MUSEUMS AND CASTLES

[lorenza]

Hello to all...
I am very busy these days and with some knots to be solved and resolved.
I saw a portfolio of a collaborator of Alamy (important) stated that, in the editorial images, it provided for the non-sale possibility for PERSONAL USE.
My doubt is this: in what context I have to foresee the NON-USE PERSONAL and how do I indicate it in the picture, it escapes me. I would also like that an image with people as well as EDITORIAL is also NOT AVAILABLE FOR PERSONAL USE. I can not find the way ...

My doubt is this: here in Trento we have a large museum, designed by Renzo Piano, an internationally renowned architect. It's a science museum, I took some pictures and I'm going to do some more. I have been accepted by the management of Alamy, clearly marked as editorials (RM editorial)
I know for sure that it is possible to take photographs.
Another example here, in my region, is the Castello del Buonconsiglio, a very beautiful fortress and here, you can not take pictures inside and do not issue the authorization. I took some of them outside, from the street ... and that's fine.
So I can not send them to Alamy even as editorials - do you confirm it ???
I hope I have been clear enough...
lorenza

[Martin B]

The castle is like 800 years old. No one holds a copyright on the design or the building. Go ahead and send them in. There are already dozens of photos, inside and out, of that same castle already on Alamy. It's a UNESCO site anyway, so you don't need permission to photograph the exterior. As for the Renzo Piano building, mark them Right Managed Editorial and click the not for personal use box.

[fotoDogue]

If you want to put Personal Use Restrictions on an image, check on the image in AIM, go to the Optional tab, and click on the box that says "Don't sell for Personal Use."

If you want to remove Personal Use Restrictions, un-check the box. Changes seem to take effect when the system upfates.

[spacecadet]

18 minutes ago, Martin B said:

The castle is like 800 years old. No one holds a copyright on the design or the building. Go ahead and send them in. There are already dozens of photos, inside and out, of that same castle already on Alamy. It's a UNESCO site anyway, so you don't need permission to photograph the exterior.

In fact Italy doesn't have freedom of panorama and, although it may not affect this particular castle, there are restrictions in Italian law on the reproduction of state cultural assets.

http://www.unesco.org/culture/natlaws/media/pdf/italy/it_cult_landscapeheritge2004_engtof.pdf

A bit dense, but here's a recent case of effective "state copyright"

http://ipkitten.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/exclusive-rights-in-classical-art-works.html

As far as I'm aware world heritage site status doesn't affect domestic law.

OP, Alamy will accept it as editorial only. I would submit it as RM without restrictions but accept that publication might be restricted in Italy. But that would be up to an Italian publisher to decide.

[Joseph Clemson]

Photographing museums and castles may not be that straightforward. For example,  note that the website of Castello del Buonconsiglio states 

'Photography and video recordings for publicity or commercial use are only permitted with previous authorisation'

 

I can't comment on the situation in Italy, but in the UK, the only photos you might submit to Alamy under these circumstances are exteriors taken from a public road (which you need to mark ad Editorial Only) or interiors taken with written authorisation from the people who own or manage the building (and they will probably deny such permission or place restrictiond on what you can do with such pictures). You can't simply use the example of pictures already in the Alamy library because you don't know whether they have the appropriate permissions or not. 

 

Many castles, museums, stately homes and similar properties have this kind of restriction imposed on photographers who visit them. It is up to the photographer to find out what they can or can't do in any given location. 

[Martin B]

1 minute ago, spacecadet said:

 

OP, Alamy will accept it as editorial only.

Except that Alamy does accept images of that castle as RF and RM with no editorial restrictions at all. Castello del Buonconsiglio

[spacecadet]

6 minutes ago, Martin B said:

Except that Alamy does accept images of that castle as RF and RM with no editorial restrictions at all. Castello del Buonconsiglio

I answered the OP's question and said that I would not myself have applied a restriction. QC doesn't check annotation.

[lorenza]

I work in Trento, I see the Castle from my window of the Office. I think the only thing I can do is street photography. For the interiors there must be authorization. I asked and they told me that any use of internal images must be authorized. In my opinion, the photos published by the contributor should not have been published. It is clear that any legal problems directly respond to the contributor, I think that's the case. Given that Alamy leaves the contributor to choose the restrictions to be applied, the contributor becomes responsible,

 

[Martin B]

19 minutes ago, lorenza said:

the contributor becomes responsible,

 

The contributor is always responsible. They are your images. Alamy is just an agent in the transaction between the creator and the buyer.

[aphperspective]

I very recently visited a small art gallery, there was no signs on the entrance doors etc regarding photography. I asked at the desk if there was a policy regarding stock photography and could i have a printed copy. I pointed out that the images i took may end up for resale and was told that was absolutely fine as it was all free advertising. My only concern is that as this was all verbal it could all be denied later if a problem arose.

Andy

[Martin B]

10 minutes ago, aphperspective said:

I very recently visited a small art gallery, there was no signs on the entrance doors etc regarding photography. I asked at the desk if there was a policy regarding stock photography and could i have a printed copy. I pointed out that the images i took may end up for resale and was told that was absolutely fine as it was all free advertising. My only concern is that as this was all verbal it could all be denied later if a problem arose.

Andy

Verbal is fine if your are selling the image for editorial.  Because of the nature of art galleries, it would be almost impossible for a gallery owner or agent to give you a legally binding written property release. There are multiple artists represented in most galleries, and you would theoretically need a release from every artist whose works showed up in your photos. Don't over think it. If you upload the images, accurately list the name and address of the gallery in your captions, and mark them editorial only. Magazines, newspapers, and editorial websites should have no problem.

[aphperspective]

Thanks so much martin i shall double check the captions. etc.

 

[lorenza]

On 23/3/2018 at 17:25, Martin B said:

The castle is like 800 years old. No one holds a copyright on the design or the building. Go ahead and send them in. There are already dozens of photos, inside and out, of that same castle already on Alamy. It's a UNESCO site anyway, so you don't need permission to photograph the exterior. As for the Renzo Piano building, mark them Right Managed Editorial and click the not for personal use box.

 

On 23/3/2018 at 17:35, fotoDogue said:

If you want to put Personal Use Restrictions on an image, check on the image in AIM, go to the Optional tab, and click on the box that says "Don't sell for Personal Use."

If you want to remove Personal Use Restrictions, un-check the box. Changes seem to take effect when the system upfates.

 

On 23/3/2018 at 17:45, Joseph Clemson said:

Photographing museums and castles may not be that straightforward. For example,  note that the website of Castello del Buonconsiglio states 

'Photography and video recordings for publicity or commercial use are only permitted with previous authorisation'

 

I can't comment on the situation in Italy, but in the UK, the only photos you might submit to Alamy under these circumstances are exteriors taken from a public road (which you need to mark ad Editorial Only) or interiors taken with written authorisation from the people who own or manage the building (and they will probably deny such permission or place restrictiond on what you can do with such pictures). You can't simply use the example of pictures already in the Alamy library because you don't know whether they have the appropriate permissions or not. 

 

Many castles, museums, stately homes and similar properties have this kind of restriction imposed on photographers who visit them. It is up to the photographer to find out what they can or can't do in any given location. 

 

3 hours ago, aphperspective said:

I very recently visited a small art gallery, there was no signs on the entrance doors etc regarding photography. I asked at the desk if there was a policy regarding stock photography and could i have a printed copy. I pointed out that the images i took may end up for resale and was told that was absolutely fine as it was all free advertising. My only concern is that as this was all verbal it could all be denied later if a problem arose.

Andy

Thank you all for taking the time to understand ...