Reading mode: Light Dark

advice on this forum

Go to last post
9

98cam

Member
Messages
37
Reaction score
3
Location
US
I am confused regarding the photography from this forum to what needs a Model release or Property release.

There are alot of times i would like to take photos of people on the streets, or at various Faires, or events, yet i have not due to my confusion of when i need a release.

When I see Documentary photographs or street photographs they show people, yet the strangers faces are not blurred or whatever, so my questions are:

I want to do this type of photography, i would like to create books on various subjects, would i need any releases to do this?

Can someone please explain the legalities of this type of photography--i certainly do not have the money to be sued, but would love to this.
Thanks
98camaro
 
People in public places are fair game. But you cannot use the photos to advertise a product or sell something without a release. Somebody can sue you for almost anything, but winning is another matter. It would be best not to use a photo that made a person look foolish.
 
Model Release:

Required if any part of the person in the photograph is recognizable, even if their back is turned, if they are wearing something unusual or easily distinguishable/characteristic, then you need a model release. If the person is very far in the distance and there is no possible way to tell who it is, then you may not need a model release.

Property Release:

I'll give you an example of a shot that requires a property release AND a model release:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonsiegel/6256468665/in/set-72157627769530721

If the background was generic, like a simple painted wall and a potted plant, then no property release would be required. However, as in the example, there are elements in the background that make it easily recognizable to the establishment, and therefor a property release is required. Any major public building which is easy to recognize will also require a property release, like taking a photo of a person in front of the Eiffel Tower.

You need to get a release any time you intend to sell the photo through a stock agency, or to use in an advertisement in print, web, or TV broadcast. If you intend to publish your own book of candid photos, from what I have learned you will not need a release(someone correct me if I'm wrong). Since you are not advertising a product or service then it's fair game.

That said, as the previous poster mentioned, you can get sued for anything. ESPECIALLY if you're in America, where people make a business or living off of suing anyone and everyone for just about anything they feel like. If you think you may want to sell the photo later or use it for some other purpose, then you may want to consider, if you have an iPhone, using one of the software-based model release applications. They're a little cumbersome, but they work.
 
thank you both for your advice, I do have photos of vegas hotels for example, and I photos of a Renaissance Faire and I am actually thinking of publishing my own book, so my new question is for anyone that has published their own books, do I legally need a property release or model release? Where can I go to find out this information specifically?
 
Jonathan Siegel said:
That said, as the previous poster mentioned, you can get sued for anything. ESPECIALLY if you're in America, where people make a business or living off of suing anyone and everyone for just about anything they feel like. If you think you may want to sell the photo later or use it for some other purpose, then you may want to consider, if you have an iPhone, using one of the software-based model release applications. They're a little cumbersome, but they work.
Click to expand...
Well, I could certainly sue Jonathan Siegel for posting this on the internet, or for publishing a photo here, it is not very likely to happen. And if it did, it would be a simple matter to get the lawsuit dismissed. It would be foolish and impractical to seek a release from everyone on dpr each time one wants to post.

Getting model releases you don't need is a similar waste of time.
--
Frank

All photos shot in downtown Manhattan unless otherwise noted.
Thanks in advance for the kindness of your comments or critiques.
 
Photography laws are different all over the world, so first be aware of that. Generally in the USA, legally taking pictures of strangers in a public place is OK without a model release, as long as the picture isn't used for commercial purposes (like for selling a product or service). The photo by itself, however, can be sold as art without a model release. That's the way I understand it...hope that helps. :)
 
Digirame said:
Photography laws are different all over the world, so first be aware of that. Generally in the USA, legally taking pictures of strangers in a public place is OK without a model release, as long as the picture isn't used for commercial purposes (like for selling a product or service). The photo by itself, however, can be sold as art without a model release. That's the way I understand it...hope that helps. :)
Click to expand...
As has been pointed out, what is legal to do, may still get you sued. If I take a picture of a drunk falling down in front of a bar, I have to be very careful about the caption, not the image.

If published with caption, "Drunk falling down in front of a bar," not only do I risk being sued, but I risk losing... :(

Guy could just claim, "I tripped, and now this psycho is calling me a 'drunk!'

