Opinions wanted

[DeniseE]

Question for wedding Photographers: An amateur requests to second shoot in order to gain experience and build their portfolio, assuming the couple is amenable, do you 1) allow it 2) let them retain copyright/ownership of their photos 3) attribute their work if you use/retain it?

I was told by another photographer that he retains rights and use with no attribution of work produced which I don't feel is right although I can see both sides of the argument. On the one hand the established photographer doesn't want to add to the competition, possible loss of referrals, etc. - they've paid the dues and therefore would allow the 2nd shooter but with stipulations. On the other hand, personally I can't imagine telling another photographer that they must relinquish use of their (specific) work or use it for display or otherwise without attribution. I may be wrong but I feel helping and contributing to another photographers growth is a better way to build relationships and business.

Just wanted to get some other photographers opinions. Thanks!

[PowerPix]

I'm not a wedding photographer but I think that using another's photo without attribution is rude and unethical.

For one, if you have to use their photo....it obviously means they did better with that particular shot than you. To use it under the pretense that it's your work could possibly create even bigger problems concerning your reputation.

[dakwegmo]

I don't think he's being unreasonable. He's done all of the work to get the client and build the relationship with them. If you come in and shoot with him, then take your images and use them in a way that ruins that relationship, it's his business and reputation that take the hit, not yours. He's taking a risk by allowing you to be there, and wants to be sure that the goodwill he is showing you be letting you have the experience isn't going to come around to hurt him.

For the copyright issue, you need to specify which rights you're granting him and which you retain. If he expects you to transfer the copyright, then I would expect some sort of compensation above and beyond the experience for the shoot. You'll also want to make sure you still have the right to make prints for your portfolio. If he is only asking for rights to make prints for the client, then that seems fair. Whatever the case, unless it's in writing, you own the copyright to any photos you make, so make sure whatever happens you have a contract with him. Attribution isn't really relevant to wedding photos. He's not going to put your name on the proofs or the final prints, and I can't imagine where else he might use your photos.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by DeniseE

1) allow it
2) let them retain copyright/ownership of their photos
3) attribute their work if you use/retain it?

1) that depends on you. Think you could use a second shooter? Then might be a good idea.
2) Yes, but have them sign an agreement stating that you can use it for the client.
3) Yes. Clearly.

[jpitz31]

If the pro wedding photographer is willing to allow the amateur to second shoot. They both should negotiate a contract between them that benefits all parties. The amateur wants to get experience and build his or her portfolio. The pro wants an income and no competition.

Have the contract state that the amateur can retain copyright on the images for their portfolio, but cannot sell the images. If any images are good enough to sell to the customer then the pro and the amateur can either split the revenue or the pro can provide guidance to the amateur in return for use of the amateur's images.

This way they both benefit.

Thanks

Joe

[Brian Mullins]

That is a pretty standard agreement in wedding photography. The client is hiring the pro, not the amateur, to shoot their wedding. As the amateur is, in essence, working for studio then no attribution should be given as its the studio, not the individual. How do you think it would look if a few of the amateur wedding photos made the album only to have a watermark of "photographed by XX"?

Rights MUST be passed along so the pro can manipulate and resell the images. As he is getting compensated and, part of that compensation includes a few of the amateurs images, then by definition the pro must have copyright.

Again, and I'll stress this, the pro is the one who was hired here. If the amateur wants experience and perhaps even compensation then that is certainly within the "expected" payments in the industry. The amateur would not have the client, the opportunity, the insurance or even the knowledge it takes to shoot a wedding so, in terms of fairness, I think that is more then fair.

Do you know how many photography websites a bride will look at before calling or emailing someone? Last report I saw was 18. That's 18 photographers she sees the images from. By chance, if that bride happens to look at my site, then the site of someone who second shot for me (so they have the same images online) it will cause confusion and NEITHER of us will get that booking and, most likely, BOTH of our reputations will suffer from it.

While I can understand where you guys are coming from as far as ownership, attribution and copyright - it just doesn't work that way in the wedding business where reputation is everything.

Looking at it from the other side, let's look at the risk a pro takes when brining on someone new:

- Additional liability of a new photographer who may blow shots (Can you imagine trying to explain to your clients mother why the shot the "other" photographer took of her, her daughter and grandmother, which happens to be the only shot like that in existence, didn't come out?)/

- Eventually competing against that photographer. Now this one doesn't really worry me because people come and go in the business all the time. It's tough, long hours, stressful and constantly being eroded by "friends" who are shooting their friends wedding for free. One more person isn't going to break the camel's back but, when you run the numbers, more and more wedding photographers are hanging out their shingle everyday.

- Reputation.. like it or not, if you work for my company at a weddng you are representing my company to everyone there. One off comment, inappropriate behavior or general attitude can cost me future business.

From my perspective, the amateur photographer has absolutely nothing to loose and everything to gain by working with a pro. With that being the case the pro has to profit in some way from teaching a new photographer to "fish".

[Jim Bryant]

Words of Wisdom...........good one Brian. Good advice and explanation here.

[HillHavenStudio]

OK, on kinda a side note on all of this, I have friend who is getting married in a little less than a year, and she has hired a more experienced professional wedding photographer to shoot her wedding, but also said she would like me to come and second shoot so that I can get some experience. I don't know if she has told the other photographer or anything. So, my question is, should I try to contact the other photographer and work out anything, or let her know I will be there? I don't want to be a surprise on the wedding day and I don't want to step on toes or disrespect anyone.

[Jim Poor]

It is pretty standard in most areas of photography for a "second shooter" to give up all rights to the person who brought them on. It's basically a work for hire arrangement.

When I bring a second shooter on, I get the © and all rights to the images and they get the rights to use the images in a portfolio.

[Jim Poor]

18. That's 18 photographers she sees the images from. By chance, if that bride happens to look at my site, then the site of someone who second shot for me (so they have the same images online) it will cause confusion and NEITHER of us will get that booking and, most likely, BOTH of our reputations will suffer from it.

You wouldn't seriously post a second shooter's images on your site outside of the private albums for the clients though, right? I'd never use a second's images in my portfolio.