Does it hurt you like it hurts me? 😬
I found this article the other day, and it really strikes home. I work primarily as a photo retoucher, and it is really not rare that I am prevented to show commercial retouched images as a retoucher (I am also a graphic designer and don't have any issues with clients for this side of my work).
I understand where clients are coming from, but I really get a sense that people are thinking with their 2005 brain when they are feeling a bit ashamed to admit their photos are retouched, and it happens mainly when the client is a photographer. Anyhow, that prevents me from showing - give or take - 75% of the work I do, and big clients and campaigns are disproportionnally affected. My portfolio says I worked with such and such, but potential clients or agencies never get to see the images, and they seem not to understand why. I have tangible proof that it has affected my prospects in the past, but there is nothing I can do about it but moan.
Does it happen to you too?
https://www.itsnicethat.com/features/designers-incognito-creative-industry-020822?utm_source=linkedin&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=intsocial&utm_content=liregular&fbclid=IwAR1BQG52yb7XtAzWlQiU7ot7ItIivveuetLsKiaYO1IvwRJyNdBXfihtiNM
(the article is more focused towards creatives, and it really pains me to see this trend spreading)
Replies9
- @Laura S Do you have to sign NDAs everytime? As a designer would you get covered by copyright laws in the US if you decide to showcase them anyway? (Or would you be just blacklisted, which frightening enough).I can understand it it in - say - half the cases, the other half, I just feel it's completely unnecessary!Hope it gets better for you in the future!
- I get that all the time as a designer in America. Currently allowed to show 2 projects from the past 3 years. Incredibly harmful.
- *Credited and allowed to showcase!
- @Gavin Kemp Yes, that's why I get it, and I can easily put me in their shoes. It's when it happens with projects photographers are proud of, and even the catering is credited (no offence to the catering) but the retoucher isn't that I feel devaluated. And yes, I could easily say it's my ego talking :)
- The whole thing about photogrpahers not wanting to be credited or being credited on another name is a minefield - even for Photographers, but can be understandable.On one hand we get mentors/advisors saying you should be known for one style with one look of to you work so clients know your brand and can book you on that basis, on the other hand you get photographers agents and production houses saying they look beyond a photographers style and book photographers on their personal work.Catch 22 at it's very best!
- @Gavin Kemp Yes, it's nearly always been driven by photographers, and sometimes by the end client (but very rarely, mostly because the project was not publicly released). I worked a lot with photographer who have a fine art/documentary practice as well as a commercial one. In some cases, they take on assignments and don't even want to be credited themselves either, or at least they do through another name (would it ruin their reputation?).What I wanted to mention too, is that it doesn't necessarily require an NDA. If a client say they'd rather not appear in my social media and portfolio, I'll keep my word. They don't necessarily need an oath and a blood signed document from me.If I do illustrations or graphic design, sometimes I don't even have to ask. Most agencies will give you the final product before the official release with the date it's in the wild with all the SM accounts linked to it. (There are other issues working with agencies, but the more I work in that business, the more I appreciate working with them rather than directly... Go figure)
- @Sandrine BascouertI can understand your frustration, interesting that you say it's being driven by the photographer, some creatives are incredibly fragile - or in some cases photographers agents can be incredibly controlling.Take careGavin
- @Gavin Kemp I get you, and I can only see it as abuse of powers (I have the right to do it, but if I do, will I ever see the client again?). The problem with photo retouching, is that the work (unlike yours as a photographer/creator) doesn't fit into the "my own creation" domain. I do not create anything, I modify other people's images. I signed NDAs more than I can count, and if I didn't sign them I wouldn't have had the project. And in nearly 100% of the cases it's because the photographer doesn't want it to be known that their photos are retouched (I asked).I worked on campaigns with big names, where absolutely everybody was credited (even the dog) but me. In that case I was able to showcase the project, because the agency was really cool about it, but if I worked directly with the photographer, I am not so sure. I also worked with a agency on a VERY big project, where the photographer had that much weight into it, that it superceded the - usually quite nice - conditions the agency has. They specifically asked that no retouching was to ever be mentionned.I negociated accordingly, fees-wise, so it's not about the money.I also don't want to fight with clients, as long as they pay well, and on time, I consider myself lucky in a sense.When I do illustrations, I can put it as many personal projects in my portfolio as I want, I don't feel I can in retouching, except for very extensive retouches/compositing, because retouching is supposed to be more or less invisible, right? 😁But you're right, I should do more of these, until agencies ask what was the client! :)At this stage it's more of a rant than anything, I wanted to know if I was all alone.
- Hi Sandrine,I think there are a few things here - and skim reading the article there was one thing that in the UK at least is technically wrong.This being the phrase "All of the ownership automatically goes to them by default" - copyright does not work this way it has to be asigned in writing.When I've been asked to work under an DNA it's been because the images we not going to be released into the public domain for 1 year, or the technology was sensitive comercially.In terms of mitigations once the work goes into the public domiain copy it as a tear sheet - photograph bill boards, use screen grabs and scan magazine pages - and that has far more credibility. Some years ago a model came in for a job and there were no photographs in her portfolio it was entirely made up tear sheets - and she was a seriously good model.I have had a clause added into an NDA that says at the time work goes into the public domain I can use it in my portfolio to generate work. I've also had a sunset clause added that after a period of time I can use it. I've found people have been reasonable there are all sorts of ways to ask to get the benefit you want and protect a client.Also there are the benefits of personal work, people who are good themselves know good work when the see it.BestGavin
You must sign up or log in before you
add a comment.