On the other hand, a caption called, "Man in front of a bar" still might get me sued, but I wouldn't lose... :)

Best advice I can give you, is to prepare your book, and then run the results by a lawyer. :)

A couple Two people lounging sitting in front of a cafe....



Dave
--
"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"
 
Legitimate news organizations aside, if you photograph an individual and sell the photograph - whether by itself or in a book of photographs - you need a release. This is true even if the photograph contains a primary subject in the foreground, and 20 distant but distinguishable persons in the background. Each of those persons in the background can claim damages if you don't have their signature on a release. Now, if you take that same photo and simply post it on a photography forum, you don't owe anyone anything. The reason you sometimes see collections of street photographs in situations where it would obviously have been impossible to collect releases from all the subjects is that the photographer is gambling that no one will sue him. In fact, it's probably a safe bet that none of the subjects will ever even see his work, let alone spend thousands of dollars on legal costs to sue a relatively unknown photographer.

This is true in the U.S., and as was mentioned earlier, laws vary by country. It's my understanding that a French photographer who posts a street scene on the Internet can get into serious trouble - not only civil, but criminal as well.

--
http://jackandkelly.zenfolio.com/

Canon 5D, 17-40mm, 70-300mm IS USM, 50mm f/1.8 II, 100mm macro, 28-135mm, 28mm f/2.0 Kiron, 135mm f/2.8 Rikenon, 200mm f/3.5 Komuranon, 500mm f/7.0 Komuranon
 
e.g. concerning the the legality of taking pictures on the streets
of France - it is pretty often misrepresented.

So much so that one can even suspect a malicious intent:
98cam said:
“Under article 9, protection of privacy prevents the disclosure of elements of a persons private life as well as the unauthorised taking of photographs of people and their publication”.
Click to expand...
However, the article 9 says nothing about taking photographs.

What you want to look at is article 226-1 of the “Code Pénal”
which restricts taking photographs of people in private places:

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?act=url&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do%3FidArticle%3DLEGIARTI000006417929%26cidTexte%3DLEGITEXT000006070719%26dateTexte%3D20090415%26fastPos%3D6%26fastReqId%3D381967113%26oldAction%3DrechCodeArticle&usg=ALkJrhjvqSiy3zh99zR29fjKFSaeFR0oAQ

And yet, if you read the article carefully, it is pretty clear that one
can photograph people even in private places - as long as it is obvious
that it being done and therefore their consent is implied.

Article 9 may come into play only when one wants to publish the
photographs, but that’s all. Taking photographs in public places is
perfectly legal , and there is nothing legal that people can do
about it. Publishing the photos is another matter, but then the law is
NOT that much different in comparison to other parts of the
western world.

It is strongly advisable to read the following concerning photographing
in France if you are interested - it will clarify the issue:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dolphin2001.net%2Fphoto%2Flegis%2Fdroit%2F%23privee&act=url

So, the next time you are in France don’t hesitate to photograph on the
streets. It’s legal:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=%22street+photography%22++France+-mountain+-nature+-book+-triptych&s=int&z=e&ss=4&ct=0&mt=photos&adv=1

jpr2
--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/

Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
 
filmluvr said:
Legitimate news organizations aside, if you photograph an individual and sell the photograph - whether by itself or in a book of photographs - you need a release. This is true even if the photograph contains a primary subject in the foreground, and 20 distant but distinguishable persons in the background. Each of those persons in the background can claim damages if you don't have their signature on a release. Now, if you take that same photo and simply post it on a photography forum, you don't owe anyone anything. The reason you sometimes see collections of street photographs in situations where it would obviously have been impossible to collect releases from all the subjects is that the photographer is gambling that no one will sue him. In fact, it's probably a safe bet that none of the subjects will ever even see his work, let alone spend thousands of dollars on legal costs to sue a relatively unknown photographer.

This is true in the U.S., and as was mentioned earlier, laws vary by country. It's my understanding that a French photographer who posts a street scene on the Internet can get into serious trouble - not only civil, but criminal as well.
Click to expand...
In the US, I can photograph anyone I want and make a book of these photo's or hang and sell them in a gallery, with no release required. I have to be careful only about the captioning. "Commerical Use" is defined as delling something. I.e. So that I cannot include a recognisable person in an ad pedling Coke or Pepsi, or toilet paper.

