Jump to content

Question

Hi. I would like to know if I can upload my travel photography as editorial as it has many people and buildings featured which would need releases (impossible to get on many occasions) if submitted as commercial?

I'm wondering if travel publications source their images sometimes from editorial sections of stock sites like Alamy. I have hundreds of images that are dying to get out there!

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Posted (edited)

The short answer is yes... but you might want to quickly double check that none of the countries featured have any restrictions (e.g. in Spain it is illegal to photograph children with out the parents' consent).

Edited by Matt Ashmore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Editorial is precisely the right way of selling images with no model or property releases. In the optional info tab, tick the people and property  present boxes and tick 'no release' in both cases. You can sell  them as RM or RF-Editorial only, as you prefer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

The short answer is yes... but you might want to quickly double check that none of the countries featured have any restrictions (e.g. in Spain it is illegal to photograph children with out the parents' consent).

 

Really? Hmmm. I better do some deleting. I guess a nod and a smile does not count as much as a model release? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Oh boy, this is some can of worms we've opened. It's not just minors who cannot be photographed in Spain -- you can not shoot pictures of anyone for any purpose without a signed release.

 

I've written to Alamy. This looks like a major game changer for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
37 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

Oh boy, this is some can of worms we've opened. It's not just minors who cannot be photographed in Spain -- you can not shoot pictures of anyone for any purpose without a signed release.

 

I've written to Alamy. This looks like a major game changer for me. 

 

On the move again?

 

Allan

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
37 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

Oh boy, this is some can of worms we've opened. It's not just minors who cannot be photographed in Spain -- you can not shoot pictures of anyone for any purpose without a signed release.

 

I've written to Alamy. This looks like a major game changer for me. 

 

Doesn't the Wiki article just say "without consent" (whatever that might mean)? I don't see anything about having to have a signed release in all cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, NYCat said:

I was curious about this and found this...... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements Often seems very complicated.

 

Paulette

 

It's complicated alright, but this is a good list to consult before travelling. As discussed in previous threads on this topic, the only outlier in Canada is the province of Quebec. Mind you, Quebec's privacy laws regarding photography don't appear to have been enforced for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Ed Rooney said:

Oh boy, this is some can of worms we've opened. It's not just minors who cannot be photographed in Spain -- you can not shoot pictures of anyone for any purpose without a signed release.

 

I've written to Alamy. This looks like a major game changer for me. 

 

Just looked at el pais the biggest Spanish newspaper, there's still a lot of people in the backgrounds, just like a uk paper. Did they all sign releases?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Mr Standfast said:

 

Just looked at el pais the biggest Spanish newspaper, there's still a lot of people in the backgrounds, just like a uk paper. Did they all sign releases?

 

I imagine that the issue would be with "identifiable" people in isolation or in small groups where they are the main subject(s) of the image, not people incidental to a scene -- e.g. in the background -- or in large groups. Also, there must be exceptions for legitimate news pics.

 

P.S. Here in BC, it's OK to photograph people in a public place and then publish the image editorially. However, I once knew someone who wanted to sue a local newspaper because she saw her teenage daughter in a news photo. It wouldn't have gone anywhere if she had, but this goes to show how uptight some people can get.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Interesting answers.Thanks. Glad to know that generally I can do this.

I guess it's a case of check before you travel and get consent from parents in more intimate up close situations. Also an idea to look at other editorial travel submissions that have been accepted and get a general idea of what's allowed.

All my Spanish shots are general street and architectural scenes,festivals etc so I dont think i'dd have a problem but i'll accept any occasional rejections based on these restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
25 minutes ago, Neil Bussey said:

Interesting answers.Thanks. Glad to know that generally I can do this.

I guess it's a case of check before you travel and get consent from parents in more intimate up close situations. Also an idea to look at other editorial travel submissions that have been accepted and get a general idea of what's allowed.

All my Spanish shots are general street and architectural scenes,festivals etc so I dont think i'dd have a problem but i'll accept any occasional rejections based on these restrictions.

 

Picking up on the last few words of your reply - be aware that Alamy, unlike microstock sites, will not reject your photos on the basis of the content, whether taken in Spain or anywhere else.  Alamy inspect technical quality only. The responsibility for complying with any restrictions rests on the photographer,  so you yourself need to decide what you will submit and what kind of releases (if any) you need to go with them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

Really? Hmmm. I better do some deleting. I guess a nod and a smile does not count as much as a model release? 

 

Yeah.. sorry Ed! This thread just re-awoke an old memory of looking this stuff up before a holiday to Spain a couple of years ago. I hadn’t remember that it was anybody but do remember reading a specific story of a photographer getting into trouble photographing children. Apologies for not remembering this stuff when you were contemplating moving to Spain. It will be interesting to see how Alamy respond to your email.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Matt, thanks for pointing it out. And Joseph is right. Alamy does not do the checking of what is legal and what is not for us. 

 

And . . . the Spanish law is for the rights of all Spanish citizens, not just children. The law in Italy is much like that in the UK. I see a bowl of pasta in my future. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I'm assuming, or perhaps hoping, that there is a particular problem if you happen to live in the country concerned as Ed does. Common sense seems to mean less and less but surely a photographer can't be expected to keep up with the nuances of case law in every country, at least for RM images with no releases, or am I kidding myself?

