|
Forums >
General Industry >
Models changing their minds on photos
I'm interested in hearing opinions from both models and photographers on this one. In the past two months I've been contacted by models, who've signed model releases, wanting me to take down photos from my website. Most of the shots have been up since 2004. I know the release allows me to continue to display the images, but is it really worth it to upset these people. I should mention one of the girls I'm still kinda upset with because she originally hired me to photograph her, but failed to pay for all of the shots. Like I said I have a model release that was part of doing the shoot for less than my usual rates. The other girl I shot for an adult site(none of the images I'm using are adult, topless yes, but nothing below) and part of my contract with the webmaster was that I could use images on my site. Of course I have supporting paperwork, but morally I'm torn. Just curious on what you all would do? Sep 06 06 10:04 pm Link I guess I put it in my pre-shoot discussion. I simply put, what we shoot I will use. No matter how much you cry, I will not take it down. If you still want to work with me, fine, if not, that's fine too. There are exceptions, but don't feel bad. You are the one in the right here, not them. They signed an agreement, now they want to back out. It's the same as buying a car and they trying to take it back 2 years later and getting your money back. Sep 06 06 10:09 pm Link What are the reasons they want the pictures removed? Sep 06 06 10:16 pm Link Tim Little Photography wrote: One says she is starting her modeling and it is "messing it all up". I kinda laugh about that one. Sep 06 06 10:23 pm Link Dear $MODEL: I would be happy to offer you a buyout on the pictures I took and which you released to me via a written model release on $DATE. The shoot lasted $HOURS_S, and I spent ($HOURS_S*3) editing the images. (IIF $MODELFEE > 0 THEN "I also paid you a modeling fee of $MODELFEE.") (IIF $PHOTOGRAPHERFEE > 0 THEN "You paid me a session fee of $PHOTOGRAPHERFEE, which was discounted from my normal day rate in exchange for rights to use the images.") If I am to not recieve any value from the time spent taking pictures and editing them, I must be paid (((($DAY_RATE / 8) *($HOURS_S*4))*2) +$MODELFEE - $PHOTOGRAPHERFEE) to compensate me for my time and opportunity cost. Please forward a check for that amount to the letterhead address: when the check clears, I will send you a signed buyout agreement. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, $PHOTOGRAPHER Sep 06 06 10:27 pm Link Eirick D. Luraa wrote: I agree with StMarc, if you are going to give up use of the images have the model do a buyout. If you put your time and effort into creating the images you need to be compensated for giving up your rights. Sep 06 06 10:38 pm Link Tim Little Photography wrote: Thank you both I hadn't thought of offering a buyout option. Sep 06 06 11:09 pm Link Tim Little Photography wrote: For once, I agree with the photographers on this issue. Sep 06 06 11:32 pm Link Iris Swope wrote: I just removed some images because of a nasty divorce situation. That was an easy one. This is a little trickier. But the buyout option seems good. Sep 07 06 12:06 am Link Hey, check out this thread I started a few months ago.. It oughta give you a little chuckle.. I think this is an issue all of us have faced at one time or another. "I got to see her naked." Sep 07 06 12:14 am Link Eirick D. Luraa wrote: funny enough you are always expected to do the right thing as a photographer but what is exactly the right thing...... Sep 07 06 12:26 am Link i put a buy out in my releas 1000$ a photo with exptions such as if some one payed for a print or was used in print or if there photo was used in a PSed photo that was added to a nether photo and i am sticking with it i meen they would have to pay for EVERY photo taken Sep 07 06 12:27 am Link nathan combs wrote: $1000/photo? Did I read that right? Frankly, I think that is excessive. At least for my business model. I could see your buy-out being conducive if you only use one photo out of a shoot. So maybe in your scheme of things your buy-out is fair. I'm only saying that in my case it would be excessive. Sep 07 06 12:37 am Link I agree. Buyout or tough cookies. Sep 07 06 02:40 am Link I agree. You paid her $400 and now she wants the images removed. wft? Even our cameras only come with a one year warrenty. I've taken images down due to family issues, mainly (Dad surfin' the porn sites and then finding his daughter on 'em!) ... anyway, I've removed a few because I wanted to do what was right with the model - however, they were TFPs and I ask her not to use any images on her site that I took of her. She agreed and we both left happy. If I had paid a model four hundred bucks, then I'd say .... buy the images or they stay up. Now, (insert model's name here) do you have any other questions? Good luck, Tim Sep 07 06 03:06 am Link StMarc wrote: I agree with this post and think this should be the deal as far as any case goes when one party backs out of an agreement. It's, fair, reasonable and understandable. I think both