as an add-on to this, when you post media (in this case, photos) to online services, be sure to read the fine print on rights, some sites declare that once you upload them, they become the owners. In ALL cases, read the fine print for media ownership.
Jared, great video. Thank you for making yourself available and being open and generous with your knowledge and experience. We're all very lucky when somebody decides to share and help others out. I've found your videos to be very helpful and this is a very important issue that (in my experience) a lot of working photographers don't fully understand. Thanks again!
I've had similar treatment from security in a shopping centre/mall. These are "private property" according to the security and any management types. Just so happens they're open to the public and their entire purpose is to be accessed by the public. Sometimes, writing a letter or calling the management well in advance and outlining what you'd like to do and how it'll be used... can get you permission. If you have to agree to certain conditions then it may be better to find a different location.
Hey Mr Fro dude. Just discovered your channel recently and wanted to thank you for sharing with us all your knowledge. I'll be going through more of your vids over the weekends cause there's a lot I know I can learn from them. Anyway, thanks again Fro Bro.
One thing here, I think needs clarification... Just because someone paid you to shoot them does NOT surrender your rights as a photographer to use the images yourself. You can still use them in your port, on your web site, etc, for self promotion, UNLESS you signed a contract with the client giving them EXCLUSIVE rights to the images. You do need a model release expressly giving you the right to sell the images or have them used for promotion of a product or service OTHER than your own photography, which this photographer seems to have gotten from the models directly. This videographer she was dealing with is totally full of crap though.
I’m a fine art photographer do I need a model release to sell the images. I paid the model for the shoot and no model release was signed. And each time the work gets published to promote my work she goes to Harris the organization saying they own no rights to publish them.
Kudos Jared, I can't stress to my fellow photog friends and upcoming photog friends enough on how many rights they actually have as photographers regarding the images. Great video bud
The mall is a public place on private property. As a private owner they can ask you not to take pics. It is not illegal to take pics since you have to be breaking a law in order to be doing something illegal. If a mall rep asks you to stop taking pics be polite, apologize, and tell them you didn't know that it was against their policy. They can't ask you to remove film or delete digital pictures and they can't detain you or take your personal property unless you are actually breaking a law.
In the US, copyright is automatically assigned to the creator of the work. You own the copyright on that picture. Now, whether you can get the picture from the camera or not could be an issue, and how you prove that you actually took the picture is just your word against his. So you do own the copyright, but it doesn't seem like a smart thing to do unless you have a lot of access to the camera to get your pictures off before the other person claims they are his.
Also, regardless of whether or not you sell the rights to your photos, you can always use them as part of your portfolio/to promote you business. You took it, it is part of you body of work. You might not be able to sell them if you sell the rights to the photos, but you are always allowed to let people know that you took those photos.
Thanks Jared, that was good info to have in mind. I always had my doubts as to my rights as a photographer, but you made it clear here on this video. Thanks again, I am learning a lot from you and the fro site.
[cont] You will also have to be careful of any copyrighted design or artwork in the photos. In the case Jared is talking about, are there any copyrighted artwork or design elements in her photos that are copyrighted to the other party, or a third party? She could be restricted in how she uses the photos if there is. However, she should still be able to use the photos in a non-commercial manner if there is. But I will say, are the photos good enough to go to though this hassle over?
This is one of the reasons why a manager from a private entity could ask a photographer or other digital creator to stop recording/taking pictures in certain areas. Restaurant and hotel kitchens can be a bit tricky to get some "street photography" shots depending on the management and/or managers on duty. Kitchens generally don't have corporate logos, but TMs could just be their scapegoat for privacy as kitchens have some expectation of privacy. Never got these employees forced me to delete the pictures of them, but only asked me to stop.Other times the kitchen staff give me a look and I point my camera away as I intended to do candid street photography (i.e. documenting cities/towns). For anyone: The catch here is try to read the room of the group of people and listen to your intuition. Not an expert in reading the room, but a stoic mind increases accuracy. If you are anxious around certain areas or people with your camera/phone, there is a chance that it may not be the best time.
In Singapore, according to Copyright Act, A: If you are a freelance, 1. If you are paid, Copyright goes to your client. 2. If you are unpaid, Copyright belongs to you. B: If you are from a registered company: The copyright goes to the Company, NOT the photographer who shoot it. and doesn't matter its paid or unpaid. All above subject to other agreements made as you mentioned in the video.
Even if it seems creepy or weird, you can photograph the kids in public too (in the US). If you are standing on public land you can photograph essentially anything and anyone (except some military property and some nuclear power plants, but the publicly visible areas of both are usually OK to shoot). The only time you really can't shoot someone is when they have a reasonable expectation for privacy (i.e. you can't go in a public bathroom and photograph them even if it is "public").
That is a grey area because the mag could claim the pics are editorial in nature, not advertising, thus they can publish them (if you do the research, artistic expression and fair editorial use are generally held up in court). However, again, they have the right to ask you for the release regardless of your actual rights to the photo since they are the publisher and they make their own guidelines based on their own legal interpretation. Either way, the magazine will let you know the specifics.
Because if you say it in a normal tone at a normal speed you run the words together and it sounds like frono's photo and it is confusing, so he makes a point of separating the words entirely and changing the intonation of each word so they are distinct. For marketing and branding purposes it helps to do strange little things that make people remember you too.
depends on your location, the Canadian copyright act Section 13(2) says that the person who commission you to take photos (client or photographer that hires you) holds the copyrights unless you made it clear in a contract. If you want to read more, google "capic what you sell". Very interresting site I learned a lot, I also printed model releases to carry "just in case"
It is legal for you to take photos of someone as long as you are not hiding it or if they are aware of it, it IS however illegal to make the photo public online or in prints without a written realease form.
