All critiques welcome from 1st Timer!
 

This painting measures 36" x 36". While painted 9 years ago, I felt Sept 11th has given it an unexpected poignacy. I would be garteful for a judgement on it's stand-alone merit. (Cynthia has already seen it, and presented a brief opinion.) Can this "low-glam" portraiture style sell? Naturally, it's from photo, and a fairly famous one at that. Are celebrity photo-sourced portraits considered valid or are they dismissed?

Paint from life
 

Dear David,

I just voted no to the question of whether painting celebrities from photos is considered valid. I admit that when I became interested in portraits I painted celebrities from magazines. I was a teenager then and had no one to guide me at that time. I became quite good at it, and the paintings looked very much like the photos of the celebrities, but it was strictly copying. I taught myself to mix colors to match and that sort of thing. Later, I went to college as a studio art major. We drew and painted from live models. Our teachers made it clear that we were not to use photographs. There is nothing else like it. You observe, converse with the sitter or not, interact with this person, empathize, make choices on composition, color, what to include and what to subdue or eliminate, what is the mood, making countless decisions. It is exciting because there is this living person in front of you, affecting you and vice versa. In a physical sense, this person is a mass occupying a certain place in time and space with air moving around and light illuminating their form, with colors reflecting off their surroundings on to skin and hair and casting shadows. Even in repose, people are constantly moving and resisting gravity. And, they are thoughtful, emotional and spiritual. There are so many levels for the artist to explore about a subject. During the process of drawing, painting, or sculpting a portrait, the artist is searching for much more than a physical resemblance.

I went to your website and saw your work. You have the skills to draw and paint really wonderful portraits. I strongly recommend that you paint members of your family and friends from life and build a portfolio. Potential clients seeing these will know these are "real people" like them. Also, the greatest place to learn about portrait painting today is on the web starting with viewing every single page of every single portrait painter on Cynthia Daniel's Stroke of Genius. Also, go to the ASOPA website (they have been a great help) and the Leon Loard website. There are great links to other sites from these. www.therp.co.uk (The Royal Society of Portrait Painters is one of my favorites.)

Best luck to you, David.

My opinion on using only (or mostly) celeb paintings for marketing commissions
 

I will summarize/clarify the opinion that I expressed in an earlier email to you regarding celebrity portraits in a portfolio for marketing portrait commissions. Perhaps this is what you meant in your poll question in regards to "valid".

Andrea interpreted the question the way I thought people would interpret it, or one of the ways, which is why I wanted to change the poll question. But, that Andrea is a quick typist :D and she got a post up there before I could change it. So, the below is what I feel we discussed.

1. It's important to build a well-rounded portfolio as one of the first steps into the world of portrait commissions since generally, people only buy what they can see. So, if a prospective client has a little girl to be painted, you increase your chances of getting a commission if you show little girl portraits in your portfolio...the more charming the better.

2. I also believe the look of success tends to bring success. If you've painted your sister's child, your sister and your father all in appealing marketable portraits, no on ever has to know these are your relatives. They could simply appear to be commissions. In the mind of the prospect, the very fact that others have commissioned you (so they think) gives you credibility.

3. If you feature only or mostly celebrity portraits that are not commissions, to me, it seems to communicate that no one has retained you previously to paint a commission. Of course, if an artist is very successful and has in fact painted many celebs, that's a different story. But, in that situation, the artist's fees will reflect that level of success.

4. Then there is the subject of figurative painting which is not a portrait commission. It is painted by the artist and put up for sale. That is totally valid.

5. There are, of course, exceptions where a portfolio filled with celeb portraits might bring you a commission. But, I feel in order to get into a higher level in fees and stature in the field, you need to start with a well-rounded portfolio of subjects and not just (or mainly) celebs. Of course, some artists specialize in adults or children, in which case, they would build their portfolio accordingly.

Hope this clarifies. And, I agree with Andrea that you have a lot of talent!

Re: Paint from life
 

Thanks for the input. It's sure what I'm asking for.

I fully appreciate the tradition of painting from life, and know the limitations placed on purely photo-sourced work, but I'm sure I'm not alone in the circumstances of struggling to make time to paint. I could not give fair attention to a live model, and no model would put up with my erratic schedule.

I'm sure my evolution as an artist will be the poorer for the lack!

