Saturday, September 11, 2010

Your Client Obligations Regarding Retouching

In our "day job" as a professional photographer, we retouch photos. SOME photos, not all. Certainly, we do not retouch images that are going out to the news media on behalf of clients. We have a policy of not retouching photographs that we provide for editorial purposes to editorial clients. However, when providing retouched images to corporate/commercial clients, where those images end up we have no control over. However, what we DO have control over is whether or not we would allow out "into the wild" the un-retouched images of the same subject from the same shoot, and we do not, for reasons that will become clear in a moment.

We have an obligation, in some cases like that of a plastic surgeon, to not reveal what re-touching was done. Whether it was a bit of acne removed, or two chins, no one need know. When we allow out of our hands un-retouched images, it becomes a recipe for disaster, and litigious clients/subjects can make lives miserable in a New York minute.
(Continued after the Jump)

Enter Jezebel. Somehow, this website got ahold of the unretouched image(s) of Jennifer Anniston that appeared on the cover of an Austrailian magazine. Anniston is no stranger to admitted Photoshopping of herself. She admitted as much back in December of 2008 for a GQ cover she appeared on, to Barbara Walters, in the view, as Jezebel reported here. What Jezebel didn't have, at that point, was the before-and-after versions of the image. Now, for another cover, they do.

On August 20th, Jezebel published This Is How Your Jen Aniston Sausage Gets Made, showing the before/after images from the shoot. Well, rightly so, the photographer - Alexi Lubomirski, filed a cease-and-desist against them, which Jezebel is fighting, as they explain here - Why You Must See Unretouched Images, And Why You Must See Them Repeatedly. The problem that Lubomirski seems to have is that, since the commentary/criticism is about the photograph, he may well have fallen into the fair use category, where he cannot preclude the use of his image since the commentary is about the image itself. Surely, lawyers will battle this one out, but the damage is done to Lubomirski's reputation.

Somehow, one of Lubomirski's images got out, and that's a problem. If you are doing retouching, you have a critical responsibility to not let the un-retouched images out. Further, if you are hiring a retoucher, you need to make sure you have an NDA agreement with them for all your client work, and further, that they may not show images of yours that they have done work on, as examples of their work, because of the need to protect your clients' interests.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
at

1 comment:

  1. Charles Carstensen's BlogSeptember 11, 2010 at 9:43 AM

    Your client obligations are to protect the chain of custody at the point of your involvement. What happens after your job is done is not your responsibility. What's the big deal? Everyone knows magazine covers like this are not accurate.

    ReplyDelete

COMMENT GUIDELINES

Every month, tens of thousands of visitors come to Photo Business News, and approximately 2,000 readers get PBN via RSS feeds. As we approach three years of blogging (in one form or another) PBN has matured, and has, as one might expect, attracted some less-than-mature readers, which, in turn, turns to commenters with their own agendas.

Following are our Terms of Service (TOS) for commenting on the blog posts:
-------------------
1. Comment Spam - we have had a ton of spam from countries like Russia, Japan, China, and so on. It interferes with the discourse, and is one of the prime reasons we are moving to moderation. All one need to is look back a few months to see the blog posts I haven't had time to clean up from this type of spam to see that moderation is needed for this reason alone. In addition, if your comment is not germane to the point being discussed, it too becomes spam. It will be deleted.

2. Over time, some pretty irrational challenges and attacks have been levied against me, and that's ok if you disagree with me, just don't make it personal on me, or anyone else. Doing so means your comment won't make it out of moderation, so don't waste your time. In addition, it would be a shame for you to make a really great point that everyone would benefit from reading, and include personal attacks on me, or other commenters, because we don't edit comments, they're either in, or they're out.

3. Over at the Photo Business News Flickr forum, (here) there are almost 2,000 members and a good opportunity to get your questions answered there. If you have a suggestion for a blog topic, there's a link to make that suggestion on every page of the blog.

4. It is the policy of Photo Business News that if there is a YouTube, Vimeo, Viddler, Hulu or any other video service online, we can post it here using the embedding players for those services (which often insert ads into the playback). We can't know if what might normally be considered a copyrighted work that you would think might not be allowed on, say, YouTube, in fact has been agreed to between the copyright holder and YouTube. So, if you have a question or concern, visit those sites, and flag the content you believe is problematic. In addition, we adhere to standards for quoting and citing other content, with attribution and where possible, a link to that content.

5. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS - For several years now, we've given free reign to anonymous commenters, and a small fraction of those were beneficial to the readership. It is our opinion that anonymous commenters would best be from someone who, for example, should their identity be revealed, could pose job security or economic problems for them. So to that end, unless your comment is significantly beneficial, anonymous comments won't get moderated in. If you wish to make an anonymous comment and you want to send me an e-mail identifying yourself (which I will not reveal), that would be helpful, and will increase your chances of getting your comments posted. Oh, and don't go creating a fake Blogger ID just to get in - blank Blogger ID's are just one step removed from plain anonymous postings. The more discourse where people know who each other are, the better. David Hobby, of Strobist fame summed it up best in his TOS: "Nothing looks more weenie and pathetic than sniping, critical, anonymous comments."