Street Photography - Model Release

[Got ThatFeel]

Hi guys,

Sorry for hijacking this tread but it seem relevant to what im enquring about and therefore do not want to start a new one.

Is the model release form below suitable enough for street portraits ? Do not want it to be too long as it will seem too intimidating. I noticed that most forms online included address and witness and im pretty sure that the public are most probably not comfortable in given those particulars to a stranger.

"For valuable consideration received, I grant to (Photographer) and his/her legal representatives and assigns, the irrevocable and unrestricted right to use and publish photographs of me, or in which I may be included, for editorial, trade, advertising, and any other purpose and in any manner and medium; and to alter and composite the same without restriction and without my inspection or approval. I hereby release (Photographer) and his/her legal representatives and assigns from all claims and liability relating to said photographs.
Model Name ____________________________________ Signature _________________________
Age ________ Contact/Email ________________________"



Does " the irrevocable and unrestricted right to use and publish photographs of me, or in which I may be included, for editorial, trade, advertising, and any other purpose and in any manner and medium" give me copyrights ? or should i add in "All negatives, together with the prints shall constitute your property, solely and completely. "

Thanks.

 

[catchlights]

Hi guys,

Sorry for hijacking this tread but it seem relevant to what im enquring about and therefore do not want to start a new one.

Is the model release form below suitable enough for street portraits ? Do not want it to be too long as it will seem too intimidating. I noticed that most forms online included address and witness and im pretty sure that the public are most probably not comfortable in given those particulars to a stranger.

"For valuable consideration received, I grant to (Photographer) and his/her legal representatives and assigns, the irrevocable and unrestricted right to use and publish photographs of me, or in which I may be included, for editorial, trade, advertising, and any other purpose and in any manner and medium; and to alter and composite the same without restriction and without my inspection or approval. I hereby release (Photographer) and his/her legal representatives and assigns from all claims and liability relating to said photographs.
Model Name ____________________________________ Signature _________________________
Age ________ Contact/Email ________________________"



Does " the irrevocable and unrestricted right to use and publish photographs of me, or in which I may be included, for editorial, trade, advertising, and any other purpose and in any manner and medium" give me copyrights ? or should i add in "All negatives, together with the prints shall constitute your property, solely and completely. "

Thanks.

1) do you know what model release intended for?

2) where you get the idea of getting model release signed for street photography?

3) since you know it is impossible to get someone on the street to sign anything for a stranger, I'm sure you won't sign your name on any paper too when a random person approaches you, so why still want to try?

4) have you read the PDPA thingy?

5) have you read the SG copyrights laws?

 

[kandinsky]

Hi guys,

Sorry for hijacking this tread but it seem relevant to what im enquring about and therefore do not want to start a new one.

Your topic may be relevant, but different enough to warrant its own thread to avoid derailing the original threadstarter's question. Have pulled your post out. It's okay to create a new thread, it's free

------------

Are you planning to pay your subjects? If not, your starting words "For valuable consideration received..."in your sample text are a lie, not sure how that would work legally. It might invalidate the entire release since there was technically no 'exchange'. Not a lawyer but it looks/sounds weird to me. Good luck getting anyone to sign that! ;p I'd think someone allowing you to take a shot of them would be hard enough, much less get them to sign all rights away for free.

I think your sample is from ASMP right? https://asmp.org/tutorials/pocket-model-release.html

"For valuable consideration received, I grant to (Photographer) and his/her legal representatives and assigns

 

[catchlights]

Your topic may be relevant, but different enough to warrant its own thread to avoid derailing the original threadstarter's question. Have pulled your post out. It's okay to create a new thread, it's free

------------

Are you planning to pay your subjects? If not, your starting words "For valuable consideration received..."in your sample text are a lie, not sure how that would work legally. It might invalidate the entire release since there was technically no 'exchange'. Not a lawyer but it looks/sounds weird to me. Good luck getting anyone to sign that! ;p I'd think someone allowing you to take a shot of them would be hard enough, much less get them to sign all rights away for free.

I think your sample is from ASMP right? https://asmp.org/tutorials/pocket-model-release.html

You are correct. The photographers have to offer something to the models, in exchange to get the model release signed.


btw, thanks for moving the post to a new thread.

 

[Got ThatFeel]

1) do you know what model release intended for?

