Model Release / Contract for TFP

[ron_jonson]

Hi,<br><br>

When doing a TFP shoot with a model, do you normally ask them to

sign a release (or contract)? Maybe not the typical release that

gives you the right to sell/publish the images, but just something

for basic legal protection (so you don't get sued for anything and

so the model doesn't go off and sell/publish the photos). Any

examples?

[Jerry_]

If you are in business, you should have a means to "Copyright" your images {{rubber-stamp}} on the back of each print. This will preclude the 'model' self-selling your work unless it is fine art.

 

 

 

Can't say I have seen a model release that does not include 'rights to publish' your work. You, through the use of your initials and the initals of the model, could alter a standard model release to void any section(s) you wanted to, or add a section or two.

 

 

 

 

If you have second thoughts of your "work" getting you into the area of a lawsuit, you should have enough common sense to keep out of harm's way.....

[john_h.1]

"not the typical release that gives you the right to sell/publish the images, but just something for basic legal protection"

 

Ron, your question is confusing. Isn't the "basic legal protection" of a release to safely excercise a "right to sell/publish" an image of another? That's the whole point of a model release. You also mentioned that your goal is to avoid being sued for anything. Anything means, well, anything. This could mean you wish someone to waive a right to seek damages because they slipped on a banana peel or something. It is impossible to answer your question without more information.

 

A release is not used to secure copyrights. I suppose you could have a model sign a document acknowledging that they have no copyright or license to publish your images of them.

[ron_jonson]

I can see how my question was vague and I apologize. I understand about the copyright issues. I guess I am wondering if it is still typical to ask for a model to sign a release (so that the photographer can sell/publish the photos) even for a TFP shoot, where the model is not paid. I guess it depends on the model, but I've been told that if you want a release signed, then some payment should be made. Is that a legitimate request or not?

[oliver_sharp1]

I don't always do so, but I have a simple release with a minimum of legalese in it and sometimes use it when I'm working with somebody I don't know. The release says, effectively, that both the model and the photographer are free to use the results for promotional purposes and neither will sell the images without consent from the other. It also says that the model freely consents to the images being taken. If you are just putting images in a portfolio, I don't think it's so critical to have a release (insert the usual disclaimer about not being a lawyer). However, if you want to put images on a public web site that are nudes or otherwise potentially controversial, or if you do pretty much any kind of shoot with somebody who is underage, I definitely think it's worth having the release. Mine has a spot for the parent/guardian to sign. In general, there are a number of potential pitfalls to working with underage models, and I very rarely do.

 

If you'd like a copy of my release, feel free to contact me - there isn't anything especially unique about it vs. the others on the web, except that it is more succinct. I don't like confronting people with an intimidating document full of language they aren't sure they understand.

[danny_newberry]

Sorry, newbie here. What is a "TFP?"

 

Thanks in Advance

 

Danny

[Steven Rowley]

TFP = Time for Prints. In exchange for a model letting you shoot them, you give them some free prints, cd, etc.

[jeff medkeff anchorage, a]

<i>I've been told that if you want a release signed, then some payment should be made.</i>

 

<p>Are you asking them to sign a release, or a contract?

 

<p>If the latter, then yes, you are correct that consideration must be made. In a TFP agreement, that consideration is the prints you provide. Otherwise it wouldn't be TFP, right?

 

<p>However, if you go paying people to sign a release then I believe you are seriously muddying the legal status of the release. You should have two documents - a model release (if you want to do anything commercial with the photos), and a contract (specifying the consideration for the model's time is a certain number of prints).

 

<p>This is from memory, but I've spoken to my attorney about these issues, and reading Bert Krage's book will reveal some information. I suggest doing both.

[scott aitken]

I use the same model release, regardless of whether I'm paying a model or doing a TFP/

TFCD. I have not yet had a model balk at this. Since usually you are dealing with

inexperienced models when doing TFP, they generally do what you ask so long as it isn't

unreasonable. Just ask them to sign it like it is a normal everyday procedure (as it is for

me).

 

You might be wondering about the usual line that says something like: "for valuable

consideration received...". "Valuable consideration" can mean anything of value, not just

money. Prints or a CD are legitimately valuable consideration. You are trading your

valuable commodity, your time and prints (or a CD), rather than paying them. Both have

value.

 

If you don't want the model to sell/publish the photos, then explain to them what

copyright is, and tell them you are not granting them publishing rights. I tell them that I'm

granting them limited usage rights to use the prints/images for personal or self-

promotional use only, and specifically not granting commercial use. This is a separate

issue, and shouldn't be part of the model release.