Search the Community

Hi there, this is Giogionny! I'm really new to this kind of system, so I will probably ask many questions to all of you! Thank you so much for the opportunity to be here and for the advices you will be giving me! Have a great day!

Hi there, I am new here and was looking around what the other photographers are uploading. I am wondering, if all the street photos with people have a model release? I have some photos, which I never uploaded somewhere, because I shot people, which are knowing, that I am taking a picture, but I have not asked them for a model release . How are you doing this here? Regards, Johannes

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?

There was much debate in the other place about the legal position on photographing in public in France This article from the New York Times provides some very useful and timely observations http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/paris-city-of-rights/ km