Property Releases on public property?

[James Fowler]

Hello,

 

Just became an Alamy contributor recently and I have a question about property releases on public or government land? I've been contributing to some other agencies for a few years and some of my best sellers are landscapes, especially in the Southeastern mountains. I usually do not put the exact location for the images in keywords or descriptions, especially when the images are generically descriptive of the whole Southeastern mountain area and could've been taken in many locations. I take many shots in National or State Parks. If I expose the location, such as Great Smokey Mountains National Park, am I then required to have a property release? Or is that only if I take a shot of a recognizable building or something? Is it sometimes better not to reveal the exact location if I wish to sell as Royalty Free? I do understand that I can submit almost anything as Editorial, but does that sometimes lower the amount of sales. What about recognizable National Monuments, do different rules apply to those than to landscapes?  I'm wondering how property releases relate to model releases, where if the person is shot from behind or is far enough in the distance as to not be recognizable that a model release may not be required?

 

Just want to make sure I've been doing this the right way. I want maximum sales but also want to be legal.

 

Thanks so much for your time and help!

Sincerely,

James Fowler

[spacecadet]

Which country? Alamy is a British company but you obviously don't mean England.

[James Fowler]

Well, I'm thinking mostly of USA, but I DO have some landscape images from Ireland, is it different in different countries?

 

[spacecadet]

Not as far as Alamy is concerned but the terms under which you are permitted to exploit photographs may depend on the country. For example, I believe that U.S. National Parks have conditions.

We generally reckon that landscapes depicting public land don't need a release, as long as there's no private property in the image.

BTW not necessarily where you took it from, but what your photograph depicts should be in the keywords. Otherwise how will it be found?

[fotoDogue]

One problem is clients don't just license pretty pictures. They usually want photos of specific places. If you don't include the location how are they going to find your photos?

 

There's another thread about shooting in the US that touches on some of the issues surrounding National Parks. Some parks require permits for "commercial photography" Others don't. There's a section in the Alamy contract about shooting in places that charge admission. If Alamy accepts photos shot in National Parks without a permit, they could change their policy on this in the future.

 

 

 

[James Fowler]

I took some shots within the Smokey Mountain National Park. Next time I travel there I will stop and ask what their policies are. But I also took several shots driving down the Blue Ridge Parkway. There are many areas to pull over where there is an awesome vista to view. Other places with nice views have no pull-over, but if you are willing to park and walk U can still get nice shots. When doing this I'm not always sure whose land I'm shooting--sometimes I could be shooting peaks inside the park from outside it. Or someone else could own land? But the whole area is sometimes called the Smokey Mountains even if it is not inside the boundaries of the National Park. I'd tag these pics something like (Appalachian mountain scene) I'd also put 'Smokey Mountains' in the tags, but not 'Great Smokey Mountain National Park'. That way people could know the general area but not exact location--which often I didn't know myself. I've seen these as generic pics of a certain area of the country, not an exact location. Two of these shots are repeat sellers.

 

Another example: I did this inside a Florida State park, so should've prob asked about their permissions policy, but took a shot of an old early Cracker House. It was just a window, a log bench, and the old clapboard siding. It was representative of many early houses of this style, could've been any one of them in a geographical area. I saw it as representative of a certain style, culture, time, era, lifestyle, and not so much about the particular house I shot. I tagged it accordingly-title something like: Close up of Early Cracker House in North Florida. Sold a few of those also. So guess I'm wondering about general vs. specific.