Like you, most of my portraits have been 'practice' paintings from celebrity photographs. It seems as though those are the highest quality photos we can find to work from. At this point for me, however, I have sworn off celebrity portraits til one of them is willing to pay me for it :)

I think paintings of 'real people' have a bit more 'bite' as far as landing commissions. When I finally got away from the celebs and painted my daughter, many friends and family loved it and it landed me 2 commissions, something I never got from Clint, Elvis or any other celeb portrait I did.

I think when youre starting out, learning to paint and searching for subject matter, its alot easier to spend the time working on famous people. Everyone knows what they look like and can form a judgement based on that. I also think that you learn something new with every portrait you paint, at least I do.

From looking at your web site, I'd say youre ready to start working on portraits of common folks, as Cynthia has suggested. I thought about throwing up my John Lennon portrait here too, but I wont bother. You can visit my web site to see all my glorious junk. (on a side note - at my web site, I have all my portraits lobbed into one page. By the end of the year I'll have 3 or 4 more portraits to add, at which point I'll separate all the celebrity portraits from the 'real people' portraits and perhaps eventually eliminate the celebs altogether.)

Another nail hit squarely on the head, Brian. I went to your site and was surprised to see R.E. Lee, someone I had not so long ago thought to paint (along with a Lincoln).

You're right, the quality of celeb photos with regards to clarity & dimension are superior to most other sources. I did most of them purely to please myself. It's only in the last 3 months that I've exerted myself to see if I could sell, but commissions continue to avoid me in droves. (I'm working on a 50th anniversary, parents & 3 adult kids portrait now for a friend. And of course, you can never charge a friend a "real" price! Who do I think I am? An artist? So I'm basically doing it for the potential word-of-mouth turn around (as well as a token fee).)

A community thanks to Cynthia. Even on short acquaintance, a truly class lady!

Without allowing myself to be drawn into the hopeless morass of life-painting versus photos, let me make some observations.

I suspect a large number of us trying to break-through struggle with devoting time to their art. The constraints of family, modern life & earning a living often leave very little "personal time". (There are few pursuits more self-absorbing than painting.) If I can find 5 hours a week (yes FIVE), I'm doing really good. Purists may deride, and suggest I give it up until I'm able to "be serious", but I hope most of you are more sympathetic.

So, I AM left with "giving it up", or using photos. All painters develop a keener eye than non-painters. (You know, there are only TWO type of people, don't you? Those who paint, and those who don't.) Then, where's the crime in using your god-given, painterly honed, skills of observation to interpret and paint MORE than the eye can see?

By necessity I am (until retirement) bound to my camera and other 2D sources!

Plagiarism
 

Any time one copies a photograph taken by someone else, it is a copyright violation, and plagiarism. Art consists of a great deal more than just making a picture, and light-years beyond the mere copying of photographs. If the photographer and the painter are the same person, there is at least no question of copyright infringement, but the question of whether it is art remains open. My advice to any artist below Master level is to lock that camera in a drawer for the next fifteen or twenty years, until you don't need it any more. Otherwise, it will interfere with your artistic development.

Virgil Elliott

Finding time for a portrait painting career
 

Good morning,
The subject of finding time for a portrait painting career came up. All of the arts require discipline and commitment. Many of us who are starting out or returning to portrait painting are still working our "day jobs," but we do both.

Be professional from the beginning. Portrait painting is your other job or business. Set up hours. Make appointments with yourself, family, friends, clients. Print your business cards and brochures. Make a price list. Identify yourself in your own mind as a portrait artist. Identify yourself to others as a portrait artist. Have confidence in your abilities.

Work in bits and pieces of time. Eliminate, reduce, combine and delegate non-art activities to streamline time and energy. Commit yourself to say one hour or more in the evening after the household has quieted down. Some people are morning people - get up earlier and paint. You will find that any sleep you lose will be compensated for in the sense of accomplishment of having progressed with your goal. (I think it is those endorphins in the brain. You become energized.) Also, lunch time and break times (10-15 minutes) can be used to surf art websites, draw, observe, look at art books, pass out business cards and brochures, talk to people about your art, etc. Not all of a portrait painting career is spent painting. Place an artwork (one of yours or a copy of someone else's--one of the master's) on your desk or somewhere in your office or workplace (depending on your situation and workplace policies). Change the work periodically.

