Is this standard practice?

[Phate]

Hi guys,

Right now since I did a shoot with Lia she has created a profile on modelmayhem and has been offered 3 paid jobs so far. One was a load of rubbish but there you go.

Anyway, for one she is going to get paid $1800 and all seems very clear and straight forward (except why she is getting paid in dollars but nevermind)

She said she is going to give me some commission out of this because she was always told by previous photographers this is how things are done.


Err is this correct?

I thought in a standard way it was they pay for the shoot/their pics then use them to their hearts content.

 

[PaulyD]

Thats exactly how I thought of it as well.

You get the experience/pics to use yourself and the models (dependant on the contract set out) would get the pics to use themselves for their own portfolio/promotion

 

[Adrianr]

Not even remotely how it's done. She's been dealing with some dodgy ass photographers.

 

[tbs]

Not even remotely how it's done. She's been dealing with some dodgy ass photographers.

Care to elaborated then?

 

[Derek W]

Care to elaborated then?

What I've read into it, is that there is a contract between a model and photographer. The deal is either party pays the other (model pays tog for shots) the tog supplies photos for a portfolio. Contract ends.

What the 'standard practice' implies is that somehow if a tog supplies a model with photos then as a consequence the model gets more work from her portfolio photos the original tog is 'entitled' to a share of the future shoots pay. Which does seem out of order unless it was written into the original contract which the model accepted.

 

[The_Abyss]

Pyramids selling via photos. As long as you got her first, you'd be laughing.

What a scam.

 

[Adrianr]

Care to elaborated then?

Unless the photographer is the modelling agency aswell, no service he provides entitles him to commission on any of the models future dealings. He owns the copyright to the photographs, not the model.

Pyramids selling via photos. As long as you got her first, you'd be laughing.

What a scam.

Pretty much!

 

[Johnny|lucidcomposure]

No you shouldnt be taking a commision for future work unless shes your model on lease.

If you agreed on a price to give her the photos to do with as she pleases its all her cash.

 

[tbs]

What I've read into it, is that there is a contract between a model and photographer. The deal is either party pays the other (model pays tog for shots) the tog supplies photos for a portfolio. Contract ends.

What the 'standard practice' implies is that somehow if a tog supplies a model with photos then as a consequence the model gets more work from her portfolio photos the original tog is 'entitled' to a share of the future shoots pay. Which does seem out of order unless it was written into the original contract which the model accepted.

Unless the photographer is the modelling agency aswell, no service he provides entitles him to commission on any of the models future dealings. He owns the copyright to the photographs, not the model.

Pretty much!

Weird. Unless shes contracted with the photographer then I see it, but you cant really profit of the model if the photographer decides to to "give the shots for free" then ask for any commissions she takes.

Definitely have it out on paper before doing anything

 

[Adrianr]

Weird. Unless shes contracted with the photographer then I see it, but you cant really profit of the model if the photographer decides to to "give the shots for free" then ask for any commissions she takes.

Definitely have it out on paper before doing anything

Photographers profit from models by the photographs they are instrumental in creating. It's why TFP is an attractive option for both photographer and model. Both get photo's in return, no strings attached (Though there should always be strings, really).

If the photographer is receiving commission on a models jobs then they are playing the role of the modelling agency. And thus should be advertising them, getting them go-sees, etc. You cant just charge for nothing.

Also, you shouldn't just be giving her photos to do with what she pleases. Whilst it's not so much of an issue now it's good practice to use model releases, photo liscencing (never sign away your copyright), etc. If, for whatever reason, a company offers your model £20,000 to use her photo, and you've said she can do what she likes with it, your SOL. If however, you only liscenced the photo to her for use in her personal portfolio, any other use of the photo must come through you

I'de be interested to know which photographers have been requesting money from her for future work. I'm wondering if they may be part of this crappy street model agency/we supply you a modelling portfolio for silly money rubbish.

 

[DampCat]

Good news is, you've basically won yourself a permanent model. She'll be happy you're not taking a commission and you're the first photographer who isn't a lying whore-bag.

Sucks when you find out someone is being ripped off.