Jump to content
  • 0

Media credentials and model/property releases


Question

If I have media credentials to shoot stock photography of an event, does that mean I can check the boxes yes for model release and property release?

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, David Pimborough said:

 

No media credentials just allow you access to a venue for photography purposes.

 

You would still need model releases for people and property releases for recognisable property.

 

You can submit as editorial of course

 

 

I’m confused.  I have requested and received credentials for events for the sole purpose of shooting photos for stock. In the past, I have stood side by side with a long line of photographers on red carpets in Las Vegas, Nevada. I was usually there as a writer and photographer, but there were plenty of others who were solely shooting photos for stock agencies.
 

In this case, I have photos from two events that were taken specifically for stock. I applied and received credentials for that reason. Of course they would be marked editorial. I wouldn’t attempt to sell them for commercial purposes. But does the buyer not want to know that the photos were taken with the permission of the person in the photo? The contract the participants signed to enter the events—a cross country ski race and a strongman competition— includes a release for photos.

Edited by dkhowe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 minutes ago, dkhowe said:

The contract the participants signed to enter the events—a cross country ski race and a strongman competition— includes a release for photos.

Then to be able to mark your images as model released you would need to be able to provide a copy of that release if asked by an Alamy client (I believe they're no longer required in advance).

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Imagine having permission to shoot at another event, where people are not the prime focus, but say, cars. Does the photographer automatically have the equivalent of a property release for using images of the cars however they want, because they have permission to attend the event? What about pictures taken of people at this car show?

 

They're two different things....

 

However, you have noted that the participants signed a release for entering the show. You need a copy of that then, otherwise, it's just your word that they did so - you need to upload some form of release otherwise you don't have one.

Edited by Steve F
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

 

I was wrong about that-

3 hours ago, spacecadet said:

I believe they're no longer required in advance).

you still upload it with the image.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 hours ago, dkhowe said:

I’m confused.  I have requested and received credentials for events for the sole purpose of shooting photos for stock. In the past, I have stood side by side with a long line of photographers on red carpets in Las Vegas, Nevada. I was usually there as a writer and photographer, but there were plenty of others who were solely shooting photos for stock agencies.
 

In this case, I have photos from two events that were taken specifically for stock. I applied and received credentials for that reason. Of course they would be marked editorial. I wouldn’t attempt to sell them for commercial purposes. But does the buyer not want to know that the photos were taken with the permission of the person in the photo? The contract the participants signed to enter the events—a cross country ski race and a strongman competition— includes a release for photos.

 

 

by way of the contributor agreement you state that you had the proper rights to take the images you upload for commercial purpose.  So from the client's standpoint the fact the images are up for licence is enough warranty.  

 

If you mislead the client, you would then be in breach of your agreement with Alamy, which would protect them, and have to face the consequences. 

Edited by meanderingemu
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, David Pimborough said:

 

Alamy removed the ability to upload model and property releases with the photos now as mentioned above they merely state if you have a model/property release it can be provided if the customer requests it.

 

Specifically

 

"We don’t need you to upload your releases, all you need to do is annotate your images in the image manager to say that you have one available. We’ll get in touch to ask you for a copy if a customer or lawyer requests to see it."

 

https://www.alamy.com/contributor/how-to-sell-images/model-property-releases-stock-images/?section=7

 

 

That's what I thought- but then I went to image manager and saw the upload drop-down was still there. But I hadn't seen that it's optional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

by way of the contributor agreement you state that you had the proper rights to take the images you upload for commercial purpose.  So from the client's standpoint the fact the images are up for licence is enough warranty.  

 

If you mislead the client, you would then be in breach of your agreement with Alamy, which would protect them, and have to face the consequences. 

I said I was submitting them as editorial, not commercial.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 minutes ago, dkhowe said:

I said I was submitting them as editorial, not commercial.

i don't get it.  

 

You ask how are the clients to know you had a credentials, as i said fact you uploaded mean you did if the event required it.

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

i don't get it.  

 

You ask how are the clients to know you had a credentials, as i said fact you uploaded mean you did if the event required it.

 

5 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

i don't get it.  

 

You ask how are the clients to know you had a credentials, as i said fact you uploaded mean you did if the event required it.

Ok

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 20/03/2021 at 20:20, dkhowe said:

If I have media credentials to shoot stock photography of an event, does that mean I can check the boxes yes for model release and property release?

dk,

 

From your original post I would say that you really do not understand the process of covering and event and the "credentials" involved.

 

In all my years I have never heard of an organization or event giving "credentials" for someone to shoot "Stock?"

 

Over the years I have covered many events (300 to 5,000+ people) with "media access" or "credentials" I have many images from those 

events uploaded to Alamy, but I would NEVER say that they are model released.  On the really "Well Organized" events there are large 

signs at the entrance stating "By entering this event you are giving authorization to be photographed at this event."  Some even print it

on the tickets to the event.  That does not constitute a "Model Release" or a "Property Release"

 

The events that I am talking about are mostly in the U.S.  I have no idea where you are working and laws differ.

