Forums > General Industry > A Model's Right to Retouch Her Images.

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:12 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:12 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:13 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:13 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:13 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:14 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:14 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:14 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:14 pm Link

Photographer

STUDIOMONA PHOTOGRAPHY

Posts: 33697

Avon, Minnesota, US

These things should be clearly stated and spelled out in the usage licence/ agreement.

Jun 07 07 12:15 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:15 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:15 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Above I have posted explanations, opinions of experts, federal Appeals Court decisions, selection from a scholarly article, and a quotation from the United States Copyright office, as well as selections of the relevant parts of copyright law.  They all point in the same direction.

That said, this seems to be an emotional issue with many people, and no matter what I have posted, I know there will be those who feel the need to disagree with it.  Now is the time, if you must.

Jun 07 07 12:15 pm Link

Photographer

Natas Vandele

Posts: 1646

https://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e59/beyster/DHHolosigFinalX3.gif

Jun 07 07 12:16 pm Link

Photographer

Invenova

Posts: 532

Irvine, California, US

And the summary is......?

Jun 07 07 12:16 pm Link

Model

Nikki Kruex

Posts: 1167

Minneapolis, Minnesota, US

I tell my photogs first hand.  Before we shoot I would like you to know I intend to request raw images, I will save you any immediate trouble as I intend to retouch my own. (most of the time I do a better job of it as a 10 year adobe vet and a schooled gaphic artist),  So it's nice to know that there are no legal bindings.  Thanks TX!

Jun 07 07 12:17 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Invenova wrote:
And the summary is......?

On the first post.  In bold letters.

I should have known better.  Nobody reads.

Jun 07 07 12:20 pm Link

Model

A Akibu

Posts: 6

New York, New York, US

thanks

Jun 07 07 12:21 pm Link

Photographer

HOTTIE SHOTS

Posts: 6018

Memphis, Tennessee, US

As an attorney I can say that Tx is basically correct (as usual), although every situation is different and there are exceptions to all rules.

But as a PRACTICAL matter, any retouching is so minimal and the use so minimal that no one will do anything about it anyway, except get pissed off.

Jun 07 07 12:22 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

This post originally made under Tyler's stated Terms and Conditions, which did not make any claim to the right to modify and sell uploaded content.  Now that Internet Brands has put a new TOC in place, which does make that claim, I no longer am willing to have my works on this site.

The new TOC says, in part:

By displaying or posting content on the Site, you hereby grant us a nonexclusive global license to publish the content submitted by you to the Site. You also grant us global nonexclusive adaptation and resale rights over any content and material submitted to the Site. These nonexclusive publishing license and resale/adaptation rights extend to any materials submitted "for publication" within the Site, including both message board postings and content submitted for uploading and subsequent publishing within non-message board portions of the Site.

Jun 07 07 12:23 pm Link

Photographer

S W I N S K E Y

Posts: 24376

Saint Petersburg, Florida, US

excellent post RT..

Jun 07 07 12:23 pm Link

Photographer

Fotographia Fantastique

Posts: 17339

White River Junction, Vermont, US

Ahh, sad but true.
I miss the days when only graphics professionals had Photoshop.

PS - Thank you for taking the time to post this.

Jun 07 07 12:24 pm Link

Model

LilPinki

Posts: 351

Englewood, Colorado, US

TX..... i'm really starting to like you....

Jun 07 07 12:28 pm Link

Photographer

Carlos Nunez Photograph

Posts: 225

Los Angeles, California, US

Nikki Kruex wrote:
I tell my photogs first hand.  Before we shoot I would like you to know I intend to request raw images, I will save you any immediate trouble as I intend to retouch my own. (most of the time I do a better job of it as a 10 year adobe vet and a schooled gaphic artist),  So it's nice to know that there are no legal bindings.  Thanks TX!

10 years??

Wow I would like to see how you would look like with out photoshop.  Any photographer that gives out there raw images is a total douche.

Jun 07 07 12:29 pm Link

Model

Nicoll

Posts: 236

Dallas, Georgia, US

Thank you for this TX.

Jun 07 07 12:30 pm Link

Photographer

American Glamour

Posts: 38813

Detroit, Michigan, US

I am confused.  Can you explain that again starting from the words "Opening Statement?"

