Selling Fine Art Prints Featuring Musicians

[KVHPhoto]

Hi, I'm sorry if this has been covered elsewhere, but I have scoured the forums and can't find a thread that specifically addresses this issue.

I am a concert photographer. Occasionally I have had to sign a release stating where the images will be used (i.e. my publication), but most of the time there is no written agreement. I love what I do for the art of it and have been fortunate enough to draw the attention of some international bands.

I may have the opportunity soon to have an exhibition at a local gallery. Obviously the prints would be considered fine art, but I wonder if any limitations would apply to selling them since they depict very recognizable people. To that end, if I could sell them at a gallery, could I sell them as art through my web site? I have always erred on the side of caution and said no to all of the requests I get, partly because of the legal issue but also because I don't want to offend any of the artists or their representatives. The music business is a small world and it's very easy to get black balled.

I've only been doing this since July and I don't personally know anyone in the industry to ask about this. I will be consulting a lawyer with regards to the specific legal issues, but I was hoping to hear from some photographers who have been in my shoes.

Thank you so much,
Karen

www.littlgirlbiglens.com

[faeriegodess612]

I can't help you any, and I know you probably hear this a lot. But I'm so jealous! I'd love to be able to do what you do. Half the bands on your list of shoots are bands I like. You Rock at what you do, and I wish you all the best in regards to your post.

[nickbedford]

I'm erring on the side of getting their permission (a model release) to sell photos of them but that's just my gut instinct. Try to find some professionals in the same field and contact them to see?

Also, fantastic website. Really well laid out and great focus on the images. Well done.

[Jim Poor]

Legally, No, you don't need permission to sell prints of a person (any person) as art.

The need for a release comes up for commercial use, but commercial use in photography terms means something other than "making money." It is applied specifically to endorsement or advertisement.

All that said, there are two things to consider:
One, I'm not a lawyer, though I talk to my own quite a bit.
Two, even if what you are planning is perfectly legal, you may burn some bridges if you don't ask first. Then your access might dry up.

[metric_photography]

I always get the bands I photograph to sign a contract letting them know that I own the images that I have taken. Did these bands hire you to take their picture, or are you in the audience taking pics on your own? If you can, I would get written permission. Like Jim said, you don't want to burn any bridges. The bands might be ticked if you are making $$ off their image/ fame.

[nokiN]

+1 to what Jim said for here in the US, but release laws vary by country and you don't indicate in your profile what country you are in.

[DravensHalo]

i think Jim is right as well - but maybe Sime would have more info???

[Jack Skunk]

Originally Posted by Jim Poor

Legally, No, you don't need permission to sell prints of a person (any person) as art.

The need for a release comes up for commercial use, but commercial use in photography terms means something other than "making money." It is applied specifically to endorsement or advertisement.

All that said, there are two things to consider:
One, I'm not a lawyer, though I talk to my own quite a bit.
Two, even if what you are planning is perfectly legal, you may burn some bridges if you don't ask first. Then your access might dry up.

Okay so I have a similar question that I think you are addressing but maybe we could clear this up. I just shot a lot of pictures of people for a non-profit I work for at an event we put on. (All of the shots were on public land and all that, and everyone knew they were getting their pictures taken.) So if I understand you, I could sell fine art prints of these shots, as Karen could of her band shots, but if I used the pictures in promotional material for the non-profit without model releases, that would not be legal? Also, I'm still confused on how we could use these shots on the internet, as that would be promotional but some of the stuff I've read seems to say it would be okay.

[KVHPhoto]

Thanks for all the replies. I appreciate it.

I'm in the US and most of my photo passes are through publicists or management. The primary use of the images is editorial (in my columns). A handful of times I have had to sign a release that states specifically where the images will be used and limits their editorial use for that publication. But the majority of the time, the press arrangements are made more informally through one or two e-mails.

My impression of this situation is that it is legal for me to sell the images as fine art, but it would be a courtesy on my part to request permission to sell them, since I don't want to burn any bridges. I would feel comfortable displaying any of these in a gallery without prior permission, but I would contact the band or its representatives before selling them. If a band gets pissed off that I'm selling their photos, even with the best of intentions, me saying "But it's legal!" will not help future relations with that band and/or its label, publicists, etc.

As for obtaining specific releases from artists, I mostly photograph large international acts. Getting someone like Jared Leto to sign a release for me isn't a viable option.