| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/19/2010 07:40:41 AM · #76 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Well, maybe it is a U.S thing with the litigation heavy culture. I think it would be a weird, paranoid little world if i recieved that email and then acted on whether the girl will get all 'freaky' and caused problems down the line. |
Yeah.....it's just us 'Murricans and our weirdnesss.
You think that getting this e-mail out of the blue three months down the road is perfectly reasonable? It shows good sense and stability to you?
I like to try and use a little foresight when something weird comes along and perhaps think about what might happen down the road. That's not paranoid, that's careful. If you don't ever consider the consequences of your actions BEFORE you do something, then you kind of get to deal with them later, don't you?
Does ANYBODY think this woman has any responsibility for what she did? D Is it really the conscensus here that this is all reasonable?
If so, fine, I'll stop, but I sure am baffled. Any other time, when someone talks about a rent-a-cop moving someone along, or God forbid, someone swipes an image and it shows up on a Czech website, the pitchforks and torches get broken out. But this is perfectly okay for the OP to just chalk it up to a bad experience, and the hell with the fact that he did everything right as far as being decent, and professional, about his original shoot?
Sure sounds like a double standard to me.....
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 07:45:27 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Does ANYBODY think this woman has any responsibility for what she did? D Is it really the conscensus here that this is all reasonable? |
Well, yea, i think she is responsible for what she did but i also think that her wishes, even if they are 3 months later, should be respected. Judging by her email she really does seem very upset. I feel a bit guilty and bad just talking about her behind her back! Of course, never work with her again etc and tell how many problems it has caused.
And for what it's worth, i didn't mean to cast aspertions of sleaziness onto the original poster or other glamour photographers here. When i wrote, 'And is now regretting thinking it was a good idea to strip off, get some revealing underwear on, get down on her knees, perhaps stick her arse in the air, for middle aged men to take photos of. She seems to be thinking she wouldn't like that now. i was kind of writing from her supposed view.
Message edited by author 2010-02-19 07:48:42. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 07:47:07 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Okay......now I'm a slimebag creep??? |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Ha! Yes you are Slimeball! ;) |
Funny thing?
I won't do lingerie or nudes. I am a middle-aged fat guy, and I refuse to even go near the whole perception of impropriety for exactly this reason.
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
But yea, i do think that if a photographer recieved an email like the one in the OP and then said, 'Hard luck honey, i got your signature i'll do what i want' or something along those lines, then that is a pretty sleazy thing to do. |
But that's never been the stance he's taken since the outset. I gathered that he was completely flabbergasted that this happened at all.
I think you're being unfair in attaching something sexual onto a business situation. He's not lined up to sell these pics to someone for prurient usage. He entered one of the images in a challenge. By your standards, that was sleazy, right?
Or.....because it was DP Challenge, that's art, right?
Can we at least take the suggestive nature out of this, take the fact that this has become something not so nice because of people's own ideas of what went on, and concentrate on the someone who wants to renege on a contract three months down the road? From what I can tell, she had ample opportunity throughout the shoot *AND* the editing process to nix the images. She didn't.
Why all of a sudden is it "The poor girl!"?
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 07:49:13 AM · #79 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Does ANYBODY think this woman has any responsibility for what she did? D Is it really the conscensus here that this is all reasonable? |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Well, yea, i think she is responsible for what she did but i also think that her wishes, even if they are 3 months later, should be respected. Judging by her email she really does seem very upset. I feel a bit guilty and bad just talking about her behind her back! |
Poor girl!
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Of course, never work with her again etc and tell how many problems it has caused. |
Wait a minute! Are you saying, give her the images back, THEN talk shit about her behind her back? THAT'S okay?
Oh.....THAT'S clear! LOL!!!!
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 07:51:26 AM · #80 |
| I wonder how this discussion would be going if the scenario was exactly the same with the exception that the model was a 20 something male? |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 07:51:51 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Does ANYBODY think this woman has any responsibility for what she did? D Is it really the conscensus here that this is all reasonable? |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Well, yea, i think she is responsible for what she did but i also think that her wishes, even if they are 3 months later, should be respected. Judging by her email she really does seem very upset. I feel a bit guilty and bad just talking about her behind her back! |
Poor girl!