Jun 07 07 12:33 pm Link

Photographer

StephenEastwood

Posts: 19585

Great Neck, New York, US

TX   I have to say I mentioned the legality of it (which you have so nicely stated) and then stayed away in the last post simply because I am way too busy to argue with people who want to argue from a point of what they think is right rather than what is factual or legal based, I commend you for having the intiative to continue to argue with these people to try to get the truth through. 

Personally I feel most of them are, and are working with wannabes and non real world high end clients/models, people so it is really not of any real practical benifit or test of the law since most will never file a large suit against the "girl" who badly retouched thier pic from a "TFP" shoot,   and I see the level of their work and people they work with and understand where all the "model will retouch badly and destroy my good name by showing it"  comes from.  When working with high end clients and models/agents/AD's/Retouching houses etc this is a non issue since we are all actually quaility first type personalities  smile

Good luck defending the reality against the quasi religious zelots that cling to what they would like to believe rather than what is true.

Stephen Eastwood
http://www.PhotographersPortfolio.com

Jun 07 07 12:39 pm Link

Photographer

Nihilus

Posts: 10888

Nashville, Tennessee, US

https://www.naturdoctor.com/bowing.gif

Jun 07 07 12:40 pm Link

Photographer

Giacomo Cirrincioni

Posts: 22232

Stamford, Connecticut, US

You know, TX, a slight acknowledgment would have been nice....

Jun 07 07 12:41 pm Link

Photographer

Giacomo Cirrincioni

Posts: 22232

Stamford, Connecticut, US

Nikki Kruex wrote:
I tell my photogs first hand.  Before we shoot I would like you to know I intend to request raw images, I will save you any immediate trouble as I intend to retouch my own. (most of the time I do a better job of it as a 10 year adobe vet and a schooled gaphic artist),  So it's nice to know that there are no legal bindings.  Thanks TX!

You have ever right to make that request, however, I think any photographer that would agree to it is insane...

Jun 07 07 12:42 pm Link

Photographer

Emeritus

Posts: 22000

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Paramour Productions wrote:
You know, TX, a slight acknowledgment would have been nice....

Quite right.  It's fixed.  Heat of battle thing, or battle fatigue, will be my excuse.

Jun 07 07 12:43 pm Link

Photographer

Miguel Book 1

Posts: 1473

Washington, District of Columbia, US

Always is good to read TX posts.

Jun 07 07 12:46 pm Link

Photographer

11th Dimension

Posts: 188

Portland, Oregon, US

Thank you. I bookmarked this thread out of others because I liked the clear and verifiable foundation for the points being made. This is the type of commentary that I find truly useful compared to others that are contaminated with emotional and subjective fluff.

Jun 07 07 12:46 pm Link

Photographer

richard boswell

Posts: 1790

New York, New York, US

so can i then assume that i can retouch a model any way i choose put her name under the photo and post it anywhere on the web or put it in my port?

just curious?

r

Jun 07 07 12:47 pm Link

Photographer

Giacomo Cirrincioni

Posts: 22232

Stamford, Connecticut, US

TXPhotog wrote:

Quite right.  It's fixed.  Heat of battle thing, or battle fatigue, will be my excuse.

You're a Prince among men.

Jun 07 07 12:48 pm Link

Photographer

American Glamour

Posts: 38813

Detroit, Michigan, US

Nikki Kruex wrote:
I tell my photogs first hand.  Before we shoot I would like you to know I intend to request raw images, I will save you any immediate trouble as I intend to retouch my own. (most of the time I do a better job of it as a 10 year adobe vet and a schooled gaphic artist),  So it's nice to know that there are no legal bindings.  Thanks TX!

Paramour Productions wrote:
You have ever right to make that request, however, I think any photographer that would agree to it is insane...

Just because a model may be permitted to retouch images herself doesn't mean that she has a right to whatever images she wants or that she will be provided them in RAW or unedited format.  In negotiating and granting the license, the photographer still has full control over what he will provide (while the model is free to decline the shoot if she isn't getting what she wants).

An important point, however, to add to this thread, is that there is nothing in Tx's discussion which stops a photographer from issuing a license to a model permitting her to only copy or redistribute unedited images.  For that matter, the photographer could grant a license to permit her to only re-distribute images without ketchup on them.

