Copyright & Photography Rules

You’re looking for printing rights, which is fairly common with photographers now. Copyright would still belong to the photographer, but you would be able to print as many or as little as you want.

In my experience with searching for a photographer, most are showing the client to have digital rights. Mine is giving me all the images on a USB

Our photographer is providing us with all our photos, but he has also put some of his favorites up on his Instagram and will likely upload them to his webpage. It was honestly no issue at all. If a photographer is not allowing you access to your photos that’s an issue. Initially on our proofs from our engagement session the photographer had put his watermark, but then he did provide all fully edited photos without the watermark. These are questions you need to ask prior to hiring a photographer, or if you already have one then you should reach out and ask.

Our photographer, and every one we spoke to for our wedding, said they’d provide a USB with all the edited, non watermarked photos. Any he posted online, and our online gallery all had the watermark. This was something I made sure to specifically ask, as I wanted to be able to use them and print them freely, but most said it was standard. I did talk to one photographer for a boudoir shoot who only gave 10 digital images and you had to pay for everything else, which I thought was crazy. Just make sure you ask, and it’s clearly stated in your contract.

You shouldn’t hire a photographer who doesn’t give you the photos (or the right to print those photos) you are paying for. What you should check in your contract is the rights to use those photos on social media or for financial gain. Most photographers will have language about that as they want to be credited for their work and you should not financially profit from their work if they don’t. My photographer had language in the contract about this and we asked him to put “in kind” language stated that he could not use our images for profit without our written permission. He was totally fine with that. Whenever I post any pictures on social media, I credit him for the work.

I’ve been mingling in the photography world for over 10 years.
Printing rights was not always a thing. It was a paid for add on. Many provided you with watermark pics for online display but their prints, coffee table books, framed prints were a thing too and That is where ur money went. That’s where people paid $1000+ for photographers.
As time evolved prints and books went by the way side to CD and USB. So now photographers charge the same $ or more than they did 10 yrs ago and all you get is a usb. The over head is very low. You are basically just paying for time as there is no tangible thing to have when you walk away.
So before you paid same amt of money for time AND prints and books etc
now you pay for time and then you have to go off and spend more money on prints, frames, books etc.

There was also photogs with contracts to exclusive shooting rights at weddings. Where no one with cameras or phones could shoot any pictures. I don’t know if those are still used but it was a thing. And I myself like that aspect and I would use it!

I'm having issues with this as well. You are indeed looking for printing rights. I'm looking for full rights to my photos as I think weddings are intimate and don't want that moment in my life broadcasted to anyone not of my choosing. So I'm looking for at trying to get a "work for hire" contract which a lot of photographer pb won't do.

My package is giving me a usb which I will be allowed to print whatever I want.

Now of days photographers are not witholding photos from you. I am not really sure why that was a thing in the past ? But all the photogs I spoke with would deliver all of my images either on USB or via an online album that I could then save and make copies of and print whatever I liked with whatever service I wanted.

View Quoted Comment

Oh this is really interesting to know. Thanks for sharing!

It really just means that you can't profit off their work, but you will be free to print and share them for personal use. Like if a magazine calls you and says they want to feature your wedding photos and are going to pay you for it, you can't do that without speaking to the photographer first because they need to be properly credited, and possibly compensated. At least that's how our contract was. It also stated in our contract that we were giving them full reign to share our photos on their own website and social media, and to use them as advertising if they wanted to.

As a photographer let me help explain. Copyright is something that 99.9% of photographer do not give up. This means that they own the right to the photos and that you need there permission to use in publications and for other similar things. You are looking for a print release meaning you are given the rights to print and copy the images for your own personal uses, not for advertising or making money. All photographer SHOULD give you that. You will have to pay for the print release for ALL photos I am sure but there should be something in the contract about how many photos you get, additional charges, etc.

Hope that helped

View Quoted Comment It is a very wrong assumption that actual professional photographers have very little overhead. I have over $50,000 invested into my equipment, plus studio overhead like a mortgage payment, electrical bills, ect. Not everyone gets a cheap camera and starts taking money as a “pro.”

Most wedding photographers do give digital images with a print release, but lots of photographers focus on selling prints, and that’s totally ok - it doesn’t mean they are “ridiculous” or “backwards,” it probably means they are a true pro who knows their stuff, and they don’t want their images printed through terrible printers like Shutterfly. It’s like going to a fancy restaurant and getting the ingredients to take home and cook yourself....Not ever quite as good as the restaurant! Your professional photographer has access to products you cannot access as a consumer, so getting prints through them can be a great investment. Just be sure to ask what is all included in your package, and if it comes with a print release. Also, be sure to ask how many photos to expect from your wedding day, and how many will be duplicates. My sisters photographer only gave her 300 images total, and they were actually only 100, edited in color, bw and sepia. She missed so much, it was terrible!! Clear communication up front is your best bet.

View Quoted Comment Not all photogs have studios, in fact very few do. I’m talking about the ones who are primary wedding. Very few wedding photogs here that are legit have studios.

Yes cameras are expensive. Software can be too. But with 5 weddings at $3000/each all that is paid for.
The ones with no studio who used to provide prints, books, online sharing and framed 16x20 pics for $3000 now charge $3000 for a usb only.
Making $3000 with out having to pay $1000 for the prints, books etc means more profit.
Means being that it’s wedding and not annual family photos means the consumer didn’t just do this and hire a photog 2 years ago. They aren’t realizing the difference in stuff from 5+ years ago til now.

Imagine if all you had was 2-3 cameras and software that you bought at Jan 2017?
You did only on location shoots and you did 7 weddings at $3000+ last year plus other shoots. You only give usb images to all clients. Wouldn’t you say your overhead would be less and your profit be high?

View Quoted Comment Other things have changed that offset that profit to some extent. Most photographers we researched included some kind of extra shoot (engagement, boudoir, bridal) which wasn’t the case when I married my exH 8 years ago. They also typically are with you for longer hours. Some include a second shooter or an assistant, which they have to pay, and that wasn’t as common before.