2nd shooter- main tog using my images on his website!

Aimee K

Aimee K

Suspended / Banned
Messages
561
Name
Aimee
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello! I know there are a lot of threads with roughly the same thing in, but I need some advice!

I was a second shooter for a wedding a few months ago. The wedding went well, the main photographer was pleased with my images, he downloaded them to his laptop on the day, paid me (a minimal amount) and job done. I was meant to sign a contract on the day from the bride saying that they (the couple) owned copyright and I would not use the images for commercial purposes/resale etc. Fair enough, but I didn't sign as I didn't have time in the end and then forgot!

Now, I felt like being a bit nosey earlier and had a look at the main photographers website, as I've heard absolutley nothing from him since the wedding. I noticed he has put a gallery up of the images from the day on his website as a portfolio (so not a private gallery or anything). Pretty much 75% of the images in this gallery are images that I took. No reference to me at all, his copyright logo plastered on them etc.

Morally, I think this is wrong as he's passing my work off as his, so any perspective clients that contact him on the back of these photos will think he has taken them himself.

But besides morals, should he be doing this anyway? As he does not own copyright to these images (technically I guess I still do as I didn't sign the contract!?)

Any advice would be appreciated! :thumbs:
 
I would have thought that as you were working for and being paid by the main shooter then he has the copyright to the images.
 
I don't agree with that, because technically the same could be said for any wedding when you are working for and being paid by the couple! I would have thought copyright remains with me unless otherwise agreed before hand, as in any other job you do.
 
I would say that since they were his client and you were there as the second, gaining experience and what not.... I would go with Flash on this one...

I know a few people who have been to weddings as seconds, there images were used by the main photographer.

Nigel
 
I do understand where you are coming from on this... but I am not an employee of the company employed to do the initial job... I am a 'sub contractor' and was actually paid by the couple directly (in terms of they handed the cash over to me at the beginning of the day, it was just the photographer had been requested to find someone and correspond with them).

And I wasn't there to gain experience, I was there as a professional second photographer.

My issue is more morally though... I don't think he should be using these images on his website because it is misleading to his new clients.
 
But we don't know exactly what you both agreed here, either in writing or not

If they are the main tog's clients, and he hired you, then they are not your clients - just his - so you may have no entitlement to sue them anyway. Bit like a newspaper tog always hands over the images no matter how ground-breaking and valuable they may be

As you downloaded onto his laptop it would appear you were giving him the images, hence if he thinks that, he now has copyright over them or at least a damn good argument to that effect

Problem seems to me to be with communication/expectation and the lack of anything written down

Perhaps just a lessen learnt? :(

Hope that's not harsh - not meant to be :)

DD
 
I'd agree with the advice that already been given. If anything, if 75% of the pics he is displaying are yours, then I'd imagine they'd be great to put into your own portfolio to show to prospective clients of your own.

Who knows.. this could be the turning point where you're looking for a 2nd shooter of your own :)
 
Aimee K said:
I do understand where you are coming from on this... but I am not an employee of the company employed to do the initial job... I am a 'sub contractor' and was actually paid by the couple directly (in terms of they handed the cash over to me at the beginning of the day, it was just the photographer had been requested to find someone and correspond with them).

And I wasn't there to gain experience, I was there as a professional second photographer.

My issue is more morally though... I don't think he should be using these images on his website because it is misleading to his new clients.
Click to expand...



Ah - typed my last reply as this must have come through - and that puts a different spin on it for sure

I can't see you being happy with any outcome here - but if 75% of the best images are yours - go Pro - and outdo the other chap

:thumbs:

DD
 
Maybe I'm too soft with my second photographers then! I work in a team where we all work for each other as second and we always agree that the copyright remains with the photographer, but the main photographer can use the images in any way s/he agreed with the client ie. Albums, online gallery, DVD etc. And that we would not use each others images in our own portfolio unless crediting the other photographer. I had thought that was the standard!?

It was agreed with this particular photographer was that I would take the images from the day, giving him a copy to burn to CD for the clients and for him to print their selection for an album. That none of the images would be used commercially by either party and that I was to invoice the couple directly (I don't think he had insurance to cover employees).

Ok, let me put it this way. I have no intention on sueing anyone, he can do what he wants with the image. I would be happy for them to be on his website if there were some reference or link to my own... but would you put an image in your portfolio, taken by another photographer, and pass it off as your own?!
 
Haha, thanks DD. To be fair, I think I out-did the other chap on the day! He apparently had '20 years experience' and yet I had to set up most of the shots... and it was noticed by the wedding planners, who took my contact details after and not his! lol.
 
As per my thread and the replies (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=113831) you are a subcontractor as you provided your own equipment to do the job and aren't doing regular/routine hours as an employee would. You are the main photographer's client just as he/she is the wedding couple's client.

