Royalty Free VS Rights Managed

[Reimar]

 

 

Something else to keep in mind is that Alamy's RM licenses are now really RM/RF hybrids. Buyers have a lot more usage flexibility than they used to when buying RM images. Couple this with the lower prices for RM and it's easier to see why RM images are probably more popular (for editorial anyway). Having said this, I don't really know much about RF. I only have a handful of RF images on Alamy and none of them has ever sold.

 And vice versa.  I mostly supply RF images.  I've had about a dozen RF images sold with usage restrictions identical to RM.  Clever sales department.  But I agree: on Alamy license type doesn't make a big difference, although for me, RF license prices tend to be higher.

 

 

Just curious, don't you have to have property and model releases to sell mostly RF (if it's buildings, trademarks, and people)?

 

Yes.  If images contain people and I have releases I go with RF.  If the image contains unreleased people, private property or trademarks (that can't be removed) it's RM.  Buildings are a judgement call for me.  If there are several, I count that as a skyline or cityscape and will set those as RF.

[John Mitchell]

 

 

 

Something else to keep in mind is that Alamy's RM licenses are now really RM/RF hybrids. Buyers have a lot more usage flexibility than they used to when buying RM images. Couple this with the lower prices for RM and it's easier to see why RM images are probably more popular (for editorial anyway). Having said this, I don't really know much about RF. I only have a handful of RF images on Alamy and none of them has ever sold.

 And vice versa.  I mostly supply RF images.  I've had about a dozen RF images sold with usage restrictions identical to RM.  Clever sales department.  But I agree: on Alamy license type doesn't make a big difference, although for me, RF license prices tend to be higher.

 

 

Just curious, don't you have to have property and model releases to sell mostly RF (if it's buildings, trademarks, and people)?

 

Yes.  If images contain people and I have releases I go with RF.  If the image contains unreleased people, private property or trademarks (that can't be removed) it's RM.  Buildings are a judgement call for me.  If there are several, I count that as a skyline or cityscape and will set those as RF.

 

 

Reimar, I don't know much about RF, but wouldn't an image like E3YTHK require model releases in order to be offered as RF?

 

EDIT: Whoops! My mistake. I see that one is RM. Sorry about that.

[MariaJ]

 

 

 

Something else to keep in mind is that Alamy's RM licenses are now really RM/RF hybrids. Buyers have a lot more usage flexibility than they used to when buying RM images. Couple this with the lower prices for RM and it's easier to see why RM images are probably more popular (for editorial anyway). Having said this, I don't really know much about RF. I only have a handful of RF images on Alamy and none of them has ever sold.

 And vice versa.  I mostly supply RF images.  I've had about a dozen RF images sold with usage restrictions identical to RM.  Clever sales department.  But I agree: on Alamy license type doesn't make a big difference, although for me, RF license prices tend to be higher.

 

 

Just curious, don't you have to have property and model releases to sell mostly RF (if it's buildings, trademarks, and people)?

 

Yes.  If images contain people and I have releases I go with RF.  If the image contains unreleased people, private property or trademarks (that can't be removed) it's RM.  Buildings are a judgement call for me.  If there are several, I count that as a skyline or cityscape and will set those as RF.

 

 

 

OK.  I had thought that photos of groups of buildings, with recognizable ones like the CN tower, would need to be RM.  But as long as it's not the main focus of the photo, it's fine then?

 

I really like your Toronto skyline images.

[John Mitchell]

 

 

 

 

Something else to keep in mind is that Alamy's RM licenses are now really RM/RF hybrids. Buyers have a lot more usage flexibility than they used to when buying RM images. Couple this with the lower prices for RM and it's easier to see why RM images are probably more popular (for editorial anyway). Having said this, I don't really know much about RF. I only have a handful of RF images on Alamy and none of them has ever sold.

 And vice versa.  I mostly supply RF images.  I've had about a dozen RF images sold with usage restrictions identical to RM.  Clever sales department.  But I agree: on Alamy license type doesn't make a big difference, although for me, RF license prices tend to be higher.

 

 

Just curious, don't you have to have property and model releases to sell mostly RF (if it's buildings, trademarks, and people)?

 

Yes.  If images contain people and I have releases I go with RF.  If the image contains unreleased people, private property or trademarks (that can't be removed) it's RM.  Buildings are a judgement call for me.  If there are several, I count that as a skyline or cityscape and will set those as RF.

 

 

 

OK.  I had thought that photos of groups of buildings, with recognizable ones like the CN tower, would need to be RM.  But as long as it's not the main focus of the photo, it's fine then?

 

I really like your Toronto skyline images.

 

 

Maria, I wouldn't worry. There are zillions of shots of the CN Tower (and other well known buildings) on microstock and other RF websites. My bet is that none of them come with property releases.