Photography On Campus

So, today I will attempt to answer a question from my business plan:

Is it legal to photograph on Stanford campus without a permit?

Much of my business plan is built around the use of Stanford campus for location photography. Well, it turns out I was a little naive in my assumptions that Stanford would be an open studio for me, but all hope is not lost. For those of you who don't live near Stanford, this entry is still quite relevant because it relates to photography in any privately held area, especially university campuses.

The first place I looked was the Office of University Communications, which is responsible for coordinating interactions with the outside world, either disseminating Stanford information out into the world (like press releases and news) and controlling the outside world's intrusion into the university (controlling Stanford's image, websites, photography and videography of campus). For photography, all commercial photography must request permission to use the campus. Most of the relevant information is in the list of photography policies.

After looking at that page, I contacted the Communications Office to ask about whether I'd be likely to get permission and if blanket permission for a restricted set of activities would be possible. What ensued was e-mail tennis for much of the morning where it seemed like the woman I was chatting with was trying to evade my question. I know now that I had misread an important part of the policies but she was patient enough to get the message through. At one point I told her anything she said would be off the record, so I won't reproduce any of the conversation here.


What I will do is highlight the important statements on the Photography request policy page:

• Exploitation of the Stanford name is prohibited. In other words, advertising that I specialize in photography on Stanford campus is a no-no and can get me sued. I can request permission to do so, but I doubt I'd get it. I'm better off advertising location photography in the Palo Alto area, and then if people ask, tell them that Stanford might be an option. There goes SUPhoto as my company name! No biggy. Really, this doesn't impact me much, except my blogspot name, stanfordphoto.blogspot.com. I'm going to look into changing the blog address without disrupting my (meager) traffic.
  
• Videotaping, filming, commercial photography or professional wedding photography is prohibited without permission. Permission is rarely granted. This was what I missed my first, second, and third times reading through the page. Pretty much shuts down all hope of using Stanford for my commercial portrait shoots. Except...
• Wedding photography is prohibited except for couples being married at Memorial Church or those with a Stanford connection, including alumni, students, faculty and staff. Ahh... An opening. If my clients are Stanford students or alumni, I might have a chance of getting permission because of the connection. Maybe not on a super-regular basis, but if I prove that I'm not out to make a lot of money or hurt the Stanford name, it will be allowed.
  
• Requests for filming or photography must be made in writing at least five working days before proposed shooting. In other words, I need to request permission before every shoot. In writing. Not something I'll want to do a lot.
• Non news-related requests must include the following information: ... Proof of adequate insurance coverage and indemnity. This is a whole new can of worms I need to add to my business plan. Not just for shoots on campus, but anywhere I shoot, if I do it for money, I need to have insurance for my equipment and in case anyone gets harmed. For Stanford, I expect the indemnity is to prevent Stanford from getting sued. This might be as simple as a clause on the contract removing any responsibility from Stanford (or me) if an injury occurs.

So, overall, it is not legal to shoot without a permit, unless I am not taking payment for my services. So doing my TFCD shoots on campus is perfectly within reason (as long as I don't make a nuisance of myself). But if I want to take paying customers, I should get insurance and get permission from the communications office before I take any pictures.

Overall, I need to adjust my business plan to focus less on Stanford and more on me as a photographer.

In the bigger picture, there are two take-home messages:

1. On location photography is a hassle, especially since you need to worry about permission and insurance. That's why people pay extra for it.
2. Running a photography business is less about the photography, and more about everything else. I've been hearing this for a while, but until I started wading into the realities of pricing, ordering prints, marketing, and permissions, it never really hit home.

This just in! While I was writing this entry, I was also corresponding with the communications office (again). Apparently I 'wore her down', and she has given me the OK to do paying shoots on Stanford campus as long as they are Stanford affiliates. If I start doing a lot of volume, then I'll need to contact the communications office and renogiate (mostly for insurance reasons).

