Jump to content

Park bench, laptop and phones as property?


Recommended Posts

Ive done a series of self portraits of me sitting on park benches while holding various electronic gadgets such as laptops, phones and tablets. I guess all such items would need to be checked as property in the submission page? In a lot of the images, there are no company names visible on the electronic gadgets.

Edited by Patrick Cooper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure that I have ever seen a buyer search for a property released image, model released yes, but maybe I am missing something here, or have the wrong types of photos!

 

I tend to err on the side of caution these days and generally click the property box, unless it's a shot containing only countryside. I guess it depends upon the context, buildings  in the distance, as an incidental  part of the landscape, probably don't need it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bryan said:

Not sure that I have ever seen a buyer search for a property released image, model released yes, but maybe I am missing something here, or have the wrong types of photos!

 

I tend to err on the side of caution these days and generally click the property box, unless it's a shot containing only countryside. I guess it depends upon the context, buildings  in the distance, as an incidental  part of the landscape, probably don't need it.

 

I usually do the same. More proof that not only great but also paranoid minds think alike. B)

 

In fact, I'm so paranoid, that I often wonder if I shouldn't be asking Mother Nature for a property release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

I think it depends whether you could identify the make/model/manufacturer. A park bench is a fairly generic thing and I wouldn't tend to worry about that too much. But a phone, tablet or laptop might be identifiable by it's shape/design as much as simply by a logo.

 

 

Unless the phone, tablet or laptop has a very distinctive design, and as long as the logo is not visible or has been edited out, I wouldn't think a property release is necessary. By way of comparison, I do a lot of aviation photography and there are loads of unreleased RF images on Alamy of aircraft with no airline logo or registration visible but in which the aircraft type is easily identifiable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Richard Laidler said:

 

My permanent dilemma - I know I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough? :D

Me too. It asks me in clear black and white: "Is there any property in the image?" I'm not sure I have the confidence to click 'no', even if I can't see a logo or other recognisable design feature. It's still property, no? Yes, no? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive just done a search for "woman with phone" on Alamy and something surprised me. I see a fair number of submission where it says - "Releases: model - yes / property - yes." To me, this suggests that the photographer obtained a property release from the company who produces the phones. That's no easy task getting a release from a major company like Apple, Samsung, Nokia etc. Unless I'm reading this wrong?

Edited by Patrick Cooper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Patrick Cooper said:

Ive just done a search for "woman with phone" on Alamy and something surprised me. I see a fair number of submission where it says - "Releases: model - yes / property - yes." To me, this suggests that the photographer obtained a property release from the company who produces the phones. That's no easy task getting a release from a major company like Apple, Samsung, Nokia etc. Unless I'm reading this wrong?

 

I agree that if the yes to the property release question is regarding the cell phone, the photographer either made a mistake or is referring to some other property, or, has some friends in very high positions in the realm of electronics.  :-)  

 

I have three images in my port of a "woman with phone" (I hope at least one showed up in your search) and have a model release but I checked no to property in the images because there is no possible way to identify the phone, or any other object in the image.  

 

mature-woman-talking-on-a-mobile-cell-ph

 

The phone is very generic with no trademark visible and no distinctive style besides being a "flip phone".

 

I think I'm pretty safe in this regard.  But if I ever have any doubts I check the property box and "no release" along with "editorial use only".  Almay specializes in editorial content and even a trademarked item can, in most countries, be used editorially.

 

Rick

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • 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.