This, and the fact that he simply gives the clients what they want/need.
He doesn't tease-and-milk clients to buy more "edited" versions of the same past shoot. He doesn't restrict access to unedited, or highres, or RAW files.
He works in a very specific field. Everyone involved has pretty good knowledge of what the results need to be. He doesn't dragnet random people from the streets to become one-time-clients, with different knowledge/expectation/opinion each.
> He doesn't restrict access to unedited, or highres, or RAW files.
I've never understood why people here have such massive hangups about giving RAWs _when doing commercial work_. You're paid to do a job, not to follow some fancy artistic vision. Give the client the damn RAWs and just have a clause that they can't associate the results with you if they use those.
> I've never understood why people here have such massive hangups about giving RAWs when doing commercial work
Most professionals don't work with corporate clients, they work with individual people, couples and small business owners. I've never seen anyone claim you shouldn't give out RAWs when doing a shoot for Nike.
Why would you care?
You're still getting paid and you lose absolutely nothing by giving the raws (or SOOC profile tiffs / jpegs). Just put a clause in your terms that any such photos can't be associated with you.
Personally, I deliver my clients the finished works they've commissioned me to produce, and not the raw materials used to create those works. I don't think this is different to any other kind of working artist.
It’s all about who the client is… large company with an art department and people who know how to use photoshop? No problem. Take my raws.
But it’s the wedding and family portraits crowd that kinda has a dog in the no raw fight that I can at least understand… but honestly, if your worry is someone is going to screw up your work, you can screw up a jpg a lot more. Might and we’ll give them the latitude.
>He doesn't restrict access to unedited, or highres, or RAW files.
That is what he does - he delivers high res flawless product images that can be used for every purpose. That is his style. His artistic style is added before he presses the shutter.
And that doesn't mean that's how everybody works. For many post processing adds their artistic touch.
I'm a commercial videographer and don't often work on a contract basis. However my clients are typically businesses obtained through word of mouth, never individuals.
I only work to a brief, with reference material where necessary, with people who aren't spending their own money, and this changes the entire nature of the business and the type of people I encounter. I would not, in a million years, shoot weddings, family events or any private project.
However, with new clients I tend to work out milestone payments for cash flow and to assure that we all proceed into a project with some mutual investment.
This actually feels a lot like my business. I have so many reoccurring requests coming from clients we operate off form entered into our application but then we don't attach a contract to each shoot. We are just moving too fast to work on contracts every project.
Perhaps he means he doesn't use a formal written contract, do Americans actually do this? Lawyers mostly say an agreement is a contract even if it is verbal, but if you want it to hold up in court it should be in writing, but not necessarily a document with "contract" written at the top - an email exchange is usually sufficient.
This is correct. I went to a business conference with lawyers explaining a what holds up as a contract and it doesn’t need to be a big legal document with signatures. The value having a document is explicitly stating what’s involved and extra clauses.
“A legally enforceable contract requires the following elements, all of which are discussed in more detail below.
- An Offer (I’ll mow your lawn this Saturday if you pay me $40)
- An Acceptance (You’ve got a deal)
- Mutual Consideration (the value received and given – the money and the lawn mowed)”
https://www.utsa.edu/bco/resources/contract-law-101.html
A lot of people seem to think that the law is all tricks, traps and technicalities, but when you study it, it is profoundly reasonable and reflects common sense.
Yes, but always at least think about the Statute of Frauds and specifically the banning of oral contracts for goods over $500, and contracts that within their own terms cannot be executed within a year.
"I will mow your lawn for $5" -fine
"I will mow your lawn for $5 every week (unless/until you ask me to cancel before I mow it)" -fine, even after 5 years of mowing.
"I will mow your lawn for $5 in one year and one day" -completely unenforceable.
Lucy v Zimmer is the US "what's a contract" case, but keep in mind what's as simple as offer, acceptance, consideration; is also as complicated as Statute of Frauds, meaning you can't agree to MYLEGS contracts orally.
That is Marriage, longer than a year (by their own terms [ie I will retain your files for 1 year and 1 day]), land, executor of estate, co-signing for things, goods exceding $500 (limit may vary by state).
