p.2 #1 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
um... shouldn't this have been discussed BEFORE the wedding? Why are you worrying about it now? Anyway TRR gives good advice as does most everyone else.
p.2 #2 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
On the flip side, do some B&G want to charge the photographer a fee for allowing their images to be used for advertising and promotional purposes like in websites, etc?
Jul 02, 2012 at 12:22 PM
whtrbt7 Offline • • [X]
p.2 #3 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
I guess this all depends on how people work. If I discount a wedding, I definitely won't take out a model release since I'm already discounting a wedding and I would take more of a hit by not having it to use in marketing promotions. If I like the couple and they are generally cooperative but they want their photos to be completely privatized, I respect that decision and I can come to an agreement possibly free of charge. If a couple is willing to pay extra for waiving the model release, that is perfectly fine as well. Most times, couples want to have online presence on the website. It's just an extra place for their friends and family to take a look at some of their photographs.
p.2 #4 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
I would, without question, inform them of the additional fee. For every wedding that you cannot use to market yourself, you lose potential clients. You lose marketing material.
This industry is based upon the fact that you can use the images you take to bring in further business.
I'd charge a hefty amount, but that's just me.
Edit: Looks like this wasn't done BEFORE the wedding, so you're S.O.L., my man. But next time, charge before hand.
p.2 #5 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
Prettym1k3 wrote:
For every wedding that you cannot use to market yourself, you lose potential clients.
I'd charge a hefty amount
You don't shoot enough other weddings to just use those for marketing material? Losing a wedding here and there is going to make any difference in your bookings?
Fact is, most photogs have full rights to use ALL the weddings they shoot for samples but probably most weddings don't yield even a single picture added to the portfolio.
p.2 #6 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
Yes, I would have a fee to release levels of usage. If a client doesn't want you to show the work to anyone they are effectively dictating what you can do with your copyrighted material. That's totally fine, but there ought to be a cost for that kind of exclusivity.
Fact is, most photogs have full rights to use ALL the weddings they shoot for samples but probably most weddings don't yield even a single picture added to the portfolio.
Copyright does give the photographer the right to do anything he wants with his property, it just prevents anyone else from copying it. States will rule that the client has the valuable right to publicity--that's why we have to have the model release in the first place. It's certainly debatable whether the client shouldn't be charging us for the right to use her images.
When this tradition of presuming an entitlement to using a client's image for self promotion began, that use was confined to hardcopy portfolios and studio displays. In fact, at least two states (NY and IL) explicitly exempt photographers from needing model releases for those two specific purposes.
Both states require, however, that the photographer remove the images from display on request of the client, by which the legislatures intend to showthat the client still ultimately controls the commercial use of her own image.
But today, we're talking about releasing them out of our control onto the Internet.
If we were to push this issue in court these days...we might not prevail. Get away with charging for exclusivity if you dare and can, but don't get the idea that it's a right or entitlement that a court would accept.
p.2 #7 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
With respect to what RDKIRK is talking about we specifically sell an agreement to not post anything online (either party). That means we cannot post or share anything in any way and neither can the client - if they post they are in violation of the agreement and there is a penalty for that. The whole model release thing is dubious because you can only sign an agreement with the couple not the rest of the guests or the venues. So there is some issue of rights regardless.
Best thing to do is to define exactly what everyone can do.
p.2 #9 · Fee for taking out the model release in contract?
RDKirk wrote:
States will rule that the client has the valuable right to publicity--that's why we have to have the model release in the first place. It's certainly debatable whether the client shouldn't be charging us for the right to use her images.
I must admit that even WITH the model release, I am always uncomfortable putting up any client images online due to the loss of privacy the client incurs consequent to having their images posted to the internet.