Selling a book or hanging in a gallery is for "Artistic" and not "commerical" use. Like I said, And, as I said, I am referring only to US Law.

Dave

--
"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"
 
Doesn't "publication" include posting a photo on the Intenet? I remember when these newer laws were passed in France and the discussions that ensued. It was clearly stated that posting an individual's photo on the Internet or elsewhere without permission is now a criminal offense. Is that not true?
jpr2 said:
So much so that one can even suspect a malicious intent:
jpr2 said:
“Under article 9, protection of privacy prevents the disclosure of elements of a persons private life as well as the unauthorised taking of photographs of people and their publication”.
Click to expand...
However, the article 9 says nothing about taking photographs.

What you want to look at is article 226-1 of the “Code Pénal”
which restricts taking photographs of people in private places:

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?act=url&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&twu=1&u=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do%3FidArticle%3DLEGIARTI000006417929%26cidTexte%3DLEGITEXT000006070719%26dateTexte%3D20090415%26fastPos%3D6%26fastReqId%3D381967113%26oldAction%3DrechCodeArticle&usg=ALkJrhjvqSiy3zh99zR29fjKFSaeFR0oAQ

And yet, if you read the article carefully, it is pretty clear that one
can photograph people even in private places - as long as it is obvious
that it being done and therefore their consent is implied.

Article 9 may come into play only when one wants to publish the
photographs, but that’s all. Taking photographs in public places is
perfectly legal , and there is nothing legal that people can do
about it. Publishing the photos is another matter, but then the law is
NOT that much different in comparison to other parts of the
western world.

It is strongly advisable to read the following concerning photographing
in France if you are interested - it will clarify the issue:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dolphin2001.net%2Fphoto%2Flegis%2Fdroit%2F%23privee&act=url

So, the next time you are in France don’t hesitate to photograph on the
streets. It’s legal:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=%22street+photography%22++France+-mountain+-nature+-book+-triptych&s=int&z=e&ss=4&ct=0&mt=photos&adv=1

jpr2
--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/

Comments and critique are always welcome!
~
Click to expand...
--
http://jackandkelly.zenfolio.com/

Canon 5D, 17-40mm, 70-300mm IS USM, 50mm f/1.8 II, 100mm macro, 28-135mm, 28mm f/2.0 Kiron, 135mm f/2.8 Rikenon, 200mm f/3.5 Komuranon, 500mm f/7.0 Komuranon
 
I just would like to thank everyone for their time and responses, hate to say it, I'm still unclear of what is legal. The best example I can give is this:

I have alot of photos, primarily landscapes, I do however have photos in which I went to a Renaissance Fest, I personally asked to take their photos, they agreed, now my question is this:

My book idea is more or less--"Things to do--Places to visit"---since I do not have written consent can I still use their photos with a verbal agreement, and can I sell this book--like a coffee table book?

And if I want to take photos of faires or festivals with and including people, children, at a "Public" event can these photos be used without model releases?
I am also finding it difficult to find specific "copyright" lawyers.
 
You have gotten a lot of advice that is wrong, and a lot that is speculative and not relevant to your needs.

The answer is yes, you can use these photos in a book. You do not need a model release. Art photography and documentary photography are, in the US, treated the same way as news photography. No release needed.

This is the general rule.

If you want more information, this forum is not the place apparently. Try Weekly Street Photography, where people are knowledgeable, or News Discussion or Pro Digital Talk or the professional Nikon or Canon camera forums. If you do a search in those places, you will see that that these issues have frequently been discussed. Zubu's link is also a reliable source.

Good luck.
98cam said:
I just would like to thank everyone for their time and responses, hate to say it, I'm still unclear of what is legal. The best example I can give is this:

I have alot of photos, primarily landscapes, I do however have photos in which I went to a Renaissance Fest, I personally asked to take their photos, they agreed, now my question is this:

My book idea is more or less--"Things to do--Places to visit"---since I do not have written consent can I still use their photos with a verbal agreement, and can I sell this book--like a coffee table book?

