Quote:
Originally Posted by GH85Carrera
Unless it is written into the contract, the photographer will retain all the rights. He wants to keep the rights to be able to SELL that image to the client at the huge markup and keep those profits.
|
Yup. Just wanted to mention the differences between simple print-releases and other rights-managed agreements, or full-blown copyright-releases. It's a matter of image ownership/rights/control, vs. revenue.
As a photog, you want to maintain the most control, while making the most money. As such you would typically charge a lot more for a total copyright-release than a simple print-release and/or rights-managed agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GH85Carrera
We will sell a copyright release to a client for a limited and specif use. It us $2,5000 and up for the release. We want to control the quality of any reprints. We have provided clients of images and they make some horrible quality prints.
|
I am sure you have your bases covered (and probably just splitting hairs), but I would be careful with the terminology/contract verbiage there. A "copyright release" is just that, and if not articulated/worded correctly, it could have you losing the royalty rights to your images (deeming them "royalty-free"). Hence the use of limited-use licencing (rights-managed) agreements. RM agreements typically address limits on image size/resolution, mediums, distribution, time, etc. without relinquishing any ownership (copy) rights. It's basically a detailed lease agreement, where the lessor allows the lessee the use of their "property" with very specific limitations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GH85Carrera
Often the images we produce are too big fo most clients. The project I am working on right now is not large area yet the image is 4.1 GB. Clients try to open that in Word or PowerPoint and it crashes for some reason.  |
Ask them try MS Paint instead.
You using PhaseOne or Leaf backs?