Combine your portrait work with getting closer with your family and friends. Most people are understandably nervous about having someone look at them closely, especially someone they know. This is a great opportunity to gain experience in conversing with people (gaining insight into their personality, interests, etc.) and putting them at ease. After two or three sittings, most people I know relax a bit and actually look forward to this time. Don't feel badly if the first sitting did not produce a "successful" drawing. The greatest artists did many drawings and paintings of the same subject and person. This is GROWTH. You are learning. You never cease to learn. This is also an opportunity to learn the art of negotiation so that they and you get what you both want. From your viewpoint - samples for your portfolio and from your friends' and family's, a lovely portrait.

All of these bits and pieces of time will add up and even in the beginning I am sure you will find that you will be spending at least 20 hours a week working on your portrait painting career -half the hours of a full-time job, an impressive accomplishment.

There was an 18th century woman portrait painter who had 13 children and managed to have a very successful career. I am not good at remembering names, so maybe someone else knows who this person was.

Dear David,

Having been in the position (as I suspect the majority of portrait painters have) of needing to work a day job, and grabbing painting hours wherever possible, I wholeheartedly applaud your sense that it is much better to paint than not to paint.

There are a handful of painters perhaps who have never painted from photographs, only from life, but it is beyond me to guess how they pay the rent along the way. It would indeed be a luxury to have a studio ready at hand, and willing cooperative models who arrive on time, don't change their hairstyles. For most people, though it is simply an unworkable demand.

To paint successfully from photographs, I think you need three things:

1. Experience painting from life. If you can get people you know to sit for you, do it. If you can work your 5 available hours to include an open studio in your local area, where professional models will sit (usually for a few dollars an hour, when artists share the fee), do that. But is you can't find a live model, PAINT ANYWAY. You can also use some of your hours from time to time to paint the still life from life. It's something you can set up and leave between sessions, and it will sharpen your skills in seeing values, colors, and edges.

2. Become familiar with the problems inherent in photographs, so that you can apply the skills you have gained painting from life to overcome the limits of photographs.

3. Hours and hours of time. If you clock in your hours at five per week, you will be ahead of where you would be at three per week. If you can work this up to 6 hours per week, then 8, do it.If you can't see #1 above, PAINT ANYWAY.

When I was working a full-time day job (more like 50 hours per week than 40)I would take my vacation time, and use it to attend full week workshops. See if this is something you can do.

To the question at hand (finally): I think Cynthia's comments are on the money. Rather than use celebrity images to demonstrate whether you can get a likeness, be willing to show clients source photos as well as the finished painting, and let them judge this for themselves. There are artists who don't agree with this either, but I can tell you I would never commission someone without having a feel for the degree of likeness to expect.

Spend time learning how to take your own photos, since the way you view and pose your subjects is part of your approach and style. If you do need to work from another person's photos, I agree that you will face copyright infringement problems. I have had several circumstances where I have requested written permaission from the photographer, and to date, have received it willingly. In this case I always credit the photographer in the legend of the work.

I wish you well.

Chris

Thanks again for the input!

Virgil, I find your indictment a little harsh and elitist though. A "plagiarist" tries to present his work as uniquely original. I do not. I mean, after all, the photographer didn't "invent" John Lennon or the light that day in New York, did he? He saw. I see. We take away a vision from the event that is personal. I also give indelible credit to the original photographer on the back of the canvas.

This painting was only done for myself as a fan of the man & his music. I now learn from you good folks how a real marketable portfolio should be built.

You live, you learn. (Although I'm keeping my camera!)
;)

Copying Celebrity Photos
 

David,

There is a widely-held perception that attaches the stigma of amateurism to painted copies of celebrity photos. That perception did not originate with me; I was simply the one who was good enough to tell you about it. It is generally regarded with less respect in professional artist circles than dog portraits. You may do what you like, but I thought you ought to at least know how those things are viewed by those whom you would have as peers, and by prospective clients as well.

