this photographer is definitely NOT getting paid
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- Let's go over some photography horror stories !
My Photography Presets
www.jessicakob...
Follow Me
/ jessicakobeissi
/ jessicakobeissiphoto
/ jessicakobeissi
www.jessicakobe...
Music
share.epidemics...
In Germany the photographer has the copyright of the picture and the model has the right of their image. So if any party does not consent to use, then both cannot use the image.
That sounds smart.
In Australia you can take a picture of anything or anyone publicly visible, as long as you are not interfering with what they are doing. You can put the pictures on your website or social media. You can sell the pictures, but only if anybody who can be easily identified in them agrees to it. If you copy an image from someone's website and post it yourself, that is copyright infringement and the photographer can sue. If you have sharing turned off on your social media and someone screenshots it to post, they can also be sued (only yourself and the social media platform have the right to use the image in this case). You also have to be careful if your pictures contain famous landmarks or company names - the companies or landmark keepers can prevent you from selling images or sue for compensation.
That's the thing with aita. The way they word the title it's always like, "Yes, YTA" but then they tell the story and realize they really aren't a lot of the time.
Or the opposite where they word the title to sound innocent but then in the story they're an absolute monster. (The one that comes to mind is a parody one I saw like "aita for buying my wife a dress?" where the fake story was that the guy threw away all of the clothes his wife already owned and wore and liked because he didn't like them and instead bought her a bunch of dresses 'a size or two down' to encourage her to dress and look how he wanted -- again, this was a parody story, but it really condenses the idea)
When people book me at the last minute I always ask what happened to the last photographer.
Their answer gives me an insight as to whether I should take the job or not.
Most of the time I turn them down.
In France you can take pictures in the public space of anything you see but you can definitely not post anything on the net or any other media without the persons consent. This situation in France with a photograph taking pictures of stranger and then asking them if they want to buy them showing them the result is usual. But buy no mean they can use it on their site without the persons permission. They usually delete them right away. Only exception is about public persons in public space like politicians or actors
Street photography is legal in the United (if the writer was indeed from the United States) “there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in public places”. The phot was property of the photographer. The writer committed a crime in stealing intellectual property.
Street photography is legal, yes. But not taking pictures of strangers without consent to make money. That’s when you have to sign a release. All professional photographers and filmmakers have to do that.
@@benugdsen75 That's not actually true. The photographer would need a release to sell the image to a third party, such as for an advertising campaign. They do not need a release to take the photo or to ask for money to sell it to the subject in the photo.
I believe someone in the comments of that video said OP lived somewhere in Europe so the laws in the US dont apply
@@benugdsen75 still doesn't give anyone the right to take someone else's work just because they happen to be in the picture.
That photographer that dropped out right before the wedding had the right idea. Probably they were being screwed over and smelled the BS and bounced. Photogs don't just miss out on that wedding payday for no reason.
When I did whitewater sports photography, the way independent photographers would get money was by posting the photos we took of people going down rivers on Instagram or whatever, then whenever people asked for the photos we'd give it to them for free and they could send a tip for whatever it was worth to them (unless they wanted prints of course, those cost money)
I'm not on the Surfers side, but the photographer definitely needs to adjust the business model. Take the photo, if it's nice show the person and give them your business card, offer to send it to them and add that if they want to pay then tip it. Or they can book you in the future. Personally, I don't do it at the beach given that people are kinda "vulnerably" dressed. It's public spaces, but I feel creepy taking pics of unwilling people in swimsuits
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Cropping out the watermark and using it for yourself is still theft. As is often the case, both are A’s.
The first girl actually gave 12 hours of labor. 4 there, 4 for the wedding, and 4 to go home. Bill the bride.😂
the drop out photogtapher probably did the engagement... aaaaaand didn’t get paid 😂
Literally editing photos I ended up feeling obligated to do for free for my brother in law because he asked me 2 days before the wedding. Jokes on him though because the wedding was in August and I told him he gets them when he gets them and I finally have some time to work on them. (I am a hobby photographer and don’t really do a lot of paid shoots anyways but it did annoy me a bit that he waited until 2 days before, and I knew he was broke af and wasn’t gonna pay)
A good word to use is "mooch". Somebody is trying to mooch off a bride by "borrowing" their photographer. A friend of mine would ask for PC help until one day, in a snow storm, I told him it was a big f-ing favor on my part. Since then he buys me lunch to pay for my services.
Never never never shoot one picture until you have half the money in your hand. put that in your contract.