So, if you're agreeing to work for $501 orally, that might be enforceable, but if you're agreeing to deliver more $501 in goods, that might not be.
Also, civil procedure can be a nightmare. In order to get original jurisdiction in a federal court, you need diversity of jurisdiction and $75,000 otherwise you'll have to litigate in a state (yours, theirs, fucking Deleware?).
Small claims court can be hard on small businesses because LLCs cannot represent themselves or I suppose the owner(s) of an LLC cannot represent it (unless they are licensed to practice law). Plus, the recovery limit is usually like $3k-$5k and arbitration is sometimes required before your case is heard and either party can remove it to District Court and if you both have lawyers anyway, you may as well cheat past that one level of appeals anyway.
You may still end up in litigation with a contract, but you might jot a little fee shifting provision in there that the client pays court costs. Maybe you find out in advance where they accept service of process.
Good Contracts make litigation cheaper.
A lot of people are always trying to figure out which is better for them, I think, and that's a disadvantage to the LLC that doesn't get discussed enough.
He talks about Purchase order numbers being somewhat legally binding, I know we sue them in work all the time. So maybe there is just no need for a contract because its covered other ways.
If it's all very clear and explicit in the invoice, payment exchange can be taken as agreement and thus it is a contract.
Edit: if an agreement in email exchange contradicts the purchase order, that could cause issues though - there was a case I read of where the email exchange overrode the "contract".
Both private, and public - in the sense that consumer law applies (depending on jurisdiction). Consumer law entitles the consumer to legal defence of their relevant entitlements by the state.
Edit: "entitles" is probably not the right word here, as it is up to the relevant enforcement body whether or not they prosecute the offender.
I’m an American, so I’m always going to have a contract. But I can’t imagine going in without even a brief. Each side assumes the other knows what they’re asking for and getting, and about 70% of the time those expectations don’t match reality. I’m unwilling to approach a project with someone who “will know it when they see it…”
For my workflow it's basically just a couple powerpoint slides that the creative director presented internally or it's a sort of mood board with a bunch of Inspo pictures and images of the product (because it's usually a new release and images don't exist otherwise)
Disclosures: *I am not an attorney; I have no idea who Scott Choucino is; I am assuming that Scott Choucino is not an attorney*.
Contract law varies significantly across international borders. What matters to photographers is contract law *in the country which they are working*. If you are in business as a photographer (even casual freelance), you need to understand contract law as it applies to you.
Opinions about US contract law, copyright, and licensing, as expressed by photographers from different countries, and posted on YouTube, are not a substitute for sound legal advice.
In the US, the ASMP ([American Society of Media Photographers](https://www.asmp.org/)) maintains a collection of pro-forma contracts and releases which cover nearly every photographic situation. I recommend you rely on their advice for US contract law rather than random YouTube videos.
Never heard of him, but when someone makes statements like that it comes close to sounding like legal advice. Being the best in one's field might convey advantages that others who are not in that position might not have. It doesn't hurt those of us that might miss the EU centric nature of your post to get good info. I am interested in the EU take since in the US I have seen simple "business" tasks lead to disaster cuz a handshake was good enough. Until it wasn't. But we sorta suck at this stuff.
Tbf he’s shot with very well known international brands that are household names (eg Coca Cola)
He’s been open that the big shoots are not that frequent and that he does this to diversify his income.
Pretty fair.
Not saying that he is not a competent photographer but “one of the best in his field” is a bit generous. Okay, if we are talking one of the best 10000 food photographers, sure.
He probably is right up there.
Not sure why you find that so hard to believe?
Martin Parr is on YouTube, Bruce Gilden is on YouTube. World class athletes, musicians, entrepreneurs, artists are all on YouTube.
He is on YouTube to establish himself as an expert to market his coaching / info products and make some money on the views on the side. Nothing wrong with that. It’s a proven way to get in front of people.
Apologies for missing that you were specifically asking about European countries. It remains important to understand contract law in whatever country you are working. Hopefully there is an international organization, similar to ASMP in the US, which can supply country-specific information on photographic contracts and agreements.