That is highly determined by the "owner" of the landmark. For instance, the Eiffel Tower has no daytime restrictions, but in Chicago you can't take pictures of landmarks without a permit. You need to specifically check the rules for each landmark. It can take a lot of research and calling around to know for sure. On the other hand, people take pictures of landmarks and make money off them all the time and they get away with it even when they shouldn't, so it depends on your personal ethics too.
In public, you have no expectation of privacy and you may photograph whomever and whatever you would like -period. You have all rights to the photo for personal use and prints, but if you wish to use the photo for commercial applications (advertising) you need a written release. This is the case in the U.S., but this varies greatly by country.
Jared is right - unless you have some verbal (harder to prove, but still valid, IIRC) or written agreement *prior* to the shoot, whoever pressed the shutter button owns the copyrights & licensing rights. IIRC there are slight differences in different countries, e.g. in Australia I believe if you are employed as part of your job to take photos, the employer owns the rights regardless of if you have signed a contract (as in the US & UK). You'll have to check in your own country. [cont...]
I'm not sure you are right in all terms. Here in Germany, and we are not the only one, you cannot take photos of persons and own them automatically. If there is nothing written, the person on the Photo can demand to delete the photo, especially when you can make profit out of it. So, no "contract/written agreement" --> no owner of shooted photos. This is also to protect the people on the photos, so they have control what happens with the photos.
In Australia the laws on copy rights is different, for commercial photography it is as you describe but domestic photography ie Wedding Portrait it is the client who owns the copy right unless their is a contract very the ownership.
Another amazing video! I would have to agree. You created the shot. You took the time to angle it, focus it, make it what it is! Of course its YOUR picture! Great topic
It’s clear to us as photographers, but I’ve had clients that don’t see it so clearly. That’s why it’s so important to write it out in the clear. It helps to avoid future misunderstandings.
That's an easy question to answer. Basically with street photography since you're in public you have 0 expectation of privacy. Without having an expectation of privacy legally you can be photographed or you can take photographs without asking permission. With that said far as I know the subjects have 0 legal rights to the images HOWEVER it is good form to ask first if possible and if a subject sees a photo and asks for it to be deleted it is good form to do so.
Hi, What are your thoughts on 3rd party use? For example: Your client gives the photos that were made to promote their services to another entity/vendor.
Just a quick note to all of you mentioning the law. Laws are different in each country, and in some nations (The UK and The USA are 2 of many) the law even varies by region. Please be specific about where the law applies that you are quoting as it can become confusing without this information, thank you. I'm guessing that Jared is referring to USA.
This also applies to the following, If you use somebody else's camera your still considered the artist and therefore the copyright belongs to you. If you shoot on the street for editorial purposes such as news etc and not for commercial purposes you do not need a model release. I'm a press photographer and I have to deal with this issue on a daily bases.
Hi, TheCrookedPenguin. I am a photojournalism major at Purchase College, so I'd like to hel answer your question. From what I have learned so far, you are allowed to take someone else's photograph without asking first as long as they are not a minor. It is usually a good idea to ask the person regardless, however, it is always good to take the photograph as you intended before going in and asking to make sure you do not interfere with the moment your capturing.
I was with my friends taking pictures in front of BJ's restaurant in California and I was stopped by security personnel told me I can't take pictures with their logo on it because it was copyright protected.
not sure where you are...but here in the uk it's not ilegal to put the image online. it only becomes ilegal if you sell the image to be use for, lets say, advertising. Because when you do that you are, in effect, putting their name to whatever is being advertised, and making out that they endorse that product, when in fact they may not like that product or the company behind it. (I'm not an expert, so I MAY be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's the basic idea.)
Great video! Carolyn E. Wright is the USA authority on photographers rights. I wish I had visited her blog sooner, it would have saved me hours of legal research.
Jared I love what you present to the people man!!!! I met you back at the FStoppers party at Peter Hurley Studio!! Aside from being an amazing photographer you are a cool ass dude!!
It's obvious that the photographer always has the publishing rights on a pictures unless the contract about those pictures says differently. However, the people you can recognize in your pictures also have rights and you need to have permission from them before you can publish those pictures. Even when shot in a public place. There are exceptions to this, of course, but in general, you need a release form from the people in your pictures. At least, that's the law in Belgium.
Hey Jared, great reminder to keep our rights in mind. I have a question about rights when shooting a show. I've taken some shots of bands playing that have been used in online concert and album reviews uncredited (just taken from facebook). They're watermarked, but not with my website or anything, should I send an email to the author of the article or the publication and request credit? I'm stoked to see my work there so I don't necessarily want them taken down.
in short if you take the image you own the image and copyright and depending on the release you got from the model as to how she is delt with or compensated if at all.
In Canada, federal copyright law has been changed. Now a photographer always owns their photos. You still need a release to sell the photos, but even after selling, the photographer retains copyright.
I had a question about putting watermarks on your photos. I have been looking up information about the pros and cons. Best piece I have read is that "You don't get mad when you see an emblem on your car, infact you take pride in it" What are your thoughts on having a small discrete watermark on your photographs you give clients.
There is this Gypsy Vanner horse show that tours the country. People bring in their Gypsy Vanners and pay to compete for prizes. They were performing at a public venue owned by the local city. As we entered, a woman came up to me and asked me if I was there to take photos for business. I told her no, it was just personal photos. The event photographer, apparently, was so insecure with his job being taken from him, that during a break in the show, the announcer told everyone that they could use the photos they took of the horses for personal use. However, if we took our photos and tried to sell them for profit, or even utilize the photos in our photography portfolio to obtain business profit, then the event photographer would legally be able to track us down and sue us over our photos. It was very hard to find this event photographer, but I found his portfolio, and he mass uploaded every photo of his, even the very bad ones (He used flash a lot, causing a lot of white eye in the horses). I can see why he felt so threatened.
