Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Release'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Alamy Forum guidelines and announcements
    • Forum guidelines
    • Announcements
  • Alamy discussion and community support
    • Introductions
    • Portfolio critique
    • Community support: ask the forum
    • Stock photography discussion and contributor experience
    • Alamy Quality Control and technical talk
    • Let's talk about pics
  • Suggestions and ideas
    • Alamy
    • The Forum

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Alamy URL


Joined Alamy

Found 22 results

  1. I have uploaded Model Release forms in the past but there doesn't seem to be a facility for this since my last upload. In the user guide (p21) an upload icon is shown but doesn't seem to be anywhere in the image details panels. Only link is to existing release forms in the "Assign Existing Release".
  2. Hey all, So it's a lovely autumn here in Lower Austria and the vineyards have gone lots of shades of yellow and red. I've taken a range of shots, from fairly wide-angle and zoomed out, through to very closeup. So my question is, when do I start filling out in the optional field that the photo has "property"? There are no buildings, cars, people etc. but the vineyard owners would be able to identify some of their land from the trees and lie of the land plus the location information I'm giving (i.e. the village). So I'm thinking marking the photos as "no property" if I couldn't identify where the location is myself, and with "property" if I could. What are your thoughts? Steve
  3. Hi I'm a new(ish) contributor. I thought I'd search Alamy to find out how high ranked my images were. To my surprise I find a photo of my house, with the 'details' bit saying 'Property: no' or similar. The image was available for all use, not just editorial. Looking further it appears that quite a few contributors simply choose 'no' when there's a property. What do people think? (I couldn't insert the image - wouldn't let me!)
  4. Is a model release necessary for a photo such as this containing a gloved hand? Or perhaps I should rather ask, would you set "Number of people in the image" to 1 or 0?
  5. Hi everyone. Could you please help me- I cannot find info on alamy whether I need to upload releases for my own paintings" photos? Thank you very much.
  6. Hi, For all images that contain either people or any form of property, i always mark them as Editorial only, as my understanding is that these cannot be sold as commercial unless I obtain model/property release. Is this the right way to do? Thank you
  7. Hello everyone, I'm new to the stock industry, started just this week to make upload's. I ran into a hurdle with one of my recent uploads, the subject is a waterfall in Oregon, USA named Multnomah Falls. I want to know if this type of subject would require a property release or just be limited to Editorial use to keep it safe? Thanks in advance!
  8. Hello, I am new here and trying to figure out how the release form works. The release is for my own children. In this case i just fill in the form as Guardian and sign for them, right? - Do I need to complete a release form each time for each shot separately or i can have one form attached to all shots? - If possible to use same form for multiple shots - what date do i put in the release form - would it be a date range for example 1 jan 2012 - 1 jan 2018 or smith like that? - Is there an editable word format for the release form, i could only find a pdf one thanks a mil Elena
  9. G'day, I am sure I'm not the first to ask but I can't find it in other posts. If I have an unrecognizable person, say a silhouette, or only an arm and I have no model release should I simply say there are no people in the image? I am asking because if I say there are then the image will by default go RM and I want to list many of my images with other agencies. To be honest to have RM images across multiple agencies would simple add confusion to my workload. Cheers Trev
  10. hi, i am also new to alamy and i have some questions about legal issues. As all we know we can upload any image to alamy if it passes qc and we are free to choose between RM and RF or we can answer whatever we like to "is this image requires property release" question. No one cares. Ok well my question is if i choose wrong answer what will happen? For example if i choose there is no one in that image (totally mistakenly) BUT there are some people on that image whose responsibility is that or if i choose that image does not require property release BUT again it actually does what happen? There are lots of images in alamy which other agencies do not allow to upload even RM or editorial like Universal Studios interior. I could not decide what to upload because actually i dont want to be sued because i dont know a place requires property release or not. People in alamy do not care too much about this issue but it is a serious matter.
  11. Do we need property release to sell plants shoots taken in botanical gardens on commercial license? Both plants details and whole arrangements with description exactly where it was photographed. Thank you.
  12. Hello, I took a picture of a master lock on a open door. Do I need a release to sell it rights managed? Thanks in advance, Jacob Y.
  13. Hello! So i asked this same question on my Introductions post, but I think it deserves it's own thread. I could use some more clarification on what exactly does Alamy do, if you upload a picture with people in it (Without Signed Releases). Do they put it into a different classification which makes it less attractive for potential customers to purchase? Are companies simply not going to look at photos, unless they indicate that every person has signed a release waiver? I guess my question comes down to this. If I want to successfully sell my work on Alamy, should steer clear of uploading images with people in them, without a signed release?? Thanks for all the help! Josh
  14. Dear colleagues. I'm starting to upload some pictures to Alamy and I have a question. The most of my pictures have been done during touristic trips, which means that in the most of them there are people around, public buildings, museums and so on. So this means model/property releases are required, but I don't have them. Therefore, I understand that I should sell these pictures under the next layout: - RM license - Model/property release required: Yes - Do I have model/property relseases?: No Then, I have read that I should also sell these pictures with restrictions for editorial-use only... and here my question shows up. From my point of view, if I'm saying the picture requires model/property releases that I don't have, I think the buyer should decide if he wants to do a commercial use of them under that situation, isn't it? I mean, what's the point of setting "editorial use only" restrictions to a picture that must have releases for commercial use, that I don't have? So I'm thinking about not setting restrictions to my pictures in these terms, because I guess that just by saying I don't have the required releases should be enough to avoid commercial use of them, and, in case somebody is doing commercial use of them, he's the responsible of its bad use, not me. Am I right? Thank you very much in advance. These forums are great for newcomers I hope to be able to help people too in a near future! Best regards.
