Britty Lonn wrote:
What is the difference between test and tfp? i hear different stories all the time...mainly that they are the same thing, but then i hear differently yet again..can someone set me straight...with details!!
thankyou!!
~Britty~

TEST and TFP is used almost interchangebly these days - except - most pro photogs and agencies use "TEST" rather than TFP. It's a term that was used before TFP became common...

The compentation will vary from photog to photog and from agency to agency.

Do a Google "Model Test Shoot" and go and read what comes up - you'll see..=*^)

TXPhotog wrote:
In both Testing and TFP the photographer should give a Copyright license to the model to enable her to use the pictures for self promotion, but it seems to almost never happen.

I do - for self promotion - but not for self printing...

And actually I give her a "license for the use" - but not a copyright - I never give that away..=*^)

TXPhotog wrote:
There are many differences.  Too many, in fact, to detail in a short post.

Briefly, it's this:

"Testing" is an old concept that encompasses all sorts of reasons why models and photographers might shoot together, but they all have one thing in common:  it's not intended that the pictures be sold to a client, and usually no model release is signed.

"TFP" (later, TFCD) is an Internet concept largely unknown by people who don't frequent the online modeling and photography forums.  It's a simpler arrangement in which photographer and model compensate each other for their respective services by providing their own services.  Again, the intent isn't supposed to be to sell the pictures to a client, but typically the photographer asks for a release from the model; the scope of the release varies quite a bit.

In both Testing and TFP the photographer should give a Copyright license to the model to enable her to use the pictures for self promotion, but it seems to almost never happen.

It happens in every TFP/CD shoot I do.

Wouldn't do it any other way.

TXPhotog wrote:
I confess I rarely give a copyright license to a model.  I always do if I'm asked for it, but in the last 30 years I've only been asked four times.

That has almost never been a problem.  I don't worry about whether or not the model has a license, because it's not my intention to try to enforce copyright against her for any reasonable use she puts the images to short of advertising some product.  She has a "de facto" license, even if not one on paper. 

Oddly, it's saved some problems sometimes.  Example:  I had a case about two years ago where a model sent her pictures to some online dating system.  They used them as they were supposed to, to list her for potential dates.  But they also used her picture on their home page to advertise themselves.  She asked me to help her get the shot off of the site.  When I confronted them about it they claimed they had the right to do that; I informed them that they couldn't have that right, because I had never given it to anyone, and they didn't get it from me.  If I had given the model a "promotional" release, and she provided it to them, they could have claimed that they were acting within the scope of that release.  As it worked out, they took down the picture on the home page, the model was happy, and I was happy.

These things are never simple.

Point well taken...but for me, that is the exception that proves the rule. (smile)

Me...I seek fairness and equality in what I do off the clock....if I own the copyright, the TFP model should as well. Simple as that.

Thanks for your comments.

TXPhotog wrote:
There are many differences.  Too many, in fact, to detail in a short post.

Briefly, it's this:

"Testing" is an old concept that encompasses all sorts of reasons why models and photographers might shoot together, but they all have one thing in common:  it's not intended that the pictures be sold to a client, and usually no model release is signed.

"TFP" (later, TFCD) is an Internet concept largely unknown by people who don't frequent the online modeling and photography forums.  It's a simpler arrangement in which photographer and model compensate each other for their respective services by providing their own services.  Again, the intent isn't supposed to be to sell the pictures to a client, but typically the photographer asks for a release from the model; the scope of the release varies quite a bit.

In both Testing and TFP the photographer should give a Copyright license to the model to enable her to use the pictures for self promotion, but it seems to almost never happen.

Well that is not entirely correct.  The term “Time For Printâ€? is not an Internet invention (maybe the acronym is).  The term was widely used around colleges in the 70’s.  The Test is correct.  It is basically an audition.

studio L wrote:
Me...I seek fairness and equality in what I do off the clock....if I own the copyright, the TFP model should as well. Simple as that.

That makes no sense to me and I think reflects a misunderstanding of the two. Why would a model care about having copyright? What they need is a use license. I'm glad we're discussing all this ... I don't recall it having come up before....

Curt Burgess wrote:
I'm glad we're discussing all this ... I don't recall it having come up before....

You're kidding, right?