Jump to content

New to Stock...hello and licensing question!


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone! Apologies in advance if this rambles, I like what i'm seeing from Alamy and the experts on the forums so just wanted to say hello and ask about a couple of things!

 

I'm very new to Stock, and my objectives are 1) having a driver for working harder on my photography skills, and 2) it'd be great to make enough to cover some kit costs. I applied to the few biggest microstock agencies plus Alamy, which I didn't expect to get accepted to but was pleased that I did. I've found that pretty much every part of working with Alamy is better than any of the others -  upload process isn't agonizingly slow,  don't have to keyword until AFTER I pass QC (which is always super fast!), lack of random and contradictory rejections, etc etc.

 

I'm still pretty confused about the legal and licensing side of things. Every agency seems to take a different view...I've had rejections on shots including the Olympic Stadium (which i live next door to!) for infringing intellectual property for agency A but then it's been passed fine by Agency B.

 

So, I've been avoiding shooting anything which includes people, landmark buildings, or logos - which in London is pretty restrictive. Then when I looked through the portfolios of some of the experts on the forum, I can see that there are many shots which have of all of those things, but not marked as having property releases and apparently on an RF license (the "Marketing package" is fully commercial, right?!).  I've read a ton of articles but am not really any the wiser, and what I see on people's ports doesn't seem to tally with the advice i'm reading. So i'd love some guidance on what I should be doing, if anyone can help?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just mark images with people and property for which you don't have releases as RM and let the publisher worry about it.

FWIW the Olympic park is probably well covered. I live up the road and my only images with those keywords take a rather different approach.

You'd need something pretty special to compete with the other 23,692.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are an awful lot of images on Alamy (mostly agency images I imagine) that don't conform to the rules but we should still do so. Just follow Mark Spacecadet's advice and you can't go far wrong.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome, Kate

 

I see that your image of the man next to the lighthouse is listed as RF but has no model release. That's a no-no. Make any image with a person in it RM and say you don't have a model release. 

 

Furthermore, Alamy takes the position that any small part of a person (a hand, a foot) is a person that needs a model release.

 

Also, you cannot have the same image on Alamy as RM and on one or more micro agencies as RF.

 

Read all the information Alamy has put up for contributors . . . and then read it all again. If you don't understand something, you can ask in the forum. There are lots of people in here who can be helpful to newbies.

 

But understand something: forum members are giving their opinions about things. Opinions can vary.

 

Good luck,

 

Edo 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou all for your replies, I appreciate everyone's thoughts.

 

I have read the official blurb (honest!) but was confused by what i was seeing in practise from other contributors. However this kind of guideline i can deal with:

 

Just mark images with people and property for which you don't have releases as RM and let the publisher worry about it.

.

Great, job done, will do that - and for any kind of body part or figure, too, thanks Ed!

 

Now just need to figure out a couple of other things, but i'll add new threads for those.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou all for your replies, I appreciate everyone's thoughts.

 

I have read the official blurb (honest!) but was confused by what i was seeing in practise from other contributors. However this kind of guideline i can deal with:

 

Just mark images with people and property for which you don't have releases as RM and let the publisher worry about it.

.

Great, job done, will do that - and for any kind of body part or figure, too, thanks Ed!

 

Now just need to figure out a couple of other things, but i'll add new threads for those.

 

Hi Kate:

 

Most of your images should be RM not RF. All your beach shots have people in them, the hand hugging the tree, the graffiti building, the beach huts, all these require either model or property releases. Probably the statues in the graveyard as well. I actually see very few RF images in there.

 

Jill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought i could just go back and correct the license type but it seems not, i'll have to delete and resubmit?

*Le sigh*

 

Email Member Services, explain the situation, and ask if they can change it for you. They may say re-submit but you might as well at least try.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work Kate, I think you have a future here, just stay away from those "nasty" microstock agencies. ;)

 

Nice varied portfolio already. Stick a couple of noughts onto your total and you should see some steady sales.

 

John

Thanks gents! If only the current crop weren't the sum total of over 5 years' shooting...admittedly not with stock in mind, but ohmigosh i was shocked at how few of what's stored on my hard drive would have passed QA! Hence I think this will be a really good learning exercise either way.

 

David - the nasty microstocks are doing their bit to dissuade me. The large one in particular has a truly comedic approach to QA - the Southbank silhoutte sunset shot was rejected for "poor lighting". Out of any 3 shots of the same subject, one will get rejected for allegedly infringing IP, the other two won't. And on it goes. Not worth the time to upload frankly, after a minor dabble i think i'll be forgetting about those.

 

 

Thought i could just go back and correct the license type but it seems not, i'll have to delete and resubmit?

*Le sigh*

 

Email Member Services, explain the situation, and ask if they can change it for you. They may say re-submit but you might as well at least try.

 

Alan

 

Okay here goes, worth a shot! Thanks.

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.