Personally, I'd weigh up whether or not you'll get more work and perhaps better paid work from him to risk raising this issue and if not then asking him to remove his copyright and post an appropriate link to you instead.

One thing that confuses me, you have stated that you were suppoed to sign a contract handing over copyright to the couple but you haven't said if the main photographer was also supposed to do this? If not then why was it only you to do this and also if this is the case then why is the main photographer claiming copyright?
 
He signed over copyright of his images to the client, I have the signed agreement from him in my files.

I don't think I will get any more work from him... he didn't like that the wedding planners asked for my business cards and not his!
 
I think that I'm with Aimee here. As I see it she has not handed over copyright of the images and in that situation she still holds copyright.

OK it may be that something in the agreement she had (and a verbal contract may be worth at least the cost of the paper it's written on) causes a copyright xfr, but if that is the case it isnt clear from the posts.

I used to be a software developer and I did stuff for all sorts of companies and organisations. But so far as I am concerned I retain copyright to everything that I did unless the contract explicitly handed over copyright to the client. (It isn't relevant, but I'll throw in that if I did something to an explicit specification then I'd regard that as being a copyright handover because the direction and intent wasnt mine).

Meanwhile, back in the real world, I would probably talk to the main shooter. I wouldnt have a problem with him including them in a portfolio of images for xyz ltd, but I would want a credit. I would not accept his copyright notice on them.

My question to Aimee would be "What do you want?". Do you want some sort of credit? For him to take the images down? Payment? Are you usin gthe images on your website?

2nd Q for Aimee "What did you agree beforehand?"

As an aside perspective != prospective

edit: I hadnt seen any replies after mad ferrit at 18:24 when I started typing.
 
Aimee K said:
He signed over copyright of his images to the client, I have the signed agreement from him in my files.
Click to expand...

He shouldn't be putting his copyright on his own images never mind yours, but in a real world I don't think the wedding couple would really care all that much.


Aimee K said:
I don't think I will get any more work from him... he didn't like that the wedding planners asked for my business cards and not his!
Click to expand...

In that case I'd write to him asking him to remove your photos, go solo and get rich :D ;)
 
Aimee K said:
He signed over copyright of his images to the client, I have the signed agreement from him in my files.
Click to expand...

Then he shouldn't be using the images at all - unless he has a licence to use the images on his website and if he has it will be in the agreement he has signed.
 
gman said:
He shouldn't be putting his copyright on his own images never mind yours, but in a real world I don't think the wedding couple would really care all that much
Click to expand...

lol... you haven't met the couple! Bridezilla eat your heart out! And there is the fact they made this contract asking him to give over copyright!

But your first point, he shouldn't be putting his copyright on his own images etc... that is exactly what I thought!
 
SimonTALM said:
Then he shouldn't be using the images at all - unless he has a licence to use the images on his website and if he has it will be in the agreement he has signed.
Click to expand...

I'll fish it out when I get home, I had a look at it again last night though and from memory it doesn't mention websites at all!
 
Thank you for your help everyone. It looks like I can't really do anything about this one, other than point out his own copyright infringements. Like DD said, chalk it up to experience, lesson learnt and next time I will be tougher with what I expect out of it!
 
Sounds bizarre this though - there were two photographers paid separately by the couple??? :cuckoo:

If that's right - then yes he's nicked your images and shouldn't be surprised when you bill him for their use, or respectfully request he stops using them to waive the bill

I'd never have a second tog with their own arrangement with the couple covering any of my Weddings :nono:

DD
 
As an individual can you actually "sell" or "transfer" copyright? Excuse my ignorance on this but i was sure I read someplace that you transferred usage rights ot a licence for use and that in the case of an individual (not an employee of another tog or company) the copyright automatically remained with you havingtaken the photos?
 
haggis said:
As an individual can you actually "sell" or "transfer" copyright? Excuse my ignorance on this but i was sure I read someplace that you transferred usage rights ot a licence for use and that in the case of an individual (not an employee of another tog or company) the copyright automatically remained with you havingtaken the photos?
Click to expand...

Yes you can transfer and sell copyright - but yes also, that's is more common to allow use under license

DD
 
gman said:
As per my thread and the replies (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=113831) you are a subcontractor as you provided your own equipment to do the job and aren't doing regular/routine hours as an employee would. You are the main photographer's client just as he/she is the wedding couple's client.
Click to expand...

You've got that the wrong way round the couple are the photographer's client, as he is the one providing the goods or services.
 
Do you have a link to the photographer in question? I agree with you by the way. Why would you want to pass off anyone else's work as your own?
 
is that what some of the so called 'pros' who come here an bitch that 'non pros' are stealing their business do? take photos from a colleague on the day and stick them on their site as their own work?