If a parent of each girl cosigned a contract that states you are giving them something in exchange for money, then it is a valid contract and they owe you the money if you gave them the product. If you mutually chose to void the contract, they need to return all of the product to you. The digital pictures are part of the return, meaning they need to delete digital copies but you need a lawyer in your jurisdiction to verify. If you didn't void the contract, they owe you the money for the product.
Does a news outlet have any right to use my photos? I shot photos of an outdoor music festival as a volunteer for a radio station with the understanding I would allow them to us the photos in promotions and on their Facebook. That is fine. But Monday evening I find two of my photos on the front page of the newspaper, I was not asked for permission to use them (they did credit me). They pulled the images from my public Facebook post. Does the newspaper need to seek my permission to use my images?
diapernh entirely depends on the licensing... from a Facebook post is a no-no unless you specifically released them in their, but if you said something like these are CC-by-SA 4.0 then that would be allowed. So no, the newspaper commited copyright infringement, unless they got a deal with the radio station
My understanding of FB privacy policy is that, once you post something to FB it ceases to be your property. Sort of the same way with your bank.... when you deposit money in the bank, it's no longer yours, it belongs to the bank.
pthompson108 pthompson108 it doesn’t become Facebook’s. That’s like saying if you draw on paper it becomes the paper company’s property. Your copyright is yours on any social media unless you sign over the rights or produce content under ‘Work for Hire’. Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Flickr ask for the right to modify creative works because the companies need to resize, compress, and transmit those works across servers. Intellectual property cases have slapped those companies on the wrists for over reaching Term of Service.
Fast and to the point. Thats how I appreciate videos. Fro do you happen to know where can we have access to the Photo release forms? Or we basically write them, print them, and use them? HUgs, Zoe
I'm taking pictures at a public marathon. This is a public event with no expectation of privacy. I'll be taking pics of hundreds of people. Getting a model release for every person in the race is going to be impossible. As you know, out of 100 photos maybe 2 will be worth printing and entering into a contest. Do I need to get a model release from one of the runners in the race to use the photo I took of them for the contest?
Also, if you're an employee of a company, not an independent contractor, then you don't own the rights to the photos that you take while working for the company. However, in all other cases, you own the rights to what you shoot, unless specified otherwise.
Hey Jared! Great videos! I have a kind of legal manner question about street photography and generally shooting in public. Is it invasion of somebody's privacy if u take their photo without asking first and what rights do the ones depicted on the image have on the picture itself?
Basic contracts; there is no contract without exchange(meaning something of value). "You take pics, I'll take vids", without some exchange;you own your pics. To quote Cindi Lauper, money changes everything.
I was a second shooter for 4 wedding this last spring. I was learning and being mentored at the same time. We had no writen agreement, no mention of whos property the photos belong to. I did ask if I could us any photo in the class I was taking at the time. One of the 4 I was paid $60.00 for being an assistance but I spent most of the time photographing. Some of the photos where taken on their camera but I was given a lot of the files I took. Other shots were with mine, to continue in comment
Hey this really helpful but I have a question: I did a couple of girls senior portraits recently, and I had them sign forms and they also were going to pay me (they asked me). I gave the pictures to both of them (unedited) so they could choose which ones I should use. One of them put them up on Facebook and didn't give me credit. She later said that she wasn't going to use them (after I did all the hard work editing them) and she still offered to pay. She is a minor but we had her mom sign the
I'm not an attorney and don't play one on TV but I do adhere to saying that it cost less to have an attorney help KEEP you OUT of trouble than to GET you Out of trouble. 9 out 10 times not an issue but kinda like buying insurance. You pay for it in hopes of never really needing it.
You forgot about one thing. You can't use your footage how ever you won't publicly without the confirm from the subject you shoot. What I mean is, you can't for an example interview a random person on the street and then public release it against he's will. You talked about rights, and that's good, but you should also talk about the rules of publishing. Because their are some shady lines there to look out for as a newbie in photography.
How about a smartphone app that shows the most relevant legal points depending on which country you are in? With auto-update of course. Digital model releases could also be built in.
Yes. In Lithuania (EU) you must have a parents permision to photograph kids. And you can't phograph compromising things (like injuries or damaging things). Cheers.
Hey Jared, thanks for the info but you left me in one hole now.... I also recently did a photo shoot (TFP) for a model who also brought along a friend.. I didnt get a release form the friend... Can I use the photos in my portfolio legally without the release form? If yes, then so what is the point of needing a release form?
actually, although may be creepy, it is not illegal. If you are in a public space, you can shoot anything. If they want to walk around nude in front of their window, you can take their photo from the public sidwalk. Look up the story of the art photographer who shot from his apartment building people in the next building going about their life and then having a show. S/he was sued and the photog won...no expectation of privacy.
Thank you for this video!!! This happened to me but with my family. I was threatened for posting on My photo ig account for a family event that I offered to photograph and paid for the materials in that shoot (smoke bombs). I was proud of my image and for my family and they threatened me.
Does this apply to video too? Example: if I were in an agreement with someone to take video of an event and they would pay me a small fee but there was no signing over of usage or copyright. Do I still maintain the rights to my video and can use them or sell them as I see fit? I would hope so. Also, please let me know.
What about the public photo. In Quebec Canada and in France you cant take photo of people in the street and use it without their permission. So it's also depend of your location.
I've started doing paid photography for a studio, and haven't yet signed any papers nor release forms. Am I allowed to send private links to my portfolio to new potential clients as a freelancer with images from those studio shoots?