If one practices drawing from life a great deal, it is possible to become very fast at it, and that enables the artist to make the most of short sittings without having to use a camera or, worse yet, someone else's photos. The drawings can then serve as reference material for paintings. I suggest trying grey paper, with charcoal for the darks, the paper for the middletone, and white chalk for the lights, as a very fast way of getting an image noted down. I can get a head and shoulders portrait study done in one hour, perhaps an hour and a half at most, following this method. In another 45 minute sitting I can execute a small color sketch in oils to give me accurate color of the subject's complexion and hair (no details in the color sketch; only color). I can do a grey underpainting without the sitter being there, by following the charcoal study. I like to finish the grisaille with another short sitting from life if possible, but it is not absolutely necessary if the charcoal study is accurate. I can follow the color sketch when putting color over the grisaille, and can finish the picture with one or two more sittings with the subject, if he or she is available, or just by following the study and the sketch, if not. The Old Masters had to work this way when commissioned to paint popes, kings, generals and other important people who had little time to pose for them before photography was invented. The clothing was usually posed on a mannequin, or sometimes sketched quickly while another person of the same build as the subject posed, if the subject were unavailable. I suggest you work that way, regardless how awkward it may feel at first. One improves in speed and accuracy with much practice. I find my sitters are intrigued by the process, and appreciate the results more when they have participated more in the making of the portrait. It also gives the artist a better read on the personality of the sitter, and THAT is really the subject of a portrait.

We all have difficulties of one kind or another to overcome. If quality results are important to you, work with the best equipment you have: the artist's eye. A camera's eye is inferior as a viewing instrument to the two human eyes and brain of an artist. See my article, "The Photographic Image Versus Visual Reality" in the current issue of The Portrait Signature for more specifics on that.

Virgil Elliott

Valid to copy?
 

I paint all of my portraits from photographs I have taken...I even started that way.

However, I would not use anyone else's photo to paint from unless I have their written permission to use it. Copyright laws are no joke....respect them.

You really have enough talent to be a pro. It would seem to me that it is a waste of your time and effort to paint from someone else's work. It is much better to learn to use a camera effectively (and make sure that you have a single source of lighting on your subject).

Arnold Newman - portrait photographer
 

One of the world's greatest portrait photographers is Arnold Newman. He is a portrait artist. He uses a camera instead of brushes and paint. Among his best known works are Igor Stravinsky at the piano, Nazi industrialist Alfred Krupp looking demonic in his factory, and a mask-like, three-dimensional portrait of pop artist Andy Warhol.

Arnold Newman was a Life magazine photographer. His photographs are powerful and unforgetable, and I hope no painter ever tries to copy them.

Please take the time to read this article:
http://www.masters-of-photography.co...articles2.html

Two Thoughts
 

I have two different thoughts to add on to the previous posts.
First thought- is regarding copyright infringement when working from photos of celebs. Consider that in addition to the problem of the photographers copyright, there is also some law that has to do with not being able to use a famous person's face without their permission. So even if I happen to be some place and I am able to take my own photo, I still don't have the right to use the image of the celebrity for the purpose of commercial gain without their permission. I forget what the law is actually called, but I think it should be looked into before using celebrities as samples.

Second thought- Since my paintings are done from a combination of source photo, notes, and a client sitting to finish the painting up, the finished painting is not going to look like a duplicate of the source photo (and it shouldn't). If a perspective client sees a source photo, they may start looking for "mistakes" and expect to see a "duplicate", and what they think is a "mistake" might be me rendering something as it really is and not being a slave to the source photo. An excellent way to show a perspective client that you are capable of creating a likeness, is to have the subject pose next to the finished painting, and take a photo of the subject and painting together. I've done this a few times, and it works great!

Mary Reilly

Celebrity Portraits
 

I started out doing mall shows and art fairs to promote myself and get commissions, but I always knew that I wanted to be like John Howard Sanden, a professional portrait artist. I made a rule for myself to distinguish me from the quick sketch artists who were painting next to me.

I would only paint celebrities if I was commissioned to paint them. What this meant was this:

1) I had to have met the celebrity.
2) I took the photographs, or references had to have been provided to me by the celebrity or their representative.
3) I had to have been commissioned (money changing hands).

How this worked:

My husband was able to wrangle us backstage passes to the Beach Boys. (This was 20 years ago....) We met Carl Wilson, who graciously consented to having his portrait painted. We met the next day, I took photographs, I did the painting, delivered it a few months later at a concert, he paid a (nominal) amount for the portrait. Mike Love (another member of the Beach Boys) saw the painting and wanted one of his own, I took photographs, did the portrait, and was paid a not quite so nominal fee, etc.