If you were paid by the groom,, get on the phone to the flaming tog and talk to him!
 
sounds like the gravitational effect on a testicle.
you dropped a b*****.no contracts/agreements signed.
no he shouldnt realy use em as his own. yes you probably acted as an employee , by taking money from him as payment.

stick it in the folder marked experience.
wow , life gets complicated.
also sounds like your more popular than he is.
if 75% of those pics were yours, what does that tell you about his confidence in his own work.
 
Aimee K said:
Hello! I know there are a lot of threads with roughly the same thing in, but I need some advice!

I was a second shooter for a wedding a few months ago. The wedding went well, the main photographer was pleased with my images, he downloaded them to his laptop on the day, paid me (a minimal amount) and job done. I was meant to sign a contract on the day from the bride saying that they (the couple) owned copyright and I would not use the images for commercial purposes/resale etc. Fair enough, but I didn't sign as I didn't have time in the end and then forgot!

Now, I felt like being a bit nosey earlier and had a look at the main photographers website, as I've heard absolutley nothing from him since the wedding. I noticed he has put a gallery up of the images from the day on his website as a portfolio (so not a private gallery or anything). Pretty much 75% of the images in this gallery are images that I took. No reference to me at all, his copyright logo plastered on them etc.

Morally, I think this is wrong as he's passing my work off as his, so any perspective clients that contact him on the back of these photos will think he has taken them himself.

But besides morals, should he be doing this anyway? As he does not own copyright to these images (technically I guess I still do as I didn't sign the contract!?)

Any advice would be appreciated! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Aimee K said:
I do understand where you are coming from on this... but I am not an employee of the company employed to do the initial job... I am a 'sub contractor' and was actually paid by the couple directly (in terms of they handed the cash over to me at the beginning of the day, it was just the photographer had been requested to find someone and correspond with them).

And I wasn't there to gain experience, I was there as a professional second photographer.

My issue is more morally though... I don't think he should be using these images on his website because it is misleading to his new clients.
Click to expand...

DiddyDave said:
Sounds bizarre this though - there were two photographers paid separately by the couple??? :cuckoo:

If that's right - then yes he's nicked your images and shouldn't be surprised when you bill him for their use, or respectfully request he stops using them to waive the bill

I'd never have a second tog with their own arrangement with the couple covering any of my Weddings :nono:

DD
Click to expand...


I can't seem to make my mind up who paid who here:(
 
Flash In The Pan said:
You've got that the wrong way round the couple are the photographer's client, as he is the one providing the goods or services.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant supplier. You know what I meant.
 
Take it as a compliment that he thought they were good enough to put on his website!
 
mr_v_s said:
Do you have a link to the photographer in question? I agree with you by the way. Why would you want to pass off anyone else's work as your own?
Click to expand...

I'm not going to put the weblink on here in case anyone knows him! lol. Rather get advice from you guys and approach him privately!

Gofer - sorry, I missed out the word 'they' in my OP. Basically, he doesn't normally deal with second photographers but the couple requested one, so he advertised for one on their behalf (normal, if you don't have a list of seconds). As he'd already been dealing with the in regards to what they did/didn't want then it was easier for him to relay this information to me. So all correspondance was from him, but the contract to sign and the payment on the day came directly from them and I had to provide them with the invoice/receipt. Strange, I know, and something I have never experienced before. But they were quite a controlling couple, so I guess they wanted to know that they were paying for me and not for me + commission!
 
Another thing to mention, I wasn't pre-told that they wanted copyright in any of the pre-wedding chats. If I had known that, I would have asked for a higher rate of pay!
 
Had a look at your website and you should be doing them on your own! Nice shots there.

Why would you give the Tog your images if your were not hired by him? I have done the same as him although didn't use as many shots from my 2nd shooter.

The Pro on the day owns the copyright. If you shot as a second shooter to him, he owns the copyright - as much as it may seem painful. If your images didn't turn out, it was his neck on the line.

Take your images, make a sample album and compete with him.
 
I'd look at it this way, if he's using your images in his portfolio and getting work on the strength of them, then he's got your standard of shots to live up to (which from what you say, he'll struggle to do). So when he comes knocking to ask you to help him out in future, make sure your fees cover the lost images too :)
 
Sorry Aimee, but I don't see what you're fussing about ;)

You say you are talking 'morally' here, but morally you agreed to hand over the copyright, and so morally, the images do not belong to you anyway. They are no longer any of your business. You were paid for the job at a fee you agreed, end of story.

From what you've said, it seems that the couple own the copyright (morally or otherwise) and they almost certainly gave the main photographer the permission to put them on his website. The fact that they've got a copyright mark on them is kind of irrelevant, and I guess he does that to all his images as a matter of course.

