Hello Everyone! Need assistance please...

[Brenda]

I'm very new to Alamy, and I would like to know if the two images in my portfolio (the motocross jumpers) need to be designated as having "property" in them. What does "property" mean exactly? Thank you so much ahead of time. I appreciate the help very much.

[Steve F]

Hi Brenda,

There's a lot of threads about this on the Forum:

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/7756-just-what-constitutes-property/

 

Here's Alamy's guide:

https://www.alamy.com/help/what-is-model-release-property-release.aspx

 

Stephen

 

[John Morrison]

Slightly off-topic... but while your collection of pix is still small, I’d suggest you expand each caption into a sentence. ‘Hope of a new day’, for example, won’t help buyers to find your pix. Be more literal, less ‘poetic’! Include latin names for flora and fauna. Add ‘Chevrolet’ as well as ‘Chevy’. When location matters, include US, USA, United States, America, American, etc. Good luck…

[meanderingemu]

1 hour ago, John Morrison said:

Slightly off-topic... but while your collection of pix is still small, I’d suggest you expand each caption into a sentence. ‘Hope of a new day’, for example, won’t help buyers to find your pix. Be more literal, less ‘poetic’! Include latin names for flora and fauna. Add ‘Chevrolet’ as well as ‘Chevy’. When location matters, include US, USA, United States, America, American, etc. Good luck…

 

 

though i totally agree, i am starting to wonder, and will start doing some reviews, for the need to also include some of the more poetic licenses KW after getting a zoom on a search for "Leading the way" on an image with a boardwalk leading to infinity (on this one I did have "leading line" and the name of the trail included "way" so get a false false positive) 

 

yes i am weird, but i enjoy these mental exercises...  

[meanderingemu]

12 minutes ago, PAL Media said:

 

As to the property question: All uploads to Alamy automatically get a 'no' to property and 'no' to people releases if you upload as RM (could be for RF as well, don't know, I have no RF images) which lets the buyer decide if they need a release.

Releases: Model - no | Property - no   Do I need a release?

 

 

 

@Alamyif this is correct from an operational matter, why not have it set this way so that the "additional information" reads as "No" by default, instead of "select", and then allowing people to override it?  

[meanderingemu]

45 minutes ago, PAL Media said:

It makes sense to leave it as it is and let people make their own judgements, but once you have been here long enough it's a good shortcut to know 😎

 

how is it a short-cut?  If the intent is default is "No and No" that should be the default.  

[Cal]

2 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

though i totally agree, i am starting to wonder, and will start doing some reviews, for the need to also include some of the more poetic licenses KW after getting a zoom on a search for "Leading the way" on an image with a boardwalk leading to infinity (on this one I did have "leading line" and the name of the trail included "way" so get a false false positive) 

 

yes i am weird, but i enjoy these mental exercises...  

 

I include conceptual keywords and phrases where I think it matters but in most cases not. Generally my rule is if I designate the image as a concept (something I rarely do these days) I'll be a bit more flexible with the keywording.

 

23 minutes ago, PAL Media said:

Because you don't have to bother with it!

 

I mostly don't particularly in cases where I'm not sure if something is property. Been over it before here but you can never be totally sure some land or some dilapidated old building in the corner of your photos is owned by some crank who loves suing people so often err on the side of caution myself. It can be useful to fill these fields out when you are certain of what's in the pic though as it helps search. If an image I post absolutely has no people in it I'll usually mark it as 0 so that when someone does a WOP search it'll help bring mine up.

 

Sometimes I just get lazy and tick the "sell only for editorial" box and be done with it, particularly with anything that could be vaguely bothersome like an image that happens to include a child. Incidentally I leave all LN images as editorial, for various reasons.

Edited January 28, 2021 by Cal

[MizBrown]

Manufactured items and handcrafted items have more than one property right to consider.  The item is an individual's property and the item may also be the intellectual property of a manufacturer or culture (this has been an issue in recent years with designers in the developed countries using traditional designs in their work) or individual artist.   If I can recognize a Swedish brand of floor loom without seeing the brand name, I suspect that others would be able to recognize a motorcross bike brand without seeing the label.   Safer to mark things property release no and for editorial only unless you have the releases. 

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

Brenda, your images appear a bit dark (to me). You might want to check the calibration of your monitor.

[Allan Bell]

Nice images and very saleable. Must agree with Bet about the images appearing a bit on the dark side.

 

Allan

 

[Mr Standfast]

7 hours ago, Steve F said:

Hi Brenda,

There's a lot of threads about this on the Forum:

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/7756-just-what-constitutes-property/

 

Here's Alamy's guide:

https://www.alamy.com/help/what-is-model-release-property-release.aspx

 

Stephen

 

 I'm becoming a fan of the "directing people to the help pages" form of answer.

[meanderingemu]

3 hours ago, Cal said:

If an image I post absolutely has no people in it I'll usually mark it as 0 so that when someone does a WOP search it'll help bring mine up.

 

Sometimes I just get lazy and tick the "sell only for editorial" box and be done with it, particularly with anything that could be vaguely bothersome like an image that happens to include a child. Incidentally I leave all LN images as editorial, for various reasons.

 

 

but don't you then lose the WP searches?  

[Normspics]

If you don't have these photographs at other RF agencies, you could leave them as rights managed and editorial that way you don't need to worry about property or model releases. Alamy is primarily an editorial agency. Best of luck here at Alamy.

[MDM]

1 hour ago, Betty LaRue said:

Brenda, your images appear a bit dark (to me). You might want to check the calibration of your monitor.

I was going to say exactly the same thing earlier. The images, even those with snow, have no white. It could be underexposure in camera either or as well but I would guess Brenda has her monitor set too bright. Short of hardware calibration, the simplest thing is to use the histogram and turn down the brightness of the monitor. 

[Cal]

55 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

but don't you then lose the WP searches?  

 

If you mean for images with people in it, possibly. It depends on the image content how I mark it up. If I don't think that the amount of people matters (or that it's bloody obvious there are people in it, like a photo titled "protest") then I won't bother, if it's maybe an image with one or two people where the image is entirely people centric I am more likely to. Similarly as I said there are images which clearly have nobody in it that I will mark as 0 so someone doing a WOP search for that subject gets it.

 

Like PAL said though I won't mark that optional section if I don't think it adds value to the image, and the default state of no releases protects the contributor. the other reason for this is I'm conscious that if I make a mistake and accidentally mark something as released when it isn't that it could land me in a lot of trouble. I don't need that stress.