[Tom Edgerton]

I don't know if in this instance that work for hire would be a problem for you, since these works would be of specific people, and might not have another use. But work for hire is generally not a good idea because:

1) Under copyright law, you keep the copyright and control the use of what you produce. No one can reproduce your work without your permission.

2) If you produce work for hire, you relenquish the ownership of this "bundle of rights" to the person that hires you. You no longer have control over how, and how many times, your work is used.

I don't know the specifics of your deal, but here's a hypothetical: you produce a specific portrait sculpture of a child, under a work for hire agreement, and are paid a modest amount for your effort. Subsequently the work proves to be so beautiful and universal in appeal, that your client and the subject's family decide to mass-market copies of the work in gift shops, garden fountains, on tee-shirts, on greeting cards, on key fobs...you name it. Suddenly the work is as ubiquitous as bad copies of Rodin's "The Kiss. Your client retires on the proceeds to a house in Malibu, and collects royalties on the image's use for the rest of their life.

Under work for hire, you get nothing more than the original fee.

I'd advise that your contract specifically states that you are granting only the usage rights for the original purpose, and that any subsequent use be subject to additional fees, and that the work is specifically not work for hire. Get a lawyer who understands copyright law to help you with the verbiage.

Best of luck--TE