2nd shooter problems

[mishanikole]

Hello everyone,
I sued a second shooter for my last wedding. I paid her before she left and she never gave me the images. She wont return phone calls, emails or texts. A friend mentioned that I might want to provide memory cards for second shooters and ask them to give them back before they leave the event. Any suggestions.

edited...

[lyncca]

Most weddings I second shoot with bring a laptop and download the pictures before we leave. Generally only the people I have worked with multiple times have me send them the files.

I don't think it is necessarily fair as a second shooter to take my images from me. I did shoot them afterall, so I feel I should be able to process them and use them on my portfolio. I know there are photographers that use that method but more than likely I wouldn't shoot with them.

[Tom]

Most weddings I second shoot with bring a laptop and download the pictures before we leave. Generally only the people I have worked with multiple times have me send them the files.

I always have a laptop and two external hard drives. All images from all photographers are downloaded and backed up before we leave the reception no matter what.

I don't think it is necessarily fair as a second shooter to take my images from me.

All agreements can differ, but you are being paid for a service.

If you shoot for the Houston Chronicle or the DMN, you likely relinquish your rights to the image, but they allow you to use for portfolio.

But for a photographer to give the images or sell the images to the pictures, they have to have the right to do so, which you agree to by shooting for them for pay and giving your images.

If you don't want to sell the rights to your images, you shouldn't be second shooting.

I did shoot them afterall, so I feel I should be able to process them and use them on my portfolio.

I edit my images from a wedding to have a certain feel, and I want that to be the same throughout the set. I don't want them to be able to tell who shot what, because everything was shot by my studio. That is why I do all the editing and why I pay my second shooters well - so I can get better second shooters.

Many photographers do not allow the second shooter to use for their portfolio because a potential bride may be confused when they see the same image on two different portfolios. If you shoot a high dollar wedding for someone and put those on your portfolio, it makes it look like you are able to book those high dollar weddings, when you actually are just second or assisting.

[ronocnikral]

paying when the images are delivered is usually a good idea, not after they are done shooting.

[lyncca]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

I always have a laptop and two external hard drives. All images from all photographers are downloaded and backed up before we leave the reception no matter what.


All agreements can differ, but you are being paid for a service.

If you shoot for the Houston Chronicle or the DMN, you likely relinquish your rights to the image, but they allow you to use for portfolio.

But for a photographer to give the images or sell the images to the pictures, they have to have the right to do so, which you agree to by shooting for them for pay and giving your images.

If you don't want to sell the rights to your images, you shouldn't be second shooting.


I edit my images from a wedding to have a certain feel, and I want that to be the same throughout the set. I don't want them to be able to tell who shot what, because everything was shot by my studio. That is why I do all the editing and why I pay my second shooters well - so I can get better second shooters.

Many photographers do not allow the second shooter to use for their portfolio because a potential bride may be confused when they see the same image on two different portfolios. If you shoot a high dollar wedding for someone and put those on your portfolio, it makes it look like you are able to book those high dollar weddings, when you actually are just second or assisting.

I didn't say I wasn't giving the rights to the images. I just said that I won't shoot unless I can keep my images to use for my portfolio. I also like to process my images to my style for my site. When I am a paid second shooter, I give the the RAW files to process as they choose.

I've had photographers tell me to wait for X amount of time to display them, which is fine for me too.

Like you said, it depends on the agreement and whatever someone is paid. For me, I'm generally paid a fairly minimal amount of money for 8-14 hours of work (not counting driving) so I want porfolio images

[Tom]

Don't discount the experience you are getting from shooting with another photographer that is booking the wedding - so they are probably more experienced, more talented or better at marketing. You can learn a lot. There are a number of photographers that I wouldn't hesitate to take a second shooting gig for, even though I run my own successful business.

[lyncca]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

Don't discount the experience you are getting from shooting with another photographer that is booking the wedding - so they are probably more experienced, more talented or better at marketing. You can learn a lot. There are a number of photographers that I wouldn't hesitate to take a second shooting gig for, even though I run my own successful business.

Absolutely agreed ;)

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Pretty bold post for #12. Calling out someone publicly like this only hurts your reputation as well. I think it would have been a bit more professional had you asked anyone to PM you if they were interested in the name and worked in the affected area.

