View Full Version : Beware off this Photographer
Hi to all the girls who are looking for photographer. Not all of them are genuine.
Here is one of them.
Beware of this person:
https://www.escort-ireland.com/boards/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1896
This pictures are private of an independent girl who used to work in Dublin.
Hi put them on the gallery E-I without her promotion WITH her face showing.
She had to ring Patricia to cover her face. And another thing SHE IS NOT IRISH like the photo title, (Irish Beauty in the bedroom) and Her name is not Hal
Here is another link off him
Look at this link.
https://www.escort-ireland.com/boards/showthread.php?t=3579
Unless you don't mind showing your face on the net and to be put-en on a different site without your knowledge go ahead.
Regards
I'm sure Hal can come on here and speak for himself, but I just wanted to say that I think it may have been us rather than Hal than gave the photos a title like "Irish Beauty..." as with our old photos system our staff member Jayne used to add titles to photos when the submitter didn't provide one, also Hal is not meant to be the name of the lady, it is meant to be the name of the person who submitted the photos.
I'm sure Hal can come on here and speak for himself, but I just wanted to say that I think it may have been us rather than Hal than gave the photos a title like "Irish Beauty..." as with our old photos system our staff member Jayne used to add titles to photos when the submitter didn't provide one, also Hal is not meant to be the name of the lady, it is meant to be the name of the person who submitted the photos.
OK I understand that but he is still not trusted as he put those photos without the girls permission and with her face shown. If at list he had cover the face maybe that would of been OK. But NO he did not do that and the girl had to call you to cover the face.
He has no rights to put anyones photos on the net.
I still have to say Girls be aware
Hi EastWoman,
Thank you for your update.
I'm not dismissing your issue with Hal here. I don't know if he genuinely got the lady's permission to publish these photos online or not. I think only he can come on here and talk about that.
I just wanted to clarify the small point about the naming of the photos as I think that may not have been his doing and I think it would be unfair of me not to speak up on that point.
Thanks
Pat x
Wow...
just read all of this and I am bit stunned...
However, just to make a few points...
1) I was the photographer and I own the photos. Full stop. They're mine, it's my work and I can do with them whatever I want. If I wanted to print out several copies and post them all over town, I could. The subject was willing, the photos were taken with permission... and the subject was not under any duress.
Myself and the subject have no agreement verbal or otherwise giving ownership of these photos over to the subject.
The subject was given these photos to whatever she wanted with... that however does not mean I can not do the same. The photos are property of the photographer, not the subject. She freely modeled and I freely gave her copies.
2) Second I did not publish these photos on this site. I do not admin this site, I have no say of what gets published or doesn't . To the best of my knowledge Particia does, however, admin this site. She decides what is published and what isn't.
I submitted this photo as part of a contest on this site. I had no idea it would be published or for how long it would be up.
3) Second, Eastwoman, since you seem to be mysteriously informed about this photo subject's feelings please contact the subject and direct her to contact Patricia... if she wishes to have the photos taken down, I do not object.
4) as per this "other site" you speak of, I did not post this photo elsewhere. I don't know what site you are talking about. If another site admin sees my photo, likes it and decides to post it without my permission there's not much I can do about it. All they have to do is click on the photo copy it and it then they have it. I don't have time to go around policing web sites.
Lastly, I am not a hire photographer. I DO NOT hire myself out. I am an artist and the subject should feel lucky to have copies of my work; the photos are very good. I remember the subject squealing with delight over them. Many people have photos done by me and they enjoy them very much, I am VERY good at what I do and I enjoy photography. I have never claimed to operate in a business capacity.
So in conclusion, I did not post this photo to this or any other site. I do not need the subject's permission to exhibit the photos and I can not stop others from stealing the photos from this site to use elsewhere.
Kind Regards,
Hal
Mature Jackie
15-11-07, 01:27
Wow...
just read all of this and I am bit stunned...
However, just to make a few points...
1) I was the photographer and I own the photos. Full stop. They're mine, it's my work and I can do with them whatever I want. If I wanted to print out several copies and post them all over town, I could. The subject was willing, the photos were taken with permission... and the subject was not under any duress.
Myself and the subject have no agreement verbal or otherwise giving ownership of these photos over to the subject.
The subject was given these photos to whatever she wanted with... that however does not mean I can not do the same. The photos are property of the photographer, not the subject. She freely modeled and I freely gave her copies.
2) Second I did not publish these photos on this site. I do not admin this site, I have no say of what gets published or doesn't . To the best of my knowledge Particia does, however, admin this site. She decides what is published and what isn't.
I submitted this photo as part of a contest on this site. I had no idea it would be published or for how long it would be up.
3) Second, Eastwoman, since you seem to be mysteriously informed about this photo subject's feelings please contact the subject and direct her to contact Patricia... if she wishes to have the photos taken down, I do not object.
4) as per this "other site" you speak of, I did not post this photo elsewhere. I don't know what site you are talking about. If another site admin sees my photo, likes it and decides to post it without my permission there's not much I can do about it. All they have to do is click on the photo copy it and it then they have it. I don't have time to go around policing web sites.
Lastly, I am not a hire photographer. I DO NOT hire myself out. I am an artist and the subject should feel lucky to have copies of my work; the photos are very good. I remember the subject squealing with delight over them. Many people have photos done by me and they enjoy them very much, I am VERY good at what I do and I enjoy photography. I have never claimed to operate in a business capacity.