 

Full marks to whoever compiled that table, those red cells are pretty alarming but so are the "Yes (with exceptions)" because France is not that different from Spain. I thought the article by Olivier Laurent that referenced Nick Turpin and Martin Parr was very interesting, though a few years old now:

 

https://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/paris-city-of-rights/

 

On the other hand they could be considered as 'Art' photographers rather than stock, certainly I doubt if Martin Parr had any releases for his Benidorm pictures:

 

https://www.martinparr.com/2019/benidorm/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
34 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

Matt, thanks for pointing it out. And Joseph is right. Alamy does not do the checking of what is legal and what is not for us. 

 

And . . . the Spanish law is for the rights of all Spanish citizens, not just children. The law in Italy is much like that in the UK. I see a bowl of pasta in my future. 

 

Or a plate of enchiladas. Whoops! Too late for that. Buona fortuna!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Harry, I knew about France but somehow I missed the news that Spain is just as bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Actually, it appears that when it comes to publishing a picture of a person without consent, a lot of countries are now just as bad as France and Spain, which makes one wonder about the future of candid street photography. Things don't look so good...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I’ve been checking that wiki link lately because I plan to visit Italy in the fall. I was glad to see the Italian laws are less strict than some other  European countries. I photograph a lot of crowd scenes in France and Switzerland,, and do my best to get shots of unidentifiable people. I find viewing news photos taken by AFP photographers helpful when it comes to France.

 

I’m still a little confused about what is allowed, but It seems to me that in France the laws aren’t all that clear and are open to interpretation as to what constitutes permission. Could Spain be the same? At times, I’ve held my camera up and asked if a photo of an adult(s) was ok. I assume that a nod or smile back can be considered permission (editorial only). And often, people in parades or demonstrations pose for photos when they see my camera. However, I rarely upload photos of French children, and don’t think I have ever included children’s photos from Switzerland in my port. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

I'm assuming, or perhaps hoping, that there is a particular problem if you happen to live in the country concerned as Ed does. Common sense seems to mean less and less but surely a photographer can't be expected to keep up with the nuances of case law in every country, at least for RM images with no releases, or am I kidding myself?

 

Full marks to whoever compiled that table, those red cells are pretty alarming but so are the "Yes (with exceptions)" because France is not that different from Spain. I thought the article by Olivier Laurent that referenced Nick Turpin and Martin Parr was very interesting, though a few years old now:

 

https://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/paris-city-of-rights/

 

On the other hand they could be considered as 'Art' photographers rather than stock, certainly I doubt if Martin Parr had any releases for his Benidorm pictures:

 

https://www.martinparr.com/2019/benidorm/

 

Both worthwhile articles. Thanks for the links. Remind me not to take my next vacation in Benidorm (even though I do now fit the demographic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I get the feeling these laws are to protect real privacy with the advent of cells phone everywhere, teens & adults publishing private pix & videos for revenge. The law may be drafted broadly but a judge would need to balance competing interests of the press, free speech, etc  i didntsee anything that severe. Nodding your head or smiling at the camera is consent imho ( keep those outtakes). And food doesn't have a right to privacy does it? But perhaps animals do have a right to credit for their pix (it's always a monkey trial isn't it?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

Harry, I knew about France but somehow I missed the news that Spain is just as bad. 

 

Honestly, Edo, I don't see how any of your Seville images would offend anyone. You're always careful to paint the subjects in a positive light, and they don't look as if they mind being photographed. Sometimes "the law is a ass — a idiot", as Mr Bumble said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Pretty similar scenario in Hungary, so much so that I don't take street candids here and will refrain from doing so until the law actually becomes clearer ! I will still take images that contain people but I make sure that they know I am there and will ask permission if needs be ! So far, I have not encountered any problems taking photos here ...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/14/hungary-law-photography-permission-take-pictures

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Martyn said:

Pretty similar scenario in Hungary, so much so that I don't take street candids here and will refrain from doing so until the law actually becomes clearer ! I will still take images that contain people but I make sure that they know I am there and will ask permission if needs be ! So far, I have not encountered any problems taking photos here ...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/14/hungary-law-photography-permission-take-pictures

 

 

 

 

Interesting article. It seems that going forward, the trick might be to make sure that people aren't readily identifiable when photographing in places that have strict privacy laws. I find myself doing that more often these days even where I live. The Christmas market image ( from Alamy) in the article is a good example. That approach doesn't usually make for inspiring street photography, though.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Interesting article. It seems that going forward, the trick might be to make sure that people aren't readily identifiable when photographing in places that have strict privacy laws. I find myself doing that more often these days even where I live. The Christmas market image in the article is a good example. That approach doesn't usually make for inspiring street photography, though.

 

As you rightly point out John, trying to capture images where people are unidentifiable is difficult and the end results are pretty uninspiring !

I also found this earlier which may prove to be a useful guide as to what is allowed where ....

 

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements

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

×
×
  • 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.