facebook photos

[Vectis]

will make more of a point of telling the crowds about facebook photos in future.

I wouldn't bother on two counts:

1. You have the organiser's permission (even if by way of an unread T or C)

2. You're there on behalf of your host(s), not to promote your own business. It's their special day, not your marketing opportunity.

[Corabar Entertainment]

I wouldn't bother on two counts:

1. You have the organiser's permission (even if by way of an unread T or C)

2. You're there on behalf of your host(s), not to promote your own business. It's their special day, not your marketing opportunity.

Again, completely agree. Actually, you're probably inviting trouble making announcements.

[DazzyD]

The grey area here is whether by whacking them online you are exploiting them for commercial purposes. In which case model releases should be sought.

My opinion is that technically, uploading to a mobile disco page ("Hey - book my great disco") on Facebook is a breach. Uploading to a personal page ("Hey - look at this great party I went to") is not.

Sounds like you already know what to do

As always, Martin is pretty much spot on. Taking the photos is not the problem (certainly not illegal) but what you then do with the images is significant. It they are purely personal then then there's no problem at all. If you are using them for commercial gain or to promote a commercial venture then it's not so straight forward. The reason being is that, in theory at least, a person owns the "intellectual property rights" for their own image and they can, to some extent, pick and choose what their image is used for. Some people might take offence at you using their picture to promote your business. I think, though, that most people couldn't care less. Some folk even get excited when they see their picture in print / on the website and tell their friends (good marketing opportunity!! ).

An alternative to removing the offending pics is to pixelate, or obscure in another way, the image of the complainant. That way, you've taken action to rectify their complaint and they can't really take further action on the matter.

I wouldn't bother on two counts:

1. You have the organiser's permission (even if by way of an unread T or C)

2. You're there on behalf of your host(s), not to promote your own business. It's their special day, not your marketing opportunity.

Again, completely agree. Actually, you're probably inviting trouble making announcements.

Again, have to agree with Martin and Ang. It's totally impractical to get every attendee to sign a release form. Make it clear in your T&Cs that the client is signing a "block release" on behalf of all of their guests. No announcements needed then!

[BVD]

I would say that by posting the images on Facebook you are promoting your business and therefore you should look very carefully at this paragraph in the link you posted

"'You need a model release'. Model releases are not necessary for anything except photographs to be used for commercial purposes. For editorial or artistic purposes they have no relevance unless you intend defaming the subject and need them to make a contractual agreement not to sue you for libel. If you intend selling the image for marketing or advertising use that implies endorsement by the subject, then yes, you need a model release (or rather, the advertiser does)"

Steve

[Corabar Entertainment]

I would say that by posting the images on Facebook you are promoting your business and therefore you should look very carefully at this paragraph in the link you posted

"'You need a model release'. Model releases are not necessary for anything except photographs to be used for commercial purposes. For editorial or artistic purposes they have no relevance unless you intend defaming the subject and need them to make a contractual agreement not to sue you for libel. If you intend selling the image for marketing or advertising use that implies endorsement by the subject, then yes, you need a model release (or rather, the advertiser does)"

Steve

IMO, You've highlighted the wrong phrase:

'You need a model release'. Model releases are not necessary for anything except photographs to be used for commercial purposes. For editorial or artistic purposes they have no relevance unless you intend defaming the subject and need them to make a contractual agreement not to sue you for libel. If you intend selling the image for marketing or advertising use that implies endorsement by the subject, then yes, you need a model release (or rather, the advertiser does)

Reads very different then!

[djdave01]

this all seems to be getting a bit complicated lol

i suspect this particular lady has some reason for not being photographed at the party, maybe her husband didnt know she was going.

im still waiting back to hear from her, but if taking these photos is going to cause any further hassle, i might have to consider whether its worth the bother.

[BVD]

I derive a fairly sizeable part of my income from photography (field events, gundogs etc) and I have to make sure I get a disclaimer signed by, or on behalf of, the landowner where the event is held to enable me to take photos.

In my opinion, someone, someday is going to be claimed against where images have been taken without their knowledge and then used for commercial purposes.

One question I would ask is, why do production companies go to the time and effort to pixel out peoples faces when showing videos taken on private property and shown on national TV? Not because they want to spend that time and money

Steve

[Corabar Steve]

One question I would ask is, why do production companies go to the time and effort to pixel out peoples faces when showing videos taken on private property and shown on national TV? Not because they want to spend that time and money

Isn't it because they usually do it on "Police Camera Action" style shows & the pixelated person is usually somebody accused of commiting a crime

[BVD]

Isn't it because they usually do it on "Police Camera Action" style shows & the pixelated person is usually somebody accused of commiting a crime

Not everyone caught by the Google cam is a criminal but the majority are blurred as to be unrcognisable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixelization

A familiar example of pixelization can be found in television news and documentary productions, in which vehicle license plates and faces of suspects at crime scenes are routinely obscured to maintain the presumption of innocence, as in the television series COPS. Bystanders and others who do not sign release forms are also customarily pixelized.


Steve

[katman]

The faces on most of the pictures I take are blurred.....

....they arent supposed to be but Im not a very good photographer