Newbie Questions

[bob jr.]

I am considering doing some photos for a major sunscreen dealer in

Hawaii. I was told I need to get back to them by Wednesday. They

would like shots of people at the beach doing all kinds of beach

activities. What would be a good arrangement as far as compensation

is concerned? How do I handle the pictures of people on the beach?

Do I get all of them to sign release forms before or after I take

their pictures? Or do I just not tell them? What if their pictures

appear in a sunscreen add? What are the ramifications?

 

I have never done photos professionally before. Thanks for your

advice!

 

- bob

[aslan_ivo]

Generally in the US, commercial appropriation of someone's name or likeness requires a release. Advertising is a the typical example of such a case. This doesn't apply if the persons are not identifiable in the picture, for example because their face is covered with sunglasses, or if the use was non-commercial (if they were included in a photograph of a news-worthy event, for example.)

[kbreak]

If they want the pictures *tomorrow* that doesn't sound very realistic.<BR><BR> Sounds like they want stock pictures.<BR><BR>

[aslan_ivo]

Incidentally, I was once photographed by a photographer while I was laying at the beach. The guy took the photo, then came up to me and said that he was a freelance photographer and he may use the image and he'd be happy to include my name in the caption if I wanted. I told him my name, and he jotted it down. By doing so, in effect, I had given him permission to use the image. It wasn't a written release, but the fact that he had my name was now proof that I had verbally given him permission -- proof enough to discourage anyone from trying to make a quick buck by filing a lawsuit.

[bob jr.]

Regarding:

_______________________________

***If they want the pictures *tomorrow* that doesn't sound very realistic.

 

Sounds like they want stock pictures.***

_______________________________

 

What are stock pictures?

[35mmdelux]

there are many inherent problems looming here as well as legal issues.

[aslan_ivo]

Stock pictures are generic photographs that were previously taken and already available for use. Advertisers who want that certain image can search through the photo collections of stock photo agencies to locate images they want to use, rather than hire a photographer to custom-shoot the photos they want on a case by case basis. Many photographers supplement their income by having such generic photos ready for use in their portfolio. The generic "happy people on the beach" is a common theme for stock photographs, as is "person talking on cell phone" or "pen next to checkbook" or "multicolored pills spilled from a medicine bottle" etc.

[bill c.]

Bob-- For this, you hire models and pay a modeling fee. Period. Taking pictures of strangers on the beach for use in an advertising campaign is frought with so many legal pitfalls that I would never, ever even consider such a thing.

 

And to the individual who said that merely giving a photographer his name was tantamount to giving enough permission that it would negate a lawsuit, that's one of the more ridiculous things I've ever seen written on this forum. There have been successful lawsuits over SIGNED releases, when the (minor) subject's parent claimed that she was never at the shoot and didn't sign the release. Nowadays, most photographers get copies of people's driver's licenses just to prove that the actual person was there and signed it (I take a picture of the individual holding up their license, close enough to read and far enough away to see their face). "Yeah, Joe Blow here gave me his name, so now I can use his image for whatever I want" would not hold the legal weight of the air used to say it. It would be OK for textbook and newspaper/magazine use in editorial, as those do not require releases, but certainly not commercial. Try that with Elle McPherson and see how far you get with it, good buddy.

 

"Stock Photography" is when a photographer thinks, "I can shoot pictures of <people on the beach, a girl in front of a college dorm holding books, a pert woman looking over at counter, etc, etc, at nauseum> and my images will be so good that surely multiple clients will want to buy them and I can generate fantastic use fees from it." Stock photography has been going waaaay downhill lately because of cheap digital stock, and unlike the 1980's, few photographers even bother with it anymore. Nevertheless, sometimes there is money in hiring a bunch of models and taking them to exotic places to get good generic shots that you can try to sell over and over. Instead of paying them money, often low-end photographers will try to do a trade, where the model will get copies for his or her portfolio and the photographer will be able to use the images commercially, but that's getting harder and harder to get models to agree to as the schools and agencies outlaw that type of agreement for their clientele. All you'd get is inexperienced amateurs, which might work well depending on how good a choice you can make.

 

My advice is to do it right or don't do it at all. And for god's sake, don't use strangers.

 

Best of luck. -BC-