Contract Dispute

[Moho2025]

Hello, I hired a photographer for my wedding and now she is refusing to give over the Edited digital photos that were promised in the contract. The contract reads as follows:


Wedding photography contract


CLient:
Adress:


Telephone:
Email:

Description of Photographic Services:
Package: Basic Package- which includes the following:
up to 8 hours of coverage
Edited digital photos on disc or online
Edited Photos put into a slideshow (We exchanged this for a coffee table book)



Ceremony:
Location:
Date:
Time:
Special notes:

Reception:
LOcation
Date:
Time:
Special notes:

Charges:

The prices are based on the Photographer's Price List and includes the services described therein. In addition to the package fee the extra set of charges set forth below shall be billed if and when incurred.

Engagement photos:

Photo package:
Rehearsal Dinner:
Overtime: 50/hour

Travel:
2nd photographer:

Other: (thank you notes, coffee table books, Any prints are an additional fee)

Estimated subtotal:

Less 50.00 deposit fee due when booking:

Balance due:


At least 50% of the payment must be made by 14 days before the scheduled event. Payment in full is due 48 hours before the event. No proofs or images will be released until payment has been made in full.

The parties have read all parts to this agreement, agree to ALL of the terms, and acknowledge receipt of a complete copy of the agreement signed by both parties. Each person signing as Client should be fully responsible for ensuring that full paymentis made pursuant to the terms of the Agreement.

Client:

Client:

Photographer:


She does not state that she will be retaining the rights to the photos nor does she state that the digital photos will be proofs and will have a watermark. I'm wondering if we can make a Work for Hire case against her in order to make her release the Edited Digital Photos that were promised in the contract.

[Moho2025]

Any feed back will be most appreciated. I just feel as if her refusal to give us the Edited digital photos on disc or online is a breach of contract. She never mentioned that they would be proofs or that they would have a water mark either within the contract (as you can see above) or in any conversations we had with her until I sent her an email asking her for them.

[mwfanelli2]

Any feed back will be most appreciated. I just feel as if her refusal to give us the Edited digital photos on disc or online is a breach of contract. She never mentioned that they would be proofs or that they would have a water mark either within the contract (as you can see above) or in any conversations we had with her until I sent her an email asking her for them.

Although there are a few here who will go ballistic when I say "see a professional"... Contract law is not something you can have resolved on the internet. Most lawyers will give you the initial consultation for free. Go and ask whether your concerns are valid. If they are, small claims court is designed for this and does not require the expenses of a lawyer.

[jetrim]

I would agree with mwfanelli2, this is something that requires professional advice.

Just out of curiosity though, it would be interesting to know what it is exactly that you feel didn't comply with the contract. Proofs are unedited as a rule and will usually be watermarked "unedited proof". I use this system so that when I am shooting someone I don't waste hours of my time retouching shots that the model doesn't really care for and is never going to use. They pick from the proofs and I retouch those choices. Edited photos that have a watermark are still edited photos. It's been my experience that people who complain the loudest about watermarks are the ones who want to make illegal copies of the image (I'm not accusing you of anything, only stating my experience). When I license an image for the web it ALWAYS gets a watermark, every time, no exceptions. When I license an image for print, I embed a digital note that states the license terms and gives my contact information. Even with these precautions, I remain aware that if somebody had access to professional software and knew how to use it, they could easily undo whatever security measures I've put in place. I think it may also be worth noting that your contract was for "Photography Services" not "Wedding Photographs" it would *appear* that you were buying the service, not the RAW files & copyrights to all the images.

[Moho2025]

During our consultation she assured us that we were paying for the rights to the edited photos. She even posted the better photos free for download on Flickr, so I was surprised when she refused to put them on a disc for us. If she meant to not give us the photos then why would she post any on Flickr free of a water mark and make them available for download to anyone with a flickr account? Thus the confusion.

[Frog]

Is the watermark the hang up?

[EverlastingImpressions]

During our consultation she assured us that we were paying for the rights to the edited photos. She even posted the better photos free for download on Flickr, so I was surprised when she refused to put them on a disc for us. If she meant to not give us the photos then why would she post any on Flickr free of a water mark and make them available for download to anyone with a flickr account? Thus the confusion.

The contract says "Edited digital photos on disc or online"...Flickr would be online.