Photographic Likeness, a caution to Photographers

A subject I hadn't thought about in sometime was suddenly brought to my attention when a recent post of mine, "A Model's Rights", drew the attention of a young woman with a problem and a question approached me about her situation.

It is easy for a photographer to forget about the effect that their images have on people's lives; including those of whom we photograph. More often than not, it never becomes an issue, but every so often one is presented with a unique situation.

First, the story - as is posted for models in my blog "Modeling: The Real Life":

This young woman, for simplicity I'll call her Chris (no, it's not her real name - respecting her privacy I will not be giving links or information that can compromise her), several years ago signed up as a nude model for a photography workshop. She, admittedly, wasn't really that interested, but followed the wishes of a man who was in her life at that time. As the story goes, not long after the relationship fell apart, she didn't pursue modeling at all, and the photos from that workshop came back to haunt her later on.

These nude photos of Chris began showing up on the internet, and while they aren't pornographic by any means, actually quite the opposite - they are very tastefully done, the mere presence of these photos on the internet began affecting her daily life. They have destroyed a number of great relationships, including some of those with her family, and who knows what else!

When Chris approached the photographer(s) who posted these images, she was met with hostility.

So how does a photographer protect the model without compromising himself?

First, make sure everything is spelled out to a T in the model release, and provide the model with a copyright release.

If the model would like, allow the use of an alias. This is helpful if used online because it won't come up in searches related to their name.

If the model does not wish the images to be used on the internet, respect that by stipulating how they CAN be used in the Model Release.

Make sure you do get a model release or you don't have the legal precedent to use their images.

And if a model approaches you with a situation similar to this, it works best if you approach the situation with an open mind and try to work it out for the both of you. Getting arrogant or cocky can only damage your reputation.

The model release & copyright agreement is there for your protection as well as the photographer's. Make sure to take advantage of them!

Technorati Tags: Photographic Likeness,photography,modeling,model,rights,photographer,model release,use,privacy,ethics,issues

Internet Networking Ethics

With the internet booming and sites like MySpace doing so well, many have flocked to social networking sites, both general such as MySpace and specific such as One Model Place, for self promotion and as a means to find work.

The problem that is created is one never meets the other party when contact is made. The anonymity of the internet allows for someone to create a completely false profile under false pretense to lure people, generally young women, in under the auspices of modeling.

What, then, is the best approach for a photographer, or other artist, to approach someone about possibly working together, and/or visa versa? Well, the answer is not simply clear cut.

First and foremost, above all else, I recommend that models do their homework! Learn about the person that you are talking to. Ask other photographers, ask models who currently work with them, ask models who no longer work with them, see if you can find any information in public records. Take a look at their portfolio and find out who they've done work for. Are they students or are they promising to make you a star? Watch for warning signs.

I am aware of a web site that has been floating around for a little while that keeps note of photographers reputations. It was a small personal website, but I cannot find it at this moment. If I come across it I will post it, and if someone else finds it, I would appreciate them emailing me the link.

Beyond that, everyone will approach this in their own way. One of the most effective means I've seen is for a photographer to meet with the model at least a week prior to the shoot, somewhere public if they don't have an office. That way they can become acquainted with one another. If the model is to do a nude shoot, I feel this is crucial. It would allow time for the photographer to talk to the model about all of the points surrounding that work, and lay things out clearly. Not all models realize just how exposed a nude work can make them feel, and, while done tastefully, can still make them feel shameful. On the other hand, it could make them feel liberated, free, and special to have been a part of a creation of art.

Models and photographers should not expect to trade time for prints. It is not a right to have TFP/CD (see thoughts on TFP/CD), but rather a privilege. Generally if a photographer approaches a model do develop their portfolio or work on a personal project, the photographer can offer TFP/CD but should expect to pay the model. If the situation is reversed, the model can request TFP/CD but should expect to pay the photographer. The exception to this is if they are simply contacting the other to advertise their rates, in which case there should be a polite response, inquiry, or declination and not some sarcastic quip about how they don't pay with an air of snobbish attitude.

Photographers should encourage escorts with models they've not worked with before, or for long. The model should use an escort until they are comfortable with the photographer they are working with.

Lastly, photographers and models both should be professional - even in reporting bad experiences. They should leave name calling and slander out of the equation, but it is their duty to report both good and bad experiences in order to inform those who follow in their footsteps.

