Comments on: Them Crooked Photo Contracts

By: Joel Connolly

Joel Connolly — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:51:27 +0000

Hey Dan!

I’d never make you sign a contract You take unreal shots (look how good the CC and LC ones came out!)

However I do understand the need to protect an artist and maintain some kind of control over their image. I’ve always thought it funny that someone can actually own an image of you. It must feel weird to have a photo of you somewhere on the internet and to have no control over that photo, no say in where it goes or what the owner does with it. After all, it is actually a photo of you, how can anyone other than the subject claim ownership over that?

To completely contradict myself, I understand a photographers need to own the images they make. After all, they have actually created it, how can anyone else lay claim to their art?

I don’t know what the answer is but you’re a super nice dude and you’ll do right by us, so I don’t think contracts are necessary. Good will wins!

By: Katie Rynne

Katie Rynne — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:37:43 +0000

I’ve been using my point and shoot camera for the last 2 years and have managed to get some amazing shots at all those gigs. Being able to take photos for the whole gig definitely gives you more range, and even though you’ve got to get in early for a front row spot, it’s a hell of a lot better than having to deal with all this contract shite.

By: Lonesome Tiger

Lonesome Tiger — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:33:37 +0000

I just was mailed an even better contract: They want me to *mail them* the photos and contact sheets, too! Read for yourself: http://lonesome-tiger-photography.blogspot.com/2009/11/placebo-can-go-fotograph-themselves.html

By: DerekBrad

DerekBrad — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:57:12 +0000

I just recently received one that stated that I must send them ALL HI RES photos with no limitations. Must be sent 1 week from the show. They also had in there I agree to receive $0. I can use 1 photo in my portfolio that must be approved and any other usage will be denied unless I have a written contract from the company. I wonder if they company that sent this contract understands that I am working for a publication. I also would like to know if the contract is still valid even though its from another country then I am shooting?

By: Daniel Boud

Daniel Boud — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:05:08 +0000

@Steve – That’s an interest point about commercial usage – you’d need a model release to use it for that purpose anyway.

And as for Nasty Little Man – i have a feeling they’re just the messenger for band management and it’s not them instigating the contracts. They don’t look after bands when they tour Australia yet we still have to sign the same contracts.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:06:00 +0000

One thing that everyone seems to forget about is that the law already prevents a photographer from selling an image of an artist/performer for commercial use without giving them a royalty and/or getting their permission. Any human being owns the rights to their likeness. The only way that likeness can be sold/used without the person’s permission is if their likeness was recorded (through a photograph) in a public place, at a newsworthy event (the concert), and is published in an editorial/news publication. This law is already on the books, so the part of the contract that says “no commercial usage” is unnecessary.
As for the full and total rights-grab- Nasty Little Man publicity seems to be the main culprit behind them. I’ve seen that insidious clause in contracts for several of the artists on their roster. I’d be willing to be that most of those artists don’t even know what’s in those contracts, and if it were explained to them that photographers are creative artists just like them who need the rights to their work to make a living, those artists would drop Nasty Little Man like a hot potato. I say let’s try to tell as many of NLM’s artists as possible about those contracts. If NLM starts getting threats from their artists, they’ll change their evil ways. There are plenty of other publicists out there. Until then, I’d just “accidentally” put the wrong date on the contract when you sign it, or just cross out the full rights-grabbing clause, and if they don’t accept it refuse to shoot the show. I feel no remorse doing something like that because these contracts are absurdly disrespectful to photographers. Technically it is THEFT, except you are making it LEGAL THEFT by signing it!

By: Them Crooked Photo Contracts :: Dan Boud « Throw Shapes :: Sydney

Them Crooked Photo Contracts :: Dan Boud « Throw Shapes :: Sydney — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:33:24 +0000

[...] can read the full article here at Dan’s website, boudist.com. You can also view a good selection of his photography, leave [...]

By: Robert Loerzel

Robert Loerzel — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:52:09 +0000

Oh, I meant to include a link to my posting about the Sonic Youth photo contract. From what I hear, Sonic Youth stopped requiring photographers to sign this.

http://www.undergroundbee.com/2009/06/why-i-didnt-take-photos-of-sonic-youth.html

By: Robert Loerzel

Robert Loerzel — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:42:43 +0000

Daniel, I agree with everything you’re saying. I posted something on my blog a while ago about my frustration when Sonic Youth’s management wanted me to sign a similar contract.

I feel lucky that I mostly photograph lesser-known indie artists at small venues who don’t require photo contracts.

By: Daniel Boud

Daniel Boud — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:51:34 +0000

@Jamie – Yeah, that last paragraph is on the money.

I get the impression most up and coming bands are happy for the publicity – but once you get to Coldplay or Foo Fighters size you don’t need any more publicity and seek to have more control.