I retired several years ago from a job as a studio photographer with a big city paper. Since then, I've taken lots of photos during a variety of vacations around the world. I have been able to sell reproduction rights for a number of the photos to a large travel company.
This year, as I tried to renew my relationship with that firm, I was told by a new contact that the company now gets almost all its photos from a stock photography agency that supplies royalty-free photos. Apparently they pay a little extra for each photo they acquire, and that allows them to use the photo essentially forever with no ongoing fees.
I've asked my contact to look at some of my online travel albums, promising to match the financial and usage arrangements they now have with the stock agency if she decides to use some of my work. Although this could produce much less revenue than I have made in the past, basically I'd rather have photos appearing on printed pages than hidden inside my hard drives.
But my question here deals with the issue of model releases. I have approached my photo trips as an editorial photographer, shooting scenes and situations as they occur, and I have not attempted to secure model releases from recognizable people in the scenes I shoot. In many cases the subjects know I'm taking their picture, and I can tell by their smiles, body language, and spoken replies (when I'm in a country where I understand what's being said) that I have their general approval. But of course that's not a "real" approval in legal terms, as a proper model release would be.
On the other hand, my only use of the photos, so far, has been in the semi-editorial world of travel company brochures. I'm not attempting to sell the images for commercial purposes, where a release would be mandatory.
My travel company contact said that the stock agency she deals with insists on acquiring model-released photos. I understand that, since the agency could very well sell reproduction rights for commercial uses. But I don't know whether the travel company itself has much concern about the issue; it was never discussed when they used my work in the past.
In a perfect world, every recognizable person would sign a model release and be paid for his or her trouble. But that would be almost impossible with the work I have been doing, because of language differences, timing, spontaneity, and so on.
I'd appreciate your thoughts on this issue as it applies to editorial-style travel photography. Thanks very much!
Do you want to know about editorial use (which you clearly understand) or commercial use (which you also appear to understand)?
Editorial - no release.
Commercial - release.
It's the use, not your intent when you took the photo, that matters. Nodding heads isn't a release-- and even if you got a verbal release (which doesn't exist), the subject could still take you to court... and if you don't have the release on paper... $$$ time.
As you suggest, I believe that if I'm doing impromptu street photography in a public space, and I intend to offer the resulting photos for publication in an editorial environment (say, a travel magazine), there shouldn't be a need for model releases of recognizable people in the scenes I shoot. I realize that nods, winks, other body language, or even verbal approval doesn't constitute a legal release, but that shouldn't matter if photos are used in this way.
I also believe that releases would be mandatory if the photos were taken for commercial use. If I set out to shoot for a commercial client, I would make proper releases a priority. Such assignments would probably involve models and locations that would understand and sign releases as part of the job.
My confusion arises over the real nature of travel brochures, which aren't exactly the same as travel magazines. They exist to sell tour services to customers, and I suppose (though I'm no lawyer) that someone could decide that photos in them represent a commercial use that requires a release. I sold reproduction rights to this company for several years without once encountering questions about whether my photos were released, and it may be that they don't consider the lack of releases to be a problem.
I suppose the prudent thing would be for me to consult an attorney specializing in copyright law to discuss this.
Copyright has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of model releases.
If an image is being used for a commercial purpose, i.e. selling a vacation service in a travel brochure, requiring a model release is reasonable. If your client is editorial, i.e. newspaper, magazine, then no model release is required.
In the end, it's up to your client to advise you if they require a release or not. If you are shooting with the intent of marketing on spec to a specific client, know their usage requirements up front.
On a side note, agreeing to match the pricing of royalty-free stock houses for the glory of seeing your images in print does nothing (except maybe boost your ego) but uncut the working professional photographers out there trying to make a living. Please do the rest of us a favor and price your work properly.
keithdunlop wrote:
On a side note, agreeing to match the pricing of royalty-free stock houses for the glory of seeing your images in print does nothing (except maybe boost your ego) but uncut the working professional photographers out there trying to make a living. Please do the rest of us a favor and price your work properly.
Everyone is free to price their work at whatever rate they choose. I am sure whatever rate you set, there is someone out there charging a higher rate.
I agree with Mr. Dunlop's note about copyright; I wrote before thinking. I agree that the final ruling about releases rests with the client, so I'd need to discuss that. And as a general rule I agree about pricing, too. With this particular client (or, more likely, former client), the horse has left the barn; they're already buying stock photos at cut-rate prices, and they're very happy about that. All things considered, I would rather be paid something for published work than keep my precious little images hidden on my hard drives, so, if my contact likes some of my work, I'll try to make a deal. Others, of course, are free to do as they wish.