That's good news and allows me to tap into my main market (of poor grad students), at least initially.


[Photo courtesy of my wife. Used with permission.]

Photography And The Law

I heard about Photography and the Law / Photo Law News from a DPC forum post, and I thought I'd pass it on. So far, it is just a bunch of sorted links to essays on photography law. Not that interesting you say? What if I told you the linked authors are mostly lawyers... catch your interest yet?

If you are at all interested in the business of photography or legal concerns in photography, check it out. I don't know who runs it (it appears to be a new affiliate site since it isn't even indexed in Google yet) but it has about double the links it had when I first saw it a week ago.

This super short blog entry was brought to you by the letter 'S'.

Model Release and TFCD Agreement

So, I may be taking pictures of my friend's children this weekend next week (because her baby has a dry patch on his face), so I thought I should get the contract ready.

Read the background info first here. I also asked the fine folks at DPChallenge for advice in the thread here.

The general consensus on DPC was that I was actually talking about two separate pieces of paper: a model release and a TFCD (trade for CD) contract. JenniferDavidGA (among others) was nice enough to send me a copy of her forms including a TFCD contract which is the basis for the combined release and contract below. While I want to have both a model release and TFCD contract, I don't want to overwhelm friends. After all, even my friends will get nervous if the conversation goes like this:

"Please sign this...

and this...

and prick your finger with this pin and apply your fingerprint in blood.

Now, why did Billy run away? I need his blood too!"

So, here you go, feel free to apply it to your own needs:

Combined Model Release and Time for CD Agreement

Whereas [my name], Photographer, and __________________________________, Model, have agreed to enter this agreement for the purpose of "time-for-CD" whereby Photographer will provide photography services to Model at no cost to model, and Model will provide modeling services to Photographer at no cost to photographer, both in accordance with the following Definitions and Provisions:

PROVISIONS

Copyright Ownership
Photographer retains sole copyright of all Images produced.

Proofs
Photographer will provide proofs, either digital or printed, of all Images to Model.

Selection of Prints
Model will, at Model's sole discretion, select Images for Model's prints. All prints will be fully retouched and portfolio grade prints.

Number of Prints
Model will receive ______ high resolution digital prints on computer CD-ROM within 30 days.

Reproduction Rights Granted to Model
Photographer grants Model nontransferable and nonexclusive reproduction rights to the Images. Model shall not transfer, license, sell, lease, or otherwise confer either permanently or temporarily any reproduction rights to any Images, to any third party. Images may be reproduced in print or electronically (such as e-mail or on the world wide web).

Reproduction Rights Granted to Photographer
Photographer may only use Images for self-promotion efforts, including, but not limited to: printed portfolio, electronic portfolio (CD or web site), entry into online photo contests, or an electronic web-based journal (blog). In no case will identifying information about Model be posted in a public venue. Photographer will not use license or sell Images for commercial use without contacting Model and negotiating a new contract.

Entire Agreement
This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the Photographer and Model and supersedes and cancels all previous negotiations, agreements, commitments, understandings, and writings in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement. This Agreement may not be released, discharged, abandoned, supplemented, amended, or modified in any manner except by a written instrument duly executed by Photographer and Model and shall not be strictly construed against either party.

THIS IS NOT A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT FOR WORK FOR HIRE. THE IMAGES ARE NOT THE PRODUCT OF A WORK FOR HIRE.

Photographer:
[my contact info]
Signature: ___________________________ Date _______________


Model:

Name (Print) ____________________________

Address _____________________________________________________

City ________________________ State ____ Zip ____________

Phone _____________________

Signature: ___________________________ Date _______________

If Model is a minor:

I warrant and represent that I am the father/mother/guardian of ______________________, the Model above named.

Signature of Parent/Guardian __________________________

Comments (a.k.a. notes to myself for future revisions):

• I took out a time for prints provision. I can't imaging I'd ever want to do prints instead of a CD.
  
