Am I over reacting here?

[briankelley]

<p>Hello all.</p>

<p>I am kind a new to the business side of photography and have a question about use of images. My focus has shifted recent an now I am working with several models to build my portfolio. The other day I got together with a model and we agreed in a trade for pics arrangement since she is also wanting to build her portfolio. I spent several hours editing the images and processing them and sent them off to her. Next thing I know she had posted them on a modeling page with no credit and also she had further edited many of the images further. This bothered me some what. <br>

<br />What I want to know is am I over reacting here Should I just let it go and chock it up to lesson learned or should I ask her to pull the images and post the ones I provided unedited and with credit?</p>

<p>To further poor salt in the proverbial wound. She keeps emailing me saying that I am not giving her all the images. Now the is true cause I do not give every image from a shoot. I only give the ones I feel are good and can the rest. she is saying that there was several of them that she saw when looking over my shoulder at my laptop as I was downloading them that she liked and I'm not giving them to her.</p>

<p>I appreciate your input and feed back all.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Brian Kelley</p>

 

[Matt Laur]

<p>Lessons learned. <br /><br />Set <em>all </em>of those expectations up front, in writing. Make sure she understands that just like one of those pieces of writing is her model release to you, another piece of writing is your <em>license</em> to her, that defines how she can use the images (must display credits, web site links, etc, or she's in violation). That all goes with the governing contract that spells out what you're actually doing for each other and what the expectations are. It doesn't have to be fancy, but it should be specific.<br /><br />1) Contract (Person X does XYZ for Person Y, and Person Y does ABC for Person X, on these terms [whatever], with the understanding that not every shot taken will be licensed for use or even shown or not deleted, etc)<br /><br />2) Release (Person Y allows Person X to use Person X's likeness in marketing materials, etc)<br /><br />3) License (Person X grants Person Y license to use the images in the following ways [not for resale or sub-licensing, etc] )<br>

Those are the three legs of your paperwork tripod. You could conceivably labor to establish that there are verbal versions of all of those in place, but it's best to think of this as an educational opportunity. Take the high road, move on.<br /><br />I am not a lawyer, I am a caveman, etc.</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Yes to what Matt said. Contracts are essential. They don't have to be written in legalese. Even just an email documenting both of your expectations is a Good Thing. The whole point of a contract isn't for legal battles after the fact. It's about managing expectations and making sure everybody is at the same level of understanding. Think of a good contract as another means of communicating what you should have already talked about in person.</p>

<p>Yes, you are overreacting. If you're trading prints, my assumption is that you're inexperienced with model photography. Maybe the model knows what kind of processing would better represent her than you do. Why shouldn't she make modifications? And consider it a gift that she's not giving you credit. Do you *really* want credit from somebody else's post-post-processing? :) Credit is overrated, anyway. Try submitting it along with a partial mortgage payment to your bank, and see if they'll accept it. :)</p>

<p>Next lesson is to not download images during the shoot. And then remember the final proofs when you do provide them so there are no number gaps. Generally, I have found that when clients ask if there are more images you're not showing, that means they are unhappy with what they're seeing. If you have dazzled them with the ones they have, they're not going to ask for more. Generally. There are always the ones that want more. I'd call her (not email), and ask if she's happy with what she has. Explain that she has all the good ones, and that you often experiment with various settings during this type of trade session, and that the ones she has are the ones that came out. The rest have been deleted.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>1) never do anything - free / time for / paying without a contract that lays out both of your sets of rights - what you can do and will do and what the model can and will do. </p>

<p>2) Yes, you are over reacting, but it's allowed - now get over it. She wanted the images done in a certain way - you either did them differently - or she likes to play around in Picnick or its replacement. A contract spelling out the fact that she can edit or not would eliminate this - or at least minimize the fallout. </p>

<p>3) Don't be upset that she didn't give you credit - especially if she butchered (in your mind) the images. Again that pesky contract thing. </p>

<p>4) Explain to her that she got all acceptable images. Period - end of discussion. In the future - renumber the images before giving them to the client. Also put in your contact that you reserve the right to delete / remove / not provide images that are a) not up to your quality standards b) technically flawed or c) flawed for any reason (ie Eyes closed, Looks like model is drunk, high, etc... ) </p>

<p>Let it go at this point - other than to tell her that she got all "acceptable" images. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[briankelley]

<p>Thanks all,<br>

<br />I have been looking for a copy of a contract and found many differing ones. Does anyone have a copy of a template I can start with or would you be so kind as to share a copy of yours? </p>

<p>Brian Kelley</p>

[eric merrill]

<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Business-Legal-Photographers-Fourth-Edition/dp/1581156693">http://www.amazon.com/Business-Legal-Photographers-Fourth-Edition/dp/1581156693</a></p>

[zensphoto]

<p><strong>Eric Merrill</strong>, I have this book on my Motorola Xoom very interesting read worth the buy.</p>

[denniswms]

<p>Not to change the subject but do you want to be attached to images that were 'recut' ? When your images generate work for the models you shoot you've done your job and word will get around. No one will recut your images because the cache of having shot with you will mean something. While you are still practicing it just does not matter- and you may be better off in this day and age to be anonymous. Between flick'r, blogspot, tumblr and FB you have given up control to the hoards the moment you deliver a file. The contracts aren't worth the paper they are written on. If they had money...</p>

<p>Once you're at the point where you are charging before you pick up the camera and your images are making clients money they will leave your images alone. And if they don't charge more.</p>

<p>Lastly - unless this girl is signing with FORD or CLICK next week and your images will be in her book, you don't want to be attached to these images. You got some experience, move on to the next girl. When the people you shoot book national campaigns with your images in their portfolios the junk you shot early on just sits in a drawer and you will not care. Or you'll be mildly horrified. lol. </p>

<p> </p>

[nathan_b]

<blockquote>

<p>the junk you shot early on just sits in a drawer and you will not care. Or you'll be mildly horrified</p>

<p>LMAO! So true.</p>

</blockquote>