Still photographer

[dr stilly]

We just got a still photographer on set taking photos but wondering who owns the photos?? is there an agreement we need to come to terms on?

 

[dr stilly]

BTS stills are great for promo, and production packages, etc. Not essential, but pretty good. Not worth getting tied over a barrel for, though.

So the dude was originally brought in to do stills for one of the actor's publicity? It suuuuure would suck if that actor's publicity stills were suddenly 100% unusable for the actor, 'cos his friend is being a douche. You have some claim over the content of the photos, right? I mean... if you can't use them, maybe that photographer can't, either.

Well the actor can give him personal release for his image but he you're right he cannot use any other images of other actors or crew without consent which we have not given. His coolest pics are of our lead actors not his mate. I think we'll just cut him loose and see where he hangs. He may just give us all the pics just to be apart of the team. Not being tight coz if he shooted strait from the start we'd sort him out, but these underhanded tricks leave a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Lucky Hardwood]

There's a terrible thread, from earlier this year, about a British producer/director whose entire footage was being held hostage by the DP. Craziness.

I remember that. And, yes, that was totally insane. This stills guy wasn't actually hired, and as I understand it, got no likeness/model releases and now wants a chunk of the till for the pictures he wasn't hired to take. Sounds really underhanded and sleazy to me. I know that the laws in the UK can be pretty skewed, but this guy (photographer) has no legitimate claim to any portion of the proceeds of the film. In the previous case, the DP wasn't made to sign a work for hire agreement beforehand and held the footage hostage. Lesson learned for all involved.