parties win in this case and both get good compensation. She has her photos and comfort in the knowledge that they are no longer available to the general publication; he has been reimbursed for any time wasted. Great solution! Sep 07 06 03:58 am Link John Jebbia wrote: Maybe this is the topic for another thread but I think it's funny that there's an attitude that you recieved such a treat seeing her naked (I haven't seen her maybe you did...ha:) I must be growing callous in my years but seeing a naked woman wouldn't be worth a couple hundred dollars to me...maybe when I was 14. Sep 07 06 04:11 am Link Eirick D. Luraa wrote: She should have thought of that before. Eirick D. Luraa wrote: So sad; too bad; bye bye. Sep 07 06 04:17 am Link John Jebbia wrote: Actually John, the x3 multiplier seems to be mentioned in many, many kinds of deals, photography included but not limited to photography. Methinks that is no accident... more likely that in past disputes of all kinds the courts have entertained that as a fair and reasonable offset to the [legal] disability [loss of property, rights, opportunity, and potential but unrealised profits, ect] imposed on one party by the other one that is seeking to void or alter the original agreements. Sep 07 06 05:04 am Link if its not your best work / its not the quality one would want, or whatever i see no reason why you wouldnt want to keep going and shoot something better qulaity IS better them quantity, surely. models generally should be thrilled with the way you made them look! if they are not, maybe theres something you can do with your future work to get the standard where they are begging for more! Imagine - If there were pictures of YOU that you felt wrere really unflattering or whatever that you wish werent there (for whatever reason) and they were posted all around your town in public or on the internet across the world...even though you thought they'd be great... they werent in your opinion and maybe you hated them wouldnt you be feeling horrible? I would. You would be asking to remove them. Paying to do so seems a bit harsh. Sep 07 06 05:44 am Link Talk about timely.... This message was in my inbox this morning: "Can you take me off your main picture...turns out my parents did get pissed." Model discusses with me ahead of shoot; she arranges her wardrobe, decides what she wants to wear and how she wants to pose, we discuss the release before she signs it, she takes the images and puts them up as her avatar and in her portfolio, etc.... need I say more? I wrote back offering a modest buy-out, but seriously, folks... don't model if you can't handle what comes after. Hire a photographer for your own pleasure, and keep the images to yourself, but, get the hell off sites like this because you are no a model, just a wannabe. Sep 07 06 05:56 am Link Eirick D. Luraa wrote: Personally, I would take the photos down and respect the model's wishes. Based on your port here on MM, your work seems to be on the edgy sie. Perhaos the model doesn't feek comfortable having photo like this up anymore (assuming change in jobs, etc.) Sep 07 06 05:58 am Link Tim Little Photography wrote: Hmmmm..... On a different note though, what if it's a GWC who took photos of you topless for what you were told were going to be artistic nudes/topless shots tightly cropped without head showing. Then you see the photos on his port and there's nothing artistic about the photos, your head and face ws dot as well, and the photo is not at all complimentary to you? Sep 07 06 06:04 am Link Caroline Ann Martin wrote: In a word: No. That's what the release is for. Sep 07 06 06:13 am Link A lot of things seem like a good idea at the time that some regret later. The tattoo shops are full of them... Sep 07 06 06:21 am Link Oh and my opinion: If you're not making money off the pictures...if they are not what you want as representations of your trade...it wouldn't hurt to realize that people don't always make the best decisions and cut her some slack. You could let her know you'll take them down but you're not making any promises if you had an opportunity to sell them later. If you care about the pictures then that is another matter. I'm a golden rule kind of person... Sep 07 06 06:26 am Link Caroline Ann Martin wrote: Sure they can ask... but that doesn't place any obligation on the photographer to comply with the request. Sep 07 06 07:15 am Link BlackWatch wrote: Golden rule? The golden rule is "business is business" - in modern times it's not "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" but something more like "Do unto others before they do unto you." And this thread, and others like it, just proves that, given the chance, they will. Sep 07 06 07:17 am Link My past history on this..... Shot a girl in 1993....nude but breasts covered with arms and legs covering her ya ya. Two weeks later her mother showed up at my front door demanding the photos I had and negatives. I showed her the release....reminded her her daughter was 22, closed the door and went back to watching the football game. Those photos were never on the internet and I used the money from the shoot to finish paying for the camera I used