Also See:
Photography and Social Networking - ArTech Art & Technology
The Truth About Social Networking - Modeling: The Real Life

Technorati Tags: Social networking,social,networking,modeling,model,photography,photographer,ethics,internet

Paparazzi Plague

Some things you would just think are common sense, but with the ever increasing numbers of people flocking to strike it rich as celebrity photographers with the advent of ever more cost effective digital equipment and the tabloid media's insatiable appetite for gossip, it is a wild fire that is beginning to run out of control.

We saw the effects of this with the death of Princess Diana in 1997. Everyone from Government Heads to Local Celebrity, people can't get enough of catching these people in their private, and often very gauche moments. It's as if these media outlets have a motto of "A star is money. A falling star is a fortune."

It is exactly that kind of attitude among photographers that I find to be one of the most disgusting. There are two types of photographers out there that really give the profession a bad name, one of them is associated with the modeling industry, and the other is the unscrupulous Paparazzi.

Right now there is a big "so-called" crackdown in L.A. even though the police aren't calling it such. As CBS news reports:

It sometimes looks like the Wild West on the streets of Los Angeles, with hordes of paparazzi chasing down celebrities and creating pandemonium and, frequently, danger. --cbsnews.com View Story Here

So I felt it appropriate to discuss this topic

I will concede two things here:

1. It's possible that not all Paparazzi are the type that I talk about here
2. If the public didn't want it, there wouldn't be a market for it

To point one - it's those paparazzi you never hear about. It's those guys that understand the unwritten rules of respect and privacy. But more on that in a moment.

To point two - while it may be true, and is often argued about a lot of things, if there wasn't a product, there wouldn't be a market either. People don't need to see photos of Brittany Spears being rushed to and from the hospital. The mere act of all the attention that this poor girl is getting only exacerbates her situation. It throws fuel on the fire and makes her recovery all the more difficult. Not to mention the hopes and dreams that are crushed with the failing of a person that so many may idolize.

And it's not just with pop stars like Brittany Spears, or Lindsay Lohan. What about the sports figures? What of political leaders? Their private lives are not a matter of public concern. When did we decide we needed to make it our business?

Sure, parents and other "activists" might claim that we need to know about these people and their personal lives so we can protect our children and their idols. That way our children aren't exposed to idols who could otherwise corrupt them and teach them bad traits through association. But consider this argument - if the person in question's personal life was kept quiet and any legal dealings against them kept obscured from the public eye, then that person's public reputation would remain untarnished, and thus protecting our children from learning of such traits.

Celebrity status doesn't revoke your rights as a person, in fact, it should make them even more protected as a public face your privacy is going to be a bigger deal. These people are human, just as you and I, and they are prone to make the same mistakes that we do. If we do not make it our business to plaster their personal business across the globe, then their privacy would remain in tact, and those who idolize them wouldn't suffer their fall from grace. Perhaps they might wonder "what ever happened to such and such?" years later and look them up through whatever resources to learn that after a bout with a drug problem they destroyed their career and fell from the spotlight, but by that time they would be mature adults capable of seeing the consequences.

This would give our children a piece of their childhood back, protect a person's right to privacy, and continue to encourage good things to come.

What I find more disgusting than most of the deeds that these celebrities have done is the lengths to which these paparazzi and some journalists go through to get their photos and/or story. Paying off body guards or other personnel to steal private home videos (usually sex tapes like with Brett Michaels & Pam Anderson, as well as the more well known Tommy Lee & Pam Anderson), hiding places with incredibly powerful lenses to capture them walking around their house or hotel most unexpectedly, rummaging through garbage, and planting hidden cameras/microphones in a number of various ways.

Some of the acts these people go through are just immoral and unethical, but others are down right illegal. They only get away with it because a publication does not have to identify it's source for material, which I do believe in, but a corrupt publication doesn't care about ethical or clean publications, they care about money, and much like a car wreck on the highway, everyone has to slow down and look.

I firmly believe in freedom of press and in the ability for the press to have confidential sources to encourage legitimate reporting. But I believe a person's right to privacy supercedes the freedom of the press in the case of a pop star's incarceration, an actor's admittance into rehab, or a presidents weekend fling with an intern. Does their action today take away from their achievements yesterday? No. You can acknowledge someone's achievement without worshiping them, and if you weren't spoon-fed the gossip, it wouldn't matter.

