Yes, I did. I'm working on what will apparently be a "family" of specific releases - each directed toward a specific use.Originally Posted by BrianShaw
I am, at present, exhibiting in three (3) Galleries - and preparing for a fourth - so I'm juggling a few balls in the air.
Seems to me that all that is necessary is to leave the entire "claim" phrase out, in a preliminary "Fine Art Release: "For the compensation of ... (I'd suggest, and USE money - a definite sum), I grant to AB (name of photographer) the right to use these images, after reasonable opportunity for my review (more on this later), for Gallery Exhibition and Portfolio purposes.So when sharing either anticipated or unanticipated profit as a good-faith gesture is a goal, how would that be phrased contractually -- "I give up any claim to future profits or future compensation but that might change in the event of a fortunate event where said photograph becomes a really big money maker and the photographer decides that it is right and just to be generous and share the windfall"?
There will be, if reasonably possible, a second release, specifying individual images, BOTH photographer and model agreeing to their use.
If this sounds complicated, I'll agree that it is. There seems to be a necessity for all this due to a few unscrupulous - with the accent on "UN" - "Hustler - type wannabbes" walking all over models, using the Model Release as a weapon, and causing ALL kinds of pain and embarrassment to the models - so much so, that many are giving up modeling completely.
Note that all the above applies to "Fine Art" ONLY, produced by me, exhibited by me .. without further publication. Certainly, It may not be appropriate for other uses - Commercial - comes immediately to mind.
More later. One of those "bowling pins" I'm juggling is headed for the floor.