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Of course, never work with her again etc and tell how many problems it has caused. |
Wait a minute! Are you saying, give her the images back, THEN talk shit about her behind her back? THAT'S okay?
Oh.....THAT'S clear! LOL!!!! |
Ha, i was joking of course then! More smilies needed!
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:01:26 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
[
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
But yea, i do think that if a photographer recieved an email like the one in the OP and then said, 'Hard luck honey, i got your signature i'll do what i want' or something along those lines, then that is a pretty sleazy thing to do. |
But that's never been the stance he's taken since the outset. I gathered that he was completely flabbergasted that this happened at all. |
Yes, thats true. I was going off to the extreme then.
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I think you're being unfair in attaching something sexual onto a business situation. He's not lined up to sell these pics to someone for prurient usage. He entered one of the images in a challenge. By your standards, that was sleazy, right? |
If it was after she expressed her hopes for them not to be publically shown then yes, it is pretty sleazy. But i don't think he has entered one since but posting the one he has entered up in this thread seemed a bit off.
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Can we at least take the suggestive nature out of this, take the fact that this has become something not so nice because of people's own ideas of what went on, and concentrate on the someone who wants to renege on a contract three months down the road? |
Thats one way of looking at it sure, a purely business view.
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Why all of a sudden is it "The poor girl!"? |
Well, the only voice we've heard off her is from the email in the opening post and from that she comes across as quite a poor, upset, sorry individual. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:01:45 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by jminso:
I wonder how this discussion would be going if the scenario was exactly the same with the exception that the model was a 20 something male? |
What if he's HOT!!!
If the OP is gay, does that change things?
I *still* maintain that this is more about a contractual dispute, and a reasonable timeframe, and/or compensation that the fact that this is a nice looking young woman.
And I still wanna cling onto the fact that the lingerie part of the shoot was at her suggestion.
Originally posted by albc28:
Oh...by the way...the implied was actually her idea. I wanted to shoot in a button down shirt but it wasn't working. She thought it would be better if she didn't have a shirt on and covered herself. And I ended up only using one of those shots.
The lingerie was Boyshorts and a bra....so it wasn't an overly sexy type of shots. She chose what items to bring. |
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:03:57 AM · #84 |
My take:
The OP knows the details of their contract. If you can legally keep and use the pictures, do so. Don't, however, expect her to be happy about it. If she persists, a properly worded letter asking for compensation is perfectly fine. If the OP were a large company offering free modeling sessions in exchange to have the photos used in a portfolio, how many people actually think that this large company would then take the photos down because some random model suddenly didn't want them up. Had the OP been the model complain about the situation, what advice would you be giving "The photographer should take down the photos even though you signed a release form and he put in time and effort." Really? |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:05:54 AM · #85 |
| I think i'm just a starry eyed idealist. ;) |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:14:57 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by jminso:
I wonder how this discussion would be going if the scenario was exactly the same with the exception that the model was a 20 something male? |
What if he's HOT!!!
If the OP is gay, does that change things?
I *still* maintain that this is more about a contractual dispute, and a reasonable timeframe, and/or compensation that the fact that this is a nice looking young woman. |
I think age is more of the defining thing for me but as Jeb has pointed out that she is at least 18 i feel less strong about the matter than when i first posted. The fact that she is a woman does have an importance though as historically they are far more likely to be exploited (not in this case of course). I don't think the OP being gay would change anything really. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:18:31 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
I think i'm just a starry eyed idealist. ;) |
And I'm a grumpy old man......8>) Gawd.....I never thought I'd get like that.....8>(
Here's the thing that troubles me about the general chain of events.....
