Matt Ashmore Posted May 22, 2015 Share Posted May 22, 2015 Hello, This might seem like a little bit of a silly question. I have a couple of photos of a bench underneath a tree in Kew Gardens in London. If the photos contained one of the many buildings at Kew Gardens, I would be certain that I needed a property release. But these two shots are of a bench underneath a tree in what could be park land just about anywhere. But I know it is Kew Gardens and would tend to add 'Kew Gardens' as a tag on the photos as it adds a bit of context. Interestingly, while doing a Google search to help me decide, I did encounter this: http://www.kew.org/about/commercial-filming-photography So I'm not sure if I'm being paranoid or what.. but thought I'd ask other peoples' opinions. Many Thanks, Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted May 22, 2015 Share Posted May 22, 2015 Contrary to micro stock there is more than a tendency that Alamy stock photographers protect themselves by ticking "contains property for which I have no release". This can be breeds of dogs, cattle, certain flags and designs, etc. etc. Even designs of benches that may be somewhat protected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted May 22, 2015 Share Posted May 22, 2015 Just looked at Kew's exorbitant rates. Agree with Niels on PR. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted May 22, 2015 Share Posted May 22, 2015 I've sold a shot of a detail of a building at Kew, marked it release required but not obtained as per Neil above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.