"Don't work for friends or family"
Me, scheduled to take pics for a friend who already flaked on me once: 😳
Ok but see what had happened was, i am a student trying to get some practice in lol. I just hope its not a disaster. Grinchy me taking Christmas family photos... 😈
“On this day - you’re not gonna get paid.” 💀
While in public there is little right to privacy. THAT SAID, trying to sell that image is pretty shitty.. The photographer should have approached them to show them the images and if they'd like to have it.. Give it to them for free and let them know if they'd like to do a more formal shoot, provide contact info for them to book..
Just that first story, it's funny but relatable if you're ever visiting Laos lol. In certain tourist attractions, there will be photographers there that take your photo AND print it on site and ask if you want to buy the print. Had my photo taken and I didn't even know it, they were like ninjas even though you see them.
I heard the pastor is very handy with cars. Is it ok if I ask him to do a tune up on my car on the day of your wedding? I mean he’s there, my car is there… what’s the problem? Sheeeeesh, some people.
No pay no play, never work without deposit and never deliver without the rest.
Yeah I am not even a professional photographer yet family members asked me to do a couple of events already and I did it free. Now my birthday came up and the same people did not even took the effort to wish me a HB. Well...
Present your family members with a contract if they ask you to take photos. If not, take the crappiest out of focus pictures with motion blur. Then tell them the pictures are gone because you formatted the memory card by accident, or the dog ate the film.
If there was a budget for photos and the other photographer bailed, then the budget would be free. So I suspect that there was no budget and the photographer bailed, because he became aware of that. So the guy lied to his friend from the start...
The best thing you can do is tell them you have to have half of the money before you take the pictures. That way you will make enough money for your expenses. If they refuse to pay you hold the pictures and they get none of them until they pay.
For people worried about photographers at public events, you’re probably on phone video from 10 different angles. You and the photographer, why are you so concerned about the guy with the camera? Because people filming with phone cameras have become invisible to everyone?
Also, most likely have pictures or videos of random people on their phones without those people's permission.
Here's the thing, you dont need someone's permission to take a photo/video of them in a public space and the photographer was generous to offer that person the chance to buy the photo from their site because there's a chance that they might change their mind. That surfer who stole the photo, cropped the watermark, and still posted it on their instagram is a tool and should compensate the photographer. The only point the surfer was proving is that they are too cheap to buy cool photos and no one should be on their side of the argument.
In most countries (including North America), photographer owns the photos, but the counter-suit is the photographer is using the “model”’s photo for commercial purposes without a model release. They are both in the wrong.
I don't think the photographer should be allowed to sell it against the persons consent but it was wrong to steal it too.
For the #2 one…say it with me…NO 👏 PAYMENT 👏 NO 👏PHOTOS 👏 Also, contracts are important with friends and family.
That original photographer is bogus, I hear those stories all the time being a wedding photographer myself.
I like these kind of videos! Have a great day Jessica!
I need to say you look GORGEOUS!! Your makeup is on point!! ❤❤❤
I love all your videos Jessica. Thanks for the upload. ❤
A four hour drive there and back plus a wedding is generally all day plus editing pictures and culling run me my money
I would have shown the surfers the photos and given them to them and asked if they'd give me a shout out when they posted them to social media 👍🏼
Let's be honest, if you weren't invited to the wedding in the first place, then they're probably not great friends anyway. Why would you care about ruining a friendship with someone who didn't invite you to their wedding?
It's a weird gray area tbh. Here in Hawaiʻi, that's kind of common. Where photogs set up & photograph surfers, for that exact example, & sometimes approach them OR just post it later & say "if you know the surfer, tag them".
The "gray area" comes in 2 ways, bc technically it's a public space & "street photography principles/USA rules" apply:
If it's a public space, the photog can legally photograph & distribute that image without consent or release.
^^now most do what that photog did, which was approach them & ask if they were interested in the image...
The part where it would've hung up that photog here in Hawaiʻi is the asking for $$$/payment...bc that's "commercial activity" & that photog would've needed a permit to shoot on that beach & to also be earning money on that image.
Basically there's legalities, but also commonsense & decency, that make photographing public spaces (& private events) tricky to say the least.
I'm shocked... Usually when people take pictures of me in the street they offer me the pictures as a nice gesture. It's a win win. I have nice pictures, and they have a human subject for free..
In the US, if someone is in a public space (i.e. surfing), there's no expectation of privacy, so photographing that person is perfectly legal. This example is simply an extension of the longstanding and legal tradition of street photography. Yes, there are creeps who take advantage of this as well as ethical concerns, but the surfer has no rights in this scenario. And.. to add (perceived) insult to injury, the surfer is also commenting a copyright violation by stealing the work of the photographer.