on the shoot. Case two: Shot a lady in 2005. Implied...and barely even that. She called me a month later saying her boyfriend was upset and forbid me to use the photos. I did not respond to her at all. Next her attorney sent me a nasty letter forbidding me to display the photos and demanded I return them to his office within 10 days. I got an envelope, letter and stamp and mailed to him a copy of the release, signed and dated with an invoice for $2200.00 for refund of the monies paid to the model in addition to copyrights of the images payable within 10 days. I got no response from him or her and have heard nothing since then. Don't understand why... Can someone who hires me to shoot their wedding get a refund 5, 10, 20 years later when they divorce?......roflmao Do we photographers have to remind every single model we shoot implied, glamour, nude or whatever that some family member or friend might see the images? I dont think so. Ultimately we are a business. You pay me to shoot you.....I will shoot you and get paid for it. I shoot you and pay you for it....then I am the paying customer and will use the images like I say I will. Who sees them is not my concern and that should have been tought of before you did the shoot or marketed yourself as a model who would. Just my 4 cents Sep 07 06 07:37 am Link it comes down to how important are the pictures to you........if u want to be nice to the girls i understand that, and i would be the same way, but if the pictures are winners for you, and a crucial part of your work, then leave them up. simple as that. u have done all you need to do, and the fact u have not said no purely on principal (coz u have a release) to them is more than most would do...... Sep 07 06 07:52 am Link StMarc wrote: This is a version of buyerâs remorse. You have not done anything wrong or immoral. They are asking for you to lose due to their regret. Sep 07 06 08:04 am Link John Jebbia wrote: I did get a chuckle out of this. She got paid and signed a release. Now she wants to back out on it with no cost to her. She says YOU'RE the unprofessional scammer? Wow! Sep 07 06 08:26 am Link Steve Thornton wrote: The above letter assumes: Sep 07 06 08:35 am Link John Jebbia wrote: I hasten to agree and note that my humorous letter would not be sent if I didn't have the authority to offer such a deal - if the pictures were under option or sold, for instance. Sep 07 06 08:36 am Link Caroline Ann Martin wrote: I used to write a column for a licensing law journal. I had a cute little catchphrase which went as follows: Sep 07 06 08:38 am Link Two stories that happened to me: First, the unthinking model: I shot a model TFP. We agreed ahead of time exactly what we would be shooting, one style of which was lingerie. I told her to bring whatever she felt comfortable wearing. She walks onto the set wearing completely sheer lingerie. She chose it, she wore it, I shot it. She signs the release - after the shoot, knowing what we shot. I send her the images, she says she loves everything we shot, but doesn't want her nipples seen - that it should be easy for me to photoshop them out, that other photographers have done that for her. The images in this outfit were the best of the day - not because they were sheer, but the overall lighting, poses, etc were great. Plus, have you ever seen images were nipples were removed in obviously sheer material? The model looks like a freak. I decided to not use the images, partially because I'm a nice guy, partially because I didn't want to edit out the nipples and have the freak look I just mentioned. About a year later, she pretty much has disappeared from all modeling sites, and I decided I really love that image, and am now using it. Second, the thinking model: I just shot a model last week. She is 18. She is going to school to become a college professor. Because of this, she is concerned about how images may show up in the future. So, she was very aware of this concern as we were shooting, not after the fact. She put the burden on herself as we shot to make sure nothing would come back to haunt her down the line. I give this woman a lot of credit for taking responsibility and thinking long term, not just today. Hindsight is a great thing, but it is not right for photographers to lose because of model's mistakes. Sep 07 06 10:52 am Link Some of you folks are so nice. You're willing to give up the photos you worked hard on and in some cases paid a model to shoot. Well I say bullsh%^. If you took the time to do then it has a value if to no one else then to you. If a model posed is 18 or over she's a adult and responsible for her actions. Sep 07 06 11:29 am Link StMarc wrote: You'll love this quote - on generally sloppy, back of the cocktail napkin, business dealings: Sep 07 06 11:36 am Link Eirick D. Luraa wrote: If they signed a release allowing you to use the photos, then so be it. There is no harm in them asking you to take them down, but it's solely up to you if you want to comply. Sep 07 06 11:41 am Link Just more net 'model' unprofessionalism... Send them packing to resume play in their make believe world with their dolls. John Sep 07 06 11:44 am Link |
Caroline