I'm not sure that he is claiming that he took them. You might infer that, but to potential cleints he's just saying that this is the standard of work you can expect from my photography business. Which is true in this case!

While the arrangement that you had with the couple is a bit strange, you've explained why that was the case. But I don't think the main photographer is doing anything out of the ordinary here. You obviously think differently, but 'morally' I think you are in a weak position. A bit miffed maybe, but then it was you that forgot to sign any documents or make clear arrangements.

I know you've decided to live and learn, but I think that here you are more guilty of over-sight and abnormal practise than the main photographer.

Sorry to be harsh :)
 
nice job on your website aimee.

i expect he used his name on the pics as thats the watermark he had set up.

personally even when ive let people use my camera at gigs ive put the pics in a seperate folder and made suer everyone knew they wernt mine.
ive seen photos i wished i had taken.but i love photography i couldnt rest well if it wasnt mine and i tried to say it was.

anyway i cant give advice on the rights and wrongs to complicated for me :thinking:

what i would do in the situation is, contact him and say i would appreciate it if he could make it clear which which pictures you took so people can see and appreciate your work.dont see if he has any scruples him refusing that.he may think your not worried about it if youve been paid.

if i was you i would also use any of the pictures on the day on my website.

next time you will be better prepared.

keep up the good work john
 
Is there a paper contract between you and the photographer in question?
Is there a paper contract between you and the couple in question?

Bad you if there is neither, but that can also work in your favour.

What did you actually get paid by the other photographer for? Either way you need to speak with him and essentially say the images are not his so would he kindly replace them one ones having your copyright watermark on or remove them. If he says no be a little more forceful :)
 
EOS_JD said:
The Pro on the day owns the copyright. If you shot as a second shooter to him, he owns the copyright - as much as it may seem painful.
Click to expand...

Sorry - that is just not correct - unless you signed away your copyright then it is yours. You were not employed by this photographer as an employee - you were working in a freelance capacity I assume. Did he deduct tax and NI and have insurance to cover you? You were freelance - the copyright is yours. You were actually working for the B&G as they paid you - the other photograher was just the booking agent.
 
Thanks EOS - The couple had asked that all photos go to the main photographer as he was setting up the proof book and album for them.

Thanks John! :) :wave:

Richard - There is a contract between me and the client. Prepared and signed by them, unsigned by me. It states that they own copyright and that no images will be used for commercial purposes, that's pretty much all it says!

To be fair, I didn't have a huge amount of time to consider all this before hand. I only found out about the job about 3 days before it actually took place, and it was a good 90 miles from where I live, so I was more concerned about getting there than contracts. However, I wasn't aware of their copyright needs until the actual day. Previous to that the photographer had just said that he was dealing with the album and could he copy my images on the day so he has them ready for them.

awp - that's exactly my view too! Yes, I work on a freelance capacity. I pay my own tax, NI and insurance! And none of my details for this were given over to either the couple or the photographer. So yes, I would say he was more of an agent than anything.

For the day I was paid £100. I didn't see the main tog for most of the day as we had different roles... I was to photograph the bridal preps, he the groom... he did the 'formal' images, I did the friends, family, entertainment, speeches and candids. He actually had a photographic assistant with him to organise the formal photos and take photos of decorations etc. Although as mentioned I did set up a lot of shots for him, for example, the cutting of the cake and first dance.

Hoppy - yes I am a little 'miffed'. I honestly would have no objection to him using the photos, and I'm not implying that he took them because essentially I guess I gave them to him, I'm just saying that I would be happier if there were something written on there saying something like 'some of these photos were taken by Aimee of Oxford-photography' or even a hover-over type link.
 
Aimee K said:
There is a contract between me and the client. Prepared and signed by them, unsigned by me. It states that they own copyright...

...I didn't have a huge amount of time to consider all this before hand. I only found out about the job about 3 days before it actually took place...
Click to expand...

Copyright!!! It is such an emotive subject, tends to defy all logic, and no two people have the same view on it :lol:

I know just how you feel Aimee, but the truth is that, morally (and that is the issue here, as you have stated), you do not own the copyright so it is none of your affair what happens to the images from the moment you press the shutter. You know that, and that's what you agreed up front. I guess you didn't reckon on the main photographer using your pictures in this way, but it seems quite likely that the couple have assigned the images to him and for the purposes of handling print orders etc, and he is their copyright agent. I know have a different spin on that, but that's copyright for you ;)

You agreed this before hand, and you also had time to negotiate a fee. In fact you had three days to sort everything out, and all that was needed was a few direct questions in a two minute phone call.

I'm not making you feel any better about this, am I? Sorry ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top