Afinity wrote:
EDIT: A better analogy maybe be if you were hired to take pictures of a model, back a few years ago before you got down the techniques of photography. She decides to put up every single pic that you have out of focus, discolored, and just generally crappy looking. Now you do a yahoo search for your studio, and this comes up in the top 10. Wouldn't you be embarrassed?

Not particularly...All it would really show was that some "models" can't tell a good image from a bad one.  Anybody whose opinion really matters should know a better way to find a photographer than a yahoo search...That's how teen-aged boys find naked pictures of Tara Reid, not how serious people find a photographer.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
What dosen't work is the idea of how many "models" read threads like these and think "oh well, if i don't like the pictures [or my bf or my parents] I'll just guilt trip the photographer into taking them down...That's my right isn't it?"

Sometimes I wish I could guilt-trip people [not necessarily photographers] into "taking down" my boyfriend or my parents.  .

Wynd Mulysa wrote:

Sometimes I wish I could guilt-trip people [not necessarily photographers] into "taking down" my boyfriend or my parents.  .

bear with me...i work the night shift and my sentence structure wasn't what it should have been.

Ransom J wrote:

That still has absolutley nothing to do with whether or not he SHOULD take the photos down.  They are HIS.  She signed a release.  I don't care if he shot them with a camera phone, that was a decision she made when she signed ont he dotted line.  Now he doesn't HAVE to take down squat, and he SHOULDN'T either because it promotes bad business. 

Since you like hypotheticals:  What if he took down the images, and the model blabbed to other models that  she got him to take down images  by putting a little pressure on him and running some boo hoo sob story through his ear?  then he has to deal with this from every OTHER model that feels that it was a "mistake" to shoot with him.

The quality of the work means squat.  It's simple, you want the pics you BUY the pics, other than tough noogies.

If it had nothing to do with the OP, why did you bring up the value of the images? That is what that paragraph is about.

It wasn't a hypothetical; it was an analogy so that you could possibly feel what it was like to be in this position. But clearly you just want to argue and aren't listening to what I have to say or my opinion. So my conversation with you sir, is over.

Afinity wrote:
Haven't you ever made a bad decision? How about you made a bad choice when you were 20 and took naked pictures with your gf and now she posts them on her blog. I know this is very different since you didn't sign a release, but this is how it would feel to have pictures you don't want of yourself in view by other people.

I do feel differently if you paid the model she should give the money back, but its bullshit to charge her more.

EDIT: A better analogy maybe be if you were hired to take pictures of a model, back a few years ago before you got down the techniques of photography. She decides to put up every single pic that you have out of focus, discolored, and just generally crappy looking. Now you do a yahoo search for your studio, and this comes up in the top 10. Wouldn't you be embarrassed?

I agree with the photographers here. I've made bad decisions and I live with the consequences and don;t expect others to pick up the slack.  That's not the fault of the photographer and it's unethical and bratty to try to renege on a deal just because you don't like the pictures.  Take repsonsibility for yourself before you step in front of the camera.

Offering to give in if you can recoup your potential losses (a la St Mark) is far from blackmail.  It's fair business practice.

Afinity wrote:

If it had nothing to do with the OP, why did you bring up the value of the images? That is what that paragraph is about.

It wasn't a hypothetical; it was an analogy so that you could possibly feel what it was like to be in this position. But clearly you just want to argue and aren't listening to what I have to say or my opinion. So my conversation with you sir, is over.

1.  I didn't bring up the OP.

2.  The value of the images is a non issue because YOU can't assign value to SOMEONE ELSE'S work.

3.  It was hypothetical because it was an imaginary situation that you brought up in an analogous manner (the very nature of hypothetical)

4.  I assume that anybody that doesn't agree with your skewed "fair" logic must but looking for an argument in YOUR mind.  Heaven forbid it might just be REALITY crashing down.

5.  Toodles.

Photos By Deej wrote:
Welcome to the club.  I think I answered a similiar post to this one and said that I took the pics down.  The was much more aggressive as he threatened a lawsuit as he did not allow permission even though he signed a release but b/c of minute details which weren't clear to him, I gave in.  Not only did I take them down he also demanded $500 in damages which if not paid, he would contact his lawyer and pursue the matter legally.  I paid him the $500 so there wouldn't be bad blood.  I learned a lesson and you can too by adding to your model release that your photos of said model will be posted or shown in photographer portfolio for an undetermined amount of time which could be indefinite.  Hope that helps.

DavidSouthBeach wrote:
Deej, man, this seems to be a chronic problem with you and your models.  First, put right out there what you want to snap and where they're going; second, get a model agreement that reflects your ambitions and review it with the model; third, if you've done the first two, tell him to waste his money on the lawyer!

