Question about using photos in portfolio

[ph0t0grl]

I work in a portrait studio. My question is, do I need to have a release in order to put photos I have taken into a portfolio? I do not intend to sell the photos (other than to the client) but I do intend to show them to prospective clients further down the road.

[jdepould]

Technically, probably not, but I think putting that in writing is a good policy. Let the client know that you're not going to sell their image to Virgin Mobile. Transparency is the name of the game.

[jdwalz]

A good deal of the law regarding what photographers can and cannot shoot and how the image can be displayed has to do with a person's reasonable expectation of privacy.

An obvious example: If you take a picture with a tele-photo lens that captures the image of a woman reading a book beside a antique table lamp in her own apartment. Clearly she has an expectation of privacy which would not be true if she were laying on the grass in Central Park or any other public place.

Now, if you have photographed persons in a studio for payment then I would say that you gave up certain rights by selling the photos, and more, you gave the person who paid for the portrait an expectation of privacy. Unless you somehow stated in writing that the pictures taken will become common property or that you maintained exclusive rights over the final product, then I believe you have a conflict over the reasonable right of privacy. It would seem rational that a person who enlists a photographer for a portrait and pays for the final product can expect not find that product on the internet or in any other medium.

I would say that getting a legal release from your clients would be a wise action before you proceed if only because the law is NOT always rational and even with the best of intentions you could end up having to defend your actions against some angry clients.

(I'm assuming you are talking about an online portfolio - otherwise, if these were print photos being shown to potential clients or agencies, you would probably be fine and not have to worry about the legalities.)

The solution I have used for photographs I have taken which fall into that gray area of payment/privacy is to place those photos in a password protected portion of the online portfolio and only allow a few people to see them at my discretion.

Best of luck with your portfolio.

[ELAY]

Wouldn't the easiest thing be just to have an invoice/salesform that includes a sentence that provides that while you will not sell, licence etc. your client's photos, you may include them in a portfolio which you would show to prospective clients?

EL

[ph0t0grl]

To answer jdwalz, I am planning on using them in a print portfolio not an online portfolio.

And Elay, I don't own the portrait studio, I just work in it. As such I have no control over what the sales invoices say nor how the course of the business is run.

I just want to take some of the photos I have already taken (and I'm sure some that I will take in the future) and put them in a portfolio for when I move to a different job or when I take private jobs.

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by jdwalz

Now, if you have photographed persons in a studio for payment then I would say that you gave up certain rights by selling the photos, and more, you gave the person who paid for the portrait an expectation of privacy. Unless you somehow stated in writing that the pictures taken will become common property or that you maintained exclusive rights over the final product, then I believe you have a conflict over the reasonable right of privacy. It would seem rational that a person who enlists a photographer for a portrait and pays for the final product can expect not find that product on the internet or in any other medium.

I would say that getting a legal release from your clients would be a wise action before you proceed if only because the law is NOT always rational and even with the best of intentions you could end up having to defend your actions against some angry clients.

(I'm assuming you are talking about an online portfolio - otherwise, if these were print photos being shown to potential clients or agencies, you would probably be fine and not have to worry about the legalities.)

The solution I have used for photographs I have taken which fall into that gray area of payment/privacy is to place those photos in a password protected portion of the online portfolio and only allow a few people to see them at my discretion.

Best of luck with your portfolio.

NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Selling photos doesn't mean you give up ANY rights. It isn't a privacy issue unless you're talking about commercial use, which this isn't. If it ended up in an ad, then you'd be talking about false light.

It isn't a privacy issue, the photographer holds all rights to the images, period. A person only has rights to the commercial use of their own likeness.

Medium (web, print, slide, t-shirt, whatever) is irrelevant.

[ph0t0grl]

Originally Posted by jdepould

NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Selling photos doesn't mean you give up ANY rights. It isn't a privacy issue unless you're talking about commercial use, which this isn't. If it ended up in an ad, then you'd be talking about false light.

It isn't a privacy issue, the photographer holds all rights to the images, period. A person only has rights to the commercial use of their own likeness.

Medium (web, print, slide, t-shirt, whatever) is irrelevant.

So are you saying that since I am not using the photos for commercial use then I don't need a release?

[deck]

You may use the photos for your portfolio, please do tell your boss that too. Do not sell the pictures

[Sime]

Yep, so far as I can tell, you can use the images in a portfolio. If you have taken the images, provided your place of work doesn't have something in it's contract with regards to your employment that says " you may not...blah blah blah" ..and that the [if anything] agreement that a client signs as part of having his/her photo taken doesn't specifically say "your prints will not be used in any other way then specified" then i'd say you're fine..

[ELAY]

Two comments:

First, if you are an employee of the studio, you likely have no rights whatsoever to the photos that you take -- any rights that might accrue to a photographer probably reside, depending on the labour and intellectual property laws in your country or state, with your employer. So quite apart from problems with the subjects of your photos, you might be offside your employment contract if you use photos you take on the job in your portfolio -- best to get clearance (which I would think your boss would grant).

Second (and I know I say this at the risk of eliciting a series of NONONOs ) I don't agree with jdepould, for two reasons. First of all, a portrait session like you are describing is a commercial transaction governed by contract (which can be oral or written). The question of personal use of a photo by a photographer would be resolved by trying to figure out what explicit or implied terms in the contract speak to it. I can definitely see a court holding that it is an implied term of the deal that a person hiring a photographer to do a portrait is entitled to control all uses of the photo. Second, I think that even apart from worrying about the contractual aspects, there are limits on the use of a photograph. Use that would tend to demean or embarrass a subject (sharing a nude photo on the web, or using the photo in association with hate literature, etc) would likely be considered an actionable invasion of privacy even absent commercial exploitation. I don't think it is stretching things too much to imagine that the subject of a photo taken in a private setting (ie not in a mall or at a football game) would have some expectation that the photo would be kept private. Privacy law is a moving target, and it is definitely moving in the direction of more protection not less.

EL