Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Back in September I posted about a jewelry job I received from Kijiji. First time doing this but it was a huge amount of work for next to nothing financially.

I took it on as a learning opportunity mainly but also because all they asked for were images for their website. They directed me to another website and told me to follow what they did for style and sizing. The images would be very small and usable only for the web.

After shooting 140 pieces resulting in 350 images (approx) they came back asking for the rest of the images to be 2-3 times their size. This was what the web developer was asking for apparently.

This would result in the possibility they could re-purpose those images for printed material which was not part of our original verbal agreement.

I then constructed an agreement (the first one I sent out, they ignored) stating for what they were paying, they could only use the images for the web and if they wanted to use them for anything else, they need to re-negotiate pricing.

They replied saying they owned all rights to my images and could use them as they saw fit without any further financial compensation.

They obviously do not understand the rights of the photographer, the industry or profession. So I declined to do any further work for them.

They will find a photographer out there who will disregard this industry standard and go ahead, produce the work and hand over all images for next to nothing and not be compensated for a complete buy out (which is what they were asking for).

It's unfortunate there are photographer's out there that "will" do this and as a result makes it more difficult to maintain the overall worth, respect and dignity of the photography profession.

I'm just posting this for your knowledge. As an FYI about the attitude or lack of knowledge some people have about hiring a photographer for commercial work.

These guys were green about business in general, had cash to pay but wanted the world in return.

Not worth it. Even for your portfolio!!!

Wow...sorry to hear that.

This is something I disagree with, as a professional photographer on salary.

The pictures I take as part for them on their time on their premises belong to them, NOT ME!

I can't use those images myself, because they are paying me to create them.

That's the way it is, and that's the way it should be, and I don't disagree with it.

Now if you are a studio or contractor, that's a different story, although I disagree with that, and would have the following stipulation in the contract if I hire you:

"The content of the images belong to ME and that the photographer is not allowed to reproduce them, sell them, or do anything with them without my permission."

did you at least get paid for the work you did?

I am in the same boat as Mike. I can't use any of the images I take for the company I work for. It's their product, their office workspace, heck even their camera gear. I'm just the one pressing the shutter and editing the photos. Wow that was kind of degrading to myself...

Although perhaps our salary based job is different from the OP's situation. Hmm...

yes, salary based job is different. You are an employee and functioning as an employee of the company when taking the photos. Therefore, the company is actually taking the pictures themselves and own the photos.

I highly doubt a full time salaried employment was created by the Kijiji ad and it was most likely a contract for services. Photographer gets copyright and probably was licensing the use of her photos for the advertisements planned, that's all. To hand over all rights would be much more expensive.

Why do you think people like Annie Leibovitz owns all those photos she was paid to shoot for magazines (which she put up as security for loans I understand)? Because she took them. and probably sold licenses to the magazines to use them for their editions, of course.

perhaps you can post who these people were so others won't fall into the same trap

As an employee, you are right. The company owns all rights.

As a contracted photographer, the photographer owns the rights and usage rights need to be negotiated based upon the intended use. Supplying the client with web only images will be much cheaper than exclusive rights. What is termed as "full buyout" or "work for hire" in the industry.

To understand this more clearly, check out http://www.capic.org/.

I did get paid for what I had done. I made sure it was a "pay as you go" situation. I do not want to provide their names as they are young and do not know any better.

This post is more to help the photographer than to slander the buyer. You just need to be wary and prepare yourself when taking on commissioned work. Make sure both parties understand what is to be delivered and the intended use. Get a contract signed before you begin!!!!

You are mistaken here. Not in this country, sorry. Unless you have an agreement to that effect, copyright ownership goes to whoever commissioned your work.

here's where it broke down. The dispute was over the agreement to provide web images only. Seems to be the disagreement whether that also included the full sized versions. A written contract in advance is definitely the lesson here.

The moral of the story here is that you need a contract that clearly stipulates what work is being done, what is being delivered, and who has copyright. It sounds like this didn't really happen here, although LeesaM did try. Next time you may want to consider not doing the work unless the contract/agreement is actually signed.

I'm going to guess that the compensation was likely not in tune with handing over copyright to all the images, hence LeesaM was trying to do use only.

I work at an Adverrtising Agency and discussed this issue with the Art Buyer who has been doing this for 20+ years. She deals with all the industry legalities for this country as well as other countries and confirmed, unless otherwise stated in a contract as a "full buyout", I do own the rights.

Also discussed this with a couple of pros and they said the same thing.

CAPIC explains this too.

As for compensation? They weren't even paying me adequately for producing web only images. But as I mentioned before, I took this job on as a learning experience with the understanding they would be receiving very small, low resolution images. That's also why I didn't press getting the agreement signed before starting the job.

But when they came back and asked for larger images, that's when the red flag went up.

