I have been reading a couple of threads about second shooting which made me think of something that has happened to me recently. Last year I contacted a local photographer about possibly second shooting with him for some extra experience. I had already shot a couple of weddings on my own, but just thought I could use the extra experience to prepare me for when I have a lot of weddings booked. I did not really respect the photographers work, but thought it could be fun anyways. I shoot almost all available light (when possible) and he flashes just about every single shot he takes. The first wedding I shot with him I went up stairs (double decker church) and had the bride stand in the isle and shot down on her with natural light (pretty typical shot.) He thought he should go upstairs and try the same thing with a flash. Well, I went to a bridal show that he was at just to hang out with my wife and walk around and I noticed that he was displaying a HUGE print of that image that I took. At first I thought it was kind of funny and I actually felt a little honored, but when I saw his "featured album" I got a little frustrated. Probably 75% of the images in the album were shots that I took that day and they were mostly naturally lit shots which he does not do. He was advertising something that he could not produce. I forgot about this instance, but when I went and met with him recently I noticed something that really disturbed me (besides that EXACT print being displayed in his studio/basement.) He used my image for a very expensive ad in a local wedding magazine. My image is the only one in the ad. I am a little frustrated yet again, but I want to keep a good relationship and not burn any bridges. I told him recently that I would not be second shooting with him due to booking my own weddings. Anyways...what do you think about this? Is this ethical?

I know I do not personally advertise any of my second shooters images anywhere even though I do not mind when people do it on their blogs and give that person credit. I just think that you should not advertise something that you do not shoot.

Doesn't sound particularly ethical, but he's going to have some PO'd brides who book him on the basis of your images and get a different style, and he'll probably lose credibility and referrals from within the local wedding industry because of it. It sounds exceedingly annoying, but since he can't reproduce your images, he's digging his own professional grave and won't be competition in the long run.

Did you have a contract with him that spelled out any copyright assignment or usage permissions?

that is part of the reason I don't want to work for anyone anymore that won't let you maintain the copyrights of your own images UNLESS I know it is someone who has knowledge and skills I want to learn that would make it worthwhile. I totally don't mind if the photographers I work with blog the shots I took....some of them will end up in the album etc...that is a given, but to use it in an ad and obviously be taking credit for it as their own is lame lame lame. I know that people are worried about getting burned by second shooters they work with and have had bad experiences, but this can obviously go both ways. I guess in the future I would say only work with photographers whose work you do admire and aspire to and they will probably be a lot classier anyway. that just seems pathetic really, and like the last poster said, their credibility will be shot if he can't deliver what he is advertising.

kate

It sounds like he's overusing your work and misleading his clients BUT I do use some 2nd shooter shots in my portfolio's because they represent what my couples will get in their albums. When a 2nd is working for me, all their work falls under my business name. When my clients hire me, they're also hiring my 2nd is it's appropriate to showcase their images as well. You may not have shot it but it is an example of what your clients will get, ya know?

But, this guy is definitely going too far.

Ya...I am certrainly ok with him showing brides my work. He is showing something that his business can offer, but I do not like the blowing up of prints, or using it for his expensive advertising. That just bugs me a little.

Like I said, I am done 2nd shooting for him. He was lying to brides and I didn't know it. I started shooting with another guy under the main guys name so he was double booking dates. We thought the brides were expecting us to be there until one of the moms asked us if he was ok. We didn't know what she was talking about, but I guess he called the bride the night before and told her he was very sick and couldn't shoot the wedding so he was sending me and another guy when, in all reality, he was shooting another wedding somewhere else. The brides were expecting him until the night before the wedding...I couldnt believe it...

I felt bad for the brides at first, but felt good for them at the same time because they were actually getting better photography with me and the other guy (both professionals now) than with the main guy and his second shooter who has been shooting for a few months and barely knows the camera.

Anyways..Thanks for the responses...I just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy for thinking this was a little jacked up.

I hope you have a specific contract with your 2nd shooter that states it all falls under your name, because copyright laws follow the person that click the button.

Showing 2nd shooter images in a portfolio is dishonest in my opinion. You are showing an example of what a bride would get if they hire you and you hire that 2nd shooter. If you can't guarantee both of you, then what is on your site is not a fair representation of what the client will get.

Jeremy,

Sadly, this has happened to a bunch of OSPers and you learned your lesson. It is incredibly unethical and illegal if you had no contract since he is using your images without your permission. At the same time, since you didn't have a contract, trying to establish what agreement you had is tough.

This one is a tough one, but you can either take legal action and see how that works out (Matt or one of the other ex-lawyers can chime in) or chalk it up to experience and realize the importance of contracts for everything.

I do have a contract and I also point out which one's are my second's to the bride..I'm proud of their work and the quality of second's I hire and I want to show that off. I don't think it's unethical at all...I may not hire the same photog. but I hire the same quality and I let them know that.

I view my photography business as a business and not entirely me...my albums, jewlery, prints, etc are all Mariah Smith Photography items, like the shots of my second...they're MS Pphotography items...I don't give out all the vendor info on every product I sell.

But, I don't showcase second's pictures and I do think there's a fine line. I can see both sides. As long as my seconds are cool w/ it and I don't feel like I'm misrepresenting my business, I'm good with it.

If all the expectations are set and clear between you, 2nd, and the bride, then I agree it is fine, it sounds like you know that line. Way too many photographers, even on OSP, don't make that clear and just assume that the 2nd shooters stuff automatically belongs to them because they booked the client. I think Melody pointed out that her 2nd shooter contract is bigger than her main contract.

Didn't mean to get jumpy on you Mariah, but I am glad to hear you are communicating with your clients and shooters. It makes all the difference.

Thanks Chris! I will def. just chalk this one up as experience. It bothers me a little bit, but not enough to take legal action. I have learned my lesson and I will just move on. Thanks everyone for the reply's

You could sue in small claims "to make a point" which wouldn't require a lawyer and you'd have copyright law on your side. My suggestion, is to talk to him first. If he's an A*Hole about it, then think about going the small claims route ONLY If there's no possible way to work it out otherwise. Remember, he has a family to feed and a life to live so be sure to be reasonable, hopefully it was just an honest mistake.