 

Chuck

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 hours ago, spacecadet said:

That's what I thought- but then I went to image manager and saw the upload drop-down was still there. But I hadn't seen that it's optional.

 

The drop-down list is still there if you have uploaded releases in the past, and you can assign these, but there is no option now to upload more.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
56 minutes ago, Chuck Nacke said:

dk,

 

From your original post I would say that you really do not understand the process of covering and event and the "credentials" involved.

 

In all my years I have never heard of an organization or event giving "credentials" for someone to shoot "Stock?"

 

Over the years I have covered many events (300 to 5,000+ people) with "media access" or "credentials" I have many images from those 

events uploaded to Alamy, but I would NEVER say that they are model released.  On the really "Well Organized" events there are large 

signs at the entrance stating "By entering this event you are giving authorization to be photographed at this event."  Some even print it

on the tickets to the event.  That does not constitute a "Model Release" or a "Property Release"

 

The events that I am talking about are mostly in the U.S.  I have no idea where you are working and laws differ.

 

Chuck

Hi, Chuck. My confusion in shooting stock for events comes from my short time at SS. With them, I shot three events and SS required media credentials. So I e-mailed the pr people, received permission to shoot for SS, sent a copy of their e-mail to SS and all was good.

 

I’m curious about the photos you have on Alamy when you were shooting events, I wonder who you were shooting for and how you have the rights to put them on Alamy. I’m asking because I have tons of photos from conventions, red carpets and events, but my press credentials always bore the name of the magazine or web site I was shooting for which to me means I had permission to shoot for that outlet only.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
17 minutes ago, dkhowe said:

Hi, Chuck. My confusion in shooting stock for events comes from my short time at SS. With them, I shot three events and SS required media credentials. So I e-mailed the pr people, received permission to shoot for SS, sent a copy of their e-mail to SS and all was good.

 

I’m curious about the photos you have on Alamy when you were shooting events, I wonder who you were shooting for and how you have the rights to put them on Alamy. I’m asking because I have tons of photos from conventions, red carpets and events, but my press credentials always bore the name of the magazine or web site I was shooting for which to me means I had permission to shoot for that outlet only.

dk,

 

There is no "confusion" I am a photojournalist.  Been in the business for decades.  I do occasionally contribute to a division on SS, not one I care for much anymore, but have been involved with for more than twenty years.  As a "Photojournalist" I understand the rules and business, from what I have seen from your posts, you do not, in my opinion.  

 

I am very fond of Alamy as an agent to license images and for a long time Alamy has done a very good job of licensing my images.  The main problem that I see with Alamy is that they allow too many people to contribute that do not understand photography, licensing and the business as a whole.

 

I do not mean to be insulting, I have a degree in journalism, I've worked on assignment for the major magazines around the world since the early 80's.  

 

It is easy to push the button, it is "HARD" to make a great image,  caption it, keyword it and find the right agent or library to license it.

 

I would politely suggest that you do some research into the business and learn it.

 

Chuck

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I am absolutely with Chuck on this.  I do not have his impressive pedigree, but I have been news and event photographing for several years.  All press/media credentials do are to allow you to enter the event and to take photographs, normally for commercial use.  .  It is, if you like, a licence from the organisers to enter and take photographs.  Some agencies require copies of accreditation to ensure you have permission to make photographs.  Such accreditation is unrelated to any form of release.  
 

A small number of organisations, (such as, I believe, the Notting Hill Carnival) issue accreditation on the appalling basis that they own the copyright to your photos or similar restrictions.  Accreditation to most music gigs include rules such as only allowing pit access for the first three songs then out or stop.  
 

it is essential you understand the nature of accreditation for your own and the agency protection plus misuse of accreditation can badly impact other photographers.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said:
3 hours ago, Chuck Nacke said:

dk,

 

It is easy to push the button, it is "HARD" to make a great image,  caption it, keyword it and find the right agent or library to license it.

 

I would politely suggest that you do some research into the business and learn it.

 

Chuck

I do a lot of research and this thread is part of it. Thank you for the time you took to respond.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
41 minutes ago, IanDavidson said:

I am absolutely with Chuck on this.  I do not have his impressive pedigree, but I have been news and event photographing for several years.  All press/media credentials do are to allow you to enter the event and to take photographs, normally for commercial use.  .  It is, if you like, a licence from the organisers to enter and take photographs.  Some agencies require copies of accreditation to ensure you have permission to make photographs.  Such accreditation is unrelated to any form of release.  
 

A small number of organisations, (such as, I believe, the Notting Hill Carnival) issue accreditation on the appalling basis that they own the copyright to your photos or similar restrictions.  Accreditation to most music gigs include rules such as only allowing pit access for the first three songs then out or stop.  
 

it is essential you understand the nature of accreditation for your own and the agency protection plus misuse of accreditation can badly impact other photographers.  

Thank you for your time.

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.