I now had two celebrity portraits for my portfolio, recognizable names I could put on my resume, and they were legitimate commissions. I also met some terrific guys and got to hang out on stage with them during concerts. In my future as the portrait artist of celebrities, I found myself sitting under a white grand piano at the Governor's mansion, listening to tapes in a van with Danny Hutton of Three Dog Night, and having Graham Nash write a song about a project I was doing.

I don't actively chase celebrity portraits anymore, but I recommend to my students that it is a great way to add some penuche to your credibility, and also show that you can get a likeness without going through those uncomfortable "...let me look at the photograph..." appraisals.

But do think about following the rules I've mentioned above. It starts your career off with integrity and professionalism. Most importantly, it will also get you out into the marketing world where you need to instigate meetings, make calls and follow up, and deliver the portrait. I will still cold call an institution and suggest a meeting to discuss a commission. There is a lot more to this business than getting an agent and waiting for the commissions to roll in. You need to be proactive and bring the work back to your studio, at least initially. The skills you learn initiating a celebrity commission will pay off long after you have removed their portrait from your portfolio.

Peggy

I agree with many people who have previously posted. If you have to work from photos (which I do), take your own photos of the subject. After doing a lot of research, I decided to invest in a Minolta SLR. It is well worth the money. The photos are excellent, I can choose the position, lighting, background, ect. With several roles of resource photos, I can make a flattering composite painting.

If an artist is "copying" for practice, Karin's suggestion of copying the Old Masters is a more constructive approach.

Renee Price

I studied illustration in art school (in Los Angeles), and all of us were required to have a celebrity portrait in our portfolio. Fortunately, I loved movies, had already drawn (and sold) a lot of celebrity portraits, so producing celebrity portraits was no hardship for me.

I guess because of my background, I shrug my shoulders at the celebrity portraits. I see no big stigma there, but I can see why others do. "Fine Art" portraiture is different than illustration, after all.

I've also been commissioned to do portraits for celebrities. (Hey! I'm from L.A.!) Jaclyn Smith's secretary hired me to do a pencil portrait. I was giving a promotional still to use as reference. Jaclyn liked it very much, and gave me an autographed photo (which I have misplaced, of course).

A friend of actor Robert Ito (from "Quincy") hired me to do a portrait of Ito and co-star Jack Klugman. The friend said that Ito never had a picture of himself with Klugman, and she wanted to give him one. I presume he liked it. I was also given promotional stills as reference.

And then there was the one of David Hasselhoff. I was hired by an acquaintance of David's then-wife to do a portrait of them together. I used a combination of promotional stills, and watched videos of them (the wife was a soap opera actress) to get the likenesses right. It would be fair to say that no one photo was "reference". Hasselhoff and his wife liked the portrait - I was given a picture of them posing with it. But of course, once again, I have misplaced the photo!

I think that with a more traditional portrait artist, it would be important to have portraits of "ordinary" people. I don't feel any shame in my celebrity portraits. It is part of my background, and also part of going to art school in L.A.!

I do agree, painting and drawing from life is something that should be done as much as possible. Obviously it cannot be done all the time. But it's a wonderful experience to be able to observe your model from life, and at least get some sketches, or something! And, using your own photos is always better than using someone else's. Of course, when you are doing a portrait of someone who has passed away, you haven't got many choices.

Valuable PR materials
 

Jacqueline,

I'm concerned about your mention of misplacing important photos. Photos such as those you mentioned which were misplaced are a valuable record of an artist's career and potentially great PR material in the future. When I managed a portrait artist, I took all past PR materials (from before my tenure), put them in chronological order, with the most recent first and created a PR book which was a leatherette, 3-ring binder with plastic page protectors.

Once created, I kept this PR book up to date on a regular basis. Whenever we had an exhibition, the PR book was always on a table close by for attendees to peruse. Seeing the artist's history in this book brought a lot of credibility and provided easy conversation starters.

I would also often copy recent sections of the PR book and send out with press releases to provide additional material that might catch the recipient's attention.

The PR book (which actually grew to 4 books) contained such things as:

1. Newspaper articles where he was either the main feature or where he was mentioned.

2. PR photos taken at an event.

Even if your participation in an event is never published, you can still create a story for a PR book.

