diff --git a/text/044-image-models.md b/text/044-image-models.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..70903c45
--- /dev/null
+++ b/text/044-image-models.md
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+# RFC 44: Make "custom image model" the default
+
+* Authors: Karl Hobley
+* Created: 2019-10-23
+* Last Modified: 2018-10-23
+
+## Abstract
+
+"Custom image models" is a feature that allows developers to supply a
+model for Wagtail to use to store image metadata instead of using the
+built-in one. It enables developers to add custom fields to images and
+override Wagtail's default image handling behaviour.
+
+It's challenging to switch to a custom image model once a site
+has already made use of Wagtail's built-in image model. Because of
+this, we can't add new features that require a custom image model as it
+may not be feasible for some users to migrate to one.
+
+This RFC proposes that we start creating new Wagtail projects with a
+custom image model from the start. This change will add a small amount
+of extra code to the project template, which I know we would want to
+avoid, but I think preventing a potentially arduous migration later
+outweighs the overhead of having one extra app in the project.
+
+This change also applies to image rendition and document models as well.
+
+## Specification
+
+To implement this RFC, we will make the following changes:
+
+### Update the project template to use custom image, rendition, and document models
+
+We will add a new app called `assets` into the base project template.
+This app will contain three models: `Image`, `Rendition` and `Document`.
+
+All three of these models will exactly match their built-in counterparts
+(we will not add an `alt` field to the image model out of the box).
+
+### Add a custom image model to bakerydemo
+
+We will add the `assets` app as described in the previous section and
+update the fixtures and foreign keys to use this new app.
+
+### Rename the built-in models to fix naming conflict and discourage their use
+
+Currently, custom image models are often called `CustomImage` or
+`WebsiteNameImage` because calling the model `Image` would cause the
+name of a reverse relation to clash.
+
+We will not remove the built-in image model, as that would only force
+developers to perform the complex migration that this RFC aims to
+eliminate for future projects.
+
+### Tweak the beginners tutorial, so it uses the custom image model
+
+We will only make necessary tweaks so that it works with the new project
+template. I don't think there's any need to describe the image model in
+the beginners tutorial.
+
+### Remove the "Custom image model" advanced topics doc
+
+We could replace this with a reference document that describes the
+methods that developers can override to tweak its behaviour.
+
+### Stop calling it "Custom image model"
+
+The documentation will be updated to no longer refer to "Custom Image
+models" as an extra feature any more.