Is there any property in the image?

[meanderingemu]

 

 

I'm curious how literal to be to the "is there property" question..  For example the image below, Obviously someone owns this horse, the bridle and the doorway, but animals is not it the "?" list, and the other items are pretty nondescript.  Would you say this has property, but leave the Editorial not checked and let the buyers decide?

 

 

 

[Joseph Clemson]

It looks like the image is taken on a piece of private property, someones farm or stable. Therefore, if you were wanting to sell this picture for commercial use you would  need a property release for the site itself. The horse is also property and a further  release would be needed for commercial use.

 

If it were me I would be looking simply to sell the photo for editorial use, I would have satisified myself beforehand that there were no explicit restrictions on photography for 'commercial purposes', i'e. photographs intended for sale. I would also try to make sure the horse was not particularly significant (not a Derby winner and not therefore recognisable to hundreds of racegoers!). In those circumstances I would leave the property and model release boxes unticked so the buyer can decide. 

 

If the horse was significant and well known, I would also tick the Editorial Only box as an additional safeguard.

 

If I wanted to use the photo commercially I would ask the stable owner for the two property releases.

[M.Chapman]

In the UK I'd set

  Licence type - RIGHTS MANAGED

  Is there any property in the image - YES

  Do you have a signed release for the property - NO

  Sell for editorial only - UNTICKED (assuming photo was taken from public footpath/highway/property etc.)

 

Mark

Edited August 11, 2019 by M.Chapman

[meanderingemu]

 

7 minutes ago, Joseph Clemson said:

It looks like the image is taken on a piece of private property, someones farm or stable. Therefore, if you were wanting to sell this picture for commercial use you would  need a property release for the site itself. The horse is also property and a further  release would be needed for commercial use.

 

If it were me I would be looking simply to sell the photo for editorial use, I would have satisified myself beforehand that there were no explicit restrictions on photography for 'commercial purposes', i'e. photographs intended for sale. I would also try to make sure the horse was not particularly significant (not a Derby winner and not therefore recognisable to hundreds of racegoers!). In those circumstances I would leave the property and model release boxes unticked so the buyer can decide. 

 

If the horse was significant and well known, I would also tick the Editorial Only box as an additional safeguard.

 

If I wanted to use the photo commercially I would ask the stable owner for the two property releases.

 

if this was a famous horse i would identify it and this would become editorial.  it would be ridiculous not to do so.

 

where do you get that picture was taken from private property?  This was road side in country side.  

[meanderingemu]

14 minutes ago, M.Chapman said:

In the UK I'd set

  Licence type - RIGHTS MANAGED

  Is there any property in the image - YES

  Do you have a signed release for the property - NO

  Sell for editorial only - UNTICKED (assuming photo was taken from public footpath/highway/property etc.)

 

Mark

 

would you do the property part for the Barn itself, or because of the horse or both?  more curious if you would say property Yes, for a sheep in a field.

Edited August 11, 2019 by meanderingemu

[M.Chapman]

Just now, meanderingemu said:

 

would you do the property part for the Barn itself, or because of the horse or both?

 

The Barn, the bridle and the horse. Alamy's question in AIM used to be

     Does this image contain property that requires a release?

Which required interpretation. Whereas it now says

   Is there any property in the image?

Which makes life easier (IMHO).

 

Mark

[spacecadet]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

 

where do you get that picture was taken from private property?  This was road side in country side.  

In the UK stables are not usually at the roadside.

[Joseph Clemson]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

....

 

where do you get that picture was taken from private property?  This was road side in country side.  

 

The perception purely from the picture alone is that the photographer is close to the horse and, therefore, probably on private property. There is no wider context to indicate otherwise. If the picture is editorial use then it is not greatly relevant whether the image was taken from a public highway, or from private land where the photographer was working with the tacit permission of the owner.

 

However, if I were a buyer looking for a commercial use, I would want to be sure that there was no possibility that the property owner (location and horse) would not object. Therefore, in the light of my perception of the image and not being cognisant of it being taken from a public highway, I would look for a property release for the location itself as well as the horse.

[NYCat]

2 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

 

would you do the property part for the Barn itself, or because of the horse or both?  more curious if you would say property Yes, for a sheep in a field.

