Question about a release (well, kind of)

I have releases and not the kind that say "I will do what I want, when I want, how I want with your image and you're gonna let me!" type. I clearly state in mine that the image will NOT be used in any lascivious or immoral manner, and that it will NOT be altered to such an extent that the end result would in no way mirror the original, yada yada yada.

I've never had a problem with folks signing them before but suddenly I seem to be getting a lot of "I want 10% of whatever you get for it" types. I keep telling them that the shot may never sell and he or she may just be asking for 10% of nothing. I live in a fairly rural town in NC and I've taken shots of barns and horses that I really dig and the folks will either ask for a percentage or flat out tell me that they want $100 or so (One guy asked for $500) to sign the release.

Any of you encounter such things and if you have, how did you get around 'em (or did you)?

Well, have to say I have not run into that on the few I have done so far. I can say that if I did, that image just would have lay there unused. Guess the only thing I can think of is that I would offer them a copy of whatever their pic got used in.

db,

What you've run into is simply called a location fee. It may be a bit rare where you are, but at photogenic spots in larger cities, those fees make up a huge business, and are considered absolutely legit and routine.

Now, more often than not it involves large productions at private locations for everything from photo shoots to music videos to motion pictures, but (as you've discovered) folks just about anywhere will ask for a little something if they think they can get it.

It's up to you to decide if their requests are reasonable or not, and whether you would be willing to agree to a payment or try to negotiate something else, such as a tradeout for prints.

The percentage thing seems a little weird to me. I've never run into that situation, and I'm not exactly sure how they would verify what sales you make and therefore what cut they're entitled to. I've always done flat fee or nothing...

You might want to check into the legalities of photographing someone's property from the public right-of-way. It's very possible that in that case you may not even need a release...

To answer your question: if the fee was reasonable, and the location important enough to me, I simply paid it...

[QUOTE=Asylum Steve]You might want to check into the legalities of photographing someone's property from the public right-of-way. It's very possible that in that case you may not even need a release...
QUOTE]

This is the first thing that popped into my head when I read this thread. Then the more I thought about it, it made me wonder if there were copywrite or trademark rules that applied to things like this. It made me think of the posts we've had about trademarks on things like the Bean in Chicago, and the Eiffel Tower in Paris, and how it's against the law to take photos of them and use them for commercial purposes. Could the same hold true for the barn in the farmers field, or a nicely landscaped yard?

You may be in a media savvy area where a location crew has been through and offered contingency fees for site locations.

Depending on how many people you are asking, the word may be 'spreading' that there's a photographer about looking for releases.

For negotiation purposes, you could offer them a signed copy of the photo in question as the 'consideration' part of the release. General releases can usually be thought of as a courtesy, unless there are recognizable people, or a trademarked image, or you've gone onto (like a lane) or across private property(walked through a field) to obtain the photograph. If you are in the middle of a public country road and take a picture of horse leaning over a fence, it is yours. Now, if the horse is uniquely recognizable to the public or is against a backdrop that says something like "Jones Arabian Stable Clayton, NC" then you should pursue an agreement.

Not being familiar with the intricacies of NC law, does it have any state legislation like California that provides additional protections for images of people? That might change the things somewhat.

I've found very few people who wouldn't give me permission, verbal at least, to photograph from even the middle of the front yard if I asked and explained what I was doing. Otherwise a long lens might be your best friend. If the photo is truly good the wallet or checkbook often comes out when they see a print. Just show 'em what you've done and see what kind of response you get!

Good luck!

Nope. We're talking about plain ol' Mr. and Mrs. Bubba in BFE, NC. Seriously, these aren't sophisticates. I think they just see a chance to maybe make a buck (hence the percentage thing, they have no clue that these might go for a 1.50 if I'm lucky! LOL

I think the rule on public buildings is something like anything put up before 1990 (or some year) can be photographed without permission but anything after that must (I read that somewhere. I'll try and see if I can't find it again).

I know that I can photography anything I want if I can see it from a public area or road. Selling the photo would be a different thing altogether. I'll see if I can't find someone around here who might have the answers. It would be cool if each of us from different states (even countries) could gather the legal bits needed, and maybe we could make a doc so that as we travel, we can carry the "rules" around with us.

My 'drive by shooting'. I took this at 50 mph. I think I'm ok without a release. However, I took pictures at the local minor league ballpark last summer, and whether I needed them or not, had the players all sign releases.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...ckandwhite.jpg