If you're watching this video and thinking "He's just talking about the US", he actually is not. The Berne Convention is the international treaty regarding copyright, and includes most of the world as signatories. If your country is a signatory, what he said here applies to you as well - unless your government has decided to pass laws that erode the Convention's protections, in which case, take that up with your government.
I wish you would have elaborated on taking pictures of people in public and what the laws and rights to you as the photographer. BUT, thanks for the info!!!
She gave you consent to shoot her because she knew you were taking model shots and she willingly entered into them. There is nothing she can really do about a public showing of the pictures, for instance if you put them in an art gallery or a photo book or your web galleries. The model release gives permission to use their likeness in advertising, so if you try to sell that photo to a magazine they likely won't print it without a release from the girl.
Hello Jared,yesterday I went to a football stadium and tried to take a panorama of the stadium (inside the stadium). But I was stopped by the security guard and he told me I can't take the photo of the stadium with the dslr as it infringes the copyright. I don't understand it, I got my own camera and I own the photo I took, that's what I told him. But he said the is copyright to the professional photographer they hired. You understand what I meant? So, I can't take any photo next time?
Stephanie, He was trying out & learning how to shoot videos. Then all of the sudden, he found out that you are a better photographer than he was. Be proud of yourself. Don't deal with jerk like him. Did you know Bambi Cantrell, Dennis Reggie and many well known photographers are not really good photographers. Most clients like their assistance's photo images. But they are smart and made sure the assistance signed their contracts. All cheat and using Photoshop daily.
Other rights include shooting in a public place. In an event open to public, and or in a public place - photographers have the rights to shoot. Consent to a photographer taken a photo can be as simple as the subjects posing for the shot. This is an exception stated in the personal protection act as in my country's law.
Jared my nephew shoots concerts and he has had agreements with some bands to shoot them and he allows them to use them so he can also but some bands are cropping his watermark out and not giving him credit like if they shot the phots themselves. Can you please give us your input on this situation?
Also sometimes with street photos you have to worry about defamation. Some people like to knock photogs with that. One of the grey areas is with architecture. If it's a well known building with a unique recognizable look you need permission to use the image. Government buildings are a no no, but you're not allowed to know which ones those are until it's to late. Not sure if someone can tell me how it goes for places of public transportation. I understand the security risk, but is it ok?
Question, Im a photography enthusiast, I regulary join paid or free event that allow me to shoot certain model. Ofcourse I dont have any written model release form. If I publish the picture on a Magazine or somewhere without letting the model know, does he/she have the rights to take legal action against me?
Hey Jared i was told that someone saw my pictures on a tv show of a famous boxer, it took me almost a year but I found the show and saw that Getty Images took the credit for my pictures. How do I get paid for that because I know they did and I can't seem to get anyone on the phone to talk about it. Should I go the legal route. Thanks.
There are exceptions, however. For example, if someone in the witness protection program was photographed by you -- even unknowingly -- you would be in violation of state and possibly federal law for not deleting the photos of that person when a request was delivered to you either immediately or later.
Great tips thank you! my brag- won an online photo contest with a naturally amusing cat photo it was published into a large book. Amazingly this was all done online no negatives frills etc. Just agreed to conditions offering permission to use photo. Tried to make a wildlife calendar years ago was asked to surrender negatives permanently therefore ownership to photos.
Am glad, I came across, this because I had the same problem. I wanted to know if there is a way where I can write a contract or tips for a photography when it comes to a contract? I was getting bullied by the person and her husband came out for me, telling me not to use etc. I wanted to know what I can i do in this situation? Because I want to put on my Instagram and website but they are stalking me, don't want my Instagram to be shut down. Should I also, watermark? My photographs Hope you can advice me.
I had a shoot yesterday for Willis Tower (Formerly Sears Tower) and they paid extra money to have exclusive rights to those images. They are giving me credit on the website, but it was agreed that I am not to put it online anywhere. Get absolutely everything in writing, really.
another point of view....I photographed a drop dead gorgeous girl a while back who later moved from my area of California, and got married. Although I had a generic model release, I contacted her to get her approval to use a few of her photos in a website i was making....We always had a good casual relationship but, now being married she was hesitant to have her photos shown. In the end, I decided not to use her photos. Instead of getting into a hassle and garnering bad will, although I probably could have used them. Besides, Cali, is full of beautiful girls so im hoping to find another gorgeous face to photograph...haven't we all been there?
Yo fro, I need a good Intermediate camera, i thought of the D3200 but then again thats too beginner-ish, don't know about the 650D though. Any suggestions. Cannot exceed $1000
as an add-on to this, when you post media (in this case, photos) to online services, be sure to read the fine print on rights, some sites declare that once you upload them, they become the owners. In ALL cases, read the fine print for media ownership.
Jared, great video. Thank you for making yourself available and being open and generous with your knowledge and experience. We're all very lucky when somebody decides to share and help others out. I've found your videos to be very helpful and this is a very important issue that (in my experience) a lot of working photographers don't fully understand. Thanks again!
I've had similar treatment from security in a shopping centre/mall. These are "private property" according to the security and any management types. Just so happens they're open to the public and their entire purpose is to be accessed by the public. Sometimes, writing a letter or calling the management well in advance and outlining what you'd like to do and how it'll be used... can get you permission. If you have to agree to certain conditions then it may be better to find a different location.
Hey Mr Fro dude. Just discovered your channel recently and wanted to thank you for sharing with us all your knowledge. I'll be going through more of your vids over the weekends cause there's a lot I know I can learn from them. Anyway, thanks again Fro Bro.