Originally posted by albc28:
I shot with this model over 3 months ago. We spent weeks discussing clothing and ideas for the shoot. During the shoot, I made sure she was comfortable and anything she wasn't comfortable with we didn't do. We looked at the photos after the shoot. Even after the photos were edited, we discussed editing changes to the photos together. So we worked together throughout the whole process (as you are supposed to do). |
These are not the actions of someone who was anything but decent, considerate, and respectful. This woman had ample time to think this through, and apparently, was even offered the opportunity after the editing process, to enact changes.
How could the OP *possibly* have done anything more correct, not to mention thoughtful?
This is NOT fair to the OP, using the moral high road thing is *really* unfair considering how conscientious he was throughout the process, and nobody really seems to want to acknowledge that this young woman has really done something pretty rotten by taking three months to reach her comnclusion that she no longer wants the images in existence.
The saad part is, there is no upside for the OP. If he acquiesces, then he's tacitly admitting that there was something wrong with his intentions and/or his process, not to mention that he's opening himself up to wondering, and perhaps questioning himself, any time a model avails herself of his services for a lingerie shoot.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:19:10 AM · #88 |
| The Jebby and Clivey show. (sung to the Ithcy and Scratcy Show opening song from the Simpsons) Just like the Simpsons though, they're not as funny anymore. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:24:10 AM · #89 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
This is NOT fair to the OP, using the moral high road thing is *really* unfair considering how conscientious he was throughout the process, and nobody really seems to want to acknowledge that this young woman has really done something pretty rotten by taking three months to reach her comnclusion that she no longer wants the images in existence. |
Thats fair enough and i apologise for taking the moral high ground. It's very rare i get up there to enjoy the view though! My apologies to  albc28 for that. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:25:47 AM · #90 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
I think age is more of the defining thing for me but as Jeb has pointed out that she is at least 18 i feel less strong about the matter than when i first posted. The fact that she is a woman does have an importance though as historically they are far more likely to be exploited (not in this case of course). I don't think the OP being gay would change anything really. |
Though 18 is the age of majority, I don't think anyone would argue that an 18 year old is guaranteed to be an adult. Heck, I'm 54......8>)
And yes, it would make a difference if he's gay. The undercurrent of the sexual sleaziness has been here the whole time, you were just the one to actually say it "out loud"; if he's gay, then that changes everything as there's no prurient factor, is there?
That's where this whole issue lies. Everyone's concerned about this "Poor girl" and "sullying" her reputation. *SHE* did it to herself!
There has to be some way to meet in the middle.....obviously, the OP is concerned about that, but what to do?
Perhaps, she scould write a formal recommendation/testimonial as somethimng that he could put into his portfolio as a reference as to what a fine photographer he is as well as a stellar businessman, along with one tasteful headshot for the photographic reference.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:26:43 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by Jac:
The Jebby and Clivey show. (sung to the Ithcy and Scratcy Show opening song from the Simpsons) Just like the Simpsons though, they're not as funny anymore. |
Tut! And i thought i was being fascinating but in reality i jumped the shark on my second post! :) I'm off out now to indulge in some proper high class sleaziness. All this morality is making me feel strange. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:26:51 AM · #92 |
Originally posted by Jac:
The Jebby and Clivey show. (sung to the Ithcy and Scratcy Show opening song from the Simpsons) Just like the Simpsons though, they're not as funny anymore. |
I prefer Ren & Stimpy....I *am* Ren! Least that's what my wife says, generally in a disgusted tone.....8>)
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:31:36 AM · #93 |
The OP never mentioned the age of the girl.
A) If over the age of 18. I suggest negotiations, you never know who this girl knows, or will know.
B) If under 18, No contract, and could end with the words â You have the right to remain silentâ¦â |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:32:56 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Tut! And i thought i was being fascinating but in reality i jumped the shark on my second post! :) I'm off out now to indulge in some proper high class sleaziness. All this morality is making me feel strange. |
ROTFLMSOAO!!!!
