Unless the laws have changed, if it's not published for advertising reasons then everyone is fair game.Other wise you would need a model release and pay them at least one dollar.'The moment you think your great is the moment you quit learning.'http://www.gawalters.com..
I am not a lawyer and I have no idea where you live or where/what you shoot, but it is my understanding that unless you sell an image for advertising use with recognizable people, you are in the clear..
Enough weasel words for you?..
This will explain it all. In a nutshell, you only need a model release if the use is commercial..
Unless the laws have changed, if it's not published for advertisingreasons then everyone is fair game.Other wise you would need a modelrelease and pay them at least one dollar..
I don't think even the dollar is required for a release everywhere. It depends on local laws..
I am not a lawyer and I have no idea where you live or where/what youshoot, but it is my understanding that unless you sell an image foradvertising use with recognizable people, you are in the clear..
You can actually sell the image to be used commercially as long as you don't misrepresent the fact that you don't have a model release. It is then the publisher's responsibility to get the release or to assume the risk of not having one. (And many do just that if they feel the risk of being pursued is justified.).
Thanks for the model release info and every one for the other comments. micheal..
That wasn't specifically mentioned. The photos must be taken in a location where there is no expectation of privacy. You take a photo on the beach that's one thing. Take it of someone in their back yard that is another..
JimOlympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...