David

On thinking about Deej and his problem I conclude that he is the first person here on MM that really, absolutely, positively NEEDS a manager. Preferably some 6' 4" 300# dude with a size 18 neck and size 3 hat.

Studio36

Afinity wrote:

If it had nothing to do with the OP, why did you bring up the value of the images? That is what that paragraph is about.

It wasn't a hypothetical; it was an analogy so that you could possibly feel what it was like to be in this position. But clearly you just want to argue and aren't listening to what I have to say or my opinion. So my conversation with you sir, is over.

It isn't that he isn't listening to your opinion...He simply dosen't agree with it.  I don't either, so I guess you can walk away from me in a huff too if you like.

Frederique Porter wrote:
But, you are talking about a "hobby", we or I am talking about "business".

That is true. I'm giving this hobbyist's viewpoint. (And thank you so much for the comment on the portfolio. When you're a hobbyist, that's what you live for.)

You force another aspect of my view of it. In my own (nonphotography) business, if I paid for a good or service - say, a legal form template - and the lawyer whom I paid called me up and said, "It's not very good work. I don't want my name associated with it. I don't do that type of law anymore. Please send it back and don't use it anymore," then I might well say, "Since I paid you for it, please either send me a good one or let's talk about how much of my money you're refunding."

Photography has a different nuance, at least for me. She's got her image out there for millions to see. Even if this became a business for me, I'd still be inclined to withdraw them pending some negotiation. I still don't want to be a part of anyone's lifelong regret. I'd tend to want to shoot the same thing again with a model I trust and even improve the concept - shooting is still fun, after all. But you can make a strong argument for "business is business," and you can do business graciously without being a wipable body part.

Justin wrote:

That is true. I'm giving this hobbyist's viewpoint. (And thank you so much for the comment on the portfolio. When you're a hobbyist, that's what you live for.)

You force another aspect of my view of it. In my own (nonphotography) business, if I paid for a good or service - say, a legal form template - and the lawyer whom I paid called me up and said, "It's not very good work. I don't want my name associated with it. I don't do that type of law anymore. Please send it back and don't use it anymore," then I might well say, "Since I paid you for it, please either send me a good one or let's talk about how much of my money you're refunding."

Photography has a different nuance, at least for me. She's got her image out there for millions to see. Even if this became a business for me, I'd still be inclined to withdraw them pending some negotiation. I still don't want to be a part of anyone's lifelong regret. I'd tend to want to shoot the same thing again with a model I trust and even improve the concept - shooting is still fun, after all. But you can make a strong argument for "business is business," and you can do business graciously without being a wipable body part.

Since when is expecting a rational adult to abide by the terms of a signed a greement "being a wipable body part?"   Feel free to treat pretty girls differently than you would any other participant in an agreement if you like, but don't put it on the rest of us for expecting them to live up to what they sign.

Eirick D. Luraa wrote:
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?

Who among us wouldn't like to go back on legal agreements we have made in the past?

I remember when the Insurance industry in the state of Massachussetts decided they had improperly estimated their profitability for the year -- they simply had the legislature give them approval to bill every driver $250 additional retroactively at the end of the year -- and if you failed to pay, the state yanked your license and registration.

I SO wanted to write back and say, "you know, I haven't had any accidents for the last 10 years, and so I've decided I didn't need insurance for that period. Please refund the money I paid you." It would have been just as fair as what they did, but not legal.

Or how many times have we sold something, only to regret it. Wouldn't it be great if you could just go back to the buyer and say, "oops -- changed my mind -- give it back!"

Legal agreements are necessary for an orderly, sane society. Sometimes there are very good reasons to break them, but it should be a rare exception, not a routine habit.

Models need to expect that when they are shot by someone and sign a release, it is a legal agreement with the force of law that they will be held to, just like a cellular contract or any other agreement they sign in the course of their lives.

Paul

StMarc wrote:
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

LOL As a former math teacher I fouond this pretty good stuff.

Eirick D. Luraa wrote:
Of course I have supporting paperwork, but morally I'm torn. Just curious on what you all would do?

Then what's the problem?

Use them or let the models buy the rights back at a fair market rate, you're in business not babysitting.

Melvin Moten Jr wrote:
Since when is expecting a rational adult to abide by the terms of a signed a greement "being a wipable body part?"   Feel free to treat pretty girls differently than you would any other participant in an agreement if you like, but don't put it on the rest of us for expecting them to live up to what they sign.

It's not necessarily. It's determined largely by the attitude and the presentation.

I don't believe anyone here knows whom I treat differently, or why - if indeed I do.

I don't put anything on anyone else. I'm expressing what I would do and why. I don't expect anyone to abide by any standard that I set for myself.