What to expect in terms of copyright with regard to a potential shoot
I would like to photograph a professional dance company backstage during a performance - 1:1 portraits shot in large format and printed in pt/pd ...
At this stage I have simply contacted them regarding the general concept and am waiting to hear back regarding the idea. It got me thinking that if indeed the idea was met with enthusiasm I had no idea how the ownership of the images would be dealt with ...
Obviously I would like to retain the right to exhibit them at any time and would certainly extend that right to them also (for marketing/ whatever) - a win win situation ->> but what if there was interest in the images in terms of sales ?
As I am not a name photographer I imagine I will be paying for all the gear/film/time spent in the darkroom souping the negs and printing.
how should I approach the situation with regards to this ? Are there other factors and situations I am yet to think of ? How best to protect myself yet give them a great deal at the same time ...aaand at the same time not bog down such an opportunity with legal crap ?
Like many things, it seems the more eager party will get the worse end of any eventual deal.
I would like to photograph a professional dance company backstage during a performance - 1:1 portraits shot in large format and printed in pt/pd ...
This is the part that has me scratching my head. Large format portraits, shot backstage? During a performance? Have you been backstage during a performance? Do you think there will be enough space there to set up the camera, lights, background, etc.? And just when do you think the dancers will have time to come pose for you? In my experience shooting dance for over 20 years, backstage during a performance is pretty busy, and pretty cramped.
If it's really possible for you to do this (or some more practical variation), then the details can be worked out with the company, if they are interested. In my work, I shoot dress rehearsals and/or performances, and I maintain copyright of the work and sell prints to the company and the dancers. Neither party usually has much money, so it is not a quick way to get rich, believe me. But it is very rewarding in the artistic sense.
You should retain the copyright. My general belief.. if you ask, you pay. If I ask, it's free. So you shouldn't plan to charge them for making the pictures, and you might sell them prints at cost, and allow them so reproduction rights for their marketing it they'd like to use them. I met one photographer who essentially gave her portrait subjects 10% of her profits from the sale of prints. This was for her personal work... after she photographed a family over the course of 10 or 15 years, and produced a book of the work.
I'm not sure anyone got rich from it, but it struck me as very fair. Giving the dance company something in return for their time strikes me as fair and ethical, but you should retain the full copyright to the images.
And Eddy makes a good point... 8x10 portraits backstage during a performance??
yup, 8x10 - not on stage, but in the crossover or corridors around the changing rooms etc...
I should have noted that I have worked in theatre as both a mechanist and lighting technician for around 7 years and have worked with this company previously in that capacity on many occasions - some of them, the head mechanist/sometime production manager and stage manager are not only colleages but friends ...
This particular style of dance often has long dry spell between scenes in which artists are idle and the theatre involved has heaps of space in the wings and around to fit me in, I could always use a spare changing room also. - I would like to do near on 1:1 magnification head shots, probably with strobe, or hot lights which I am used to if I can get the output I need without cooking them - in either case >> same setup everytime, I'll be in a place which they frequent so it shouldn't take much effort on their behalf to stand in a spot for 30 seconds or so.
I imagine the photos would be a 'requirement' of the dancers from the company management, like a press call - that is, if I can convince them it is worth their while...
For 1:1 head shots and in camera neg for platinum printing, I think you will probably will need at least an 11 x 14 camera (?) and a good dose of light if you want a modicum of DOF.
The lens will be quite close to the model....definately an "in your face" shot....
IMNSHO a 14 x 17 neg would give you a bit more freedom in composition etc. At 1:1 a full face portrait is about all one could hope for on the neg, or hands in the face plane etc.
Dancers are good models at "holding position" .
__________________
[FONT="Arial Black"][/FONT]
Last edited by Dave Wooten; 06-30-2008 at 08:38 PM.
Reason: spelun
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
In the USA the copyright is automatically created when the snap is made, if I push the button I own the copyright, period. The copyright can also be registered to make enforcement easier but that's an optional step as I understand it.
What is negotiable is the use, by you and by them. You don't have to give up the copyright to grant them use.
Licenseing is a good way of granting use to them. Just define the use well and what you get in return.
Modle releases from everybody in every snap are what you need to use or sell the snaps commercially. Again, just define the use well and what they get in return.
__________________
Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO
"The photograph itself doesn't interest me. I want only to capture a minute part of reality."
Henri Cartier-Bresson
I like how this topic (in ethics and philosophy, for want of a more appropriate forum) is attracting technical discussion also - which I'd like to thanks everyone for the advice - certainly appreciated ...
11x14 - yes ... I am building one at the moment but its likely it wont be finished in time - at 8x10 its a bit of a crop, especially considering I usually dont show the film edge in the print and brush coat the emulsion... I don't mind this, though and would probably take 4 shots per dancer - two attempts at near on 1:1 hopefully capturing the eyes and mouth in sharp focus (use a little tilt if I have to) and the other more of a standard head and shoulders shot with the corresponding deeper DOF - perhaps having two 8x10's ready to go - or a 8x10 for the Pt/Pd's and a 4x5 for scanning only, maybe even use chromes or color neg in 4x5 ...
With two 650w open face lamps partially diffused about 3' away from the subject (hot hot! but nothing they aren't used to already is theatre side lighting) and the camera lens about the same I can get 1/30 exposures at around f8 when I develop my negs for about I think 12 mins in Pyro - film rated at 200 (I really have to look at my notes) - Yes you are correct about the DOF however, "hmmm, shall I focus on the iris of the eye or the eye lashes ... hmmm" - two cracks at it will have to do considering my budget ...
That being said, I am ordering some Rollei R3 and the high speed dev soon which apparently can be cooked up to 6400 - not sure if I want to use it for Pt/Pd without a good session or three to make sure I can get the kind of dense neg needed for Pt/Pd - I remember reading the base is clear-ish, which always helps but at 800 or 1600 (which would be really helpful) it might increase fog and show my film holders up as the second hand beaters they are - testing testing testing...
Still yet to hear back from them however - its helpful info for future reference whatever the outcome ...
In the USA the copyright is automatically created when the snap is made, if I push the button I own the copyright, period. The copyright can also be registered to make enforcement easier but that's an optional step as I understand it.
What is negotiable is the use, by you and by them. You don't have to give up the copyright to grant them use.
Licenseing is a good way of granting use to them. Just define the use well and what you get in return.
Modle releases from everybody in every snap are what you need to use or sell the snaps commercially. Again, just define the use well and what they get in return.
registering is required in the usa if you want to enforce your copyright.
(at least here in the usa ).
without the registration papers lawyers won't help you, and judges won't
see the case.
one thing to think about is model release forms.
when i take portraits of people that i expect to use
on my website or on the web, or in a portfolio
i tell the people before i take the photographs
( i should use the form but i don't )
and i give copies of the photographs as "compensation "
(some folks use $1 but i like to give a print ) and
make sure that in the days, weeks, months and years down
the road they don't mind me using their portraits for my own purposes.
suzanne is right about the copyright, you should retain it
( unless they want to pay you a fortune for a full buy-out ).
give first prints for free, and if they want to reproduce them
or use them in any way they can as long as you get a "by-line".
What to expect in terms of copyright with regard to a potential shoot 
Linear Mode
