Just carry around a package of those little red legal seals, affix it to the Release, and have the model touch it when he/she signs (the Release should indicate that it is signed under seal).
A contract signed under seal is said to supply its own consideration.
Alternately, include a promise of some value (no matter how slight) from the photographer, and have the photographer sign as well.
It all goes back to the mists of time, when the (English) law would only enforce bargains, not mere promises.
Now back to the work on my desk...
I think a lot of portrait photographers offer "time for prints" when the start to build a portfolio or a discount on sitting fees and prints when they are adding to a portfolio and want to use the images in their own marketing. I know I did that!
One photographer I've met, Andrea Modica, photographed a young girl, Barbara, and her family over a period of ten years. She's published two books, "Treadwell" and "Barbara" with this work. She says she offers 10 percent of her profits to the people she photographs, and I think she gives them prints from time to time.
That struck me as fair and ethical.
Originally Posted by MattKing
Elegant! I only half-recall that argument, but I'm pretty sure you're right. Wasn't signing over a postage stamp regarded the same way?
If you plan on modeling, a print would go well in your portfolio, especially a prize winner.
Last time I needed a model release, I sat down with an English "standard form". Then I deleted evrything I didn't want to worry about, translated the result to Norwegian, cut some more, and translated the remains to English again.
That made for a very short contract, but also one which is easily translatable and pays no special consideration to either country's special laws.
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
that was the end it...
So to speak....
Another aspect of this is that the item of valuable consideration can also be a promise not to do something. e.g. not use the image for a particular purpose.
So what did it end up saying, Ole... "I take yur pictyure..OK? Sign here_____"
Originally Posted by Ole
Thanks to everyone for input on this whole model release topic (in both threads). I'm shooting my first model next week, so this is very helpful indeed.
The inducement to a contract. The cause, motive, price or impelling influence which induces a contracting party to enter into a contract. The reason or material cause of a contract. Some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to one party, or some forebearance, detriment, loss, or responsibility, given, suffered, or undertaken by the other."
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, 1990
1) The above definition does not require, nor does it preclude, monetary remuneration.
2) Juan, other than suffering from a severe case of misogyny what would lead you to claim that feminism is the reason why contractual consideration no longer requires monetary recompense? It hasn't for a long time - if ever.
3) I usually see non-monetary consideration in the course of contractual arrangements b/w financial institutions (e.g. the inducement for two or more banks to enter into an Intercreditor Agreement). Seriously, you don't think we're still supposed to go through the fiction of exchanging a dollar (or some other meaningless monetary sum) in order to effect a contract?
4) Seals - quaint English common law concept. Perhaps still required in UK and Canada - not so in U.S. These days we close a transaction via a signature page exchanged via a scanned .PDF file.