Took my motorcycle up the tail of the dragon. Photographers camp out there and take pictures as you go by, and you can find their website later and buy the picture. I appreciated it, and I think a lot of riders do too.
Right on Jessica! Fighting for Common Sense and the Rights of Photographers Everywhere!
I agree with your philosophy of not shooting friends and families .. even for money.
Nevertheless, I will break this rule to be the 2nd (and unpaid) photographer for close friends and give pictures to the couple as presents.
I did this on two occasions and after the wedding the couples told me that my pictures were better than the 1st (paid) photographer.
Of course I knew that. At both weddings, I noticed that the paid photographer was poorly positioned and was obviously going to miss the shot so I positioned myself and anticipated the money shots. In both instances, my gear was better than the paid photographer. However, that is not the point -- it's about the photographer's eye/skill -- not the gear.
If you're in public, (USA) I can take your photo. My photo is mine. You CAN NOT be sued for taking a photo in public. Although I would offer it for free to the subject. You never send the images if you aren't paid. And I want 50% upfront for a wedding. And always refer another professional if it's a friend or relative.
Personally, if I take a picture of a stranger or even if they just happened to be in it and they asked me if they could get a copy I would gladly send it to them. We have no contract between us and if they like the picture I see no reason not to give it to them.
You have no expectation of privacy out in public.
She apparently has no clue that photography in public is protected under the 4th Amendment. Both parties were jerks and the surfers broke the law by using the pics without permission or payment. No grey area here.
This is such a bizarre story.
First, if you are in public, photograph, video what you like. It is called street photography. Anything you see from a public space is fair game. A Private investigator can take a photo with a telephoto lens into a window to record your activity, as long as it visible from a public area. Moral or not, it is allowed.
The person should not have clipped it. Full stop! That is the facts. Yes some countries laws vary, but in most Western countries this is how it works. Like it or not.
BS, you don’t have to ask permission in public
Ultimately moral ground is somewhere in the middle on #1, negotiating using the picture on your website for giving them a copy of the photo is very fair - assuming it's promo/portfolio photo and not a gallery specifically for review/sale to the person in the photo.
While it's not a scene I'm into, there are quite a few sports(ish) photographers that will attend open sports locations (surfing, track days, skiing, motorcross etc.) with the stated business model. The later pitch to sell photos varies as well as how informed people were (some locations/events have signs up as well as having it in their T/Cs) but from what I've heard there's always d*cks that manage to be both offended you took the picture but also want the picture so much that they will try to take pictures of the back of a cameras etc. Some photographers even have full setups with preview screens for clients and dye sub printers and frames you can buy straight out the back of their van. They will usually have permission to operate from land owners, event operators or none if shooting from public land to a public recreational sports location (where many countries have no expectations of privacy as well as allow for any commercial use for said photo - Germany is some of strictest in world, let alone strictest in Europe)
#2 -the original photographer definitely had it in their contract that they will not shoot the wedding if the sum is not paid by wedding day or return deposit in such a breach of contract - the couple put that to the test.
Taking pictures of people in PUBLIC is not doing anything wrong theres NO expectation of privacy in PUBLIC
As a photographer in Australia, I need the model to sign a Model Release.
Is that in the case you're going to sell them or use them to promote your business?
2:37 okay I have something to share... its common in México that when theres community religious events like baptisms theres always a photographer that no one call, contracted or invite and during the ceremony they'll take pictures of you going to the altar, sitting on the benches, next to the priest and the group photo when your posing for the digital camera your parents bring (now smartphones). Then they'd pass around a notebook where you'll note your adress and 2-3 days later they be visiting you with the PRINTED photos for you to buy 😂 most of the times you could say no, with luck dont let them take the picture in the first time but they know the way around, but my mom ended up buying them multiple times to not have the risk of them running into wrong hands (like sick people with pictures of kids)
Luckily with most of the people having a good camera in their smartphones that tricky businesses has been dying
He can take the picture, but he can’t show it much less sell it without permission
Love this photography Reddit video! Would love to see more of these from you ❤
This seriously doesn't make any sense. I found it infuriating. I couldn't take much of it. The part I watched detailed a tale of some photographer who did nothing wrong, except in some Karen world of imagined etiquette. Then some jerk infringed her copyright and confessed on social media to altering visible Copyright Management Information, which carries a $25,000 statutory penalty and is just about the only bit of protection for photographers that the US courts haven't taken away. (You can file suit before the copyright registration has been granted, which means for practical purposes that you CAN file suit.) Somebody is suggesting that this may have happened somewhere else. Copyright laws are harmonized just about world wide. In Europe, especially in Germany, infringers can expect that the courts will take a very dim view of altering CMI. In virtually all countries one can photograph anyone or any thing in a public place ("no reasonable expectation of privacy") and publish the image. In Europe, pretty much anybody can ask that an image of them be taken down from web publication and the website operator has to do it. That's a separate matter. I would suggest that photographers study the laws in their jurisdictions and model their behavior accordingly. Talk to real lawyers. Don't take advice based on how some TH-cam influencer "feels".
