| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/30/2004 03:33:49 PM · #1 |
I was wondering, if I am in a public place, during a public event (or not... maybe in a park).. and I snap a candid of someone in the park, do I have to get a model release?
Jennifer |
|
|
|
12/30/2004 03:35:41 PM · #2 |
| Yes, if you are going to sell the photo in any way and the person is recognizable. |
|
|
|
12/30/2004 03:37:27 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by Paige:
Yes, if you are going to sell the photo in any way and the person is recognizable. |
Ok.... thanks. That's what I figured, but thought I would be SURE. Thanks again
Jen |
|
|
|
12/30/2004 04:14:35 PM · #4 |
| But it's OK to shoot it for your own collection, and to use it for "educational purposes" like submitting it here. Just don't try to sell it. |
|
|
|
12/30/2004 05:27:33 PM · #5 |
What's a model release? Just a sort of 'ok' from the model for you to publish the shots?
|
|
|
|
12/30/2004 05:33:09 PM · #6 |
yeah.... its this legal mumbo jumbo that states you own the picture and they don't have the right to claim any royalty you receive from selling or displaying it... something like that.
Here's another question. Do you need some kind of a release to sell a photo of an object...like a barn or house or something that is OWNED by someone? |
|
|
|
12/30/2004 05:38:18 PM · #7 |
| I have heard that some buildings are "copyrighted" in some crazy way. There are "fair use" clauses - but in general, and especially if you are thinking to try to make some money - it is far better to be safe and ask for permission than to be sorry. |
|
|
|
12/31/2004 08:03:00 PM · #8 |
There are property releases, also.
There are several good books on the market about legal issues, ans they include standard forms that can be copied and used. A good investment if you intend to do commercial photography.
If you have your portrait done, read the fine print when you sin the contract. It includes a model release, although it's not called that. It gives all rights of the images taken to the photographer. |
|
|
|
12/31/2004 08:11:46 PM · #9 |
Here, and it is probably the same elsewhere, you also have to use a model release if the person can be recognised and it looks as if they are endorsing a product.
For instance, I take a candid shot of someone for use in the challenge here, but they are holding a bottle of coke and enjoying a cool drink on a hot day .... that would need a release form as the implication is that the person is endorsing coke ... even if 2 secs later, after their first taste, they spat it out.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2004 08:32:37 PM · #10 |
Then how come you can take a photo of a celeberity and sell it, without there permission?
|
|
|
|
12/31/2004 08:40:29 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Travis99:
Then how come you can take a photo of a celeberity and sell it, without there permission? |
There is a difference between editorial-stock and commercial-stock. If you're selling a product or service, you need a release. If you're reporting news, you don't!
You can't use a picture of Paris Hilton to sell your widgets without a model release -- but you can use her picture in a tabloid to report 'news'. Same goes with any other recognizable person.
Message edited by author 2004-12-31 20:45:36.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2004 08:43:41 PM · #12 |
That's editorial use, for a celebrity. You would not be able to submit it to a stock agency and sell it without a release nor would you be able to make posters or art work and sell them for a profit without a release. Different uses have different rules.
edit. I'm not repeating his post, just typing slowly.
Message edited by author 2004-12-31 20:45:21. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 02:38:22 PM · #13 |
You also have 'expectation of privacy'. A public figure, or someone who voluntarily puts themself in public view, has less expectation of privacy.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 02:42:24 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by joebok:
I have heard that some buildings are "copyrighted" in some crazy way. There are "fair use" clauses - but in general, and especially if you are thinking to try to make some money - it is far better to be safe and ask for permission than to be sorry. |
It may be crazy, but it's "The Law." Here is a link to The List for further reference (not just buildings listed).
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 16:06:38. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:19:21 PM · #15 |
Here is a link that has most of the releases you could ever want.
//www.reedservices.com/standard.htm
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 04:55:50 PM · #16 |
WOW! Thanks for all the great information and great links! It really helped me ! This sight is so awesome!
Jennifer |
|
|
|
01/19/2005 04:00:57 PM · #17 |
I'm going to be shooting some model shots next week and intend to have some model releases on hand. The model has agreed for me to offer the images (if they are any good) to stock sites such as Istock and Shutterstock. I've looked at the generic model relases on the net and I assumed they were good enough. I've also looked at the model releases on Istock and Shutterstock and they have specific parts that state their company name. In reading their forums, particularly at Istock it seems people are getting rejections if their model releases are not Istock specific.
Do people here who upload model shots to the various stock agencies have a generic model release or a specific release for each agency? Also has anyone had difficulty with model releases in the past?
Are model releases per model, per shoot, or per day? I'll have access to the model for a week so do I just need one release that covers all images taken during that timeframe?
|
|
|
|
01/19/2005 04:04:34 PM · #18 |
My last photography prof gave out sheets of model releases to use in the general public. Instead of an entire sheet of small print that NO person would read or sign, it's a couple of lines in huge print saying that the photog has the right to take the shot and use it for whatever purpose.
Pretty niffty.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2005 04:23:48 PM · #19 |
| I use one model release per subject per shoot. If we shoot two days I will have two signed releases. Each of my release forms includes information regarding the model and the date. I took mine to Kinkos and had them printed on the carbonless copy paper so that the model's copy is on a light yellow paper and he/she can see what I write regarding what they will receive as well as having a copy of the document. At the end of the session I put down what they can expect as compensation (money, prints, whatever) and then they fill out their sections and sign it. They get their copy and I have the original which I file. |
|
|
|
01/19/2005 05:04:30 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by moodville:
I've also looked at the model releases on Istock and Shutterstock and they have specific parts that state their company name. In reading their forums, particularly at Istock it seems people are getting rejections if their model releases are not Istock specific.
Do people here who upload model shots to the various stock agencies have a generic model release or a specific release for each agency? |
I'm pretty sure Jon at Shutterstock has said that a "generic" release is OK, as long as it has all the necessary information to cover them in a manner equivalent to their own form. |
|
|
|
01/19/2005 08:14:32 PM · #21 |
| You have to use iStock's release for pictures you upload there. I just have people sign a generic release and the iStock release at the same time. I like Kevin's idea about the carbonless copies. I don't know about having to have different releases for different days. Might be something you'd want to ask the specific sites. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/19/2025 08:56:49 AM EDT.