As far as athletes and steroids and other such things are concerned, yes, those things can influence their achievements and should be dealt with accordingly, but that doesn't necessarily mean publicly. Why destroy someone when they are innocent until proven guilty? Why provide the possibility of glamorizing their offenses by making it a public ordeal? Let the systems that are in place settle the score, decide the outcome, and then report it.

Photographers, as well as journalists and artists alike, need to respect the individual that becomes their subject, whether they like them or hate them. There needs to be a level of respect to be maintained in order to keep an ethical and just system in place that does not contaminate the public perception. There needs to be a balance between the lynch mob and idol worship.

For more information regarding paparazzi, see USA Today's article: Laws do little to block paparazzi.

Technorati Tags: photography,media,paparazzi,ethics,privacy,rights to privacy,celebrity,freedom,freedom of the press,press,moral,unethical,law,invasion,invasion of privacy

Finding Direction without a Road Map

I have decided to move this blog in a particular direction involving philosophical practices and ethics that, in my opinion, should be shared by all artists - especially photographers.

As one acquaintance put it to me, "Photographers are the Miles Davis-es of Art..." As a photographer, and artist, I understood where he came from as a painter when he made that comment.

There are many many photographers out there who take photos for the sake of taking them. They don't care who they hurt, or what they have to do to get ahead. They are cut-throat, not only with their subject matter, but with their peers and business associates as well.

So photography will be a focus, but Art in general is my purpose here.

I do hope this to be a learning experience for me, as well as an excellent resource, guide, and insight into some of the things that drive the creative process.

<a href="http://technorati.com/claim/345u82f49" rel="me">Technorati Profile</a>

Technorati Tags: blogging,direction,art,photography,ethics,philosophy,beginning,start

A Model's rights with the Photographer's Images

Without going into to much detail about the apparent attitude of many "models", since I already touched on that quite enough in my post about Time For Print/CD, I would like to discuss an issue that has been brought to my attention a number of times recently by other photographers - some of whom have been in this business far longer than I!

Many many photographers feel that they are starting to witness the destruction of the creative process altogether. With digital technology becoming more easily available and the general public having tools at their disposal to provide an easy means for image manipulation on the computer, many models have taken it upon themselves to "Fix", as one photographer put it, their photographs to their liking.

I have even heard of models submitting a photograph as her own work of art under this reasoning:

[The Model] owned half of the copyright since she was there when the photo was taken and was the subject of the photo so it HAD to be a 50/50 collaboration. Then [The Model] altered the background and did some "artwork" to the photo which had to make it 100% her own.

It's a very complacent disregard and disrespectful attitude that I've seen in other aspects of society in recent years, avoiding a sociopolitical rant, however, let me just state as fact that this is NOT how the system works.

When a model is given payment in the form of monies or trade product (such as prints, images, or such) - that makes the service they provided nothing more than a work for hire. In Title 17 Chapter 1 §101 of the Copyright Law a work made for hire is the ownership of the employer. That is, if a model could lay any claim to copyright at all. For all technical purposes, a model is nothing more than a tool for the photographer in composition, just as paint and canvas are tools for the painter, and the release the model signs simply gives permission to the photographer to use the model's likeness (and other details depending on the agreement).

When a photographer releases a final print of any image, that image is to his liking. Everything from the retouching, the artwork he's done (physically or digitally), the composition of the subject matter in the image, it is all part of the photographer's creative process and we need to remember that the presentation of the photo is just as important as the image itself!

To quote directly from a personal journal of BillyD Photography:

The model has the right to not like the pose, not like the photo or not use the photo. During the photo shoot the model always has the last word and no is no. Once the photograph is taken, I believe they do not have the right to change the photograph to their liking. Especially if my name is on it as photographer. Butting their name on it, well, that's just plain thievery.

And he's right. No model has to use the final products they get from a photographer, I know many models who've hated the work they've gotten from a photographer and they've just pitched them and never worked with that photographer again. As for myself, I always make it a rule that I will not force a model to do something they don't want to do, and, if they do something they aren't sure about (say a nude pose) - if they aren't satisfied with the outcome of the final product, then I simply dispose of the image and neither of us will use those images ever. I would not want a model to feel shameful for taking part in creating something with me, and I have wasted hundreds of yards of film, and probably thousands of digital images that have never been seen because either the model, myself, or both of us did not like the final product.

That said, it still does not give the model, or anyone for that matter, the right to take the images of some photographer and alter them to their liking. Doing so is not flattery - it's thievery and it is illegal.