For example, we attended a fund raiser for the Young Musician's Foundation in LA. We were invited by Shelley Conti, the wife of Bill Conti who won an Oscar fo the soundtrack of the movie Rocky. It just so happened that at that time, George Peppard was Bill's best friend (George is now deceased). I managed to get snapshots of the artist with Bill Conti and with George Peppard. Though our attendance at the event was never published anywhere, I created a story with these photos. At the event, I shot the artist next to the event's main large banner, giving a title to the event story and then assembled the photos with captions.

Another example of creating a story was when the artist painted a portrait of George Washington offering a quill to the viewer, inviting them to sign the constitution as part of the Bicentennial Celebration. When this painting was exhibited at Disneyworld, again I took photos of the event and make a story in the PR book. I included our name tags which had Mickey Mouse on them and the printed program where he and the painting were mentioned.

Even if you don't manage to get photos of an event, you can still include the printed program, highlighting any mention in the program of the artist.

3. Anything related to the artist that had been in print.

When one of his portraits was used for the cover of a Chick Corea album, I color copied and reduced the album cover and included it in the book with a caption.

4. Special projects.

When the artist was commissioned to do a painting for the annual Donaulinselfest (Danube Island Festival) in Austria, I created a story behind the painting by photographing him photographing Vienna's mayor and a famouse Austrian rock star, both of whom were to be in the painting. One of the photos ended up in the Vienna newspaper, which I clipped, of course, and included in the PR book also.

PR and an historical record of an artist's career is an often overlooked aspect of an artist's career and wanted to mention it here for you and for anyone who is serious about their career.

Copyright red flags
 

I realise this thread is not the most active one on the forum, but I hope what I am providing is valuable.

Someone (I think it was Mary Reilly) brought up the issue of what is properly known as "personality rights". That is the right that people have to control the reproduction of their own likeness. It is just like copyright--where the creator has the right to control reproduction of his/her work of art--except it is for one's visage.

One key point should be understood about copyright (and hence, personality rights): they apply to everyone, not just to celebrities, and you don't have to do anything to get these rights. The very act of creation makes copyright apply to the thing created, through the operation of the law. Personality rights also exist by operation of law alone. You don't have to do anything other than be.

With some exceptions, you can buy and sell these rights at will, as if they were property (which they are). For example, if you paint a snow scene, you could then sell the right to use the image on holiday greeting cards but retain the right for any other reproductions, such as posters. Or, you can sell all of the copyrights and you no longer control the reproduction. Or, you can sell the physical painting itself, but keep the copyrights in the image. This latter one is the most common situation for a fine art painter.

Globally, copyright law is pretty uniform today on account of various international conventions and treaties. That doesn't mean that some countries aren't fairly lax in enforcing them, though. States such as Vietnam and Taiwan are notorious for their copyright infringements (pirating) yet they are subject to most of the laws as they are found in the US, Canada, UK, France, etc..

Before I get to the important issues for portrait painters; a further word on personality rights--they do not just adhere to celebrities. We all get the same rights, it's just that we are all not famous and recognizable. If you see your mug in an advertisement's photo of a crowd in front of some store, you could exercise your personality right and ask them not to print the picture. They may pay you, they may simply use a different shot, or they may digitally get rid of you. They could also just go ahead and you could sue them. But, it wouldn't be worth it because, other than on account of their being jerks, you wouldn't get much for your efforts because you aren't a famous celebrity. If you were, you could make a good case that the firm using your image was riding on the coattails of your success for their own gain, and without paying any compensation.

For portrait painters to paint celebrity paintings from photographs they must infringe on two copyrights: the photographer's and the sitter's personality rights. Or, they must get permission from both. This sort of thing goes on all the time without much reprisal because, usually, neither the photographer nor the sitter are any the wiser. However, it is still copyright infringement.

A unique aspect of the copyright law applies to portraits here in Canada. I would very much like to know if it is the same in the US, the UK, and elsewhere. If the painting, or the photograph, is a portrait, then the copyright automatically belongs to the sitter, not to the artist/photographer!! Think about that for a moment. This means that, by law, you cannot use that image even as advertising for yourself. You have to get permission . . . in writing. There is no implied right to use such images in self-promotion; it must be expressed in writing.