 

All animals except wild animals are property. My cat would dispute that, of course.

 

Paulette

[Colblimp]

3 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

 

more curious if you would say property Yes, for a sheep in a field.

If that sheep has tags in her ears, then yes, it's property

[Russell]

55 minutes ago, NYCat said:

 

All animals except wild animals are property. My cat would dispute that, of course.

 

Paulette

Under UK law cats are property, so you can't steal them. On the other hand they have a "right to roam" and the owner cannot be prosecuted for allowing their cat to trespass on, or foul, another persons property.

[meanderingemu]

On 11/08/2019 at 14:19, Colblimp said:

If that sheep has tags in her ears, then yes, it's property

 

 

again, those are the obvious ones.  So i guess everything is property, but leave to buyer the decision 

[meanderingemu]

On 11/08/2019 at 13:36, NYCat said:

 

All animals except wild animals are property. My cat would dispute that, of course.

 

Paulette

 

interesting.  I was doing searches and found most animal pictures were available as commercial, so wasn't sure 

 

i would assume even wild animal would generally be on owned land, so they would have similar restrictions, 

[M.Chapman]

3 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

i would assume even wild animal would generally be on owned land, so they would have similar restrictions, 

 

Not if it's a free roaming wild animal in a location/setting that's not distinctive. Wild animals kept in a zoo may have restrictions, as might confined distinctive/rare animals. 

 

Mark

Edited August 13, 2019 by M.Chapman

[John Mitchell]

I'd check the property box but probably not the editorial use only box (unless I was going to make the image RF, in which case I would definitely check the editorial use only box).

 

Has anyone here ever been sued by a horse? 😃

Edited August 13, 2019 by John Mitchell

[dustydingo]

It appears to me that in the final wash, it doesn't matter whether you identify property or not, as long as you don't claim you have a Property Release when you don't.

 

Whether you say YES to property (and NO release) or simply NO to property, it appears the interface visible to customers will in both cases show "Releases: property - no".

 

DD

 

 

[Ed Rooney]

On 11/08/2019 at 11:36, NYCat said:

 

All animals except wild animals are property. My cat would dispute that, of course.

 

Paulette

 

Cats dispute everything, Paulette. Especially being confused with dogs. 

[Allan Bell]

1 hour ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

Cats dispute everything, Paulette. Especially being confused with dogs. 

 

And horses.🙂

 

Allan

 

[NYCat]

2 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

 

Cats dispute everything, Paulette. Especially being confused with dogs. 

 

My cat seems to think he is a dog -- friendly to everybody and rolls onto his back. He and the Jack Russell across the hall have a very interesting relationship. They want to play but can't figure out how.

 

Paulette

[Harry Harrison]

On 14/08/2019 at 07:08, dustydingo said:

Whether you say YES to property (and NO release) or simply NO to property, it appears the interface visible to customers will in both cases show "Releases: property - no".

  

Yes, I suppose that means you're covered. Looking at the csv download from some images just through QC I can see that the default in the database is '0' for both people & property and 'NA' (Not available) for the model release status of both, which is what it would be if you'd entered it yourself in the Optional tab. In fact in the Optional tab it doesn't show that anything is entered at all.

 

I can see that there is a benefit in entering the number of people as it appears in Advanced Search but it's less obvious whether it's necessary to agonise for too long about what constitutes 'Property' as you can't search on that. On the other hand if there obviously is Property in the image and the database says there isn't, would it matter so long as it is stated that there is no Property Release? Of course if you do have a Property Release then it's a different matter but I have a feeling that most of us don''t.

Edited August 16, 2019 by Harry Harrison

[Bryan]

I find it a bit tricky when photting a countryside landscape in which there is property. Obviously if a building or flock of sheep form a significant element of the composition then that property needs a release or editorial only, but if that house or flock is a blob on the horizon over say open moorland, can it be ignored?  Similarly if there are streets of houses in the background, none close enough to be individually recognised, is there an issue?  Surely commercial companies producing TV adverts don't go knocking on hundreds of doors asking for releases - which they would be unlikely to get -  if they shoot an Ad involving such a backdrop? Can we differentiate between incidental background objects and the subject of the composition?

Edited August 21, 2019 by Bryan