My Blogs, Photos, and Rights Management

I have subscribed to a rights management service whereby allowing myself to syndicate and license out my contributions myself.

Please bear in mind that at the moment I currently have about half a dozen blogs, and while they currently all have the same content on them, I have no intention of them staying that way. While they will likely have cross content, in the future, for now, the identical content is just to introduce myself to those communities while I decide what directions I'm going to send these in, and, perhaps, what other authors I may include.

So, bear with me, and the slow posts in the beginning, while I get these things moving...

Thoughts on TFP/CD work - A reference for Models and Photographers

First for those that do not know TFP (time for prints)/TFCD (time for cd or images) is where a 'model' will pose in trade for some prints or images on a CD from the shoot. This is typically used with beginning models and beginning photographers to get experience and some images to help build a portfolio.

Well in general I no longer do TFP shoots. I'm here to make money, I do this for a living, and I have bills to pay. I spend a lot time editing images, and other tasks behind just taking photos. I've also invested a lot of money in equipment, props, and things. It can be rather aggravating when I am talking to a model, whether I approached her or she approached me, and the moment compensation comes up I get the "I don't pay photographers, photographers PAY me!" attitude. To be fair, I find it equally annoying when I get the same attitude from photographers in regards to some of the models I manage. In all honesty, I look at it like this: who's providing who with the service?

• If I am hired to do a shoot for a product and I bring a model in, I'll pay them.
  
• If I'm booking a model to take photos for their portfolio, I'm spending my time and money on supplies (prints, portfolio books, etc) - I expect to be paid.
  
• If I have an art project or choose an exceptional model to expand on my portfolio I will offer TFP or TFCD, and if I have it in the budget I may even offer to pay.
  

In the business real models get paid for the use of their photographic likeness to sell a service or a product, and the photographer gets paid to take photographs of a model or product. That means the model, if she's updating, expanding, or developing her portfolio usually pays a photographer to have it done with the most experienced photographers charging, and the emerging photographers willing to trade TFP or TFCD.

Now im not a total hard ass and do make exceptions. As I mentioned before mostly for artistic projects of mine or when the 'model' comes to me with a unique idea, unique look and/or shoot location. This usualy is in the areas of fetish, figure(nude), retro, pinup or other areas of intrest that I like to shoot for artistic purposes. This would be a colabortive effort between the 'model' and I to create some works of artistic merit.

I do not do TFP for general portrait or portfolio work, unless it meets requirements above. It never hurts to ask but be prepared for a no.

Also, I generally will not do TFP for a first shoot, only with those I have shot before. I hate seeing "I need to work on my portfoilo so I'm looking for some TFP." If you want a good portfolio it is in your best interest to look around and find some great photographers and pay fo their services and get the best photos you can. As I said before, the photographers most willing to do TFP or TFCD are usually the less experienced, college students, hobbiests, and such. You may get some really great work from some of them as I did some great pieces for people in the beginning, but you'll also get some general mistakes and average quality work - as I also did in the beginning.

When I do a TFP shoot, I will generally give the model a CD with 10 to 15 web quality images of the best shots after they've been enhanced and a discount on any prints. I do not give any digital artwork to the model, but after a piece has been completed, I will offer it to the model at a discount as well.

I never give out the high resolution originals, and a model release is always required. Also since this is not money making, all paid shoots will have priority so there can be a delay in image processing.

I don't say this to sound like a prick, I just feel it best to get this out of the way to avoid problems in the future. I feel, and have been told, my rates are very reasonable. I'm always happy to work with my clients because I enjoy what I do, and you can ask anyone I have worked with I typically will go beyond what I agree to in the first place.

Advice and words of wisdom taken from some models & others who are in "The Biz":

• It's not necessarily what you are interested in getting from a shoot. You have to understand others motivations for even showing up.
• If it's a TFP, it's not only that they want you in their book, they also have to want what someone else is bringing to the table. And, this will be collaborative. This means, it's not just about you. What does the photographer want/need? What does the makeup artist want/need? Fashion and hair too. You have to be willing to work with the team, not just shoot what you came there for.
  
• Getting what you need for your portfolio takes some thought on what you want to do, you want to be versitile, but you don't want to be all over the place. It also takes good communication with your photographer.
• If you are willing to pay each team member, we're talking a different ball game. You may very likely get stronger talent to work with you. And if you are paying, you would have much more control over the shoot, and you'd have a team much more motivated to care what they achieved for *you*.