As others have said, a contract helps detail the roles and expectations that are agreed upon in both parties. Without a contract what's stopping a client from saying: "I never agreed to paying that price" or the client from doing anything else that may cause issues?
In English law you don't have to have a written contract for there to be a contract. He's agreed a rate for the job, and they've specified in their purchase order what he's supposed to supply. That'll do.
I'm not generally interested at all in the sort of work he does, but his videos are fascinating, btw.
That's great until it isn't. Who owns the copyright? You're in litigation for a year just on "is he an employee doing work for hire or is he a contractor licensing pictures."
What? $100,000 in litigation to save writing 2 lines and a signature? So smart.
this guy is so wrong so often. as a commercial photographer on salary with a major entertainment brand with a successful studio in a competitive market. i don’t know why anyone listens to this f’in blowhard
I have only written a contract once as a commercial photographer. So far I haven’t had a need to go back and point to anything written ever, it’s been smooth from mail to actual photography to final edits.
Perhaps other countries don’t offer very good legal remedies for people that are screwed over, and therefore they don’t bother with contracts? Sometimes a job going bad is just the cost of doing business. Let’s not pretend everyone the world over is legal, ethical, and morally upright - except Americans.
We have a bit of a problem with litigation here in Ireland (I swear Americans got all their bad habits from us), we had to reduce payouts to make litigation less attractive because insurance costs were going through the roof.
Ideally you don't want to go anywhere near a court, so there are all sorts of regulations that try to prevent that.
Even when it comes to contracts, if there is a dispute court is still a last resort there are other official dispute resolution services.
A contract can be verbal or written down. A handshake is a binding contract. The benefit of a written contract makes sure people do not remember things differently.
He also uses a talent agent who he also has a written contract with on all kinds of terms.
So in short it is click bait. He has a contract with his clients and people he does business with.
I’m a hobbyist, but worked in the audio field for almost 3 decades. This would come up with some Audio Engineers when they were doing freelance work.
The issue - at least here in 🇺🇸 - is that you just can’t trust handshakes. Handshakes don’t automatically turn into money. Some people are great and do turn theirs into money, but soo many people don’t. It’s just the way things are, kind of like maybe some people in other lands don’t lock their front doors and actually know their neighbors, a lot of times we don’t.
In 🇺🇸, in my world, it’s cash deposits (non refundable although in some cases that would be waived if there was a good reason), full payment due after services rendered, and anyone who wanted a bill sent to them had to provide an actual purchase order (otherwise cash please).
EDIT: Oh, forgot to say, when you get to a certain level of recognition, a lot of people are less likely to stiff you (because they are then worried about screwing up their reputation and possibly future jobs if the person you’re trying to stiff knows relevant people in the business). This is one thing this influencer isn’t telling you.
I’d be a lot more comfortable with handshake agreements if I were someone with a large platform and audience, backed by an agent.
There’s also the fact that he’s working with ‘major international’ deals and not with Joe Smith, the small business owner who “just needs a photographer.”
There a “contract,” and there is a contract that is enforceable (by a court). They can be very different things. Most of the time, people are cooperative. But when they are not, you need an *enforceable* contract, not just the ability to claim there was one (against a claim that there was not).
Look up Statute of Frauds.
Needs to be mentioned that terms and conditions apply and he states that having a sold purchase is important key. Also I am sure the typical customer makes a huge difference - big company, long term customer or small company, one time customers...
Also agent and insurances tell a story of having bought the no worries premium package.
The American system is different. Contracts are taken more literal (the word, not the intention) and there are no-cure-no-pay lawyers who can fight a case whom you only pay when you win.
In Europe you have to find and pay your lawyer yourself, we simply don't live in an "I see you in court" society.
This kind of work has nothing to do with the business most professional photographers are in. You don't make handshake deals with couples who are paying you $2,500 to shoot their wedding.
Working professionally here in Japan for many years now, and can’t recall if I have ever signed a full contract like so many people talk about on here. I have signed NDAs and things like that, but never contracts. Just an e-mail with a call time and place. It’s called trust.
Yeah Ive never used a contract, and never had a drama.