One thing here, I think needs clarification... Just because someone paid you to shoot them does NOT surrender your rights as a photographer to use the images yourself. You can still use them in your port, on your web site, etc, for self promotion, UNLESS you signed a contract with the client giving them EXCLUSIVE rights to the images. You do need a model release expressly giving you the right to sell the images or have them used for promotion of a product or service OTHER than your own photography, which this photographer seems to have gotten from the models directly. This videographer she was dealing with is totally full of crap though.
I’m a fine art photographer do I need a model release to sell the images. I paid the model for the shoot and no model release was signed. And each time the work gets published to promote my work she goes to Harris the organization saying they own no rights to publish them.
Kudos Jared, I can't stress to my fellow photog friends and upcoming photog friends enough on how many rights they actually have as photographers regarding the images.
Great video bud
The mall is a public place on private property. As a private owner they can ask you not to take pics. It is not illegal to take pics since you have to be breaking a law in order to be doing something illegal. If a mall rep asks you to stop taking pics be polite, apologize, and tell them you didn't know that it was against their policy. They can't ask you to remove film or delete digital pictures and they can't detain you or take your personal property unless you are actually breaking a law.
In the US, copyright is automatically assigned to the creator of the work. You own the copyright on that picture. Now, whether you can get the picture from the camera or not could be an issue, and how you prove that you actually took the picture is just your word against his. So you do own the copyright, but it doesn't seem like a smart thing to do unless you have a lot of access to the camera to get your pictures off before the other person claims they are his.
Also, regardless of whether or not you sell the rights to your photos, you can always use them as part of your portfolio/to promote you business. You took it, it is part of you body of work. You might not be able to sell them if you sell the rights to the photos, but you are always allowed to let people know that you took those photos.
Thanks Jared, that was good info to have in mind. I always had my doubts as to my rights as a photographer, but you made it clear here on this video. Thanks again, I am learning a lot from you and the fro site.
[cont]
You will also have to be careful of any copyrighted design or artwork in the photos. In the case Jared is talking about, are there any copyrighted artwork or design elements in her photos that are copyrighted to the other party, or a third party? She could be restricted in how she uses the photos if there is. However, she should still be able to use the photos in a non-commercial manner if there is. But I will say, are the photos good enough to go to though this hassle over?
This is one of the reasons why a manager from a private entity could ask a photographer or other digital creator to stop recording/taking pictures in certain areas.
Restaurant and hotel kitchens can be a bit tricky to get some "street photography" shots depending on the management and/or managers on duty. Kitchens generally don't have corporate logos, but TMs could just be their scapegoat for privacy as kitchens have some expectation of privacy. Never got these employees forced me to delete the pictures of them, but only asked me to stop.Other times the kitchen staff give me a look and I point my camera away as I intended to do candid street photography (i.e. documenting cities/towns).
For anyone: The catch here is try to read the room of the group of people and listen to your intuition. Not an expert in reading the room, but a stoic mind increases accuracy. If you are anxious around certain areas or people with your camera/phone, there is a chance that it may not be the best time.
In Singapore, according to Copyright Act, A: If you are a freelance, 1. If you are paid, Copyright goes to your client. 2. If you are unpaid, Copyright belongs to you. B: If you are from a registered company: The copyright goes to the Company, NOT the photographer who shoot it. and doesn't matter its paid or unpaid. All above subject to other agreements made as you mentioned in the video.
Even if it seems creepy or weird, you can photograph the kids in public too (in the US). If you are standing on public land you can photograph essentially anything and anyone (except some military property and some nuclear power plants, but the publicly visible areas of both are usually OK to shoot). The only time you really can't shoot someone is when they have a reasonable expectation for privacy (i.e. you can't go in a public bathroom and photograph them even if it is "public").
That is a grey area because the mag could claim the pics are editorial in nature, not advertising, thus they can publish them (if you do the research, artistic expression and fair editorial use are generally held up in court). However, again, they have the right to ask you for the release regardless of your actual rights to the photo since they are the publisher and they make their own guidelines based on their own legal interpretation. Either way, the magazine will let you know the specifics.
Perfect Video... Short... To the point...No repeating the same thing... a and not to much ranting... perfect... Keep it like this.... Thanks Fro!!!
Because if you say it in a normal tone at a normal speed you run the words together and it sounds like frono's photo and it is confusing, so he makes a point of separating the words entirely and changing the intonation of each word so they are distinct. For marketing and branding purposes it helps to do strange little things that make people remember you too.
Yo Fro!! Just wana say thank you for the amazing videos that you do, and really great to see that you are directly helping some people...
depends on your location, the Canadian copyright act Section 13(2) says that the person who commission you to take photos (client or photographer that hires you) holds the copyrights unless you made it clear in a contract. If you want to read more, google "capic what you sell". Very interresting site I learned a lot, I also printed model releases to carry "just in case"
It is legal for you to take photos of someone as long as you are not hiding it or if they are aware of it, it IS however illegal to make the photo public online or in prints without a written realease form.
Does these rights apply in 2019?
That is highly determined by the "owner" of the landmark. For instance, the Eiffel Tower has no daytime restrictions, but in Chicago you can't take pictures of landmarks without a permit. You need to specifically check the rules for each landmark. It can take a lot of research and calling around to know for sure. On the other hand, people take pictures of landmarks and make money off them all the time and they get away with it even when they shouldn't, so it depends on your personal ethics too.
In public, you have no expectation of privacy and you may photograph whomever and whatever you would like -period. You have all rights to the photo for personal use and prints, but if you wish to use the photo for commercial applications (advertising) you need a written release. This is the case in the U.S., but this varies greatly by country.
Jared is right - unless you have some verbal (harder to prove, but still valid, IIRC) or written agreement *prior* to the shoot, whoever pressed the shutter button owns the copyrights & licensing rights.