So in conclusion, I did not post this photo to this or any other site. I do not need the subject's permission to exhibit the photos and I can not stop others from stealing the photos from this site to use elsewhere.
Kind Regards,
Hal
Did the model sign a model release form? If she did not, you do NOT have authorisation to publish these photos in any form of media, even though you own the copyright.
Watch it, you could end up with the pants sued off you.
2) Second I did not publish these photos on this site. I do not admin this site, I have no say of what gets published or doesn't . To the best of my knowledge Particia does, however, admin this site. She decides what is published and what isn't.
I submitted this photo as part of a contest on this site. I had no idea it would be published or for how long it would be up.
Just to clarify, it was made clear to all persons submitting photos to E-I in the exact circumstances that Hal did, that the submitter had to be the owner of the photos, the photos would be published here, and the submitter was granting us full rights to use the photos as we wish etc. If you look at Jayne's posts on this subject, I think that is clear there also:
https://www.escort-ireland.com/boards/showthread.php?t=3846&highlight=photo+competition
3) Second, Eastwoman, since you seem to be mysteriously informed about this photo subject's feelings please contact the subject and direct her to contact Patricia... if she wishes to have the photos taken down, I do not object.
We were contacted by the lady in the photos a while back and asked to blur her face out. We obliged. If these photos being published here is causing this lady distress or similar now, she is welcome to contact us again. Whatever the facts of this case, we are not going to continue publishing these photos if our doing so is causing distress to the individual pictured.
Thanks
Pat x
Did the model sign a model release form? If she did not, you do NOT have authorisation to publish these photos in any form of media, even though you own the copyright.
Watch it, you could end up with the pants sued off you.
Nope, incorrect. She is not a model, she is a subject. Just like a bowl of fruit, architecture, or a photo of people on the street. She gave full permission to have picture taken and indeed asked me to do so.
I am competely within my rights.
I don't guess when it comes to copyright law, I know.
I have taken many photographs over the last 10 years and I have been published in MANY types of media, I am well aquainted with the law.
However, thanks for your concern.
Cheers,
Hal
Mature Jackie
17-11-07, 11:03
Nope, incorrect. She is not a model, she is a subject. Just like a bowl of fruit, architecture, or a photo of people on the street. She gave full permission to have picture taken and indeed asked me to do so.
I am competely within my rights.
I don't guess when it comes to copyright law, I know.
I have taken many photographs over the last 10 years and I have been published in MANY types of media, I am well aquainted with the law.
However, thanks for your concern.
Cheers,
Hal
Suit yourself. Did you know some buildings also come under copyright law? Keep reading all those reviews of me you stated on these boards that you had read, even though I only had one at the time.
Suit yourself. Did you know some buildings also come under copyright law? Keep reading all those reviews of me you stated on these boards that you had read, even though I only had one at the time.
Mature Jackie, atourney at law and escort. Whatever...
Oh, and WHAT?
Keep reading all those reviews of me you stated on these boards that you had read, even though I only had one at the time
???
i modelled for many years and all photographers legally have to get a model to sign the release forms the release form states that the the model is no longer the owner of her image and has no rights to the photos and the photographer can do with pictures as they see fit
if photograpphers dont get a model release form signed and dated the photos still belong to the model as it is her likeness the other reason photographers need a model release form is because you have to show id before you sign to prove you are over 18
so as hal has done none of this the pics do not belong to her and is she shaw that the images are not of a minor someone under 18 and could she prove that if the model sued
well you would if you had a model release form without one you could end up in court paying damages
may advice to all models is only go to photographers if they ask you to sign release forms remember you can put on the release form on the condition my face is not showing all pictures subject to model approval and so on so you do still have some say on what pictures are shown and where
never go near any photographer who knows nothing about model release forms you may well up on cards in phone boxs in london asthis is what happened to me so beware photographer who no nothing about the industry even time for print work requires a model release form
I agree with all of this but...
the SUBJECT was not and is not a "model". The SUBJECT was not employed to pose and was given digital copies to do whatever she wanted with. She did not "model" for me.
By your logic if a father takes a picture of his child he has to get a release form... and that is crazy.
However, the point that we're missing here is the SUBJECT complained to Patricia about her face and ask that it be altered and Patricia did just that. The subject did not ask for it to be removed so obviously the subject was happy to have the altered photo posted on this site.
I am well within my legal rights and I have confirmed this with my solicitor and a barister.
Futhermore, Eastwoman, I am noto a "photographer", I am an artist and I use lots of mediums to express myself.
In the last 6 months I have turned down repeated requests to shoot but as I am not intrested in the subject matter and I am going artisiticially in a different direction; I have turned down these opportunities. Specifically because the person inquiring asked questions like "how much do you charge". I am not a business. I don't operate as such. I did not charge for my work and did not employ models.
Many people apriciate me as an artist. I have taken many photos of the girls who use this site and all of them were very happy with the photos and were given copies. ALL of the subjects said that my photos were the best they had ever seen of themselves.
keeping all this in mind... there is no problem.
The reason that the subject was upset originally was because some other website had posted this photo. The subject, who was not very computer litterate, assumed that I had provided this other website with this photo when I had not. The admin/ site designer of this other site copied it from EI and published it without my permission. (right click, copy or "print screen"). This is out of my control.
In fact, I had no knowledge this photo would be posted on this site. I do not usually publish online... most of my work is shown in magazines or in galleries.
At any rate, no one need "beware" of me as I am no longer taking photographs of escorts, the subject bores me. Frankly, if anyone want ed me to photograph them they missed thier chance.