LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Images of people on Stock Photo sites

FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography
Thread started 19 Jul 2008 (Saturday) 11:35   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Pete ­ W
Goldmember
Pete W's Avatar
Joined Apr 2007
1,257 posts
Sawbridgeworth, Herts. UK
[MORE/SHARE]

Hi all can you help.

A friend has started up a Stock Photo site and I posed the question about images of people in public and whether or not they can be used on a stock site without a model release..... His current stance is all images where you can see the persons face require a model release..... Is this right???


Stock photo site = http://photostore.snap​t.orgexternal link

Post #1, Jul 19, 2008 11:35:36


All the best
Pete Woods LRPS
My Gear List
My Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Pete
Cream of the Crop
Pete's Avatar
Joined Jul 2006
38,607 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

As far as I'm aware (and I could be wrong here), if you take a photo of someone with the intent of making money out of that photo, you need a model release.

The same goes for some buildings as well.

Post #2, Jul 19, 2008 11:37:22


Pete
UK SE Catch of the Day

LOG IN TO REPLY
TheHoff
Don't Hassle....
TheHoff's Avatar
Joined Jan 2008
8,804 posts
Vancouver, BC
[MORE/SHARE]

It varies by country but in most cases, yes, you definitely need a release. I can't think of a country where you don't but of course different laws and penalties would apply. You do not need a release if the photo is displayed as art or depicts a newsworthy event and you do not editorialize or imply that the person endorses a product or idea. Stock photography is usually sold so that the person will appear to endorse a product or idea, hence the need for a release.

Post #3, Jul 19, 2008 11:43:30


••Vancouver Wedding Photographer external link••| [gear list] | Latest blog: 5 steps to stopping image lossexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
basroil
Cream of the Crop
basroil's Avatar
Joined Mar 2006
8,015 posts
STL/Clayton, MO| NJ
[MORE/SHARE]

Pete W wrote in post #5941939external link
Hi all can you help.

A friend has started up a Stock Photo site and I posed the question about images of people in public and whether or not they can be used on a stock site without a model release..... His current stance is all images where you can see the persons face require a model release..... Is this right???


Stock photo site = http://photostore.snap​t.orgexternal link

Looks like a really bad microstock agency to me.... If you are going through the trouble of getting releases, then at least go with a better service.

Post #4, Jul 19, 2008 12:09:15


I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Pete ­ W
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Pete W's Avatar
Joined Apr 2007
1,257 posts
Sawbridgeworth, Herts. UK
[MORE/SHARE]

basroil wrote in post #5942123external link
Looks like a really bad microstock agency to me.... If you are going through the trouble of getting releases, then at least go with a better service.

This is a new site I was just asking the question here as the owner said you would need a model release, it was I that was questioning their policy, which looks to be correct...

How can you tell it is bad, the site has only been up a week... no cost to join and the commission is 30%, seems OK to me

I am happy to see where this site goes :)

Post #5, Jul 19, 2008 12:15:37


All the best
Pete Woods LRPS
My Gear List
My Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
madhatter04
Goldmember
madhatter04's Avatar
Joined Oct 2006
1,853 posts
Southern California
[MORE/SHARE]

Alamy requires a model release and property release when you use ANY likeliness of a person, including certain body parts, silhouttes, etc.

Post #6, Jul 19, 2008 13:08:50


www.alexanderfitch.comexternal linkflickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
basroil
Cream of the Crop
basroil's Avatar
Joined Mar 2006
8,015 posts
STL/Clayton, MO| NJ
[MORE/SHARE]

Pete W wrote in post #5942161external link
This is a new site I was just asking the question here as the owner said you would need a model release, it was I that was questioning their policy, which looks to be correct...

How can you tell it is bad, the site has only been up a week... no cost to join and the commission is 30%, seems OK to me

I am happy to see where this site goes :)

Most agencies are free to join and just have a portfolio process to go through. The main reason it is a bad site though isn't because it's microstock or there are webpage problems (which both are true), but because it's an unknown, has almost no photos, and the license terms are bad at best. The entire point of a stock agency is that your photos don't sit there doing nothing, rather you're actually having people look at the photos.

Also, microstock is a horrible idea for any halfway decent photographer, as you can make 100 to 1000 times as much money with a good photo.

Since you are required to have a model release, you might as well go with a real stock agency where you know that the terms of use are better. Model releases are needed for any person that is identifiable, unless used strictly for editorial purposes about that individual. Property releases are needed for anything that is privately owned and is identifiable, when taken on private property. There are exceptions for and against a release when property is involved, so check all local, state, and federal laws for conflicts and exceptions.

Post #7, Jul 19, 2008 13:34:49


I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.
Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Pete ­ W
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Pete W's Avatar
Joined Apr 2007
1,257 posts
Sawbridgeworth, Herts. UK
[MORE/SHARE]

basroil wrote in post #5942543external link
Most agencies are free to join and just have a portfolio process to go through. The main reason it is a bad site though isn't because it's microstock or there are webpage problems (which both are true), but because it's an unknown, has almost no photos, and the license terms are bad at best. The entire point of a stock agency is that your photos don't sit there doing nothing, rather you're actually having people look at the photos.

Also, microstock is a horrible idea for any halfway decent photographer, as you can make 100 to 1000 times as much money with a good photo.

Since you are required to have a model release, you might as well go with a real stock agency where you know that the terms of use are better. Model releases are needed for any person that is identifiable, unless used strictly for editorial purposes about that individual. Property releases are needed for anything that is privately owned and is identifiable, when taken on private property. There are exceptions for and against a release when property is involved, so check all local, state, and federal laws for conflicts and exceptions.

Thanks for the info :)

Post #8, Jul 19, 2008 13:54:38


All the best
Pete Woods LRPS
My Gear List
My Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
697 views & 0 likes for this thread
Images of people on Stock Photo sites
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00089 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.01s
1176 guests, 853 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is greeman5639

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.