Sorry for your troubles and I realize you want to hurt this person like they did you but come on...

Joe

[photojournalist]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

All agreements can differ, but you are being paid for a service.

If you shoot for the Houston Chronicle or the DMN, you likely relinquish your rights to the image, but they allow you to use for portfolio.

With the DMN, you license your images to be use exclusively 30 days after the first publication of the images. Afterwards it becomes nonexclusive. You retain your rights.

[toverman]

I don't have any suggestions in this case.

For the future, I'd recommend building relationships with a variety of shooters you can trust. If you are contracted for a wedding and are fully paid by the day of the event, your second shooters should have the same courtesy. As noted above, you can transfer their images to a portable hard drive or laptop and then your business together is complete. If it is someone you trust, then you don't have to worry about them delivering a DVD of the files at a designated time.

I would hope the original poster, as a primary wedding photographer, has more/better equipment than a Nikon D40x.

[AllenAyres]

Maybe at least post the area they're from so we would have an idea of whether or not to flood his pm inbox with inquiries (I don't usually hire someone from the DFW area) :)

There's a second-shooter feedback topic here as well... surely we're allowed to post a negative review too or what's the purpose of the topic?

[ramiro]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

But for a photographer to give the images or sell the images to the pictures, they have to have the right to do so, which you agree to by shooting for them for pay and giving your images.

If you don't want to sell the rights to your images, you shouldn't be second shooting.

I don't think this is accurate. The only way a photographer, any photographer, relinquishes his rights to the images is with a "work for hire" contract/agreement. Without that particular wording, the copyright owner is the person that pressed the shutter and it happened the moment the image got transfered to a tangible media.

I am doing work for a studio in Lisle IL that one of my requirements to work for them was that I could use the images for portfolio type displays, branding materials, website and such. When they sent me the contract it was specifically work for hire, which would not allow me to do the things I wanted. I mentioned it to them and they removed the wording and simply made is specific that I can only use the images for portfolio purposes, but I cannot sell the images or prints of the images. But without the "work for hire" wording, I am still the copyright holder, and I give unrestricted use to the studio, per agreement. I hope this all makes sense.

[mishanikole]

Yes I do have beter equipment than a d40x.....thanks for the concern... ;(.

Thanks for all of the advice, its just a lesson learned.

[dminton]

Originally Posted by photojournalist

With the DMN, you license your images to be use exclusively 30 days after the first publication of the images. Afterwards it becomes nonexclusive. You retain your rights.

Yup. Straight from the DMN freelance agreement:

"... for a period of thirty (30) days after you submit the work to us, an exclusive, fully-paid up, worldwide license to use, distribute and sublicense the accepted work and after suck 30-day period, a non-exclusive, fully-paid up worldwide license to use, distribute and sublicense the accepted work. The non-exclusive license lasts for the entire term of the copyright in any accepted work. In addition, for no additional fee paid to you, you grant to TDMN a non-exclusive, fully-paid up, worldwide license to use distribute and sublicense all of the works that TDMN has previously accepted from you, if any.

You expressly agree that the license granted to TDMN in the accepted works includes the right to use all of the accepted works in any manner that TDMN sees fit, including using them in any medium of format (no known or later developed) for no additional fee paid to you."



What does this all mean? It means that anything you shoot for them on an assignment, they own the right to publish it. You retain your copyright, but you relinquish your right to tell them how they can or can not use your images. You agree that for 30 days they are the only ones on the planet who can publish or distribute the photos. After 30 days you may sell the photos to anyone else. BUT they still have the right to use them, since they still own reproduction rights to your photos forever.

In other words, if I got say, a picture of Mark Cuban picking his nose and eating it, and I was on assignment for the DMN, then they get exclusive rights to it for 30 days. After 30 days, I can sell it to anyone. But they can keep using it any way they like forever, and never have to pay me again. They can put it on the web or in the paper everyday for the rest of time, make giant billboards or even plaster it on the moon, and I never see a dime. Also since the DMN contributes to the AP, that photo can be sent to AP by the DMN and they get paid instead of me.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by photojournalist

With the DMN, you license your images to be use exclusively 30 days after the first publication of the images. Afterwards it becomes nonexclusive. You retain your rights.

Sorry, I meant as a staffer. I believe the papers retain the rights of the staffers.