If the photographer doesnt have a model sign a release> wins money off the photo...

[Nodda Duma]

Money isn't everything. Even when you are poor.

 

[removed account4]

i have only heard of model releases in commercial endeavors, not for art projects,
i've never heard of "street photographers" asking for model releases ...
FWIW
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_release
glad ot hear your friend won the big bucks .. if it was me .. i'd buy you a beer or cup of coffee
and give you a copy of the photo and say thanks ...
the kharma train runs for miles and miles ..

 

[CMoore]

Having money and having to share it are two separate things. If you were letting her photograph at the time without asking for any compensation, why would you think you're entitled to it now that she's won a photo contest? Compensation for a job needs to be discussed prior to the shoot, not after. Seems to me if she hadn't won none of this conversation would be taking place.

Are you expecting an answer form the person you quoted.?
Their post was from 2006.....

 

[Ces1um]

Are you expecting an answer form the person you quoted.?
Their post was from 2006.....

didn't notice this was a necro post. I thought it was active. My bad.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you do not have a signed release before the photograph is taken, then you are out of luck and have no control of your image.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Here's my philosophy in giving that I try to live by. I give without attachment. You have your time in posing for the girl and she won a photo contest. You should be happy for her. No need to think about what's in it for you. However, if a professional photographer is making money off of your likeness, that would be a different story.

 

[faberryman]

I wonder if the OP has gotten over the perceived slight in the ensuing decade.

 

[BradS]

The thread was started twelve years ago...The OP is long gone. It's been ten years since he last logged in to the site.

Why do we keep getting (pointless) old threads dredged up from long ago?

 

[Luckless]

I wonder if the OP has gotten over the perceived slight in the ensuing decade.

"get_me_a_gun was last seen: Apr 10, 2008"

Sadly this is a mystery we may never know the answer to. Wonder if I'll think about it again in a decade's time. I kind of hope something reminds me of it for some reason...

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Money isn't everything. Even when you are poor.

That's absolutely true. I'm poor as a church mouse but walked away from my inheritance because my brothers were fighting over it. Our parents would have been ashamed. I may not have much but at least I know what's worth fighting for and what's not worth ruining relationships.

RE the OP from 2006: Too many people put too much emphasis on "what's in it for me?"

 

[Sirius Glass]

I wonder if the OP has gotten over the perceived slight in the ensuing decade.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi, so true story here. This happened very recently.

Last semester I was photographed multiple times by a girl taking some photo classes at the same college I go to. She entered one of the photos she took of me into a contest online (without informing me before she did so).

I never signed a release and we never talked about this. So she won this contest last month, a $1000 prize. As the model in this photo what am I entitled to? I am not looking to go to a lawyer because I dont have the money, i just wanted to know what I should do so it is fair for me (In fact it was the portrait section of the contest, therefore I assume I should get a fair share)

Any help you guys could give me would be wonderful, you've helped me out tremendously on this forum, thank you all so much, and ask questions and ill do my best to answer them. Let the games begin!!!

she did you wrong and I'm sure she knows it.You are entitled to a fair share but, if you don't want a lower involved who would cost you initially as well take a third of the negotiated sum, I would just talk to her and ask for your fair share(30-50%)if you bring hit up to whoever ran the contest, she could lose it all.

 

[Sirius Glass]

she did you wrong and I'm sure she knows it.You are entitled to a fair share but, if you don't want a lower involved who would cost you initially as well take a third of the negotiated sum, I would just talk to her and ask for your fair share(30-50%)if you bring hit up to whoever ran the contest, she could lose it all.

I doubt it, the original post is very old.

 

[CMoore]

Just Stop Already.!
I hope the guy is STILL stewing over this stupid thing...FROM 2006.
..... and that the gal is over-flowing with Fame, and Millions of Dollars.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Let's sum this up with the following lessons learned:

• Photographer: ALWAYS get a signed model release when photographing a person acting as a model (as opposed to journalistic captures like the Iwo Jima flag raising).
• Photographer: ALWAYS be honest with the model regarding the nature of the images you want to take, and your intended use for said images.
  
