Is anyone willing to share their "official photographer" wording from their contract with me? I'm in the process meeting with some potential clients for an event and I would need to have some very clear wording on this matter. Thanks

If you are not comfortable with posting it here you may email me at wetclay(at)comcast(dot)net

thanks

"The photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the Client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer's duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer."

These clauses seem left over from 'back in the day' when wedding photographers made as much or more from the paper products. With today's big service fees I question their need anymore.

I simply carry a big aluminum bat with me in case i get some uncle tom's trying to bug me.......one swing with that thing does a lot of damage.

This is not for a wedding but an event where there is a distinct possibility of having some other photographers there. Maybe this is the wrong forum for this question. If the mod wants to move it that would be great. thanks

Silliest thing I ever heard of in a wedding. You are a hired gun to shoot good images. The B&G can't, shouldn't and won't tell their guests not to have cameras at their wedding. No judge in the world is going to enforce it.

In short, it is a scare tactic to make sure no one might shoot a better image than you. Why not worry more about being the best photographer at a wedding by actually being the best instead of the "only."

This is a really dumb thing to have in your contract - kind of an 'I am an idiot' declaration.

It's really something that never gets enforced.......really only something to have in case some idiot should interfere with your coverage to the point where you can't do your job and later on down the road the bride inquires as to why you didnt get certain shots.........

I.E....ceremony, uncle bob stands in the middle of the aisle and fires away blocking you and there is nothing you can't do to move him.........and some of your ceremony shots are not doable..........then having that clause is something you could fall back on should the bride be upset with you for not getting the shots..............

Wetclay wrote:
This is not for a wedding but an event where there is a distinct possibility of having some other photographers there. Maybe this is the wrong forum for this question. If the mod wants to move it that would be great. thanks

I shoot two types of events where my contract states I am the sole professional photographer .. sports & weddings.

Wintertime we shoot sports and I get permission from the sponsoring association and usually pay an access fee to shoot the event. I pay two people to help me at most tournaments, so my investment is often close to $1,000 before I make a dime. I don't want some unauthorized shooter setting up a sales desk next to mine. Mom & Dad can take all the shots they want of their kids, but my contract states no other commercial shooting during the tournament.

My wedding contract states that I am the only hired photographer at the wedding .. in other words the bride & groom will not hire a second professional shooter for their wedding. Guest photography I actually encourage .. Uncle Bob's are fun.

Depending on the type of event you would be well advised to ensure that you're the only (for profit) shooter.

What kind of event will you be shooting?

If you really want this kind of clause in your boilerplate for this kind of event contract, you should run it by your lawyer. And be prepared to defend it when negotiating. The potential customer may be trying to ensure they have adequate coverage and may not be as protective/considerate of your interests. As others have suggested, be sure your pricing structure covers your time and other expenses especially if the potential for sales of resulting images isn't solid.

As Hassy pointed out, it's in there more for butt coverage than anything. People can be so obnoxious with their little point and shoots and Drebs and can sometimes get in the way of the shots you're being paid to do. If they prevent you from getting a shot, a clause such as this can bail you out of a potential jam.

jermscentral wrote:
"The photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the Client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer's duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer."
This is by no means a slight on you. But I really dont like this wording. To me, it implies the photographer is all so important and its all about us. I have a clause like this is my contact, I just dont put the bit in there about family and friends being permitted to take photos. of course they bloody do whether the photog likes it or not.
I couldnt give a stuff if someone wants to photograph my poses, I didnt make them up lol their flashes wont fire when mine do etc etc.
Just me opinion though.

hassy501 wrote:
It's really something that never gets enforced.......really only something to have in case some idiot should interfere with your coverage to the point where you can't do your job and later on down the road the bride inquires as to why you didnt get certain shots.........

I.E....ceremony, uncle bob stands in the middle of the aisle and fires away blocking you and there is nothing you can't do to move him.........and some of your ceremony shots are not doable..........then having that clause is something you could fall back on should the bride be upset with you for not getting the shots..............



I could care less if other people shoot. Heck, they can shoot my formals too. I do have this added to my contract. If I'm doing a group shot and I have everyone looking at other photographers, thats their problem, not mine. Of course I try to nail the shot every time.

As Hassy said, its more of a cover your butt if other people interfere with the shot, and IMO should be in your contract. Just don't expect to have everyone put their cameras down.

I shot a wedding in January where the MOTB insisted that my camera would be the only one there - she attended a wedding last year and was astounded at the number of little cameras. She expressed that she thought is was a social crutch and gave many guests the easy opportunity not engage in the event, because they were photographing it. It hacked some people off - I heard two Uncle Bob's grumbling throughout the day.

Watch CNN, does anyone else find it goofy at the amount of cameras that are pointed at any candidate making a speech or shaking hands?

I know of one photographer that doesn't allow 'other' cameras at the wedding

http://www.jeffascough.net/main.html

How does Jeff enforce that ? I'm curious......