Unrecognisable people present in photo

[gettons]

Hello,

 

I am uploading some photos as a contributor, and in some of these you can see a person or two, however they are not recognizable (either because the frame does not include their face, or because it is a silhouette, or simply because too far).

As far as I understand it is still recommended, for each photo, to specify whether or not a person is included (regardless of being recognisable or not). As soon as select the option, you have an additional option asking whether you have a model release or not.

Now, this is my question: say someone wants to buy a photo with a person in it, and they use such filter that in the search bar, but they also want to be be on the safe side and as such they want the model release as well, my photos would not show up because I do not have the model release. Despite the fact the latter is not even needed because the person is not recognisable.

Could  you please elaborate more on that and provide some guidance? It would make sense, in my humble opinion, to see a third option saying "person/s present but not recognisable", as the way it is now it seems to be impacting negatively those who have people in their frames (even if not recognisable).

 

 

Thanks

--

Tommaso

[meanderingemu]

There are people, and you do not have a waiver is the recommended way to enter.  In fact the guidance for People is quite clear-not so much for property.

 

There was historically no negative impact to enter the proper information, the client then gets a notice "Do i need a release?" and they will then clearly be able to make their own appropriate decision.  

 

Note that even if you enter there is No people in image they get the same notice, but you would now miss searches where people look for images "With People"

Edited November 10, 2022 by meanderingemu

[Martin L]

If you want some bedtime reading then you can wade through these:

 

Just Realized When I Should Use For Editorial Use Only

 

 

Vital / Uncut Collections - what's the criteria?

 

Edit: Jean-Francois beat me to it. Just to add if there are recognizable people and if you really want to protect yourself (maybe) and bury your images at the back of the server somewhere  because you don't want them used for commercial purposes (and possible comebacks), there is the 'Sell For Editorial Only' check box.

 

 

[Steve F]

Hi Tommaso,

See also:

https://www.alamy.com/blog/model-and-property-releases-explained

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

 

I would assume most clients are educated on whether or not they need a model released image (mainly needed for advertising purposes). Alamy sales team would also provide guidance to clients. So I wouldn't worry about it too much unless you want to try to license images with unrecognisable people and no model releases for advertising purposes - which is not advisable in any case.

 

And really, any image with high enough standards for advertising use, I'd assume you'd have model releases for any people in it anyway ('snapshots' don't tend to get used by advertisers much, you'd need to put a lot more work in!)

Steve

 

p.s. nice images, particularly like the Piccadilly Circus silhouette and bus. You probably need to look at your Captions - they are searchable by clients too - they're too short at the moment.

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Steve F

[NYCat]

I love your "eye" for photos. I agree with Steve about the captions and I'll borrow from something he has said to others..

 

Your captions are too short, be aware that they are also searchable by clients. Include the Latin as well as the common name and the location. Some helpful links:

https://www.alamy.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Captions-and-Tags-checklist.pdf

https://www.alamy.com/blog/tips-for-your-captions-from-the-sales-team

https://www.alamy.com/blog/captions-and-tags

 

Paulette