Campos & Davis Photos (photos@campos-davis.co.uk)
Sat, 24 Jul 1999 22:04:43 +0100
It is very strange, but model releases are becoming the norm for editorial
photography thesedays in UK. Certainly with the recent child protection
act, (its now illegal to photograph your own newborn baby naked!!!!) but
one famous USA agency who was going to sell some of my library material of
people told me that they never supply model releases to the client. They
send the photos and tell the client that no model release is available,
even with kids shots in peoples homes. They said they had never had a
picture refused because of no model release. This is for editorial
illustration, not for advertising.
In Europe we hear a lot about product liability and similar issues making
lawyers rich in the USA, but some things that we expect about USA just
doesn't seem to be true.
What does the USA law say about child photography - nudity - advertising -
editorial illustration - involving people?
Campos & Davis Photos
6 Cranbourne Road
London N10 2BT
Tel/Fax + 44 181 883 8638
email: photos@campos-davis.co.uk
WEB SITE: http://www.campos-davis.co.uk
----------
> From: Judy Seigel <jseigel@panix.com>
> To: Carl Weese <cjweese@wtco.net>
> Cc: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca;
alt-photo-process-error@skyway.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: something else???
> Date: Saturday, 24 July, 1999 8:59 PM
>
>
>
> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Carl Weese wrote:
>
> > Ed,
> >
> > It's always wise to get a release if you can. If one's approach to
> > "street shooting" is thoughtful and respectful it's often quite easy.
If
> > photography is done so it resembles a drive-by shooting, releases
aren't
> > going to happen.
>
> You can call me all the names you like, my "street shooting" is typically
> 5-6 rolls a day (and NOT posed). Folks who shoot *fast*, however, do 20
or
> more. This is not model release territory -- mentally or physically. Try
> now if you please to consider.... Garry Winogrand, Arthur Fellig, Louis
> Faurer, Lou Stoumen, Robert Frank, Helen Levitt, Sebastian Salgado, Henri
> Cartier-Bresson, being the first ones come to mind, though I'd hazard
that
> the ranks include most exciting 20th century photography (from Erich
> Salomon on), getting "model releases." And who did the subway hidden
> camera series -- Walker Evans?
>
> Some entire bodies of work would not exist, tho no problem with the
Fellig
> corpses, I suppose, or maybe next of kin could make a fuss. In other
> words, this notion strikes me as ..... the politest thing I can think to
> say is counterproductive.
>
> By making "model release" the norm, you box photography in even more. For
> instance in malpractice medical suits, one consideration is *customary
> practice.* If by this kind of attitude you make model releases *the
norm*,
> any photography without a model release is even more at risk.
>
> Now I suppose someone will say, but these are different times. Yeah,
sure,
> but we also have better cameras.
>
> > But this is getting pretty un-alt. I always print this sort of work
> > silver-gelatin.
>
> Is that another rule? I print my street & subway shots "alt." In fact
> what strikes me about much "alt" work is how static it seems. Some work
is
> fine, even *best* when static (say Eugene Smith), but ... it can be,
is...
> limiting.
>
> Judy
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | Judy Seigel, Editor >
> | World Journal of Post-Factory Photography > "HOW-TO and WHY"
> | info@post-factory.org >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:40:38