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

Thank You USA. I have quite a few people pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 hours ago, Martyn said:

Pretty similar scenario in Hungary

Yes, very interesting, I was surprised to see that even 5 years ago when the article was written it states that judges had already overseen hundreds of such cases and from what you say things haven't moved on in the intervening period. On the other hand I've never been to Hungary but judging from what we read in the papers freedom to photograph in the street may not be a top priority for the current government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Thank You USA. I have quite a few people pictures.

 

Yes, you do seem off the hook when it comes to editorial use, although privacy laws no doubt vary somewhat from state to state.

 

In Canada, things seem a bit vague to say the least:

 

"Generally if the person(s) in the photograph in a public place is not intentionally identified, it is generally okay to take and publish the photograph even if the person(s) are identifiable. "

 

Huh? Can you run that by me again again please...

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

New York has always been pro photographer when it comes to editorial at least. Given how many magazines & newspapers are headquartered here it's no surprise. Given all we have to feel bad about these days nice to know the good ole USA is doing something right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

It is my understanding that it is the contributor's responsibility to follow laws and rules regarding the images we put on Alamy. That is a sobering thought. And here's another: an Alamy search of "people Spain" bring up 437, 822 images. You don't really think that they all have MR, do you?

 

In the now long ago film age the ASMP in NYC said in an interview that they had never had a case concerning a PR. 

 

Edo

Share this post


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

It is my understanding that it is the contributor's responsibility to follow laws and rules regarding the images we put on Alamy. That is a sobering thought. And here's another: an Alamy search of "people Spain" bring up 437, 822 images. You don't really think that they all have MR, do you?

 

In the now long ago film age the ASMP in NYC said in an interview that they had never had a case concerning a PR. 

 

Edo

 

Does "giving consent" necessarily mean signing a model release, though? Model releases are typically needed for commercial uses only. Perhaps a "nod and a wink" plus a positive response from a subject qualifies as consent if an image will be -- or at least might be -- used editorially. If someone swears at you or covers her face when you point your camera her way, I guess that's enough evidence that no consent is being given.

 

A search for "france people" brings up over 670K images. Check out "quebec people" as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)

You're right about model releases not being needed for editorial use, John. A good point. 

 

But I have no proof of a "nod and a wink." That's he said, she said. 

 

Let me point out the obvious. Nobody to suing me for snapping their image, not in Spain or anywhere else. It is highly unlikely that that should happen. But like healthcare and a resident visa, this will have to be another unsettled issue. Unsettled is very unsettling. 

Edited by Ed Rooney

Share this post


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

You're right about model releases not being needed for editorial use, John. A good point. 

 

But I have no proof of a "nod and a wink." That's he said, she said. 

 

Let me point out the obvious. Nobody to suing me for snapping their image, not in Spain or anywhere else. It is highly unlikely that that should happen. But like healthcare and a resident visa, this will have to be another unsettled issue. Unsettled is very unsettling. 

 

I'd be unsettled as well, especially if access to healthcare was still unsettled, super important to get that one sorted out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Just read through this thread, and have to confess that I have many shots including people from France, Spain and Italy (not to mention a few from Quebec). To be honest I find the none UK European market to be challenging, with proportionally fewer sales than from elsewhere, but my one repeat seller from Spain includes clearly recognisable unreleased people, (it includes the magic selling  keyword "couple") and you would expect that the end users would know and understand what is permissible. 

 

The only non UK problem that I have encountered to date was with a photo of a statue, where the sculptor insisted that I remove it from sale. Image speedily deleted.

 

Maybe  the lawyers are busily preparing their cases against me as I write this response......

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

To be clear, Bryan, Italy does not have the privacy laws that France and Spain do. I'm less worried about releases today. 🤪

 

Sapping artwork is a different problem. With art, I always try to include other things in the fame, even people. 

 

Bryan, did you get New York's mayor to sign a PR for your pics of the Brooklyn Bridge? Oh oh.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I had four Montreal images zoomed earlier this week, all with identifiable people in them. Can't say I'm terribly worried.

 

Regarding The Brooklyn Bridge, I seem to remember Bryan mentioning that he is now the proud owner of said bridge. Apparently, some nice guy -- Parker I think the name was -- sold it to him on his last visit. 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)
On 18/05/2019 at 18:09, John Mitchell said:

I had four Montreal images zoomed earlier this week, all with identifiable people in them. Can't say I'm terribly worried.

 

Regarding The Brooklyn Bridge, I seem to remember Bryan mentioning that he is now the proud owner of said bridge. Apparently, some nice guy -- Parker I think the name was -- sold it to him on his last visit. 😉

 

Yeah, used last month's Alamy income to buy it. Intend to have it shipped over and added to the collection already across the river Tyne. 

Edited by Bryan
appalling lack of apostrophe, should be flogged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

They used to say a Cockney was someone who lived in the hearing of the Bow Bells and can spit into the Thames. A Geordie is someone who lives Tyneside and can spit into the Thames. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

They used to say a Cockney was someone who lived in the hearing of the Bow Bells and can spit into the Thames. A Geordie is someone who lives Tyneside and can spit into the Thames. 

 

Doesn't apply to me as a Mackem, rather than a Geordie.

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.