What's the proper etiquette?

[Christina Lauder]

I am with Michael.  It really depends on the course.  One of the first courses I went on the instructor said the model was happy to let us use our shots providing that we gave her some prints.  It was an environmental session where we had a block of time to use the model how and where we saw fit.  After giving us a couple of examples he asked us to find something elsewhere and without any help from himself.  During that time I was able to create a handful of images that had no creative input whatsoever from the instructor.  I feel justified in using those images. 

I would never attempt to use any images that I did not set up entirely on my own for anything other than reference material for my personal use. 

So really I believe it is a judgement call by the individual and we can only hope people are honest in these situations. 

These same expectations would apply to anyone attending one of my courses.  If they create the image its theirs to do as they please.  If I create the image but they press the shutter it would be dishonest to lead someone else to believe they were they creator. 

Just my opinion but I feel very strongly about this. 
Christina

[Michael Turner]

Following on from David and Christina's points, the models I use are generally 'ordinary' children and families ie not professional models. As we all know, children (especially under fives) don't hold the same pose or expression for very long! So, there may be a case for discretion depending on the type of workshop. An outdoor children's lifestyle workshop might give more scope for delegates to capture completely different images from the tutor than a highly stylised and directed fashion or bridal workshop with professional models for instance. Taking the models to one side for your own few minutes of shooting, as Christina suggests, is a perfectly legitimate solution.
At the end of the day it's down to the conscience of the individual.

I might also add that passing off a professional model in a wedding dress as a 'real wedding' shot is, IMO, a definite no no.

[David Simm]

I might also add that passing off a professional model in a wedding dress as a 'real wedding' shot is, IMO, a definite no no.

With you all the way, however even professional modes get married...... just have to play the devil's advocate to make people think

[Christina Lauder]

Good point David.  I don't think it is so much that a model has been used as it is that the photos were taken under the pressure of a real wedding.  Certainly models get married as do incredibly gorgeous and photogenic couples.  I think the point is that it must be real weddings.  The pressure of a wedding, with so many variables and time constraints are the issues that I think are important when comparing wedding portraiture.  It is completely different and therefore unfair if someone hires a couple and spends unlimited amounts of time in ideal circumstances.  Its like comparing apples to oranges. 

As Michael said, it is down to the conscience of the individual.  And also what the photographer wants to use the photos for.  If its for a competition that says it must be a real wedding than definitely no.  If its to show your client what you did on a course and would like to try at a real wedding if given the time then of course.  Its all about honesty and fairness. 

[David Simm]

Alarming as it may seem almost all American competition and panel pictures used to shot as "self assigments" which clearly means they were not shot on a wedding day. It can be noted that legendary wedding photographer Rocky Gun would take a group of "real couples" into the mountains to produce his spectacular display images and that included his BIPP fellowship panel.