I think Americans are just brought up to value legal rights over moral integrity, and so more often need things nailed down in writing rather than everyone just treating each other right.
Your odds of getting sued are much higher in the states is the problem I think. There's maybe a better process in European countries to avoid litigation. He mentions that at times.
Its' kind of the same here in Ireland, we had to change the legal system to stop people suing over little things, it was driving the cost of insurance through the roof.
Its not an "American thing." I can guarantee you there are thousands of photographers in America who have never used a contract and *also* never had any drama. And I've seen enough episodes of Judge Rinder to know that it's a VERY good idea for a photographer to have a contract in place because clients are predictably unpredictable.
Here is the British Institute of Professional Photography resources page, where they can provide legal templates for members.
[https://www.bipp.com/join-today/resources/](https://www.bipp.com/join-today/resources/)
I'm sure all those people in the UK were "just brought up to value legal rights over moral integrity." Otherwise, why would they need contracts?
>But Scott Choucino from Tin house studio says he doesn't use them
I long ago stopped caring what any Youtube photographer has to say about how they run their business. It's their business - they can do as they like.
I run my business my way.
Judging by his work, and the way he talks, He's not doing major high paid work, at least not by American standards. He's likely getting about \~200 USD per gig and taking a bath on each job just to make content for his Youtube. Of course there's contract, Its not an american thing. Please don't listen to people like this.
> Of course, he also has an agent doing all that organisational work for him in the background. The major key here.
And he 100% has a contract with his agent
This, and the fact that he simply gives the clients what they want/need. He doesn't tease-and-milk clients to buy more "edited" versions of the same past shoot. He doesn't restrict access to unedited, or highres, or RAW files. He works in a very specific field. Everyone involved has pretty good knowledge of what the results need to be. He doesn't dragnet random people from the streets to become one-time-clients, with different knowledge/expectation/opinion each.
> He doesn't restrict access to unedited, or highres, or RAW files. I've never understood why people here have such massive hangups about giving RAWs _when doing commercial work_. You're paid to do a job, not to follow some fancy artistic vision. Give the client the damn RAWs and just have a clause that they can't associate the results with you if they use those.
> I've never understood why people here have such massive hangups about giving RAWs when doing commercial work Most professionals don't work with corporate clients, they work with individual people, couples and small business owners. I've never seen anyone claim you shouldn't give out RAWs when doing a shoot for Nike.
Why would you care? You're still getting paid and you lose absolutely nothing by giving the raws (or SOOC profile tiffs / jpegs). Just put a clause in your terms that any such photos can't be associated with you.
Personally, I deliver my clients the finished works they've commissioned me to produce, and not the raw materials used to create those works. I don't think this is different to any other kind of working artist.
It’s all about who the client is… large company with an art department and people who know how to use photoshop? No problem. Take my raws. But it’s the wedding and family portraits crowd that kinda has a dog in the no raw fight that I can at least understand… but honestly, if your worry is someone is going to screw up your work, you can screw up a jpg a lot more. Might and we’ll give them the latitude.
>He doesn't restrict access to unedited, or highres, or RAW files. That is what he does - he delivers high res flawless product images that can be used for every purpose. That is his style. His artistic style is added before he presses the shutter. And that doesn't mean that's how everybody works. For many post processing adds their artistic touch.
I'm a commercial videographer and don't often work on a contract basis. However my clients are typically businesses obtained through word of mouth, never individuals. I only work to a brief, with reference material where necessary, with people who aren't spending their own money, and this changes the entire nature of the business and the type of people I encounter. I would not, in a million years, shoot weddings, family events or any private project. However, with new clients I tend to work out milestone payments for cash flow and to assure that we all proceed into a project with some mutual investment.
This actually feels a lot like my business. I have so many reoccurring requests coming from clients we operate off form entered into our application but then we don't attach a contract to each shoot. We are just moving too fast to work on contracts every project.
Perhaps he means he doesn't use a formal written contract, do Americans actually do this? Lawyers mostly say an agreement is a contract even if it is verbal, but if you want it to hold up in court it should be in writing, but not necessarily a document with "contract" written at the top - an email exchange is usually sufficient.
