Last edited by Longshots; 15-09-2010 at 7:25am.
Hi Im Darren
www.darrengrayphotography.com
SONY A850 (FF)] + GRIP | SONY A350 (APS-C) + GRIP | SONY NEX-5 +16 2.8 + 18-55 E-MOUNT LENSES | CZ 85 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 28-75 2.8 | 70-200 2.8 | 2 x 42AMs | 24" imac | LR | CS4 | + loads of other junk
Darren, as per my posts above, I think you should remove the 'remain' from your conditions (second line) and replace it with alternate wording, cause as stated above, under the copyright act, copyright wasn't yours to begin with, so it cannot 'remain' with you. Remember that AP directs members to seek their own legal advice.
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
Nikon, etc!
RICK
My Photography
I understand that my SIL infamy or lack of may not have bearing upon the photographer wanting to keep ©, however the photographer may want to have © so that they can display, sell, enter into competitions, promote etc using those images, and that is exactly what my suggested changes were designed to stop. My SIL simply doesn't want her images spread over the internet, bridal exhibitions, magazines etc etc.
In your examples of alternative views, the only relevant one here is the artist painting my SIL likeness, because all of the others contain nothing personal.
Looking at it from my POV, I would never agree to that simply because you want to be assigned absolute © and further the statement "may use any images taken on the day to promote Darren Gray Photography in any way he chooses."
Both of those are deal breakers for me, as said earlier, If I commissioned and paid someone to go and shoot something personal for me, I own it. I would certainly offer the chance to amend your terms to exclude those provisions, but if you won't play ball, then you lose the job. There are plenty of photographers out there who will happily leave © with the client for personal shoots where they have been paid the going rate.
If you were to shoot at a significant discount, or with some other concession, then certainly there has to be something in it for you, and part of that may be © and the right to use those images for promotion, display etc.
OK, so I can now see your concern.
If you can understand that I'm simply reading what you've posted and then I've had to assume to the specific nature of your concern re ©
Most people want to remove that part so that they can control how much their prints will ultimately cost them. Hence my examples.
But with that additional information there could have been an additional option for you.
As opposed to wanting the copyright, your alternative and better option, would have been to ask for a change/adaptation to the terms so that your SIL's images remained private and you could have asked for a restriction of that.
I am asked that from time to time, and I have no issue with it, because most of the time if thats what the client wants, I'm happy to adapt, as I'm not giving anything away.
I'm assuming again that you did ask and explain why you were asking ? If so, yes the photographer did stiff themselves and gave away a sale.
No-ones turned me down yet ... I think the key thing is that you as the photographer agree not to sell the images to anyone else for financial gain. Everyone Ive done work for are absolutely fine with that. Selling and using for self promotion are two entirely different things.
This particular photographer was advised that the intent was to keep the images private, and verbally they agreed they wouldn't use the images without seeking permission first, but when asked to amend the written terms to reflect same, they were not willing to do so. Definitely stiffed themselves...
My friend who is a bridal photographer said she just had her work published in a major bridal magazine but credit given to someone else even though she and the bride never authorised this. She called the bridal magazine and they were quite rude saying they signed off on a release to that person who credit was given. What would happen in this situation?
Can I ask why you are asking to the op, mile?
Darren
Gear : Nikon Goodness
Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
Please support Precious Hearts
Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated
A decorator who they don't know anything about or had anything to do with the wedding has taken credit for the photos and they have no idea who this decorator is or how they got a hold of the photos to give to the magazine.
I suggest the photographer contact the magazine, and advise them directly of the issue. Maybe email a RAW file showing they have the originals etc stating they are contracting the services of a lawyer. This could become very serious and it depends how far your friend wants to take it. However, someone provided them to this decorator, and if everyone is deny it, someone is lying!