MicrostockGroup

Did you have a witness to the signature?  That made the difference for me at DT.  Of course, you can sign for your own kid.   That's BS.  STEVE-OH, back me up here!!! 

I have a few pictures of my children in my portfolio, and I have signed the releases with my husband as the witness. All the sites have accepted these.

In the case where the photographer was the sole legal guardian, it would be nuts to suggest that the parent/photographer couldn't sign the release.

Add to that my today rejection experience from DT :
13 in a row rejected for :

"The signatures of the photographer and the witness look stitched. We cannot accept digitally manipulated model releases (we only accept hand-written signatures)."

They are actually me calling a fraud, a cheater.

The model release in question is a standard model release i use for all my shoots, the witness sign on it is from the woman who accompanies me on my shoots almolst 90 %, the photographers signature is mine... that model release has been copied numerous times, thus the fading compared to the original...

But no, for DT the quality of the model release print is even as more important as the picture.
Never had any problems with my releases besides a occasional data missing (had some rejected because for belgium i had filled in B, while according to DT it had to be BE....)

Remarkable that these new reject reasons show up the same week new reviewers start.

Patrick.

ps  : wanted to add that if a reviewer/inspector can't see the difference between faded ink and an digital manipulated release he/she is clearly not qualified being in that job...!!!!

I have hundreds of images of my children on stockexpert and everwhere else I upload to and have always signed the release my self as the parent with somebody else witnessing.