Dilemma

[DEGREEFOTO]

<p>Hi all,<br>

Just want to put this out to all, simply to get some feed back and perhaps a different persepective. I am currently being hounded by a model that wishes that I remove her images from my web and any other web including this one where her images appear.<br>

I have a signed model release signed by her in agreement to the sessions and all the terms and conditions, which are pretty clear and that she understood and agreed to.<br>

Her request...simply because she is expecting a child.....the dilemma...she is only 19....a fact that she lied about and provided ID at the time of signing indicating that she was 22 which was when the shots were taken. I am located in Spain and by law she is an adult at 18. I do not consider the shots taken to be explicit as such...a sample can be seen in my file..the shot titled 'Fishnet Escape'.... as part of the series.<br>

Has this ever happened to any one else...and what actions did you take....any points of view are appreciated.....oh one final thing...she has more explicit full frontal nudes with other photographers on other sites...whom I have contacted a couple to find out that she has not requested their work be removed as she consider those shots as...art.....<br>

Thanks in advance<br>

Artur</p>

[Charles_Webster]

<p>Sounds as though you are within your rights to refuse to take down her pix. But, what kind of relationship do you wish to have with her in the future?</p>

<p><Chas></p>

[mariosforsos]

<p>LEGALLY, you can do whatever you want. The question is (in my mind): are you making tons of money from her images? In other words, are they such a key part of your portfolio that you simply cannot go on without them? If that is indeed the case and their removal would cause financial loss for you, then you can either refuse her request OR offer her the option of buying those images from you (including copyright) for a specific amount.</p>

<p>What she may or may not have done with other photographers is not much of a yardstick really - it all depends on her relationship with those photographers AND the images they took. If their images are full nudes but you cannot easily discern her face or are "arty" dark B&W images, then she may be more comfortable with those than with yours - that is an entirely personal issue.</p>

<p>Personally, I'd offer her the option of removing all of the images except, possibly, one (which she would choose) for my portfolio. A bit of good will goes a LOOOOONG way these hard days...;-)</p>

[blake_schwalbe]

<p>Almost all such model releases for casual modeling jobs in the States are really all encompassing documents that give the photographer basically unlimited rights. As such, they are really weak documents in court, because they are so generic and have such a wide sweep. A legally strong release is one that is very specific about a particular shoot, listing where the images will be published, print and/or web, specific geographic areas, for what duration, what sizes, the client's name, etc. and that have also the signature of a third witness.<br /><br />If it's one of those all encompassing releases, I think she has a legal case if she would really pursue it. But also a moral one too. As an informed individual about copyright and releases, would you release all rights and claims of any conceivable use to an image of yourself, without clothes on? I think as photographers we're playing a little bit of a dirty trick with these sweeping releases when we're dealing with models that are naive and uninformed about copyright and usage rights.<br /><br />I mean, an informed model comes in for a shoot for Versace lets say, and gets paid specifically for, lets say, a print campaign in Vogue in Europe and the USA, for a certain size page, etc., and the release and compensation reflect that. If images from the same shoot are to be used for an ad of a silk manufacturer, she would get to sign another release and get more money.<br /><br />One has to know that as photographers we have these types of all encompassing releases to protect ourselves and that they are necessary for the type of work where a model comes in just to take portfolio images (not for a specific job), but that we are really taking more rights than are really fair. It's not really informed consent on the part of the model in most cases like these, and she is not asking for damages. And think of her kid once he or she goes to school, would you want classmates to see those photos of their mother?<br /><br />Artur, your photos are really classy. I would be a nice guy to this girl. She just feels the shots are too explicit for her now. </p>

[albert_richardson1]

<p>I think you have to decide what you will win by putting up a fight over these pictures. Being right does not always give you power.</p>

<p>Generally I believe that accommodating a client is better than refusing her wishes when the result doesn't make much difference in the long run. You have other pictures of the same model that are very good and reveal less. It isn't clear from you post whether your relationship with her is based on a business or a more personal transaction, but I don't think it makes much difference. Upset clients, reasonable or not, can cause you more harm through the testimonial they tell to the people they meet about you than the good you think you get by winning an argument with them.</p>

[DEGREEFOTO]

<p>Thank you all for your comments. Have taken on board much that you have mentioned. In general my release is one of those all encompassing as such and which she gladly signed after the session was finished. My relationship with her was and is solely one of model/photographer as I have not seen her since the session which was back in May of this year and that at the time of viewing the shots afterwards she commented that she enjoyed the session and loved the shots.<br>

I am not making or loosing any money from these shots and I take what you have said on board in regards to making friends and not enemies in this day and age and the harm that comments can make. I suppose in hindsight she is signally me out as according to her partner...I have been the only photographer that had been honest and informative to her about her modelling aspirations. The fact that she is now expecting a child; I feel has had a great impact on her...and her family from what I have now heard.<br>

Nevertheless, thank you all for taking the time and imput.</p>

<p>Regards</p>

<p>Artur</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

<p>Was she at least 18 when you took the photos? Can you prove at least that?</p>

[blake_schwalbe]

<p>Marios has a good point, in that she is so readily recognizable and she is presented with such clinical clarity.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Artur - </p>

<p>I agree with the majority of people that have posted - while you may be in your "legal" rights to post her photos - Is it really worth the hassle to keep them on-line?<br>

Especially since: <br>

1) you're not making money off of them<br>

2) She obviously wants them removed<br>

3) You have plenty of other work to show<br>

4) You seem to want to maintain a decent relationship with her. </p>

<p>I'm not sure what she considers the photos on your site / portfolio - but what ever it is to her - it's not art. </p>

<p>I've had one instance where I was asked to remove photos from advertising and website - I'm in the U.S. - and I complied with it since I didn't want to alienate the client - although it may have already been too late for that - since some postcards with their images on them went out before I could stop them - and of course they found out about it. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

[DEGREEFOTO]

<p>To Ellis.....yes she was 18 at the time....although she provided documents showing she was 22.<br>

To David....I have taken on board your comments and although I agree with what you have mentioned...the shots were taken not as an art session...but more of a soft erotic one which is what she and I had agreed on before hand.<br>

I have no relationship with this girl as she moves in different circles to me and the session(s) which in total there were 3, were all to her liking at the time. There was only 1 session in which she appears semi naked. I am a little pi off with her mainly because I have found out that she has pulled this stunt with others in the past and due to her inexperience believes that she can tell photographers what they can or not publish after a certain amount of time has passed. I do however find that her current state of pending motherhood to be simply a ploy...as I have already mentioned she has full frontal images on other sites of which she has not approached the authors of those works. I agree its not worth the hassle...but due to her background....I am in two minds as to whether its time that some one teach her the realities of her actions...have consequences...and that she may be used to playing games with others...but I am drawing the line.<br>

Once again thank you all for your comments...I will make up my mind by weeks end.<br>

Artur</p>

[michael_gray7]

<p>My advice is to end your relationship with this nut job reguardless of wether you keep the images up or not. Nothing is worse than an unpredictable model with an overblown sense of self-importance.</p>