• Photographer: ALWAYS specify the rights you intend for the image, and what rights to review (if any) the model is given in the release.
• Photographer: ALWAYS discuss the terms with the model, make sure they are comfortable with them, and then get their signature on the release BEFORE you ever click the shutter button.
• Photographer: ALWAYS specify either in the release itself or on a separate document the compensation you will give the model for their time (time-for-prints, $50, a new car, whatever) and that this compensation is one-time, and upon receipt of said compensation, the model is not entitled to anything else from you.
• Photographer: If you are not paying the model in money at the time of the shoot (cash, check, gold bullion, etc), but are instead paying them in trade-for-services, that you specify a time frame for delivering said services (prints of the work from the day's shoot, an additional shoot of images that the model wants, etc) and that you adhere to it.
• Model: ALWAYS get a signed release form from the photographer. Make sure that the terms of the release are terms you are comfortable with, and the same for the compensation.
• Model: Understand that the compensation you agree to at the time of the shoot is one-time, complete and total.
• Model: Set a reasonable time-frame for the photographer to deliver their non-cash compensation (prints, additional shoot for you, etc) and allow them that much time to deliver.

I think that's a pretty good summation.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Answering someone who has not even logged into this forum in ten years..... ?

Good answers, but not for the OP. That person has probably died of old age.

PE

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Answering someone who has not even logged into this forum in ten years..... ?

Good answers, but not for the OP. That person has probably died of old age.

PE

If you're referring to my comment, then no - that wasn't intended for the OP. Since this is a zombie thread, and others are reading it again, I thought it would make sense to put something sensible in it rather than a lot of me-too posts.

 

[Ces1um]

The thread was started twelve years ago...The OP is long gone. It's been ten years since he last logged in to the site.

Why do we keep getting (pointless) old threads dredged up from long ago?

they get dredged up because just under the last response there is a "similar threads" list. People click on em (myself included). sometimes they're new and relevant and sometimes they're so old they have to boot up the vic 20 to retrieve the thread. It's all the software's fault for suggesting relevant subjects.

 

[Ces1um]

Answering someone who has not even logged into this forum in ten years..... ?

Good answers, but not for the OP. That person has probably died of old age.

PE

The op will be 32 in December. (S)He might be dead, but probably not from old age.

 

[wiltw]

that doesnt mean she cant share the wealth! i need to spend $$s on photo stuff , not that im bitching, im just saying she has money she should share it.

Zombie thread, but the principles are fairly timeless...

Yes, it would have been nice for her to 'share a bit of the wealth' with you, but there is zero obligation to do so. The photo was not shot for commercial purposes (advertising, brochures), and it was not 'sold' as a license to a third party to use for commercial purposes (advertising, brochures), No commercial use, no release needed, and no fees are necessarily associated to someone appearing in said photo. One MIGHT have some basis of claim if the photo was later used to publicize some event/product. No release, no use for commercial purposes.

Disputably a photo contest is not necessarily for commercial purposes, but that depends upon the conditions under which the organizer says apply to all photos submitted as an entry to the contest.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yes, the points made above and by others are timeless and that is my point.

I was being kind of tongue in cheek about the OP though.

PE

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I doubt it, the original post is very old.

You are right; I wish we could set an age limit to reading posts.

 

[faberryman]

I don't see any reason to limit the renewal of old threads as long as the topic remains relevant. There are really not that many topics which are truly new in analog photography.

 

[Helios 1984]

Just Stop Already.!
I hope the guy is STILL stewing over this stupid thing...FROM 2006.
..... and that the gal is over-flowing with Fame, and Millions of Dollars.

or the arguing lighted the fires of love, and they ended up tying the knot.

Spoiler

 

[Sirius Glass]

You are right; I wish we could set an age limit to reading posts.

I don't see any reason to limit the renewal of old threads as long as the topic remains relevant. There are really not that many topics which are truly new in analog photography.

It would be nice to have a different color background for old threads.




.