Hi, Just wondering. I'm a senior in college and have traveled the world extensively taking black and white photos mostly of people and children that I then developed myself. My photo professor says I should "do" something with them because they came out great, but he didn't tell me how to "do" anything. Two questions--1) if a parent willing allowed a child to "pose" for my photo, or if the child allowed me to photograph her, do I have the right to show the photo or publish it? 2) what can I do with these great shots (have a show or publish them)?? Thanks so much for any info you can give me.

-- C.arrie M. Leonard (Gwinevere1@aol.com), June 25, 2000

Answers

OK, here we go again...Generally, in the USA, you can publish photos like you describe for editorial purposes, that is photos used to inform or educate, without model releases. But, you cannot publish the photos for commercial purposes, that is to advertise anything or sell them through an art gallery, without model releases. I'm not a lawyer but I have many years of experience and have studied photography and the law so that's what I'm going on. You just have to be careful when you publish photos without releases. The above is pretty good advice. Just remember, to inform or educate, no release needed. Anything else, you need a release.

-- Joe Cole (jcole@apha.com), June 26, 2000.

Carrie, Most published work requires a model release. Restrictions on using work , especially of children , becomes a bit hairy. Even if the parent gave you a verbal ok. It all depends on the contex within which the work appears. Even with editoral work , if the photographs are used to illustrate a point that has nothing directly to do with the person in the photo you could find yourself on the wrong end of a law suite. There was a rather well known case a few years ago where a cover photo of a well dressed African American man was used to illustrate a rather negative article on the new black middle class in america ( I believe TIME magazine) The photo was taken on the street , but without the man permission. The photographer and magazine ended up being sued for a tidy sum. The point of the suite was not that the photo was taken without permission or that it was used, but that he was being used as a visual example for the artical. Its always a good rule to get a model release if you can and if your intention is to have the work published.

-- jim megargee (jmegargee@nyc.rr.com), June 27, 2000.

I don't disagree with the above, but have you thought about publishing them on the web? You have total control over your own web site, so they wouldn't be associated with any negative text. You wouldn't be getting paid, so the chances of being sued are (probably) reduced. You don't have to convince any publishers that your work deserves publishing.

No, I don't suppose you have a 'right' to publish then on the web, but if no-one objects...

-- Alan Gibson (Alan@snibgo.com), July 01, 2000.

read the book "sell & re-sell your photos" by Rohn Engh and get "Photographers Marketplace" by Lane publishing both under $20 a piece and helped me a whol-lota....

-- Jason Tuck (jtuck80@csi.com), July 06, 2000.