  15. Hello everyone, newbie questions, so please be kind. I have just passed initial QC for "grown-up" Alamy (have some Stockimo images) and am now going through the process of keywording, etc those first 4 little images I have a question - well, two really, about property releases: 1. I have a set of images taken of the facades of 100+ year old buildings. All the photos are taken from a public street, and none of them show people or other copyright items such as logos, etc. From what I know or have researched, the architects of these buildings died well over 70 years ago so therefore copyright in the buildings would not subsist (if it ever did which is a whole other debate about whether in fact photos of a building can be the subject of copyright as opposed to the original building drawings...but I digress). Anyway, what is Alamy's general approach to whether these need releases or not? I have read the guidelines but I have submitted the same images to some of the micro sites as commercial with mixed results: most have not required releases, while some have. (Even more frustratingly, some images of the same facade of the same building have been treated differently by the same agency). So the guidelines, while helpful, don't give a feel as to how the rules are applied in practice. What is the experience of others with regard to photos of this type? I was proposing to put them forward as RF, but is the prudent course to classify them as RM? 2. This leads to the second question: the contributors agreement says that the images must have a licence that is consistent with how the images are being licensed on other sites, but if there is no consistency on other sites, then what do I do?! (Also, as a general question, I am assuming that in practice this means that if images are listed as 'editorial' on micro sites, this is the equivalent of RM here?) 3. Just thought of a third question: I read in some forums that if images are RM on Alamy, they can't be sold on other sites, but that's not how I read the contributor agreement which expressly states that the images are supplied on a non-exclusive basis. And the section regarding consistent licensing between sites seems to confirm this. Perhaps what I was reading was old information? In short, if images are made available on Alamy as RM (because need to be editorial because no releases), can I still leave them on other micro-sites? (Clearly different story if they are RM-Exclusive but won't have any in that category). Sorry for the long post, but I find this one of the most baffling aspects of the whole process. Thoughts?
  16. I have tried to search for this answer but I have not found any. Do religious structures like temples, mosques or monasteries need PR? I just had my test file all pass QC and am filling in the attributes. In the pull down menu it asks "Does this image contain property that needs a release for commercial use?" Do these types of buildings need a PR?
  17. I have looked at the threads and some of this has been covered, but as a January forum newbie, I have a question about releases, I am aware of the difference between RF & RM, but I have some images of a model, that I think could sell with model release, but haven't asked them to sign the release. I know model releases are partly about people suing you in the future, amongst other things, but I wondered if you have a model release will that make the image more saleable in monetary terms in general? Or is it only more valuable, If it is used in a advert of some description, or am I wrong to think that? Thanks
  18. Is it possible to send in model releases in hindsight, after a photo has been keyworded and uploaded?
  19. In the past I've made quite a few shots of hot air balloons both in the sky and on the ground. Most of these are obviously sponsored, also used as a means to advertise, for instance by cigarette companies etc and logos on them are often hard to miss Do I need releases from the companies that own these logos? Or can/must I photoshop them out to out entirely to be able to submit them without a release? And what if the logo is only partly visible (not recognizable)? I have some too that are showing a stylized G inside a circle, a logo from my home town of Groningen, used for marketing purposes. Are these okay without releases and where does one draw the line? Any help is appreciated
  20. This is a great article for a question that comes up quite frequently on the forum.... http://www.pdnonline.com/features/What-Photographers-N-10515.shtml#
  21. See here. It's also available to download on trial. I took the plunge today and upgraded (well TBH, on trial until I'm happy) Well I guess I am happy, a few hiccups taking my catalog across: 1. Color label sets not transferring, Need to copy/paste from old catalog. 2. Settings. Again, need to copy the folders if you have your settings stored with the catalog, not general. In use: 1. Defiantly more responsive. I took the opportunity to kill my old previews file so it rebuilds and the system is defiantly a lot faster now. Dual screens are now usable again on my old MBP (grid on secondary screen). 2. The re-worked clone tool not as useful as I hoped. It's ok for small areas against sky of foliage but detailed removals near importance edges is not possible. 3. The Auto straighten/perspective corrections are brilliant. Like I say - overall, I am very happy. You could argue that the speed should not have been so bad in 4 and hence that is not a chargeable improvement but overall, yes I'm happy to pay for the upgrade
  22. Hey there, As a relatively new member I have struggled to build my portfolio based on the fact that most of the images I like to take or have the opportunity to take would probably require a model/property release. I have noticed over the last couple of days that every person I've looked at pictures of (about 10 people ) doesn't seem to have model/property release for most of the work that is on here. So how does anybody sell anything? I reckon I could increase my contribution by a bucket load if I didn't need releases, however, I was always told that I needed it for everything that wasn't owned by me or in the public domain. I went through about 20 pages yesterday of someones portfolio and not one picture had a model/property release and it was mostly pictures of town centres, parks, car shows, or candid moments out and about. Some were even models in a studio. So I scratched my head for a while, then created this thread. How do these images sell? Cheers, Paul Glasgow
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.