And if I want to take photos of faires or festivals with and including people, children, at a "Public" event can these photos be used without model releases?
I am also finding it difficult to find specific "copyright" lawyers.
Click to expand...
--
Frank

All photos shot in downtown Manhattan unless otherwise noted.
Thanks in advance for the kindness of your comments or critiques.
 
filmluvr said:
Legitimate news organizations aside, if you photograph an individual and sell the photograph - whether by itself or in a book of photographs - you need a release.
Click to expand...
The above is wrong and the info posted by Chato is correct. A model release is never needed when you sell a photo - it is only needed when you use a photo for commercial purposes - and the definition of that is use for advertising, promoting/marketing a product, service or company .

Selling prints, post cards or a photo book does not constitute commercial use (even though the photographer is making money) and so no release is needed. However, if the tog were to use one of the images from the book in an advert, in order to sell the book, then a release would be needed from anyone featured in the image used in the advert.

--
Dan
-

I love my girlfriend, my dog and my canon 7d - even though none of them ever do what I tell them :(

I am learning photo graphee - see the results at http://www.danmarchant.com
 
Blog that explains the myths related to property releases and model releases
http://danheller.blogspot.com/2011/09/busting-myths-about-model-releases.html

A post about property releases by the lawyer Carolyn E. Wright, aka the Photo Attorney, who specialises in intellectual property law as it relates to photography.
http://www.photoattorney.com/2007/12/property-release-requirement-put-to.html

Post by Carolyn about model releases that explains they are only needed for "commercial use".
http://www.photoattorney.com/?p=64

--
Dan
-

I love my girlfriend, my dog and my canon 7d - even though none of them ever do what I tell them :(

I am learning photo graphee - see the results at http://www.danmarchant.com
 
Jonathan Siegel said:
Model Release:

Required if any part of the person in the photograph is recognizable, even if their back is turned, if they are wearing something unusual or easily distinguishable/characteristic, then you need a model release. If the person is very far in the distance and there is no possible way to tell who it is, then you may not need a model release.

Property Release:

I'll give you an example of a shot that requires a property release AND a model release:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonsiegel/6256468665/in/set-72157627769530721

If the background was generic, like a simple painted wall and a potted plant, then no property release would be required. However, as in the example, there are elements in the background that make it easily recognizable to the establishment, and therefor a property release is required. Any major public building which is easy to recognize will also require a property release, like taking a photo of a person in front of the Eiffel Tower.
Click to expand...
I am afraid you have fallen victim to some common myths regarding photography and copyright/trademark/releases and the above it almost all incorrect.

Model releases are never needed when you sell an image and only ever needed when you use an image for advertising/promotion/marketing. Photographers generally need to get a release because the people/company they sell their images to will often want to use the image for advertising purposes/on a business website. It is unrealistic for these clients to go find the models to get a release so the tog gets one at the time they take the image and pass it along when they sell the image.

Likewise property releases have nothing to do with actual buildings. They relate to intellectual property (trademarks). You do not generally need a property release to take or sell a photo of a building.

See my post below http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1052&message=41057303 for a bunch of links that provide more details on this
--
Dan
-

I love my girlfriend, my dog and my canon 7d - even though none of them ever do what I tell them :(

I am learning photo graphee - see the results at http://www.danmarchant.com
 
I am very keen on becoming a stock photographer. However, I was a bit scared by the T & C of a stock agency when I was filling in the form that if if someone sues the company in the way the photograph was used it will be passed on to the photographer!!

That's a scary thought. It made me think that perhaps I should set up a company and trade under that to protect my personal assets. If I lose the case only the company will go and whatever many it may have, not my property and money.

I am based in the UK, might be different in the US.
 
Hello.

It is depends what country you are in. Here in the UK it is pretty much what ever you can see from a public place you can photograph. I take the view that this is the correct stance. I know in Italy they have a law that everyone has the right to privacy even when in a public place but because it is Italy no one takes any notice of it. They have a big problem with paparazie there so that is why the law was introduced. I just treat people with respect. I do exhibit images where people can be identified but I have held back on some pictures that whould be unfair to those in the picture. No one said street photography was easy. Have some guts. This stuff is for the future when all those who are in the pictures will be long gone and so will you and I.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top