I have indeed learned my lesson here. But also how much effort goes into photographing jewelry. Not to mention all the clean up afterwards in post.

I work at an Adverrtising Agency and discussed this issue with the Art Buyer who has been doing this for 20+ years. She deals with all the industry legalities for this country as well as other countries and confirmed, unless otherwise stated in a contract as a "full buyout", I do own the rights.

Also discussed this with a couple of pros and they said the same thing.

CAPIC explains this too.

As for compensation? They weren't even paying me adequately for producing web only images. But as I mentioned before, I took this job on as a learning experience with the understanding they would be receiving very small, low resolution images. That's also why I didn't press getting the agreement signed before starting the job.

But when they came back and asked for larger images, that's when the red flag went up.

I have indeed learned my lesson here. But also how much effort goes into photographing jewelry. Not to mention all the clean up afterwards in post.

This last part is incorrect.

http://www.capic.org/resources.html?scr ... t+You+Sell

Copyright on photos and other commissioned work

Unlike other Canadian independent creators (creators who are not employees), photographers are NOT automatically the first owners of copyright in their work. Canada's copyright law singles out photographs and some other types of commissioned artistic works for different treatment.

Section 13(2) of the Canadian Copyright Act states that the copyright owner is the one who commissions and pays for the

This last part is incorrect.

http://www.capic.org/resources.html?scr ... t+You+Sell

Copyright on photos and other commissioned work

Unlike other Canadian independent creators (creators who are not employees), photographers are NOT automatically the first owners of copyright in their work. Canada's copyright law singles out photographs and some other types of commissioned artistic works for different treatment.

Section 13(2) of the Canadian Copyright Act states that the copyright owner is the one who commissions and pays for the

This last part is incorrect.

http://www.capic.org/resources.html?scr ... t+You+Sell

Copyright on photos and other commissioned work

Unlike other Canadian independent creators (creators who are not employees), photographers are NOT automatically the first owners of copyright in their work. Canada's copyright law singles out photographs and some other types of commissioned artistic works for different treatment.

Section 13(2) of the Canadian Copyright Act states that the copyright owner is the one who commissions and pays for the

This last part is incorrect.

http://www.capic.org/resources.html?scr ... t+You+Sell

Copyright on photos and other commissioned work

Unlike other Canadian independent creators (creators who are not employees), photographers are NOT automatically the first owners of copyright in their work. Canada's copyright law singles out photographs and some other types of commissioned artistic works for different treatment.

Section 13(2) of the Canadian Copyright Act states that the copyright owner is the one who commissions and pays for the

Leesa - thanks for your followup. I'm sure lots of TPMG members are grateful that you shared your experience publicly so that others can learn from it and avoid future problems.

Cheers,
Ken

Thanks for posting this Leesa. Interesting to hear how things played out.

It would appear that you made a mistake in going forward, when they ignored your attempt to come to a written agreement. That's a huge red flag and, when doing contract work, it's not a good idea to proceed without actually having said contract in place

Thank you Leesa for this posting.

Now, where is that posting on Kijiji...?

It was under the Graphic/Web design section yesterday but I don't see it now. They must have been flooded with responses and pulled the ad.

Great info. Thanks.

Maybe this should be a sticky.

I don't think Kijiji is working right as I've now noticed there are NO jobs listed in that section which is absurd.

If you're seeing jobs then just look for the posting "photographer for jewelry" and take note of their mentioning wanting to use the images for anything. Also to a 1000px width.

OK, it seems to be working now and I've noticed a newer posting. They've changed the quantity of pieces to a smaller amount and do not mention wanting full rights to the images. A different email address is being used too so it might be the other guy (there are two of them).

But interesting no doubt!!!

I agree with the above statement, but also I am aware than in the world of contracts and agreements for services/ assignments, a even better thing to do is to write a clause is to cover your expenses upfront.

In large or time consuming work I am careful to ask upfront a non-refundable portion, usually a 30%. There's not point in having a signed agreement/contract and later on not getting paid

Lisa,

Agreement I make with my clients and I work independently with no agency or third party involved is based on their right to use the electronic format (images) in whichever way they want. This includes printed material, advertising or let's say web use. What they can't do is to reproduce or resell my images. On the other hand I have full right to retain a copy of my work for limited use such as personal portfolio, art exhibitions or artist showcase.
Anyway, keep you head up ... I'm sure the next client will be much better than this one. Hopefully when that time comes you'll nail down an agreement that works the best for both you and your customer.

Brian

You do own the rights to the images. That's a no brainer.
You did the right thing to demand a compensation for bigger files.
Web files should be about 800-1100pix max. Anything more and they are fishing to print them.
The job you did was a 5 figure job,but if they had that kind of money, they wouldn't be posting on Kijiji and went to an agency.
Happy to hear you at least got some experience from it. That also worth a lot!