If you attend a workshop where models volunteer to be photographed, is it ethical to put the photographs created at that workshop in your portfolio without explicit consent from the model.
I'm not talking about selling these images. I'm talking about prints to be placed in a professional portfolio to be shown to prospective clients as indication of what I can do artistically.
Probably not. Depends on the terms under which the workshop was conducted. Did you pay to attend? Since you stand to gain by the use of their images it would be safest to secure a model release which could limit use to your portfolio.
Probably not. Depends on the terms under which the workshop was conducted. Did you pay to attend? Since you stand to gain by the use of their images it would be safest to secure a model release which could limit use to your portfolio.
It was a free workshop in a private studio. The models were volunteers.
It won't hurt, of course, to get a signed model release but it is my understanding that you only need a model release when you intend to use the photo for a commercial purpose like an ad or product that sells something. I don't think the fact that you are trying to gain something from it, personally, is relevant except if you are actually selling prints of that particular model exclusively. I'm interested in photography illustration that mostly involves candid photography for magazines, books, and any other published material. These photos are used to support an idea, story or message but not to endorse a marketed product. You see pictures of people all of the time in magazines from people in crowds to more intimate close ups. Some of these people never knew a photographer was around and others were asked permission mainly out of courtesy and professionalism but I think very few of these photographers actually deal with relaease forms even though they probably carry these forms with them in case they are asked for them. Often a photographer will give the subject their business card with instructions to contact him in a couple of weeks if they want a copy of the photo he just took. This makes the subject feel good about the photos but they usually don't ever contact the photographer again. I think your portfolio photo is the same situation. The model volunteered to be photographed by you and as long as you are not using it to endorse any kind of product for money then you are fine.
It won't hurt, of course, to get a signed model release but it is my understanding that you only need a model release when you intend to use the photo for a commercial purpose like an ad or product that sells something. I don't think the fact that you are trying to gain something from it, personally, is relevant except if you are actually selling prints of that particular model exclusively. I'm interested in photography illustration that mostly involves candid photography for magazines, books, and any other published material. These photos are used to support an idea, story or message but not to endorse a marketed product. You see pictures of people all of the time in magazines from people in crowds to more intimate close ups. Some of these people never knew a photographer was around and others were asked permission mainly out of courtesy and professionalism but I think very few of these photographers actually deal with relaease forms even though they probably carry these forms with them in case they are asked for them. Often a photographer will give the subject their business card with instructions to contact him in a couple of weeks if they want a copy of the photo he just took. This makes the subject feel good about the photos but they usually don't ever contact the photographer again. I think your portfolio photo is the same situation. The model volunteered to be photographed by you and as long as you are not using it to endorse any kind of product for money then you are fine.
T
This was kind of what I was thinking...I don't intend to do anything other than print them (at home even) and put them in a portfolio.
I have used shots from a workshop with volunteer models before but only to obtain comments/critiques on PhotoSIG or similar sites. I haven't printed them or used to solicit business. I made the sponsors and hosts of the class aware of the photos and offered to either
1 - provide prints to the models,
2 - digital versions of the shots I'd edited for my own use or
3 - the option to just tell me and I'd remove the photos even from critique usage.
So far I've had no problems with any of these shots. I was approached about selling a couple of photos but I referred the prospective buyer to the model and suggested that he commission a set of photos so that the model could decide how she felt about this individual having these shots (I didn't know him from Adam).
I think it is more of an ethical issue rather than a legal one, hence the title. It is appropriate and professional to offer a free print or something to someone who takes time to pose for you but beyond that it strictly depends on what you do with the photo. Showing the photo in your portfolio without a signed release should be legal because the model vounteered and it is your work. As I already said earlier it is legal already to photograph people in public without their pemission (though you should ask when possible) and use it in various ways, non-commercially, so I think a case like this where you have a volunteer model is even safer. The key distinction here is commercial work versus illustrative work. What you don't want to do is exploit the model in any way, if not illegal it is certainly inappropriate and very unprofessional.
I have offered the digital versions of these images to the models and the ones I really want for the portfolio are not nudes :). Likely this will be a moot point because I think that the model whose photos I really want to use will say yes and sign a release. The other photo (and there is only one of the second model from that shoot) is nude but you cannot see the model's face at all and 90% of the shot is in shadow.
I was just kind of wondering about the ethics of it. I mean, from a journalism background and a class in journalism law, if you put yourself in the public eye, you are free game. I honestly would consider volunteering to model (these are NOT pros) at a PHOTOGRAPHY workshop would be considered putting oneself in the public eye.
I have no intention of selling prints of the ones with the model whose face is visible and likely won't be able to sell prints of the other because I'm fairly certain she won't sign the release (although that opens another can of worms...could I sell it since her face is unrecognizable and there are no specifically distinguishing features visible in the shot).
I'm just noodling this idea around and was hoping for input. Thanks for those who have chimed in thus far and I hope to see more :)
Model release would make me feel comfortable... Can you obtain permission from the organisers of the workshop?
That said, the three models I depict on my site have just given verbal consent - they are so well known that asking for a model release is like being rude...
I would think that the photos taken of the model would be used for classroom/workshop purposes only. Any attempt to show the photos other then maybe family members should have consent from the model. Written of course would be better.
Of course when I was in art school we did nudes and I still have sketches of the model most of them didn't include a face, so they would not be recognizable.
The model understood that all artwork done in the classwork setting would be reviewed by administrators and possibly by employers in the future. I'm assuming that they signed a release.