2) where you get the idea of getting model release signed for street photography?

3) since you know it is impossible to get someone on the street to sign anything for a stranger, I'm sure you won't sign your name on any paper too when a random person approaches you, so why still want to try?

4) have you read the PDPA thingy?

5) have you read the SG copyrights laws?

Thanks for the reply.

1) It is to allow the person/model to let me use the picture i took?

2) I felt it was kind of logical to do so and i have seen photographers taking pictures and asking people to sign some forms.

3) I will be approaching them for consent before taking their pictures, will be letting them know what it is for and where it will be uploaded and i will be asking for some details about themselves so why not let them sign the form at the same time to avoid unnecessary future conflicts.

4) yes i read it along with some other posts on this forum, apparently it is alright to take pictures if it is in a public place ? Eg. orchard road.

5) yes too, in this case, i the photographer would get the copyright yes? but i kind of want it to be on the contract to let it be clear to the other party?(Necessary?)

 

[Got ThatFeel]

Your topic may be relevant, but different enough to warrant its own thread to avoid derailing the original threadstarter's question. Have pulled your post out. It's okay to create a new thread, it's free

------------

Are you planning to pay your subjects? If not, your starting words "For valuable consideration received..."in your sample text are a lie, not sure how that would work legally. It might invalidate the entire release since there was technically no 'exchange'. Not a lawyer but it looks/sounds weird to me. Good luck getting anyone to sign that! ;p I'd think someone allowing you to take a shot of them would be hard enough, much less get them to sign all rights away for free.

I think your sample is from ASMP right?

Nope unless sending them a copy of the picture would count as payment. Thanks for the point out. Would it be better to change it to "In consideration of my engagement as a model,"

Yea i got it from there, most of the models are similar online and i took the shortest one.

 

[catchlights]

Thanks for the reply.

1) It is to allow the person/model to let me use the picture i took?

2) I felt it was kind of logical to do so and i have seen photographers taking pictures and asking people to sign some forms.

3) I will be approaching them for consent before taking their pictures, will be letting them know what it is for and where it will be uploaded and i will be asking for some details about themselves so why not let them sign the form at the same time to avoid unnecessary future conflicts.

4) yes i read it along with some other posts on this forum, apparently it is alright to take pictures if it is in a public place ? Eg. orchard road.

5) yes too, in this case, i the photographer would get the copyright yes? but i kind of want it to be on the contract to let it be clear to the other party?(Necessary?)

do you know how "useful" of a model release in a local context?
you read whatever things from the forum, that is some personal opinion at most, that does not hold up to anything when you are being challenge by random people you approach, or the laws.
you want to be sure about these, best is talk to a lawyer who specialise in this area. (fyi, if you anyhow ask any lawyers, they will say the same thing to you too)

and one more thing, even you find out whatever you can do, does not mean you have a green light to do whatever you like on the street, you see, yourself as a photographer also need to take so much efforts and time try to understand this thing.
how do you expect a person on the street, understand and agree with whatever you said, in 5-10 mins? (basic human psychology, whatever questions ones being asked and he/she do not understand, the reply usually is "NO")

in short, if you still think talk to a lawyer to find out all these is too much hassle, than better drop this idea in the first place.

 

[kandinsky]

Nope unless sending them a copy of the picture would count as payment. Thanks for the point out. Would it be better to change it to "In consideration of my engagement as a model,"

Yea i got it from there, most of the models are similar online and i took the shortest one.

Your change renders the release unbalanced, and possibly unenforceable from a legal standpoint? Again, not a lawyer, but based on what I can recall from some reading. Read up on : Contra proferentem, and Unconscionability). I think these releases are really written for a hired model context, not really for street.

The original meaning was basically "I, the model, in return for receiving ____, I grant the photographer these rights".

Your change changes it to "I, in return for being the model, I grant the photograher these rights...". You see the difference?

I would also question if taking a photo of a stranger on the street constitutes 'engaging them as a model'.

You can't suka suka (anyhow) change terms in a release unless you know what you're doing, cos it might end up void, or the agency you want to license the image to, they might say "This is not compliant with what we require", then all that effort would have gone to waste.