Of course, most of us don't do that because most of us, and the sitters, are unaware of the existence of this twist of the law. Nevertheless, if you normally use some form of written agreement when entering into a portrait contract, you might think about inserting a line in there that states the sitter gives you the right to use their image in self-promotion and for entering competitions, etc.. Maybe you already do this.

This specific issue applies only to portraits as opposed to other figurative art that may involve likenesses of models. Such instances probably fall under the work-for-hire doctrine (where you pay people to pose for you) or, otherwise are governed by normal copyright laws where you own the copyright, period.

Anyway, this law may not apply outside of Canada, but I would be surprised if that were the case. As I said, the copyright laws are pretty uniform all around the world. Also, it might be worth it to at least check more deeply into your copyright laws because this little tidbit took me a long time to notice--and I practiced intellectual property law for a number of years!

Finally, even if the law is not stated as clearly where you live as it is in Canada, the fact of the sitter's personality right would act as a de facto barrier to your use of his/her likeness, anyway. So, for that reason, it would again be wise to get their permission to use the image of your painting for self-promotion purposes, etc..

Thanks to those who took the time to read this. I hope some of this is useful. Please get back to me if their is anything I wasn't clear about. A lot of this is complicated and usually not something we need to get worked-up about, but it's out there. I haven't even touched on the "moral rights", but that's another ball of wax. I can already sense your eyes glazing-over.

Speaking of glazing . . . I've got to get back to work.

All the best.

Juan

Dear Juan,

Excellent post. Not being a lawyer, I can't speak to the law here, but I can tell you that I routinely ask my sitters to sign a written agreement giving me permission to use their image, both in photos and paintings, as well as the painting itself (owner permission). This way my bases are covered, and the permission is in a file. (Of course if someone prefers me not to do so, I am fine with this,too). Getting your permission slips signed at the time to the painting is so important..it was an administrative nightmare trying to track down ten years of sitters to print images in "Painting Beautiful Skin Tones". Don't assume you'll never need them, because you just never know!

Chris

This line will absolutely be in my very next contract & all subsequent contracts. Thanks!

Hi Karin!

Here's what I have been using:

I_____give to (artist), her assigns, licensees and legal representatives the irrevocable right to use my name or any fictional name, portrait(s)and/or photographs(s) used as resources in creating portraits, in all forms and all media, and in all manners, including composite or altered representations for advertising, marketing, educational, merchandising, or any other lawful purpose; I agree to do so without compensation. I further waive any right to inspect or approve finished product, including written copy, that may be created in connection therewith. I am of legal age. I have read this release and am familiar with its contents.

I also ask how people would like their painting titled...some like to use phraseology like, "The Susan & John Smith Family Collection" and some like the anonymity of "Private Collection". I have a place at the bottom of the page for the legend specifics.

Chris

P.S. Karin, once you get your form together, you should probably plan on contacting your prior clients so that you can get caught up. Now that all of us here on SOG have decided that you will be writing a book and making a video, you will save valuable time later!

I do like your suggestion and will soon begin to contact my former clients.

On my website, I have asked my clients what they would like me to name their painting.

I ALWAYS suggest that the first and last name of a child not be published :exclamati. Long ago, my 6-year-old son got his picture and name in the newspaper and the result was that he was stalked by a pedophile. I was scared to death....and it went on for a couple of years.

I often letter names into my portraits, but it is (intentionally) nearly impossible to read them online.

Chris et al.;

It's good to hear that this issue is being treated professionally and seriously. It does nothing but bring higher regard to the artist's profession. We should remember that these contracts need not be ponderous and full of legalese, although I think most people feel they just aren't "legal" unless they sound like it. The fact is, all they have to be is clear. Judges like nothing better than clarity. Unfortunately, lawyers have worked hard for centuries to make things clear by obfuscating them. A neat trick, but unnecessary.

In any event, the reality of it all is that nothing will probably ever come of it. 99% of the time, no need will arise to invoke this sort of contract. It's like insurance where we do it "just in case". Moreover, most contracts or agreements are questioned by subsequent parties, not by the people who entered into them in the first place. For example, what happens if a sitter gets run over by a bus next week? Then, all of a sudden, they're gone and in their place is their legal estate. You signed a contract with a person, not with an estate, yet there they are, standing in the shoes of the original party to the agreement. You will want to have things clearly set down in writing so there's no mistake as to what the situation is. This is when written documents come in most handy. Otherwise, it can be a nightmare figuring out what's what.