IIRC there are slight differences in different countries, e.g. in Australia I believe if you are employed as part of your job to take photos, the employer owns the rights regardless of if you have signed a contract (as in the US & UK). You'll have to check in your own country.
[cont...]
I'm not sure you are right in all terms.
Here in Germany, and we are not the only one, you cannot take photos of persons and own them automatically.
If there is nothing written, the person on the Photo can demand to delete the photo, especially when you can make profit out of it. So, no "contract/written agreement" --> no owner of shooted photos. This is also to protect the people on the photos, so they have control what happens with the photos.
In Australia the laws on copy rights is different, for commercial photography it is as you describe but domestic photography ie Wedding Portrait it is the client who owns the copy right unless their is a contract very the ownership.
Another amazing video! I would have to agree. You created the shot. You took the time to angle it, focus it, make it what it is! Of course its YOUR picture! Great topic
It’s clear to us as photographers, but I’ve had clients that don’t see it so clearly. That’s why it’s so important to write it out in the clear. It helps to avoid future misunderstandings.
That's an easy question to answer. Basically with street photography since you're in public you have 0 expectation of privacy. Without having an expectation of privacy legally you can be photographed or you can take photographs without asking permission. With that said far as I know the subjects have 0 legal rights to the images HOWEVER it is good form to ask first if possible and if a subject sees a photo and asks for it to be deleted it is good form to do so.
Hi, What are your thoughts on 3rd party use?
For example: Your client gives the photos that were made to promote their services to another entity/vendor.
Just a quick note to all of you mentioning the law.
Laws are different in each country, and in some nations (The UK and The USA are 2 of many) the law even varies by region. Please be specific about where the law applies that you are quoting as it can become confusing without this information, thank you.
I'm guessing that Jared is referring to USA.
This also applies to the following, If you use somebody else's camera your still considered the artist and therefore the copyright belongs to you.
If you shoot on the street for editorial purposes such as news etc and not for commercial purposes you do not need a model release. I'm a press photographer and I have to deal with this issue on a daily bases.
Hi, TheCrookedPenguin. I am a photojournalism major at Purchase College, so I'd like to hel answer your question.
From what I have learned so far, you are allowed to take someone else's photograph without asking first as long as they are not a minor. It is usually a good idea to ask the person regardless, however, it is always good to take the photograph as you intended before going in and asking to make sure you do not interfere with the moment your capturing.
yes
I was with my friends taking pictures in front of BJ's restaurant in California and I was stopped by security personnel told me I can't take pictures with their logo on it because it was copyright protected.
not sure where you are...but here in the uk it's not ilegal to put the image online. it only becomes ilegal if you sell the image to be use for, lets say, advertising. Because when you do that you are, in effect, putting their name to whatever is being advertised, and making out that they endorse that product, when in fact they may not like that product or the company behind it.
(I'm not an expert, so I MAY be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's the basic idea.)
Great video! Carolyn E. Wright is the USA authority on photographers rights. I wish I had visited her blog sooner, it would have saved me hours of legal research.
Jared I love what you present to the people man!!!! I met you back at the FStoppers party at Peter Hurley Studio!! Aside from being an amazing photographer you are a cool ass dude!!
It's obvious that the photographer always has the publishing rights on a pictures unless the contract about those pictures says differently. However, the people you can recognize in your pictures also have rights and you need to have permission from them before you can publish those pictures. Even when shot in a public place. There are exceptions to this, of course, but in general, you need a release form from the people in your pictures. At least, that's the law in Belgium.
Hey Jared, great reminder to keep our rights in mind. I have a question about rights when shooting a show. I've taken some shots of bands playing that have been used in online concert and album reviews uncredited (just taken from facebook). They're watermarked, but not with my website or anything, should I send an email to the author of the article or the publication and request credit? I'm stoked to see my work there so I don't necessarily want them taken down.
in short if you take the image you own the image and copyright and depending on the release you got from the model as to how she is delt with or compensated if at all.
In Canada, federal copyright law has been changed. Now a photographer always owns their photos. You still need a release to sell the photos, but even after selling, the photographer retains copyright.
I had a question about putting watermarks on your photos. I have been looking up information about the pros and cons. Best piece I have read is that "You don't get mad when you see an emblem on your car, infact you take pride in it" What are your thoughts on having a small discrete watermark on your photographs you give clients.
There is this Gypsy Vanner horse show that tours the country. People bring in their Gypsy Vanners and pay to compete for prizes. They were performing at a public venue owned by the local city. As we entered, a woman came up to me and asked me if I was there to take photos for business. I told her no, it was just personal photos. The event photographer, apparently, was so insecure with his job being taken from him, that during a break in the show, the announcer told everyone that they could use the photos they took of the horses for personal use. However, if we took our photos and tried to sell them for profit, or even utilize the photos in our photography portfolio to obtain business profit, then the event photographer would legally be able to track us down and sue us over our photos. It was very hard to find this event photographer, but I found his portfolio, and he mass uploaded every photo of his, even the very bad ones (He used flash a lot, causing a lot of white eye in the horses). I can see why he felt so threatened.
If a parent of each girl cosigned a contract that states you are giving them something in exchange for money, then it is a valid contract and they owe you the money if you gave them the product. If you mutually chose to void the contract, they need to return all of the product to you. The digital pictures are part of the return, meaning they need to delete digital copies but you need a lawyer in your jurisdiction to verify. If you didn't void the contract, they owe you the money for the product.