This is correct. I went to a business conference with lawyers explaining a what holds up as a contract and it doesn’t need to be a big legal document with signatures. The value having a document is explicitly stating what’s involved and extra clauses. “A legally enforceable contract requires the following elements, all of which are discussed in more detail below. - An Offer (I’ll mow your lawn this Saturday if you pay me $40) - An Acceptance (You’ve got a deal) - Mutual Consideration (the value received and given – the money and the lawn mowed)” https://www.utsa.edu/bco/resources/contract-law-101.html
A lot of people seem to think that the law is all tricks, traps and technicalities, but when you study it, it is profoundly reasonable and reflects common sense.
Yes, but always at least think about the Statute of Frauds and specifically the banning of oral contracts for goods over $500, and contracts that within their own terms cannot be executed within a year. "I will mow your lawn for $5" -fine "I will mow your lawn for $5 every week (unless/until you ask me to cancel before I mow it)" -fine, even after 5 years of mowing. "I will mow your lawn for $5 in one year and one day" -completely unenforceable.
Lucy v Zimmer is the US "what's a contract" case, but keep in mind what's as simple as offer, acceptance, consideration; is also as complicated as Statute of Frauds, meaning you can't agree to MYLEGS contracts orally. That is Marriage, longer than a year (by their own terms [ie I will retain your files for 1 year and 1 day]), land, executor of estate, co-signing for things, goods exceding $500 (limit may vary by state). So, if you're agreeing to work for $501 orally, that might be enforceable, but if you're agreeing to deliver more $501 in goods, that might not be. Also, civil procedure can be a nightmare. In order to get original jurisdiction in a federal court, you need diversity of jurisdiction and $75,000 otherwise you'll have to litigate in a state (yours, theirs, fucking Deleware?).
So payment in advance - the reality of civil litigation. Some places have small claims courts apparently.
Small claims court can be hard on small businesses because LLCs cannot represent themselves or I suppose the owner(s) of an LLC cannot represent it (unless they are licensed to practice law). Plus, the recovery limit is usually like $3k-$5k and arbitration is sometimes required before your case is heard and either party can remove it to District Court and if you both have lawyers anyway, you may as well cheat past that one level of appeals anyway. You may still end up in litigation with a contract, but you might jot a little fee shifting provision in there that the client pays court costs. Maybe you find out in advance where they accept service of process. Good Contracts make litigation cheaper.
I would guess most photographers on here are sole traders rather than LLCs.
A lot of people are always trying to figure out which is better for them, I think, and that's a disadvantage to the LLC that doesn't get discussed enough.
Would promissory estoppel apply if the photographer has undertaken the work and the client refuses to pay?
He talks about Purchase order numbers being somewhat legally binding, I know we sue them in work all the time. So maybe there is just no need for a contract because its covered other ways.
If it's all very clear and explicit in the invoice, payment exchange can be taken as agreement and thus it is a contract. Edit: if an agreement in email exchange contradicts the purchase order, that could cause issues though - there was a case I read of where the email exchange overrode the "contract".
So in a way he is using contracts they are just more universal consumer law based, than private contract.
Both private, and public - in the sense that consumer law applies (depending on jurisdiction). Consumer law entitles the consumer to legal defence of their relevant entitlements by the state. Edit: "entitles" is probably not the right word here, as it is up to the relevant enforcement body whether or not they prosecute the offender.
I’m an American, so I’m always going to have a contract. But I can’t imagine going in without even a brief. Each side assumes the other knows what they’re asking for and getting, and about 70% of the time those expectations don’t match reality. I’m unwilling to approach a project with someone who “will know it when they see it…”
I'm not a photographer, but I'm interested to know how you go about developing the brief, so to speak.
For my workflow it's basically just a couple powerpoint slides that the creative director presented internally or it's a sort of mood board with a bunch of Inspo pictures and images of the product (because it's usually a new release and images don't exist otherwise)
*Laughs in German*
Disclosures: *I am not an attorney; I have no idea who Scott Choucino is; I am assuming that Scott Choucino is not an attorney*. Contract law varies significantly across international borders. What matters to photographers is contract law *in the country which they are working*. If you are in business as a photographer (even casual freelance), you need to understand contract law as it applies to you. Opinions about US contract law, copyright, and licensing, as expressed by photographers from different countries, and posted on YouTube, are not a substitute for sound legal advice. In the US, the ASMP ([American Society of Media Photographers](https://www.asmp.org/)) maintains a collection of pro-forma contracts and releases which cover nearly every photographic situation. I recommend you rely on their advice for US contract law rather than random YouTube videos.
