May sound dumb..

[qsfarmer]

I am taking family pictures tom for a friend and not being paid for them. If I want to post on a webpage do I need some type of release form?

 

[reznap]

I am taking family pictures tom for a friend and not being paid for them. If I want to post on a webpage do I need some type of release form?

If you're not getting paid for them, they are your property I think. That means you can do what you want with them.

 

[Cuzzy]

That's a good question, I've been doing the same for friends but I tell them before hand that I will can do what I want with the pictures....would be nice to know though

 

[qsfarmer]

Im trying to build a portfolio and I was told I might need a release if so I need to throw one together ASAP as the shoot is in the am..

 

[Cuzzy]

It wouldnt hurt, CYA just in case.
Quick google and found this on this forum, thanks to KmH

Print Release - Use License
All images © 2009 {name or studio here}, All Rights Reserved. This Use License shall be governed by the laws of the State of _________.
I, [name or studio here], as copyright owner of these images, grant a lifetime, personal, non-commercial use license to ____________________and their immediate family to print or have printed (no larger than (whatever size, if any) reproductions of these images for display in their home and workplace only.
Online Use
{name or studio here} has provided web sized and watermarked images for exclusive use on social networking web sites that are not owned by ____________________ and their immediate family. No other online use is granted. Removal of the watermark from these web sized images, or any other violation of any of the other terms, will constitute a breach of this entire Print Release – Use License, rendering it null and void in its entirety.
Copyright Information
Please remember that because these images are protected by Federal Copyright laws they may not be altered, copied, transmitted or used in any way without prior written consent of the copyright owner, {name or studio here}.
These images may not be entered in any photography or other competition or contest without the expressed written consent of [name or studio here]. Commercial use of the images is prohibited.
No waiver by either party of any of the terms or conditions of this license shall be deemed or construed to be a waiver of such term or condition for the future, or of any subsequent breach thereof. Waivers are only applicable when they are written. There will be no verbal waivers to this agreement.
The Photographer hereby warrants that he (or she) is the sole creator of these images and owns all rights granted by law.

[Name or studio here]
Address
City, State
Phone:
Email:
Authorized Signature:

 

[qsfarmer]

Thank you so much!!!

 

[Cuzzy]

Dont thank me, thank KmH

 

[KmH]

I am taking family pictures tom for a friend and not being paid for them. If I want to post on a webpage do I need some type of release form?

Depends what kind of web page it is. Being paid or not has nothing to do with it.

If it's a personal web page, you don't need a release.

How a photo with people in it will be used is what determines if a model release is need or not.

A release is only needed for a commercial use. Selling photos one at time is an editorial use, not a commercial use.

 

[FoggyLens]

You rock Cuzzy!

 

[~Stella~]

I am taking family pictures tom for a friend and not being paid for them. If I want to post on a webpage do I need some type of release form?

Depends what kind of web page it is. Being paid or not has nothing to do with it.

If it's a personal web page, you don't need a release.

How a photo with people in it will be used is what determines if a model release is need or not.

A release is only needed for a commercial use. Selling photos one at time is an editorial use, not a commercial use.

This. :thumbup: But a simple (and non-threatening looking) release from all the parties would not be a terrible idea to have on hand anyway. There's no harm in overpreparing, you know?

 

[enzodm]

For making the thread more general, it depends on country where you live. Here in EU, with some national differences, you should be more careful. Without a model release you cannot publish (no matter what is the reason, personal or commercial) people pictures, with some exception (e.g. public events, educational aims, etc) and exceptions to exceptions (if the picture harms reputation or so).

 

[wlbphoto]

from what i heard is that you only need that release form if you think or might use the photos to make money off of them

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

I am taking family pictures tom for a friend and not being paid for them. If I want to post on a webpage do I need some type of release form?

Depends what kind of web page it is. Being paid or not has nothing to do with it.

If it's a personal web page, you don't need a release.

How a photo with people in it will be used is what determines if a model release is need or not.

A release is only needed for a commercial use. Selling photos one at time is an editorial use, not a commercial use.

^----this.

You can still make money off of photos with no release ( newspapers have editorial photos in every issue that photogs are paid for ), but it does limit your outlets for the pictures. If you CAN get a release easily, its always a good idea to do that just incase you ever find a use for your photos that may have been limited without a release. Like, for instance, you get into advertising, and someone wants to use a candid shot you have of kids playing on a playground to advertise for some new pediatric drug treatment or something. It may be easy money for you, if you have the release.

Even if you were paid, unless you released the copyright to someone, you still own the pics. For instance, just because I shoot a wedding, I still technically own the actual images and sell them to the bride, groom, family etc. If "New Fangled Bride" magazine wants to use my photos as editorials, I could sell them ( although you may have an unhappy customer if they happen to stumble across their special day in a magazine ) as long as it was only editorial and not to be used to actually sell a product or service or imply any type of association with a product or service.

Hope this helps.

 

[KmH]

from what i heard is that you only need that release form if you think or might use the photos to make money off of them

For in the US that is an untrue, urban legend.

If you rely on what you've heard, rather than what the law says, don't start a photography business any time soon.

By the same token enzodm mentioned publishing. Putting images online on a personal web site or in a photography forum is pretty much universally NOT considered publication of a photo.

Another important point is that a model/property release is for the legal protection of the model/property and the publisher of an image, not the photographer. However, it is quite possible the photographer also becomes the publisher of a photo.

 

[enzodm]

By the same token enzodm mentioned publishing. Putting images online on a personal web site or in a photography forum is pretty much universally NOT considered publication of a photo.

mmm... I chose a generic word, but perhaps we mean different things. I used publishing in its literal meaning, which is "making public".
The Italian law says "expose, reproduce or sell" a portrait. Exposing is also putting on the web.