Release for the homeless

[philip_clarke]

Hi all,

 

I'm kinda new to the legalities with regards to property and model releases, but

my main question is:

 

What information do you include on a model release when the subject is homeless?

 

I understand that name, signature, & date will not be an issue, but how about

the rest of the contact info? I do not intend to exploit the people that I

photograph, but if I would like to, for example, post these images on my website

gallery or include in a portfolio, does the address matter or will the city &

province do?

 

 

Thanks in advance for your help

[ellis_vener_photography]

In the USA:

 

You don't need a release (model or property) to take photos. You don't need a release if they are used for editorial and some "fine art" uses. You do need a release if the photos are to posibly be used for commercial or advertising purposes.

[john_h.1]

The rules for model releases apply to homeless people just the same as anyone else. An address is not what makes a release valid. It simply a way to further clarify who the subject is. If this bit of information is incomplete then its incomplete.

[philip_clarke]

Thanks for the advice.

[bobatkins]

You don't need a release for your gallery or portfolio.

 

Any advertiser who wants pictures of the homeless (can't imagine why, but I guess it's possible) will no doubt deal with a photographer who hires actors and gets a release from them.

 

Unless you are doing a serious social documentary, pretty much any shots of the homeless are probably exploitive unless you pay them the going rate for modelling. It's a bit like taking pictures of accident victims. They aren't getting anything out of it and you are. At least this applies to "hit and run" shooting where you have no intereaction with them other than shooting a picture and moving on.

 

"Regular" people in the street are "fair game" since they are normally where they are and doing what they are doing by choice rather than circumstance.

[philip_clarke]

I guess you're right, Bob. Like I mentioned in my first posting...I'm kinda new to the legalities. Maybe I'm thinking to much about the "what-if's" and not doing enough snappy-snappy!

 

Thanks for your insight.

[dawn_gunter]

You don't need a release if you're going to show it inside your gallery or portfolio necessarily, but you do if it's going out in any advertisements or anywhere on the web. Basically, if you're going to show it to anyone else play it safe and get a model release. You never know when someone is going to change their mind and want to come after you. I've seen/heard of too many photographers not worrying about getting the release and paying for it down the road, even when showing it in their gallery. While it may not go anywhere if they push it to legal action, it can eat up a lot of your time and possibly money just dealing with it.

 

Basically, get their name & date it, get their sig, and spell out that the release is giving you the right to use the images in advertising (spell out any general way you plan on using them) without any compensation to them (that's the key point), and that you retain the copyright to the image. Send me an email if you'd like to see the release I use.