Does a news outlet have any right to use my photos? I shot photos of an outdoor music festival as a volunteer for a radio station with the understanding I would allow them to us the photos in promotions and on their Facebook. That is fine. But Monday evening I find two of my photos on the front page of the newspaper, I was not asked for permission to use them (they did credit me). They pulled the images from my public Facebook post. Does the newspaper need to seek my permission to use my images?
diapernh I would say so
diapernh entirely depends on the licensing... from a Facebook post is a no-no unless you specifically released them in their, but if you said something like these are CC-by-SA 4.0 then that would be allowed. So no, the newspaper commited copyright infringement, unless they got a deal with the radio station
My understanding of FB privacy policy is that, once you post something to FB it ceases to be your property.
Sort of the same way with your bank.... when you deposit money in the bank, it's no longer yours, it belongs to the bank.
pthompson108 pthompson108 it doesn’t become Facebook’s.
That’s like saying if you draw on paper it becomes the paper company’s property.
Your copyright is yours on any social media unless you sign over the rights or produce content under ‘Work for Hire’.
Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Flickr ask for the right to modify creative works because the companies need to resize, compress, and transmit those works across servers.
Intellectual property cases have slapped those companies on the wrists for over reaching Term of Service.
Kinda like how some wedding photographers add in the contract that the couple can't over edit their photos and post them on social media .
it is , that is one of the many rights a photographer has all over the globe.
hey jarid....im a photographer also....(have a D7000...LOVE IT)....what forms do u use....release forms, useage forms, etc...???
Thanks Jared! great info. In this situation, would not having the model release forms from the models change anything?
Did "the bad guy" setup the lightning for the shoot or put some effort in it?
Fast and to the point. Thats how I appreciate videos. Fro do you happen to know where can we have access to the Photo release forms? Or we basically write them, print them, and use them?
HUgs,
Zoe
Can't help but picture the grid lines of the rule of thirds in the screen... LOL!!! Good video... and very informative as well...
You paint it, shoot it, record it (without background music from a live band etc.) it's your's!
What if I use my friend's camera and memory card - does he or do I own the photographs?
Whoever pushes the button owns the photo.
Remember that next time you or someone you know asks someone to use their phone to take a picture.
I'm taking pictures at a public marathon. This is a public event with no expectation of privacy. I'll be taking pics of hundreds of people. Getting a model release for every person in the race is going to be impossible. As you know, out of 100 photos maybe 2 will be worth printing and entering into a contest. Do I need to get a model release from one of the runners in the race to use the photo I took of them for the contest?
Also, if you're an employee of a company, not an independent contractor, then you don't own the rights to the photos that you take while working for the company. However, in all other cases, you own the rights to what you shoot, unless specified otherwise.
This is such important info. Seriously. Thanks Jared!
I have a question for you!! How do you go about officially copyright your photographs and Can you copy right a portfolio's worth of work??
Jared, would you recommend an 85mm 1.8g for street portraits? I have a D3100.. Thanks in advance!
Hey Jared! Great videos!
I have a kind of legal manner question about street photography and generally shooting in public. Is it invasion of somebody's privacy if u take their photo without asking first and what rights do the ones depicted on the image have on the picture itself?
Basic contracts; there is no contract without exchange(meaning something of value). "You take pics, I'll take vids", without some exchange;you own your pics. To quote Cindi Lauper, money changes everything.
Oh, I've been there. So frustrating!! {This is my most favorite video. Best information. Thank you so much!}
I was a second shooter for 4 wedding this last spring. I was learning and being mentored at the same time. We had no writen agreement, no mention of whos property the photos belong to. I did ask if I could us any photo in the class I was taking at the time. One of the 4 I was paid $60.00 for being an assistance but I spent most of the time photographing. Some of the photos where taken on their camera but I was given a lot of the files I took. Other shots were with mine, to continue in comment
Hey this really helpful but I have a question: I did a couple of girls senior portraits recently, and I had them sign forms and they also were going to pay me (they asked me). I gave the pictures to both of them (unedited) so they could choose which ones I should use. One of them put them up on Facebook and didn't give me credit. She later said that she wasn't going to use them (after I did all the hard work editing them) and she still offered to pay. She is a minor but we had her mom sign the
I'm not an attorney and don't play one on TV but I do adhere to saying that it cost less to have an attorney help KEEP you OUT of trouble than to GET you Out of trouble. 9 out 10 times not an issue but kinda like buying insurance. You pay for it in hopes of never really needing it.
One of your best videos Fro, thanks!!!
Portrait, Landscapes, Night, outdoor stuff mainly
You forgot about one thing. You can't use your footage how ever you won't publicly without the confirm from the subject you shoot. What I mean is, you can't for an example interview a random person on the street and then public release it against he's will. You talked about rights, and that's good, but you should also talk about the rules of publishing. Because their are some shady lines there to look out for as a newbie in photography.
Could you elaborate on this further? I'm just interested in where you found this information. :)
@BoldtCave That makes sense. I still think it sounds strange.
How about a smartphone app that shows the most relevant legal points depending on which country you are in? With auto-update of course. Digital model releases could also be built in.
Yes. In Lithuania (EU) you must have a parents permision to photograph kids. And you can't phograph compromising things (like injuries or damaging things). Cheers.
Hey Jared, thanks for the info but you left me in one hole now.... I also recently did a photo shoot (TFP) for a model who also brought along a friend.. I didnt get a release form the friend...
Can I use the photos in my portfolio legally without the release form?
If yes, then so what is the point of needing a release form?
actually, although may be creepy, it is not illegal. If you are in a public space, you can shoot anything. If they want to walk around nude in front of their window, you can take their photo from the public sidwalk. Look up the story of the art photographer who shot from his apartment building people in the next building going about their life and then having a show. S/he was sued and the photog won...no expectation of privacy.
@JaredPolin What about our rights as a photographer when taking photos in public?
Thank you for this video!!! This happened to me but with my family. I was threatened for posting on My photo ig account for a family event that I offered to photograph and paid for the materials in that shoot (smoke bombs). I was proud of my image and for my family and they threatened me.