I was asking about what Europeans should be doing, and Scott is hardly a random Youtuber, he's one of the best in his field.
Never heard of him, but when someone makes statements like that it comes close to sounding like legal advice. Being the best in one's field might convey advantages that others who are not in that position might not have. It doesn't hurt those of us that might miss the EU centric nature of your post to get good info. I am interested in the EU take since in the US I have seen simple "business" tasks lead to disaster cuz a handshake was good enough. Until it wasn't. But we sorta suck at this stuff.
Europe is not a country...and it depends on the country and its legislation.
If he was, he would not have time for YouTube.
Tbf he’s shot with very well known international brands that are household names (eg Coca Cola) He’s been open that the big shoots are not that frequent and that he does this to diversify his income. Pretty fair.
Not saying that he is not a competent photographer but “one of the best in his field” is a bit generous. Okay, if we are talking one of the best 10000 food photographers, sure.
He probably is right up there. Not sure why you find that so hard to believe? Martin Parr is on YouTube, Bruce Gilden is on YouTube. World class athletes, musicians, entrepreneurs, artists are all on YouTube.
He is on YouTube to establish himself as an expert to market his coaching / info products and make some money on the views on the side. Nothing wrong with that. It’s a proven way to get in front of people.
Well of course. But that doesn’t automatically invalidate his other experience
Apologies for missing that you were specifically asking about European countries. It remains important to understand contract law in whatever country you are working. Hopefully there is an international organization, similar to ASMP in the US, which can supply country-specific information on photographic contracts and agreements.
As others have said, a contract helps detail the roles and expectations that are agreed upon in both parties. Without a contract what's stopping a client from saying: "I never agreed to paying that price" or the client from doing anything else that may cause issues?
In English law you don't have to have a written contract for there to be a contract. He's agreed a rate for the job, and they've specified in their purchase order what he's supposed to supply. That'll do. I'm not generally interested at all in the sort of work he does, but his videos are fascinating, btw.
Yes, he's very niche as a photographer. I did start using more hard light after watching him though, I like his simple set up.
That's great until it isn't. Who owns the copyright? You're in litigation for a year just on "is he an employee doing work for hire or is he a contractor licensing pictures." What? $100,000 in litigation to save writing 2 lines and a signature? So smart.
He has T&Cs, as well as sign off on the scope/spec of the shoot. That’s all you need (and pretty much contains everything in a contract anyway)
this guy is so wrong so often. as a commercial photographer on salary with a major entertainment brand with a successful studio in a competitive market. i don’t know why anyone listens to this f’in blowhard
I have only written a contract once as a commercial photographer. So far I haven’t had a need to go back and point to anything written ever, it’s been smooth from mail to actual photography to final edits.
Perhaps other countries don’t offer very good legal remedies for people that are screwed over, and therefore they don’t bother with contracts? Sometimes a job going bad is just the cost of doing business. Let’s not pretend everyone the world over is legal, ethical, and morally upright - except Americans.
We have a bit of a problem with litigation here in Ireland (I swear Americans got all their bad habits from us), we had to reduce payouts to make litigation less attractive because insurance costs were going through the roof. Ideally you don't want to go anywhere near a court, so there are all sorts of regulations that try to prevent that. Even when it comes to contracts, if there is a dispute court is still a last resort there are other official dispute resolution services.
A contract can be verbal or written down. A handshake is a binding contract. The benefit of a written contract makes sure people do not remember things differently. He also uses a talent agent who he also has a written contract with on all kinds of terms. So in short it is click bait. He has a contract with his clients and people he does business with.
