Which is why there needs to be a national association of accredited photographers...I think I mentioned that in passing in the consumers corner some time back...
Anyway, according to "International" (read: "Western") norms, the commissioning company has to state in its commissioning agreement how much of the rights they wish to purchase, whether it be for a full buyout, or for only a period of time, and if for a period of time what media would they employ the image in and the markets the image would be employed in. To extend the rights purchase over and above that previously agreed upon, both parties would then have to renegotiate terms. Otherwise, the rights of the image reverts back to the photog. This by the way is also how local modelling agencies charge fees. If the models and their agencies get to exercise such rights why not the photogs who are actually doing creative work? because the modelling agencies are organised :think:
Is this a divinely expected right? No. It is one that photogs need to demand. And as expressed in the article pointed to earlier in the thread, it is up to the photog to demand that right. If local photogs are not educated on this, those not in the know would remain exploited in this regard and end up underpaid and under-recognized.
And not only that, photogs need to understand that if an image turns out like crap, it is ultimately the photog that gets the blame, not the stylist, not the art director...I mean, you look at a lousy image, who do you think of to blame for the lack of quality? The art director? The stylist? So, as the photog, he or she must make sure that at the end of the day, he or she can accept the image created as their own in the eyes of the world. And to do that, they must stand up for their creative imput into the project. Sure, the art director represents the view of the client, and is responsible for translating the clients idea into a brief for the photog, but as the one ultimately creating the image, the photog has to be the creative spark that melds the clients needs with their own vision. And give direction, not only to the models, props, lighting, but also to the stylist, hair, makeup. Of course, with such control, if the final product is crap, the photog has nowhere to hide behind. You want more control, you take more responsibility.
All these might sound very ivorytower-like, but this is what is needed to promote more professionalism in photography. Sure, in situations, there has to be give-and-take, and as you keep working with like-minded people, you can give them more leeway as you get used to how each of them thinks, but photogs should not accept being pushed around. Only by respecting themselves can photogs expect others to learn to respect them. And I know of photogs who rather than put their name to what does not follow their vision, ask that their names not be credited, take the money, and then refuse to work with those people again.