release forms

[Charliedelta]

Hi everybody,

I'm finally organizing my first photoshoot with a model and I have a few questions. He needs the pictures to build his portfolio (he wants to become an actor). I will use the pictures for my portfolio and will probably use a couple of shots for stock photography. We will have a model release form ready.

I'm planning on shooting outdoors, in the streets of New York, possibly having some parts of an apartment building as a background (like a section of a garage door, or some parts of a wall, or sidesteps, or a back door, or even a large section of the building like half of it). Do I need a property release form from the building owner? I don't think so, but I am not sure.

What if the model sits inside a starbucks, and in the picture I do not show any of its logos, but just the model sitting at a table? would i need the property release too?

What if the model is using a public phone in the street?

Thanks,

 

[tirediron]

I'm not an expert on US law, however my understanding is: If it's visible from a public place, it's fair game (usually); that includes signage, etc. However once you're actually on private property, you're at the whim of the owner/agent, and the Starbucks may not like or want your model in there having his picture taken. As well (and I may be wrong), but I believe NYC has a fairly rigid requirement for permits for work of this sort. You might want to check that out.

 

[Superfitz]

Hi everybody,

I'm finally organizing my first photoshoot with a model and I have a few questions. He needs the pictures to build his portfolio (he wants to become an actor). I will use the pictures for my portfolio and will probably use a couple of shots for stock photography. We will have a model release form ready.

I'm planning on shooting outdoors, in the streets of New York, possibly having some parts of an apartment building as a background (like a section of a garage door, or some parts of a wall, or sidesteps, or a back door, or even a large section of the building like half of it). Do I need a property release form from the building owner? I don't think so, but I am not sure.

What if the model sits inside a starbucks, and in the picture I do not show any of its logos, but just the model sitting at a table? would i need the property release too?

What if the model is using a public phone in the street?

Thanks,

I would say no to the first question, yes to the second question, and no to the third question.

 

[KmH]

Model/property release law is state and varies by state. Copyright law is federal law.
So in the USA there are 50 somewhat different versions of model/property release law, but just 1 version of copyright law.

I agree with Superfitz - no, yes, no - plus, inside a Starbucks would be private property and it would be advisable to get prior permission to shoot.
Starbucks decor is likely considered 'trade dress' and would necessitate a property release even though no other Starbucks trademark is in the image.

Property releases aren't needed nearly as often as model releases are.

Property and Model Releases | American Society of Media Photographers

An even better resource is - A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases: Making the Best Business Decisions with Your Photos of People, Places and Things

 

[Superfitz]

An even better resource is - A Digital Photographer's Guide to Model Releases: Making the Best Business Decisions with Your Photos of People, Places and Things

That is the guide I was trying to think of...it is a great starting point.

 

[Steve5D]

These are my guesses:

I'm planning on shooting outdoors, in the streets of New York, possibly having some parts of an apartment building as a background (like a section of a garage door, or some parts of a wall, or sidesteps, or a back door, or even a large section of the building like half of it). Do I need a property release form from the building owner? I don't think so, but I am not sure.

If it's accessible from a public thoroughfare, I wouldn't think you would need any kind of release. You may very well need permission, though...

What if the model sits inside a starbucks, and in the picture I do not show any of its logos, but just the model sitting at a table? would i need the property release too?

If there's nothing identifiable, then no. But, as has been mentioned, you'll be on private property. It wouldn't surprise me if the staff asked you not to shoot...

What if the model is using a public phone in the street?

The only potential issue I see here is being able to actually locate a public phone. I honestly can't recall the last time I saw one. If you find one, though, you wouldn't need any type of release...

 

[Vautrin]

How closely cropped are the shots? How much bokeh?

If you are inside the starbucks, with a flash, shooting f 1.4, the background is nice creamy goodness, and my guess is no one is going to go after you for a property release, even though you would normally need one for shooting inside the starbucks.

Same if the garage door is in focus, but looks like a door. Peeling paint, bricks, concrete, all provide textures that aren't generally identifiable with places if you are on a tight crop.

On the other hand, if your model is holding a starbucks cup (with logo), or you can recognize the property, that's a whole different game, and a release is probably required.

Some would argue it's best to play it safe and get one regardless. Skip the starbucks, find a nice neighborhood coffee shop, and offer to give them the images for free. They might be happy for the free press -- and it'll look a lot nicer inside than a starbucks.

Or, frame your shots in such a way (tight crop, shallow depth of field) that there's nothing recognizable as "property"

This is of course assuming starbucks doesn't kick you out when you try setting up 3 strobes around your model, and set off a couple dozen test flashes

 

[vintagesnaps]

Stores may restrict camera usage for the purpose of protecting their image, logo, etc.; restaurants are starting to restrict camera (& apparently camera phone) usage as it seems to be happening excessively to the point of becoming disruptive to other customers.

I think usually if a place is recognizable in your images that's when you'd get into needing a property release; the concern would be if the photo ever gets used publicly and you didn't have permission for usage. If you're considering stock photography I think that gets into retail use (you're making money from it) and that's when getting releases seems to be more necessary. As already mentioned, there are resources on sites like ASMP that give guidelines on usage.