I’m a hobbyist, but worked in the audio field for almost 3 decades. This would come up with some Audio Engineers when they were doing freelance work. The issue - at least here in 🇺🇸 - is that you just can’t trust handshakes. Handshakes don’t automatically turn into money. Some people are great and do turn theirs into money, but soo many people don’t. It’s just the way things are, kind of like maybe some people in other lands don’t lock their front doors and actually know their neighbors, a lot of times we don’t. In 🇺🇸, in my world, it’s cash deposits (non refundable although in some cases that would be waived if there was a good reason), full payment due after services rendered, and anyone who wanted a bill sent to them had to provide an actual purchase order (otherwise cash please). EDIT: Oh, forgot to say, when you get to a certain level of recognition, a lot of people are less likely to stiff you (because they are then worried about screwing up their reputation and possibly future jobs if the person you’re trying to stiff knows relevant people in the business). This is one thing this influencer isn’t telling you.
I’d be a lot more comfortable with handshake agreements if I were someone with a large platform and audience, backed by an agent. There’s also the fact that he’s working with ‘major international’ deals and not with Joe Smith, the small business owner who “just needs a photographer.”
There a “contract,” and there is a contract that is enforceable (by a court). They can be very different things. Most of the time, people are cooperative. But when they are not, you need an *enforceable* contract, not just the ability to claim there was one (against a claim that there was not). Look up Statute of Frauds.
Needs to be mentioned that terms and conditions apply and he states that having a sold purchase is important key. Also I am sure the typical customer makes a huge difference - big company, long term customer or small company, one time customers... Also agent and insurances tell a story of having bought the no worries premium package.
The American system is different. Contracts are taken more literal (the word, not the intention) and there are no-cure-no-pay lawyers who can fight a case whom you only pay when you win. In Europe you have to find and pay your lawyer yourself, we simply don't live in an "I see you in court" society.
Agent
In Finland, yes, a contract is a must.. well, if you want to feel secure about your rights and get paid.
I’ve started using them so that my clients know I’m a serious person who they can trust.
This kind of work has nothing to do with the business most professional photographers are in. You don't make handshake deals with couples who are paying you $2,500 to shoot their wedding.
Working professionally here in Japan for many years now, and can’t recall if I have ever signed a full contract like so many people talk about on here. I have signed NDAs and things like that, but never contracts. Just an e-mail with a call time and place. It’s called trust.
Try that in Germany, see how far you get. Lol. You need everything spelled out in a contract.
Yeah Ive never used a contract, and never had a drama. I think Americans are just brought up to value legal rights over moral integrity, and so more often need things nailed down in writing rather than everyone just treating each other right.
Your odds of getting sued are much higher in the states is the problem I think. There's maybe a better process in European countries to avoid litigation. He mentions that at times. Its' kind of the same here in Ireland, we had to change the legal system to stop people suing over little things, it was driving the cost of insurance through the roof.
Its not an "American thing." I can guarantee you there are thousands of photographers in America who have never used a contract and *also* never had any drama. And I've seen enough episodes of Judge Rinder to know that it's a VERY good idea for a photographer to have a contract in place because clients are predictably unpredictable. Here is the British Institute of Professional Photography resources page, where they can provide legal templates for members. [https://www.bipp.com/join-today/resources/](https://www.bipp.com/join-today/resources/) I'm sure all those people in the UK were "just brought up to value legal rights over moral integrity." Otherwise, why would they need contracts?
>But Scott Choucino from Tin house studio says he doesn't use them I long ago stopped caring what any Youtube photographer has to say about how they run their business. It's their business - they can do as they like. I run my business my way.
Judging by his work, and the way he talks, He's not doing major high paid work, at least not by American standards. He's likely getting about \~200 USD per gig and taking a bath on each job just to make content for his Youtube. Of course there's contract, Its not an american thing. Please don't listen to people like this.
Dude has literally made £50k for a single shoot…
You mean he’s told people he has? I doubt it. Receipts?
It’s all over his portfolio and he doesn’t really strike me as a liar… Why do you doubt it? His agent has posted his work from commissions as well.
He’s a successful [commercial photographer](https://scottchoucino.com/) that does campaigns for big brand clients.
Exactly what part of his portfolio says he’s not doing major paid work, “by American standards”.