Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello, I need some help with an editorial image I have uploaded. The Alamy tutorial explain to do this with restrictions:

  • All countries - Consumer goods etc
  • All countries - Advertising/promotion etc
  • All countries - Direct mail etc
  • All countries - Internal business etc
  • All countries - Electronic and web uses Other
  • All countries - Display etc

The last two entries are not present in the restriction options. All I can see are two similar; Indoor display (not Display) and Commercial electronic not Electronic and web uses. Are these two the entries that I must use?

Thank you

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was very confusing to me when I joined. I put on restrictions and ended up having images that couldn't be sold at all. That was because I thought ticking the boxes meant I was agreeing to those avenues when in fact it is the opposite.

If you don't have a strong need for one or two particular restrictions, just leave that whole restriction field alone. Then your images will be able to be sold to everybody, all uses.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Betty for your reply. You are right it is confusing; in attribute I check 2 people and that I have not a model release. I think that this can be enough, clients knows that without a model release can't use the image in some cases. Maybe some words from Alamy to cover this subject is appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Betty for your reply. You are right it is confusing; in attribute I check 2 people and that I have not a model release. I think that this can be enough, clients knows that without a model release can't use the image in some cases. Maybe some words from Alamy to cover this subject is appreciated.

That's exactly how it works. Check the proper boxes about model/property releases, and the onus is on the buyer. If you have assigned no model release, you are in the clear.

Occasionally one must delve deeper in restrictions. Say you put up an image of your daughter, but don't want that image used in an article about teen drug use, sexual abuse or whatever. That's when you place a restriction for those type of uses, but the image is still available for other uses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also write something like "For Editorial Use Only" in the "Description" field. I do that with some images. It's easier than adding restrictions, which is very awkward on Alamy.

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Betty and John. The write it seems a good idea, it's something that clarify. every doubt if any. Again thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alberto,

 

I agree that it is confusing, but it is really simple.  Just tell the truth and if you

don't have model releases or property releases (if appropriate) the restrictions

set themselves.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Chuck, with the new system I hope that also Alamy put a simple field "editorial" that can be check. I saw another thread about a new keywording system work in progress... But what all you said it is also enough to understand how to manage this "things".

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alberto,

 

I agree that it is confusing, but it is really simple.  Just tell the truth and if you

don't have model releases or property releases (if appropriate) the restrictions

set themselves.

Really? I can 't see that on mine (not counting where I've set restrictions myself)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Chuck means that the buyer will have enough info to decide for themselves how they can use the image - please correct me if I'm wrong, Chuck! 

 

I've said this before, but it looks like it's worth repeating - my biggest sale (over $4k) was with an image showing unreleased people and with a well-known brand name in the background. The advertising agency cut out the bit they wanted and put it on their own background such that no releases were needed. It was then used for an advertising campaign by one of the largest UK banks. If I'd used an 'editorial only' button, I'd presumably be over $4k poorer now.  

Edited by DHill
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you add restrictions "This image has restrictions" appears in a red box on the zoom page. The danger is that a buyer will just move on rather than checking to see what the restrictions are.

 

Paulette

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paulette, maybe if the picture is really good and suit the need the buyer can not move over, but yes you and David have a point. Nevertheless I hope that in the next keyword tool alamy put a simple option to tick the photo as editorial. Buyer are smart enough and know what to do. David in the end your picture "de facto" without the crop and edit is editorial, but was what the client really wanted and this not stopped the company/editor to bought. Meanwhile I followed for a couple of images what you all have suggested. The consent seems general, no objection moved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's perfectly reasonable for the photographer to put restrictions on the use of their photograph. Maybe they don't want it to be available for certain markets (perhaps it would compete with something else they are doing) or maybe they know of a restriction that would apply but is not apparent from the other information and the photograph itself.

 

In my view though I think it is a bad move to make an Editorial only option more prominent, something special and something that has to be explicitly stated. The decision about how the photograph is used is down to the buyer. I have no idea what a buyer is going to use my photos for, and I shouldn't have to know. What I have to do is tell them, honestly, whether model and/or property releases are available. It is then for the buyer to decide.  

 

What I fear is that we could see a gradual shift away from the buyer taking responsibility for how they use the photograph towards expecting the photographer to share in that risk - "Your photo wasn't marked as Editorial only so I assumed that I could use it Commercially".

Edited by Keith Douglas
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's perfectly reasonable for the photographer to put restrictions on the use of their photograph. Maybe they don't want it to be available for certain markets (perhaps it would compete with something else they are doing) or maybe they know of a restriction that would apply but is not apparent from the other information and the photograph itself.
 
In my view though I think it is a bad move to make an Editorial only option more prominent, something special and something that has to be explicitly stated. The decision about how the photograph is used is down to the buyer. I have no idea what a buyer is going to use my photos for, and I shouldn't have to know. What I have to do is tell them, honestly, whether model and/or property releases are available. It is then for the buyer to decide.  
 
What I fear is that we could see a gradual shift away from the buyer taking responsibility for how they use the photograph towards expecting the photographer to share in that risk - "Your photo wasn't marked as Editorial only so I assumed that I could use it Commercially".

 

 

Something to think about.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I agree, Keith and I seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At times this whole photography thing seems so risky and so open to exploitation I often wonder whether it is worth the hassle at all when we constantly face the need to pursue infringments to get paid and the risk of being sued in these "everyone's a victim" times. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At times this whole photography thing seems so risky and so open to exploitation I often wonder whether it is worth the hassle at all when we constantly face the need to pursue infringments to get paid and the risk of being sued in these "everyone's a victim" times. :(

 

Yes, being a victim is becoming the new road to riches, it seems. B)

Share this post


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.