• I took out a copyright and photo statement (Model shall affix Photographer's copyright notice and photo credit to any Images reproduced by Model). I don't feel write asking them to mark up the images with my name -- I don't even have a logo or anything!
• I explicitly added the reproduction rights for the photographer -- this is my 'pay' for the whole deal, and I want to protect it.
  

A "Friendly" Model Release

One of my long term goals is getting to the point where I can make some income on the side as a (portrait) photographer if I want to. Whether I'll actually pursue the semi-professional avenue, I'd like it to be open for me. Also, it gives me a long term goal to work towards, and everyone needs something to look forward to.

I'm at that point where I want to start building my portfolio and get some experience photographing someone not related to me. And a necessary part of that is writing up a model release to protect my rights and the rights of my models.


A long time ago in a land far away...

First, a little bit of back story. A few months ago, I decided that I wanted to photograph a stranger (more as an exercise than anything else). Of course, approaching strangers is a pretty scary proposition, but it is necessary skill to get photos since most good photos involve people and I only know about 0.0000002% of the 6.5 billion homosapiens crowding this planet. So, I brought my camera to work with me and spent my lunch break walking around looking for someone bored, not intimidating, and willing to be photographed.

It turned out to be a pretty terrifying experience... until I actually walked up to a young woman (who I'll call Emily) doing homework and asked if I could take her photo. Then it was pretty thrilling. That's the thing, as scary as that first step is, whether in public speaking, riding a roller coaster, or jumping off a diving board, once I'm in the moment the nerves fade away.

Anyway... Emily agreed to let me photograph her so we stepped under a nearby tree, chatted, took some pictures, chatted more, she took some pictures of me (she was also interested in photography, but didn't yet have a camera), and exchanged contact info. None of the pictures were groundbreaking, mostly due to my inexperience. But, ultimately I considered it a success and thought a few of the exposures really captured some of Emily's personality. I asked her if I could post them on my blog, and she seemed hesitant, so I told her I'd e-mail them to her first before I did anything.

Please note that I never mentioned having Emily sign a model release.

So, I got home, processed some of the images, sent them to her, and asked if I could post a description and some of the picture on my blog (without revealing any details). After a week, she got back to me and said she thought she looked 'pale' and did not want me to post them.

Now I was stuck in a position where I couldn't really post the images, and without the images, the description wouldn't be very interesting. Well, I probably could have posted the images legally, but ethically there is no way I can do that. So I put off responding to her and re-editing the images, and put it off, and eventually forgot about it.


You want me to sign what?

So, from that experience, I've decided that whenever I photograph someone not in my family that I may want to use later, I'm going to get a model release that explicitly states the rights of both parties.

The past month or so I've been (gently) asking my friends if they'd let me photograph them or their children and I have a few that are interested. Again, this is all for $0, mostly just experience and to build my (non-existent) portfolio. But I want to write up a model release anyway just to avoid possible problems in the future.

The basics of the release (in plain English, not lawyer-speak) are:

• I deliver a CD with edited full resolution photos. The model would have full rights to print, post, e-mail, or whatever. But, no commercial use (they can't use them to obtain any payment).
• I have copies of the (digital) negatives and I'd retain the copyright on the images.
• I am allowed to use the photos for self-promotion (printed portfolio, online portfolio, or on my blog) but in a way that protected their identity (only first names, or even made-up first names).
• I am NOT allowed to use the photos for commercial use. If I found someone who wanted to buy rights to a photo or I wanted to submit it to stock, I'd contact the model and renegotiate.

Remember, these are my friends -- it is not my goal to build a stock library with these photos. Mostly it will be their kids and I understand they don't want those showing up on a billboard extolling contraception.


If in doubt, find someone smarter than you.

I was going to write up a legaleze version of above (stealing borrowing from others I found on the web) but decided it might be better to ask around a little bit on the DPChallenge forums to see if I was missing something important. So I'll see what they say, and hopefully draw up some lawyer-speak in the next day or two.