It's funny, but I am dead serious about my unwillingess to shoot nudes/lingerie. I'm the father of a 15 yo girl, husband, and plain ol' middle-age frumpy guy. I'm not willing to chance anyone actually having proof that I'm a dirty old man! LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 08:44:49 AM · #95 |
Originally posted by alans_world:
The OP never mentioned the age of the girl. |
Yes, and i'm sorry to have brought up the under 18 thing, not sure why but i thought she might have been a teen from her mail, obvious that she would have been over 18 really. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 09:37:16 AM · #96 |
Hmmmm...I like how people make this out to be a man taking advantage of a poor innocent girl or some kind of sexual predation. It goes the other way too. Things like this happen to male models. I know plenty of men who have had their pics taken, sometimes with their shirt off or whatever, for an ad, their portfolio or whatever and later come to find their likeness in an ad for a male/male escort service or porn site. Since they signed a model release that didn't specify usage, they really can't do shit about it. The photog might not even know, since the end user, might have licensed the image as stock.
As for the OP, what's wrong with talking to the model, finding out what her concerns are and doing your best to accommodate them? I'd shoot her again, she's lovely, but I'd work with her beforehand to create images that you both can enjoy. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 09:43:20 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
as an aside; I am seriously starting to wonder if NikonJeb and  JulietNN were once married and now divorced? Seems like 75% of the threads on this site contain some form of you two arguing back and forth....I'm just curious....
back to the thread |
I wasnt arguing, I agreed with him on most points.
edited add; wse have only had a couple of spats, not 75% more like 3%
Message edited by author 2010-02-19 09:45:59. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 09:55:06 AM · #98 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
as an aside; I am seriously starting to wonder if NikonJeb and JulietNN were once married and now divorced? Seems like 75% of the threads on this site contain some form of you two arguing back and forth....I'm just curious....
back to the thread |
Originally posted by JulietNN:
I wasnt arguing, I agreed with him on most points.
edited add; we have only had a couple of spats, not 75% more like 3% |
Although......she has no compunction about telling me to stuff it like a proper ex-wife would! LOL!!!.......8>)
|
|
|
|
02/19/2010 11:54:36 AM · #99 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Finally.
A clear, calm voice of common sense.
Listen to it, OP. |
I love how easy it is for so many people to be so magnanimous with the OP's time, efforts, and feelings.
So it's common sense to acquiesce to an unreasonable demand? The hell with the principles involved? Who's actually using extortion here? I can't believe that any one of you wouldn't be unhappy were you in the OP's shoes.
Blowing the losses out of proportion???? Really??? Who are you to be the judge of that? Do you work for free? Or for a pittance. The value of his time and efforts is not on you to decide. This woman could create havoc for a long time if she continues on the path she's taking. If she decides that it's all his fault somewhere along the line, she could trash his reputation in the area. What about that? At this point, what upside is there for him? If he "Does the right thing", what guarantee does he have that she'll go away.
If you really want to do the right thing, then there should be a third party arbiter. Do it by the book. both parties can agree to have an impartial thrid party decide what's fair. That way there's a legal record of what goes down and if she gets weird later, he's covered. |
Who am I to judge? I'm someone who does shoots, edit photos and pays heat bills on a regular basis, as do the majority of the people I spend my time with. If the OP has a terminal illness and a few short months to live, I'd reassess but otherwise, his time and feelings get assigned the same general value that everyone else's do. It was ONE SHOOT. He did not lose his life's portfolio. She didn't set his house on fire as she left. But by all means, pull out the lawyers and arbiters. Charge her. MAKE HER PAY! PUNISH HER FOR WHAT SHE DID. That's always good for reputation, so be that person if that who you want to be. Definitely your right. But if you think this is even close to being worthy of all that hullabaloo, good luck in the future of photo business. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 12:17:26 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by mk:
Charge her. MAKE HER PAY! PUNISH HER FOR WHAT SHE DID. That's always good for reputation, so be that person if that who you want to be. Definitely your right. But if you think this is even close to being worthy of all that hullabaloo, good luck in the future of photo business. |
seems to me the only hullabaloo is coming from everyone else, i have not seen a response from the OP in some time now |
|