Does this apply to video too? Example: if I were in an agreement with someone to take video of an event and they would pay me a small fee but there was no signing over of usage or copyright. Do I still maintain the rights to my video and can use them or sell them as I see fit? I would hope so. Also, please let me know.
What about the public photo. In Quebec Canada and in France you cant take photo of people in the street and use it without their permission. So it's also depend of your location.
I've started doing paid photography for a studio, and haven't yet signed any papers nor release forms. Am I allowed to send private links to my portfolio to new potential clients as a freelancer with images from those studio shoots?
If you're watching this video and thinking "He's just talking about the US", he actually is not. The Berne Convention is the international treaty regarding copyright, and includes most of the world as signatories. If your country is a signatory, what he said here applies to you as well - unless your government has decided to pass laws that erode the Convention's protections, in which case, take that up with your government.
I wish you would have elaborated on taking pictures of people in public and what the laws and rights to you as the photographer. BUT, thanks for the info!!!
She gave you consent to shoot her because she knew you were taking model shots and she willingly entered into them. There is nothing she can really do about a public showing of the pictures, for instance if you put them in an art gallery or a photo book or your web galleries. The model release gives permission to use their likeness in advertising, so if you try to sell that photo to a magazine they likely won't print it without a release from the girl.
Hello Jared,yesterday I went to a football stadium and tried to take a panorama of the stadium (inside the stadium). But I was stopped by the security guard and he told me I can't take the photo of the stadium with the dslr as it infringes the copyright. I don't understand it, I got my own camera and I own the photo I took, that's what I told him. But he said the is copyright to the professional photographer they hired. You understand what I meant? So, I can't take any photo next time?
You can, unless the picture is clearly harassing your subject, like taking an ugly photo just to offend or blackmail that individual.
I have specific questions pertaining to photographing musicians at festivals… i would love a video on that…
Stephanie,
He was trying out & learning how to shoot videos.
Then all of the sudden, he found out that you are a better photographer than he was.
Be proud of yourself. Don't deal with jerk like him.
Did you know Bambi Cantrell, Dennis Reggie and many well known photographers are not really good photographers. Most clients like their assistance's photo images.
But they are smart and made sure the assistance signed their contracts.
All cheat and using Photoshop daily.
Thanks for the explaination. Do you know if these rules apply to Europe as well?
Other rights include shooting in a public place. In an event open to public, and or in a public place - photographers have the rights to shoot. Consent to a photographer taken a photo can be as simple as the subjects posing for the shot. This is an exception stated in the personal protection act as in my country's law.
Jared my nephew shoots concerts and he has had agreements with some bands to shoot them and he allows them to use them so he can also but some bands are cropping his watermark out and not giving him credit like if they shot the phots themselves. Can you please give us your input on this situation?
Just a note, that is the way it is in the US. I know in Canada the law is different, and I don't know about other countries.
Also sometimes with street photos you have to worry about defamation. Some people like to knock photogs with that.
One of the grey areas is with architecture. If it's a well known building with a unique recognizable look you need permission to use the image. Government buildings are a no no, but you're not allowed to know which ones those are until it's to late.
Not sure if someone can tell me how it goes for places of public transportation. I understand the security risk, but is it ok?
Question, Im a photography enthusiast, I regulary join paid or free event that allow me to shoot certain model. Ofcourse I dont have any written model release form. If I publish the picture on a Magazine or somewhere without letting the model know, does he/she have the rights to take legal action against me?
Hey Jared i was told that someone saw my pictures on a tv show of a famous boxer, it took me almost a year but I found the show and saw that Getty Images took the credit for my pictures. How do I get paid for that because I know they did and I can't seem to get anyone on the phone to talk about it. Should I go the legal route. Thanks.
There are exceptions, however. For example, if someone in the witness protection program was photographed by you -- even unknowingly -- you would be in violation of state and possibly federal law for not deleting the photos of that person when a request was delivered to you either immediately or later.
what products do u use for your hair; i have a afro myself.
What is a model release and why would a photographer need one if the photographer owns the images?
Great tips thank you! my brag- won an online photo contest with a naturally amusing cat photo it was published into a large book. Amazingly this was all done online no negatives frills etc. Just agreed to conditions offering permission to use photo. Tried to make a wildlife calendar years ago was asked to surrender negatives permanently therefore ownership to photos.
Am glad, I came across, this because I had the same problem. I wanted to know if there is a way where I can write a contract or tips for a photography when it comes to a contract? I was getting bullied by the person and her husband came out for me, telling me not to use etc. I wanted to know what I can i do in this situation? Because I want to put on my Instagram and website but they are stalking me, don't want my Instagram to be shut down.
Should I also, watermark? My photographs
Hope you can advice me.
I had a shoot yesterday for Willis Tower (Formerly Sears Tower) and they paid extra money to have exclusive rights to those images. They are giving me credit on the website, but it was agreed that I am not to put it online anywhere. Get absolutely everything in writing, really.
another point of view....I photographed a drop dead gorgeous girl a while back who later moved from my area of California, and got married. Although I had a generic model release, I contacted her to get her approval to use a few of her photos in a website i was making....We always had a good casual relationship but, now being married she was hesitant to have her photos shown. In the end, I decided not to use her photos. Instead of getting into a hassle and garnering bad will, although I probably could have used them. Besides, Cali, is full of beautiful girls so im hoping to find another gorgeous face to photograph...haven't we all been there?
Yo fro, I need a good Intermediate camera, i thought of the D3200 but then again thats too beginner-ish, don't know about the 650D though. Any suggestions. Cannot exceed $1000
Thanks. It is really cool to hear about how other countries do things! :)