Street photography is street photography if you are outside
She came there while they were in the water. So really should wait till they finished surfing to ask to take pictures? I'd take pictures but wait till they came out then ask if I could use the images..
i hired lens, took 4 hours train journey, then as i arrive.. the groom said his cousin will do it... FML 😂😂😂 never trust certain people
That took a turn 😂
In the US a photographer can take a picture of anyone in a public place. Often, street photographers will share an image freely with whomever they've shot but if they do want to ask for a fee, it's within their right to do so. I used to race bicycles, and photographers would take our photos and later ask if we'd like to buy that photo. I never saw a problem with that. People who don't want to be in public and have photographers exercise their constitutional right to take their photo should stay home. People have become so "sensitive." It's sickening. The photographer legally owns that photo. It would take more money than it's worth but the person who takes a photo, removes a watermark and then uses that photo should be sued.
It is possible for both people to be wrong
Story 1: Thats how people scam tourists! 😂
inspire trust, half to start the balance due before you show up at the wedding
aftr the wedding and honeymoon, the couple are going to come back home to reality tired and broke. They will NOT want to pay for the photos
Dang I should send in what's happened with me
Dooooo iiittttt!!! 🤘😘🔥
Love your answers Jessica! Noncompromise iron lady
That wedding one, it seems like it was another "FRIEND photog" who was supposed to originally shoot the wedding...so no contracts, etc.
I know it's family/friends...but yeahhh, even then *I* get CONTRACTS signed. Precisely bc of this. Even with text msgs or email chains, it's not enough to make your case.
So unfortunately, that's where this all went wrong. HOWEVER, good on that photog for withholding until full payment...I'd tack on interest for every day it goes over, but that's me 😅
Taking photos, THEN asking for money. Weird. Cropping photos. Bad. Weird sitch.
Is this video blurry or is my eyesight going? haha
What wedding photos? I don’t remember taking any since my bank account doesn’t show it
Brillant video, putting us up on game lol you are hilarious as well.
I do work with friends, family and friends friends. But I make it very clear how it works and what the price is before doing anyting
Love Jessica
I'm not a full-time photog, and I can still pay my bills even if I don't get work, so my thoughts are in that context. In my opinion if you take a job as a favor for a friend, relative, etc., and you agree on a price, just assume you'll not get paid. If the money gets sent to you, that's a bonus, but if you approached it as a favour with a price attached and had little or no real expectation of being paid, then you don't end up filled with resentment. I actually did this about six months ago for a friend's kid's graduation. Quoted a price, but resigned myself to doing it as a favor. When the money came through a month or so later it was a nice bonus and everyone is happy. Just be sure that whether its for pay or for a favor you only send the best images, because it's your name attached to the results.
Asking people for permission to take their photo is the death of photography. You're all going to look the same way you look when you take selfies. Perfect, staged, fake.
Not only that but every press/journalist/news outlet could be considered a photographer/videographer and they don't ask. If they did, we'd have no news. Criminals could invoke non-consent and evidence would not be admissible in court.
🤘😘🔥
I have a question though. What if I like to create pictures of the day-to-day, and strangers are in my shots. I do like “no-posing” pictures, Elliott Erwitt style. I do not sell those pictures, but by law I’m allowed to take pictures of strangers…
In America, anything you can see in public/on public property you can photograph, without anyone’s consent. It’s a part of your first amendment right, “the right of press” which means any civilian can use photography to distribute news to the public. If the subject matter is about street life, it’s ok to sell that image as well. Only when the subject matter correlates to a person in the photo is when that person deserves royalties or compensation legally. Hope this helps.
@@allennopphotography Your "when the subject matter correlates to a person in the photo" is not accurate. The federal law in the US is the First Amendment, and that allows the photographer to take the image and publish the image even if it does "correlate to a person" for the income of the photographer.
However, there are state laws that limit the photographer's _commercial use_ of a person's image without that person's permission. _Commercial use_ in every state is defined as the solicitation for future business (whether paid or unpaid). Many states also have a prohibition against exposing private individuals (generally not including celebrities or celebrity wannabes) to "public ridicule and humiliation."