One more tip: if you run into someone who is adamant about only doing business on a handshake rather than on paper, you can do a couple of things. First, you can refuse the job. If that isn't an option, then as soon as you get home, write down exactly what you remember of the conversation; even dialogue if you think it'll help. Write a page starting something like: Today, April 14, 2002, I entered in a handshake contract with so-and-so. We agreed that blah-blah-blah . . .. When you're done, sign and date it at the bottom again.

Then, put it in an envelope and mail it to yourself. (Oh yes, make a copy of it first so that you won't have to steam open the envelope if you forget something that was in the agreement yourself!) When the letter comes back to you via the post, don't open the envelope; just put it the file for that client and leave it. You may never have to look at it again, but it will be helpful if it's there. Verbal contracts are as legally binding as are written ones, but they are more difficult to prove. Taking some notes and this extra small precaution will at least give some weight to your position if it ever comes into question in the future.

Finally, I don't want to be scaring anyone into thinking that we are all in for a mucky legal quagmire. This stuff really can be quite minor and easy-to-do once you get a little boiler-plate phrase such as Chris has (personally, I'd make it a little less legalese-y :) ). Anyway, it seems that this issue is one that many of you have been aware of for some time and I guess I'm simply trying to reinforce it and to encourage others to do the same.

All the best,
Juan

Juan, would you suggest the wording for a less legalese-y but still legal boiler plate insertion into a contract?

Thanks.

Hi Juan,

I would also be happy to drop out some of the legalese...the likelihood of actually needing to do battle in court is so remote, that I don't particularly worry. In a practical sese, even if I have the permission on file, if I will be using someone's image, I would always go to the courtesy of letting them know. Not only does this further build our relationship, they are generally quite thrilled, want a copy of the ad, and will tell all their friends.

I think that one of the main values in getting the permission signed, is that you have a chance to tell the client clearly what you may want to do with their image, and it's good communication.

The fact is (I can see many of you cringe), I still do not work with a contract. During the course of eleven years and about 250 portraits, I've only been burned two times, and neither of the circumstances would have been changed by having a contract in place. This is not to say I haven't tightened up my payment policies, and I do offer written clarification about fees and expectations.

Chris

Juan,

Thank you for taking the time to clarify everything. Your posts were very helpful.
You asked who owns copyright in the US, the sitter or the artist? I think I heard once that we both do. I need their permission to duplicate the painting because it is their face I want to duplicate, but at the same time, even if they own the painting, the copyright is mine in that they can't go get copies of the painting for family just because their face is in it. They need my permission to copy the painting. Of course, I don't know how accurate this is.

The question of contracts came up in a few posts. I've been painting without contracts for a number of years, and just started using them this past year. My reason to start was not for legal reasons so much as it is my only way I could guarantee that the client and I understand each other. Last year I lost a commission because I told a customer in November that I would start her painting in spring and finish by the end of June.(the photos, interview, notes etc were done in Nov.) Anyhow, when April came she called wanting to know how the painting was coming. I reminded her that I said I'd start it in Spring and finish by the end of June. In her mind the painting should have been more in progress and she pulled out of the commission. How annoying that was because I already started the sketching on the canvas and knew I would make the deadline without a problem. I decided that if I started using contracts, the client would have in writing the approximate completion date and other details and they couldn't say they thought differently. Plus, I put in the contract right above the signature:

"Both the Client and the Artist are in agreement with the above terms, and are satisfied that all appropriate questions have been answered." And I point out this line and ask them if they have any questions.

I usually get permission to use the painting for brochures etc after it is completed. They're thrilled with the finished painting and are usually happy to give permission. I only had one person turn me down, she was a pediatrician that didn't want her daughter's image made public, she said there were too many crazy people. After what Karin said about her son, I can better appreciate why she wouldn't give me permission.

Mary

Fame etc.
 

Firstly you've got to use your own photos for all the reasons listed. Besides, the first thing someone will ask if you paint a celebrity is did they commission it and how long did get to visit with -----?

Good work will get good clients - real clients.

I have not read the entire thread, but agree with Tim. If you are working from someone elses photo, the work isn't yours. Part of it is the work of the Photographer. The photographer and the artist should be the same person. In my humble opinion.