplement that work with (tasteful) artistic nudes.

For the type of photographic work that I do, I am the one hiring the models.  There are times that I will do only TFP/CD and there are times I have no problem paying - it all depends on the situation.  Regardless, I would encourage models to reach out to photographers regardless of their preferences or lack thereof.  It's just one more contact you can make that gives you exposure.

Posted by Star: 
How would you feel if photographers contacted you asking for pay?

Would you believe I have seen some? Well, there are some!  LOL

Posted by Jack D Trute: 

Posted by * Visual Mindscapes *: 

Posted by Mike Cummings: 
Man you are cheaper than I am... 

Hells yeah!  I'm pretty cheap, lol.

We know you are cheap,  we see your images.  Duh..

What's a freaking dog doing here anyways?  I'm gonna scratch him!  Go away nasty dog!   I like the cute ones and you scare 'em away!

Posted by area291: 
I really wish I could understand why a photographer would pay a model (sans shooting stock).  Clients hire models, not me.   

---Photographers, why are you hiring models instead of having the client do that?  Better yet, if there is no client, why are you hiring a model when in this day and age of TFP you can get anything you want through barter?

Many times a client (who does not have a specific person in mind for their model) prefers to let the photographer hire their work. I much prefer working with a model from previous experience.

Additionally, it adds a buffer level to the client. There are two separate transactions. The client pays a photographer to complete a specific job. The photographer then has a separate transaction with the model for their work together.

The work with the model is then open to stock photography (once limitations agreed to with original client have been met).

JT

Posted by starmodels: 

Many times a client (who does not have a specific person in mind for their model) prefers to let the photographer hire their work. I much prefer working with a model from previous experience.

Additionally, it adds a buffer level to the client. There are two separate transactions. The client pays a photographer to complete a specific job. The photographer then has a separate transaction with the model for their work together.

The work with the model is then open to stock photography (once limitations agreed to with original client have been met).

The stock photography I understand.  Client work I don't.  You have added a layer of responsibility (what if the client doesn't like the model?), additional paperwork by having both payment and tax responsibility and other liabilities through the hiring (including, but not limited to being licensed to do so).

To eliminate the above exposure, wouldn't it make more sense to arrange for the client to interview and hire the model of their choice from those you recommend, then add only that consulting fee to your service?

Posted by Udo R Photography: 
Hey Amber;

I would say it's relatively simple... if you approach a photographer... expect that YOU should pay him!

Don't approach him/her and say "you can shoot me if you pay me."

Personally... I think that this bad form, others may disagree.

However, if a photographer approaches YOU, either he offers you to pay or shoot TFP and you can decide if you like his work and think it's beneficial for your own portfolio.

100% agree with you. Bow before your wisdom! ;-)