Is a signed contract required for free wedding photography?

[sami_zahid]

<p>Hi all<br>

I mainly cater for the Asian wedding market and have so far only photographed Asian/Indian weddings. Anyhow I would like to broaden my services and also photograph English weddings - I have offered to photograph a friend of a friends wedding for free in September - as i have very little experience in shooting an English wedding I dont want to charge her.<br>

If no money is being exchanged should a contract still be signed into? I would obviously need to re-draft a contract for this purpose only but is it safe for me to shoot the wedding without a contract being signed? The client has not requested one.<br>

thanks </p>

[mariosforsos]

<p>Yes, you should have a contract signed, with your normal price indicated and the full description of all service(s) offered, including any caveats, etc, etc. Then, on the final invoice you simply note that the price has been settled in full "gratis" (which means free) - your accountant can tell you exactly what to write on the invoice.</p>

<p>No job, however friendly or brotherly the client, however nice or accommodating or understanding they may be, should be done without a contract. It is your safeguard against ANY future issues...</p>

[albert_richardson1]

<p>I think it's a good idea to get a contract signed. It spells out the services you intend to perform and gives you an opportunity to make sure that everyone understands what they're getting and when. It also gives you an opportunity to include the "fine print" whereby you specify the remedy and procedure for rectifying any result your client thinks was misunderstood or just plain screwed up.</p>

<p>It's not up to the client to ask for a contract. The party most in need of clarity and protection from misunderstandings and errors should be the one absolutely determined to get the arrangement in writing. Even though your client isn't paying you any money, she is still in a position to demand that you perform to her expectations. You need a contract to protect yourself from unreasonable requests, and to minimize your losses if this deal goes bad. The fact that you are willing to take no money for the project doesn't mean that it won't cost you anything to do. </p>

[William Michael]

<p>I don't have a contract covering my opinions, advice and assistance here, given pro bono - yet I have charged for Photography Tuition - interesting, no?</p>

<p>To your question: I think it depends what country you are working and what insurances you have and lots of other things too.</p>

<p>I have not used a contract when I have donated my services, Pro Bono: be it a Wedding or other Photography Engagement.</p>

<p>I work in Australia and I am comprehensively insured. The Consumer Laws and Consumer Rights are different in Australia, to those in the USA: just choosing those two countries as one example.</p>

<p>If you are in the USA it might be relevant that you OFFERED your services – I don’t know, but someone else might?</p>

<p>WW</p>

[anna_bravington]

<p>I've seen so many posts (on other forums, perhaps some on here too) where the photographer has got in a bad situation without a contract. Every single time when asked what could have been done better everyone has said, use a contract :)</p>

<p>This included weddings that the photographers have done for free. There are certain things that need to be set out so that both parties know whats in the package/whats involved. Just because they're not paying doesn't mean they won't be trouble.</p>

<p>The most important thing is what they are getting in their package - so often this is misunderstood without a contract.</p>

<p>Wht not just modify your current contract, isn't it better to be cautious? </p>

<p>Good luck with the wedding!</p>

[starvy]

<p>Do get a contract that states your normal price and offering gratis in this case, with the promise that they would not take you to court if you make a mess of it. If you are an experienced wedding photographer, I wish that you had offered to the job for 50% less than your normal charges than offer a free for all. When you go free they want just a little more for nothing.</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>If you get no pay (or any other consideration) in return for your services then it isn't really a contract. It's an agreement.</p>

[jc5066]

<p>YES!!!<br>

Is everything free? Do they get as many prints they want for free? Free CD with all the images that they can have printed elsewhere?<br>

Unless you are giving up all rights to the images you take you need to have a contract, agreement, what ever you want to call it WRITTEN and signed by both of you. This way both parties understand EXACTLY what they are doing and getting.</p>

[theresa_skutt]

<p>I think it would help with both expectations and perceived value. It helps them realize how much you have given them. No one has probably ever regretted having a contract, but not having one...all the time!</p>

[mark liddell]

You should as at the very least it will outline the scope of yoru coverage and what you will provide them with. If a 'contract' feels too formal for this situation then cut any legalese and make it an agreement detailing who, when what, where at a minimum.

[ianivey]

<p>Free wedding photography is a lot like a free kitten. It sounds warm, fuzzy, beautiful, and romantic. But there are a number of hidden costs (editing time, printing, hosting, transmitting files, layout, equipment rental, and even things like travel, food, logding, parking and fuel costs) that can turn into unpleasant surprises if all parties haven't considered them.</p>

<p>There are so many variables in wedding photography that it is really quite important to establish a written agreement about what you expect to provide, what you understand your role to be, and what the bride and groom should expect from you.</p>

<p><strong>An agreement has an added benefit: it can vividly highlight the real value of your "free" services</strong> to the bride and groom, and help them understand the effort it takes to provide those services. This can make your service, itself, a very important part of your gift to the couple, entirely aside from the physical product (prints, image files) you provide at the end.</p>

<p>To put the bride and groom more at ease, you might title it an "agreement" rather than a "contract." An agreement for gratis photography services includes your time and photography services at the ceremony, and at any other parts of the day you specify, avoiding one of many opportunities for misunderstanding -- namely, articulating and limiting the scope of your coverage responsibility.</p>

<p>From there, you'll have to decide who bears any necessary costs (e.g., lens rentals), how much editing and design work the couple should expect from you, and whether you're also paying for prints, an album, etc. You also probably want to establish reprint permissions and usage rights so that the couple understand, for example, that you'll use their photos on your web site.</p>

<p>There is no such thing as a free kitten.</p>

[tina___cliff_t]

<p>Yes, definetly have a contract. Out lineing what you are giving them for free. Are you just provideing them with a CD, are you going to edit the pictures, not edit? What happens if they are unsatified, or a mishap happens (camera mis functions etc) and decide to take you court even though they didn't pay you? Make sure you cover your butt. </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>What happens if they are unsatified, or a mishap happens (camera mis functions etc) and decide to take you court even though they didn't pay you? Make sure you cover your butt.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would really be interested in seeing that go to court!</p>

[markonestudios]

Have something in writing all the same. For avoidance of doubt