Arvy777

How do I know if I need a property release?

Recommended Posts

Hello camera ppl,

 

Recently I shot landscape photo and not sure what settings to use on 'Image Manager'? 

 

After a search on Alamy for London (&other street photography) I found many Images marked as 'No Properties' on their images, and this made me confused. English is my 5th language and when it comes to using/understanding technical words I can get easily lost :) 


Recently I photographed coastal landscape with a church and lighthouse within my image (no ppl). 

 

How do I know if I need property release for such buildings and what adjustments best to use in 'Image Manager' - 'Optional tab'? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically anything that could be recognised - be it a mobile phone or a building - would need a property release for commercial use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Avpics said:

Basically anything that could be recognised - be it a mobile phone or a building - would need a property release for commercial use.

Are there no exceptions? What about city skylines or public buildings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the guideline is if no building is the main feature, but hell knows how that would be defined. If you have a single building in the image I'd be inclined to think that would need a release. I always err on the side of safety, especially as I take more editorial images than anything else

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alamy are cautious about releases, so yes you will need a release unless you have written permission from the owners of the church and lighthouse. Its best for you anyway to say that it needs a release and that you haven't got one. That way, if a client uses the photo and there are repercussions, you at least were honest; its up to the client to ensure that the photo is suitable for their use. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Colin Woods said:

 

Thank you very much for everyones comment! 

Love Learning* LL :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just sold an image of the road sign welcoming people to my local town, by mistake I have it marked as royalty free but obviously it is the property of somebody, any thoughts if this will land me in trouble?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/02/2018 at 19:59, Nick Hatton said:

I have just sold an image of the road sign welcoming people to my local town, by mistake I have it marked as royalty free but obviously it is the property of somebody, any thoughts if this will land me in trouble?

 

You can change it from RF to RM in image manager if you prefer. I would also answer 'Is there any property in the image?' as yes, and 'Do you have a signed release for the property?' as no.

 

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/02/2018 at 19:59, Nick Hatton said:

I have just sold an image of the road sign welcoming people to my local town, by mistake I have it marked as royalty free but obviously it is the property of somebody, any thoughts if this will land me in trouble?

A road sign. Who owns a road sign? The local council? I doubt they will be chasing you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sally said:

A road sign. Who owns a road sign? The local council? I doubt they will be chasing you. 

It's a matter of accuracy. That and abiding by the terms of the contributor contract. It's conceivable that a council might object to a derogatory portrayal of their district. A photographer who wrongly stated that he had a release might be in at least warm water.

Imagine if Royston Vasey had been a real place- I wonder if Royston (in Hertfordshire, South Yorkshire, Glasgow, etc.) had any qualms about it.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

It's a matter of accuracy. That and abiding by the terms of the contributor contract. It's conceivable that a council might object to a derogatory portrayal of their district. A photographer who wrongly stated that he had a release might be in at least warm water.

Imagine if Royston Vasey had been a real place- I wonder if Royston (in Hertfordshire, South Yorkshire, Glasgow, etc.) had any qualms about it.

Yes, I agree, I was simply responding to the question which was about the likelihood of getting into problems having already sold the image under a RF license.

Edited by Sally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sally said:

Yes, I agree, I was simply responding to the question which was about the likelihood of getting into problems having already sold the image under a RF license.

Ah, fair enough. Not a hugely problematic image but at least Nick has been reminded of it.

I still have the odd RF one which I haven't changed because before AIM you couldn't.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts on above topic, photo was showing my town in a good way so I don'

t really see a problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now