But Tx is absolutely right, there is nothing in the law which prevents a model from editing images.  If you want to control what is done with images you provide to a model, you need clear and concise language which memorializes the licensee's rights.

Great post Tx.

Jun 07 07 12:49 pm Link

Photographer

Giacomo Cirrincioni

Posts: 22232

Stamford, Connecticut, US

richard boswell wrote:
so can i then assume that i can retouch a model any way i choose put her name under the photo and post it anywhere on the web or put it in my port?

just curious?

r

retouching and publishing are two different areas.  If you have a valid model release which would allow you to publish the image, then the answer is yes.  Your physical port would typically be exempt from the release requirement, however an online port is somewhat of a grey area - best to have the release.

Jun 07 07 12:50 pm Link

Model

Demi

Posts: 333

New York, New York, US

TXPhotog wrote:
OPENING STATEMENT

In a thread that started out as something else, we (again) got sidetracked into a discussion of a model’s legal rights to retouch photos given to her by a photographer for her use in self-promotion.  Some people claim she does not have that right.  That is false.

If it is true that the model has the right to make copies of the pictures (as, for instance, on her comp card or web site), if she has not been explicitly forbidden by the photographer to retouch her pictures she can legally retouch copies of her pictures.

Moreover, if the photographer gives her prints for her book, she can retouch the print itself legally.  That has been going on for far longer than Photoshop has existed.

That right to retouch is not absolute; it means relatively minor changes like getting rid of skin blemishes, not adding angel wings and false backgrounds.  But as long as the model (or someone acting for her) limits herself to small changes, there is nothing in the law which prohibits it.

I fully understand that there are those who disagree, or who will want an explanation and proof.  I also understand that nobody reads long posts, so I will try to keep each post on each part of the issue to reasonably manageable size.

I need to emphasize that I am not a lawyer, although I have been a successful plaintiff in copyright infringement suits, and have been involved for years on a daily basis with dealing with attorneys and others on intellectual property issues.  I have paid tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees for the knowledge and experience I have on these issues.  Nonetheless, it would be reasonable for people to want real opinions from real Copyright (Intellectual Property) attorneys on these issues, and I will provide them in posts below.  I will provide quotations from the US Copyright Office.  I will also provide links to, and selections from, Federal Appeals Court decisions that are directly related to this issue in the posts that follow in this thread.

Most of what follows has already appeared in other threads.  It is not new to MM.  Still, people seem never to have encountered it, perhaps because it ends up (as I suppose this thread will, sigh) in threads hundreds of pages long.  So here it is, right up front.

Amen

Jun 07 07 12:50 pm Link

Photographer

Giacomo Cirrincioni

Posts: 22232

Stamford, Connecticut, US

Alan from Aavian Prod wrote:

Nikki Kruex wrote:
I tell my photogs first hand.  Before we shoot I would like you to know I intend to request raw images, I will save you any immediate trouble as I intend to retouch my own. (most of the time I do a better job of it as a 10 year adobe vet and a schooled gaphic artist),  So it's nice to know that there are no legal bindings.  Thanks TX!

Just because a model may be permitted to retouch images herself doesn't mean that she has a right to whatever images she wants or that she will be provided them in RAW or unedited format.  In negotiating and granting the license, the photographer still has full control over what he will provide (while the model is free to decline the shoot if she isn't getting what she wants).

An important point, however, to add to this thread, is that there is nothing in Tx's discussion which stops a photographer from issuing a license to a model permitting her to only copy or redistribute unedited images.  For that matter, the photographer could grant a license to permit her to only re-distribute images without ketchup on them.

But Tx is absolutely right, there is nothing in the law which prevents a model from editing images.  If you want to control what is done with images you provide to a model, you need clear and concise language which memorializes the licensee's rights.

Great post Tx.

This is absolutely true and it was the point of my getting involved in the other thread in the first place.  The point is for photographer's to understand what they need to provide in the form of a usage license so that bad retouching does not occur.  Part of the problem, quite frankly, is internet photographers who actually do provide all images (raw or otherwise) from a shoot.  This practice is as absurd as it is unprofessional.

Jun 07 07 12:52 pm Link

Model

LilPinki

Posts: 351

Englewood, Colorado, US

how about.... photographer wrecks the shape of my leg in photoshop... i crop the photo to not include the deformed leg... he threatens to sue?

Jun 07 07 12:53 pm Link