Street photography gives realism and a candid view of the world but you have to understand the limitations of how an image can be used if you don’t get releases. If you can stop passersby and explain and maybe pay them something in recognition of them signing, that’s great, but be prepared for a difficult conversation. Suspicion will have to be overcome. 
- Alan Capel,head of content at Alamy photo agency

http://www.pdnonline.com/features/What-Photographers-N-10515.shtml

I applaud your intent, but dunno how practical it is. Most of the time, for me, if the person I took a shot of doesn't want to whack me, that's a good day. Haha.

Put yourself in the shoes of the average person on the street, are you telling me if a photographer approached you while you were walking around and asked you to sign a release that allows him/her to exploit your image commercially 'any other purpose and in any manner' for free, you would sign it willingly? This means your image might somehow end up being used for stuff with sensitive subject matter. E.g., Your image might end up being used to push erectile dysfunction drugs if you're male, gambling addiction, male/female prostitution, a religious or political point of view that you don't necessarily agree with etc.

If so, I think some photogs here would be interested to hire you for TFCD stock photos, lol.

In closing, I think this makes sense:

PDN: There’s a prevailing mindset that photographers should always get model releases if they can. However, Dan Heller, you say photographers should instead consider the costs and benefits of getting model releases. Can you explain more?

Heller: Because a large company has a great deal of legal exposure if it were to publish an unreleased image for an ad campaign, it would be less likely to license an image from an unknown or untrusted source. 
Unless you’re a well-known, trusted commercial photographer who has a track record shooting models, or are with a known company, chances are very low that you will ever license an image to a large company for high fees.

While everyone’s experience may vary, here’s the quick exercise: add up all the money you ever got from sales that you never would have gotten unless those images were released. So now think about the time, effort and overhead necessary to get all the model releases you’ve ever obtained, and add the hours you invested to catalogue and maintain a relational database of images-to-model-releases. Amortize your income and expense ratio over the years you’ve been in business.

Chances are the return on that investment is very, very low. For anyone who doesn’t shoot models as their main profession, I would proffer that the time would be much better spent developing your business in other ways.

http://www.pdnonline.com/features/What-Photographers-N-10515.shtml

 

[catchlights]

yes, you have to look at the laws in a local context, not anyhow copy and paste something you saw from other countries,

model release is only useful when you are selling your photos in other countries, and reputable stock agencies will only accept a well written model release, preferably their own. and you have dot the i's and cross the t's when you fill in the particulars, else, the model release will be thrown out the windows.
So what if you spent hours coaxing your subjects for getting the model releases signned and upload it to photo agencies. Guess what? hardly any photo buyers interested in photos of random people posing on the street, probably you can make $0.25 loyalty if the photos ever sold.

and again, best way to find out the answers you are looking for is to talk to a lawyer.
You need to pay for their consultation btw.

 

[Got ThatFeel]

Thanks guys for the input.

Just to clear the air, im not going to sell the pictures to photo agencies or whatsoever.
Rather it is for a personal website which may have some affiliate marketing involved. Therefore i felt there might be a need for a release form.

 

[kandinsky]

Thanks guys for the input.

Just to clear the air, im not going to sell the pictures to photo agencies or whatsoever.
Rather it is for a personal website which may have some affiliate marketing involved. Therefore i felt there might be a need for a release form.

Ah, I see. When the usage is so overreaching/broad, as stated in the release, people will tend to assume the worst because they're really signing over everything to you and they don't know you. They have no basis to trust you. They don't know if you are lying, or if you will change your mind at a later date and exploit the images however you want, etc.

So I think what may help your project, is to word something that is more specific to your intended usage, and less broad. Something that states what the images will and won't be used for. E.g., Will never be used to sell products directly, will never be sold to a 3rd party, will never be used to promote anything sensitive/negative, etc. that's just some examples. This, I think will be an easier 'sell' than a blanket release.

 

[catchlights]

Thanks guys for the input.

Just to clear the air, im not going to sell the pictures to photo agencies or whatsoever.
Rather it is for a personal website which may have some affiliate marketing involved. Therefore i felt there might be a need for a release form.

FYI, there are many so call "models" not willing to sign a model release even they are being paid, so do you know how difficult to get a signed release from a layperson walking on the street?

IMO, get a written consent from you subjects to agree with their photograph being published at your website as portfolio is adequate, but please check with your favour lawyer is this watertight?

 

[Got ThatFeel]

Thanks guys, i will craft something more appropriate.