(Closed) Photographer Contract Language – Question

posted 6 years ago in Photos/Videos
Post # 3
Member
4755 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: May 2012

the prints is normal lots of photographers limit their printing mine did.

as for 1 hell no I wouldn’t sign that. that means if they screw up in ANYWAY all you do is get money back? no way man. if you’re not going to show for any of the reasons listed above you’re under an obligation to find someone to show up. I manually wrote that into my contract to which the photographer agreed.

Post # 4
Member
1314 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: May 2006

1. A liability clause limiting the loss to the total fee paid for the service is not unusual.  We word ours differently.  But the point could be, say we are en route to your wedding and we’ve left with plenty of time to arrive to the destination and something out of our control prevents us from arriving on time (we get hit by another car, or a road is blocked that wasn’t know to us etc), you can’t sue us for more than you paid us to shoot your wedding.  Stuff like that would suck, but should you be able to end the career of a photographer if that were to happen?  Well we don’t think so.  Now- the clause about being a no show on our part is definitely not something in our liability clause.  If I just decide not to show up?  Sure that’d be something I’d probably want to sue a photographer for.  Not showing up due to emergency is a bit different, but there should be something in the contract about attempting to find a replacement.

2.  The printing rights clause is really at the discretion of the individual studio, but most of the photographers I know including ourselves send the entire file unaltered.  At the very least I would get them to change that to 16×24.  16×20 is not a native size for any digital slr, which means they are cropping the delivered images (that seems a bit weird too).  They are trying to force you to buy large prints through them, and odds are low that you will want something larger than 16×24 (most people think 8×12 is a big print), but personally that would be a dealbreaker for me.  I have a print in my office that is over 6 feet wide.

Post # 5
Member
621 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: August 2014

The first clause is legit and so is the second. It’s the photographers prerogative. Many limit the size you can print because we know that the places you may choose to print will do an awful job on it and those larger sizes will be prominently displayed somewhere. In my eyes it’s a form of quality control over just trying to make you buy large prints to be jerks. I don’t want my name on a 16×24 print from Walmart because I know the kind of quality they produce and it would be a very visible misrepresentation of the original image. honestly most i know who do this limit printing to 8x10s or smaller so this is not unreasonable to me.

Post # 6
Member
1000 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2009

The clauses are legit… I know it sounds ridiculous that the photographer can’t be held liable for basically being irresponsible (beyond what you paid them anyway), but that’s pretty much the case with any paid gig; you don’t show up, you don’t get paid, period. You shouldn’t have to worry about being sued for the entire cost of someone’s wedding if you make a mistake and don’t make it to the wedding for some reason, and especially not if you don’t make it for reasons beyond your control.

At the end of the day, yes it sucks for the bride, but they are just photos; we didn’t T-bone you while driving drunk on the highway and injure you for life. I think it’s fair that the most you can sue your photographer for is what you paid them; it’s in our contract too.

The topic ‘Photographer Contract Language – Question’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors