She holds a copyright on the make-up job she does, if it is sufficiently
original (it has to be really original and obvious, though).  You hold a
copyright on the photographs.

Her claim to copyright is extremely weak compared to yours, unless she
is doing something very unusual, like body painting.

copyright belongs to the one who clicked the shutter, even if that person
was an assistant, perhaps even the pizza delivery jerk who tripped over the
cable release, even if the director spent days setting up the shot.   it is
generally accepted that the shutter clicker 'created' the image.

Makeup is generally believed to be a work for hire, a part of the creative
process, just the weight of all that precedent.   She traded her work for
the image.

Keep in mind that fashion has never been copyrightable, that's why stores
start filling up with knock offs before the panties have hit the dressing
room floor after their strut down the runway.

She could possibly come up with something she could  trademark.

I believe that unless you executed a contract with her specifying that
you made her a 'partner' in your images as far as copyright goes, the
picture copyright clearly belongs to you.

But copyright law is pretty bizarre, how else could Disney still own the
rights to Mickey Mouse after all these years?

Steve

My first thought is that Usenet is a lousy place to ask questions
about a specific legal situation.  This is especially true in
intellectual property law, where most people do not know what they do
not know.  So take any comments, especially mine, with a large grain
of silver halide (or other salt).

My second thought is that the copyright law varies from country to
country.  But I seem to remember that you live in the Seattle area, so
I'm going to assume U.S. law.

17 USC 101 states:
    A "joint work" is a work prepared by two or more authors with
    the intention that their contributions be merged into inseparable
    or interdependent parts of a unitary whole.

Unfortunately, the Copyright Act does not define the word "author."
Is the "make-up artist" an author of your photographs?  Based on what
you've written I wouldn't dare hazard an opinion.

In the 2002 case of Aalmuhammed v. Lee, 202 F.3d 1227, the 9th Circuit
tried to figure out if Mr. Aalmuhammed was a co-author of the movie
"Malcolm X" or just made valuable contributions.  In holding the
latter, the court found that Mr. Aalmuhammed neither exercised any
creative control over the work, nor was there any objective
manifestations of intent to be coauthors.

Both "control" and "intention to coauthor" are factual determinations.
You have your own view of what your working relationship was.  She has
hers.  Some of what you've written (images I have produced) leans one
way.  Some (the stuff we've done) leans the other way.  While such a
case might make for an interesting episode of "Judge Judy," I wouldn't
want to have a stake in the outcome either way.

If you wish to continue working together, I suggest that you formalize
your working arrangement and explicity assign (and possibly waive)
rights in the older works.