Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A few days ago, I deleted all the images I captured at the Chester Zoo. But now when I open my port here in the forum, I still see them. ???

 

Could one or two of you click on my blue port number and see if you see those images. They would be on Page One.

 

Thank you . . . and Happy Father's Day to all you dads out there.

 

Edo

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

They remain on sale for 180 days if you delete them. If you contact Alamy and explain the situation, I expect they will remove them from the system. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I can see myself writing down the code numbers of a few hundred images and sending them to Alamy. Screw it.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Rooney said:

Yeah, I can see myself writing down the code numbers of a few hundred images and sending them to Alamy. Screw it.

 

As you've already marked them for deletion in AIM, you should just be able to ask Alamy Contributor Services to delete them imediately (they should be able to find them using the deletion pending flag - just like we can in AIM).

 

I sure hope so as I've now marked over 500 for deletion so far.

 

Mark

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it 180 or 90 days? A quote from Alamy in another thread says 90. I wrote Alamy about my zoo and museum pics and they asked me to send image #s.

 

Paulette

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

Searchable for 90, up for 180 IIRC.

 

that seems about right.  Just had a look at a News submission that i've been culling over the last few months.  All images got a deletion pending date 6 months after i deleted them, however the images where the deletion waiting period ends  in July and early September, are no longer in the search results, can't even get to them with the Image ID.   

The last one i removed marked for deletion in December however is still up. 

Edited by meanderingemu
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, spacecadet said:

Searchable for 90, up for 180 IIRC.

 

Thanks.

 

Paulette

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the six month waiting period is there to give distributors time to remove deleted images as well. At least this is what I was told at another agency where I removed a lot of my images in order to make them exclusive on Alamy. 🙁

 

My guess is that the chances of being sued by a rhino are fairly slim, but I guess you never know. 😁

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only one zoo that I know of that has gotten aggressive in eliminating images from stock agencies taken without some sort of permit but I decided a long time ago to be honest about my wildlife photography. If it is a captive animal I say so. If it is in a zoo I give the name of the zoo. If my living depended on this income I might be willing to fudge things but, as it is, I want to just have joy in what I do. I do this for fun and I do have a bit of guilt about competing against people who are real professionals and need the sales, but one thing I won't do is support microstock. Not my business if someone else wants to put images there. It is not for me.

 

Paulette

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My uneducated guess is that the most a zoo would do is ask for images to be removed from sale. A zoo is probably considered a public place in a lot of countries. Interesting legal definition here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are right but I'm not really comfortable doing something that the zoos don't want me to do. I suspect it is not really bad for the zoos to have images on stock agencies but it is not a decision for me to make. Even if the zoo is a public place the animals are property of the zoo.

 

Paulette

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

My uneducated guess is that the most a zoo would do is ask for images to be removed from sale. A zoo is probably considered a public place in a lot of countries. Interesting legal definition here.

they can still restrict photography rights in the conditions of entry sadly.  One thing though most time the rules are written with big commercial production in mind.  I remember looking at South African National Parks, technically the rules are that you need a permits if you "intend to gain financially from your picture/film commercially".    

 

 

Yet there are thousands of images everywhere from the parks, of course good luck proving selling images at a stock agency results in "gain financially", if you include production cost and expenses pretty sure it's a negative amount. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has just Chester Zoo asked for the photos to be deleted or is Alamy asking everyone to delete all their zoo photos?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, domf said:

Has just Chester Zoo asked for the photos to be deleted or is Alamy asking everyone to delete all their zoo photos?

Neither.

Some are being very cautious about the new contract.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

Neither.

Some are being very cautious about the new contract.

 

which is interesting as this is one section of the contract that has not effectively changed.  we were always responsible to make sure our images respected the regulations of where we took the image.  This is actually not one of the area where i am changing much of my practices.  I will respect reasonable rights of property, but still have borderline images in my portfolio, and continue to interpret the conditions in a literal way as they are written. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All my images, not many, of zoo animals etc. are marked as such.

 

I am waiting for them to ask me for free usage as they have done with another photographer I know. He does not do stock.

 

Allan

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just the one archival photograph of an elephant stretching its trunk across the moat for treats from visitors to London Zoo over 40 years ago before they moved all the elephants to Whipsnade. Otherwise I don't do zoos; I'm just not comfortable with them, even though I know they may  do some useful breeding.

Edited by Robert M Estall
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Robert M Estall said:

I have just the one archival photograph of an elephant stretching its trunk across the moat for treats from visitors to London Zoo over 40 years ago before they moved all the elephants to Whipsnade. Otherwise I don't do zoos; I'm just not comfortable with them, even though I know they may  do some useful breeding.

 

I have only a handful of zoo images for the same reason. Even as a kid, I didn't like seeing animals in captivity. However, as you say, there are some really good zoos that do valuable rescue, breeding, and educational work. Also, these days attempt is often made to provide more natural habitats for the animals. I prefer to think of zoo animals as "guests" rather than "property," even though the guests seldom get to check out of the hotel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

I have only a handful of zoo images for the same reason. Even as a kid, I didn't like seeing animals in captivity. However, as you say, there are some really good zoos that do valuable rescue, breeding, and educational work. Also, these days attempt is often made to provide more natural habitats for the animals. I prefer to think of zoo animals as "guests" rather than "property," even though the guests seldom get to check out of the hotel.

 

i used to go to the Toronto zoo with my nephews as they really liked it, it wasn't bad.   and then at the other end you had places like the Stanley Park zoo/Vancouver Aquarium 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

i used to go to the Toronto zoo with my nephews as they really liked it, it wasn't bad.   and then at the other end you had places like the Stanley Park zoo/Vancouver Aquarium 

 

Yes, watching Orcas go round and round in a swimming pool was as about as much fun as seeing a matador torment a bull to death (but I won't go there).

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Yes, watching Orcas go round and round in a swimming pool was as about as much fun as seeing a matador torment a bull to death (but I won't go there).

 

 

 

let's no go there, i still have nightmares from my only attendance of the Picador not protecting efficiently his mount, and the mad scrambling to find a weapon to finish the work of the bull

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When I lived in Vancouver for a year or so back in the 60s, I did pop into the polar bear enclosure from time to time. No Orcas in pools then. I have a feeling it was free? The bears seemed to be having a fairly good time and jumped into the water playfully. These days, zoos are a seriously expensive day-out and they aren't content with just the admission fee, they present expenditure "opportunities" at every turn and the only way out is through the gift shop. A lot of museums operate the same way. When we were broke (which was most of the time) we could spend the day in The British Museum and it needn't cost a penny. The Louvre in Paris was also one of the world's best free-bees.

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.