So, I can do street photography of people and publish them as a book on which I earn income and not need model releases. But I can't put those pictures in my website to solicit future business (although I _can_ advertise that book I published). This has all been established by court precedents.
@@kirkdarling4120 Yeah thanks for the clarification, I was merely just simplifying, but to be more clear. When I stated “correlates to a person in the photo” was just to highlight when a person’s identifiable likeness directly benefits a photographer financially. Like selling an image as art or editorial content is permissible, but using the image to promote business ventures would require further consideration of the subject’s rights. I was intending the correlation term to broadly mean when someone’s identifiable likeness is exploited for commercial purposes as you expanded on.
I understand why you wouldn't let your sister do a separate photoshoot at your wedding, and I think that's totally valid. But I would if the photographer was ok with it. I love my sister and would be fine if our photos matched
You are really funny.
These are two separate wrongs. It was wrong to take the picture without permission, but that doesn't mean it was OK to use it.
The first is impolite, the second is illegal.
Yes! Inconsiderate.
The photographer shouldn’t have taken her photo. Legally speaking, she should not have posted the photo without permission from the photographer
The first is merely impolite; the second is illegal.
If you are in public and you can see something from public, you have the absolute legal right to take a picture of whatever you can see. It is literally in the first amendment to the Constitution. I'll say it again, if you are in public you can take pictures of anything that you can see. You cannot trespass the eyes. Thank you founding fathers for freedom of the press.
The issue is the "business model" of photographing random strangers and then trying to sell (shake down might be better description) them for money. Also, you are only correct in the US, other countries have laws about photographing people in public.
Yes, those are the rules for us here in the States.
However, the law of the land in other countries, is indeed the Law of the Land.
As a disabled Army veteran, I swore my Oath to the Constitution... The Constitution and The People.
Also as a disabled Army veteran, I've had several serious situations with sickos trying to up skirt me. Thankfully, I also, also ALWAYS wear biker shirts underneath every shirt or dress. Sundresses in the Walmart Garden Center don't illicit invitations to invasions.
There ABSOLUTELY are certain protections in regards to public photography. Why people like those men can be absolutely be charged.
In this case, you are obligated to receive consent, as well as obtain a **Photo Release signature**. Particularly so, when using the images for commercial, promotional use.
I hope this helps, for you, and for anyone else who's misinterpreted, or have been misguided.
As second generation from 4 different countries, having served through OIF & OEF, it makes me even more ashamed as a disabled Army veteran(once more for emphasis,) to hear such condescension, contempt, and ignorance you've initiated here.
May this leave you with greater understanding and compassion before commenting... Though I will, and have, defending your right to say that. Don't let our pain be in vain, please.
🤘😘🔥
the photos were taken in a public place and the photographer does not have to ask for permission so your being stupid ...and this is a BS story ...
That only applies to USA, in other places it's nothing like that. In the video it's mentioned that this happened in Europe, where the legality of it is waaay different.
It's stupid of you to assume USA laws are worldwide laws.
@@leirumf5476 I think it depends on the country in Europe as well. Here in Sweden you can always take pictures of people if they are in a public space. You can also upload them without asking as long as the qualify as "art" and "art" is a loose term but Street photography is considered art and is therefore OK
@@sofiadahlen1187 Yup, although charging people for the photo you just took of them, to them definitely reads more as commerce than art.
But yeah, totally, goes to show how laws regarding something are very different in different countries.
@leirumf5476 That is very true and the law here also talks about that. I think it sounds like a bad thing to do.
But I also think people forget just how often they are videofilmed withouth their consent in everyday life just by being in public.
Jessica , in the early days of photography photographers in tourist areas of the UK
used to take photos of people walking past , print them up and sell them to the people later ... at a local golf course there's a guy shoots every golfer teeing off and sells them at the end of the round - it's a perfectly legitimate way of earning money
💒🩷🤍 My daughter just got married in November and not only stipulated to everyone but had it posted before entry into the ceremony NO PHOTOS DURING CEREMONY.. PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES! On top of THIS the officiant announced it before.. !
She paid a good amount of money for her wedding photographer and her ceremony was literally about 15 minutes.. as mother of the bride I had to tell some of the guests to put their damn phones away!!
Its a distraction to the bride and groom AND the photographer while others are snapping pics!! Not to mention, this is how the photographer makes their income..
When people book me at the last minute I always ask what happened to the last photographer.
Their answer gives me an insight as to whether I should take the job or not.
Most of the time I turn them down.