MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Property release for a plane??  (Read 2036 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 08, 2018, 14:50 »
+1
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2018, 11:38 »
+4
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Should I bother to answer? You've already decided they are incompetent clowns and you are right.

Are there registration numbers on the plane? Is it pained any special color scheme? Anything else besides the plane and a crop, like a building or a tractor that could be recognized? Show a frame so anyone here can take a stab at the why, otherwise everything is just a guess. What keywords did you use, any that might be trademarks or protected?


« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2018, 13:40 »
+1
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Should I bother to answer? You've already decided they are incompetent clowns and you are right.

Are there registration numbers on the plane? Is it pained any special color scheme? Anything else besides the plane and a crop, like a building or a tractor that could be recognized? Show a frame so anyone here can take a stab at the why, otherwise everything is just a guess. What keywords did you use, any that might be trademarks or protected?

The footage was shot on purpose against the sun, so the plane shows no colors or markings whatsoever...
Here is a link to the same shot on SS:
https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1017459790-crop-duster-spraying-chemicals-over-cotton-field


« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2018, 18:40 »
0
If you were standing in the field on private property, you need a property release. I dont think its the plane that is the problem.


Me


« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2018, 23:35 »
0
Is a plane design treated any differently to a car? Even if you take the logo off a car image it will still be rejected, will the same not apply to a plane, boat, motorbike?

« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2018, 06:49 »
0
Is a plane design treated any differently to a car? Even if you take the logo off a car image it will still be rejected, will the same not apply to a plane, boat, motorbike?

Well, aren't all the stock sites full of images and videos of planes and cars?
How can we sell these kind of images (for commercial use) if no one can shoot cars, planes and such?

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2018, 11:07 »
0
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Should I bother to answer? You've already decided they are incompetent clowns and you are right.

Are there registration numbers on the plane? Is it pained any special color scheme? Anything else besides the plane and a crop, like a building or a tractor that could be recognized? Show a frame so anyone here can take a stab at the why, otherwise everything is just a guess. What keywords did you use, any that might be trademarks or protected?

The footage was shot on purpose against the sun, so the plane shows no colors or markings whatsoever...
Here is a link to the same shot on SS:
https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1017459790-crop-duster-spraying-chemicals-over-cotton-field

I think you neglected to tell the whole story. "No logos on the plane." ?
« Last Edit: October 14, 2018, 14:10 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2018, 12:26 »
0
The answer is that the manufacturer of the plane is the obstacle to your release. It's a case of property release by way of brand.

More importantly what in heavens name are you doing uploading video to istock? Are you some sort of financial masochist?

« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2018, 13:28 »
0
Were you on private property? You need a property release.

« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2018, 14:18 »
0
wouldn't say the problem is the plane design: a property release would not solve it!

« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2018, 14:38 »
0
wouldn't say the problem is the plane design: a property release would not solve it!

So you're saying property release isn't needed for Boeing planes? Adidas shoes? Ford cars? I would think you need a property release for branded products. A plane is a branded product unless the manufacturer cannot be identified.

« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2018, 02:09 »
0
wouldn't say the problem is the plane design: a property release would not solve it!

So you're saying property release isn't needed for Boeing planes? Adidas shoes? Ford cars? I would think you need a property release for branded products. A plane is a branded product unless the manufacturer cannot be identified.

Well, as I see it - the answer to all of these issues is COMMON SENSE, which, in recent time has completely gone from reviewers in some agencies.
A serious reviewer needs to check and see that this plane has a very generic design (just to watch other clips around). When my IAF jet fighters were rejected I could understand. An F-35 stealth fighter is very recognizable from every angle.
It took me months of planning, coordination, getting up at 4am and travel to the field. Shooting, grading, uploading and tagging. For the reviewer - he/she just a click of a button - REVISE.
Drives me nuts.

« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2018, 14:00 »
+2
If you were standing in the field on private property, you need a property release. I dont think its the plane that is the problem.

I'd need a release for the air above or for indefinable corn? Are you serious?

« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2018, 15:02 »
0
If you were standing in the field on private property, you need a property release. I dont think its the plane that is the problem.

I'd need a release for the air above or for indefinable corn? Are you serious?


No I am just joking! LOL You are just being silly. Have you never had to supply a property release for an image? Ask istock they are the ones rejecting the video. They must be the stupid ones!  ;)
« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 15:08 by cathyslife »

« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2018, 15:58 »
+2
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Went through your clip frame by frame and I could see no markings or other logos or what have you.

Conclusion ~ resubmit if you can

And yes iSuck are incompetent clowns :D

HOWEVER!

You said you submitted a batch and other clips showing this crop duster you can clearly see the aircraft registration number  4X-AFC which will get the clip rejected.

https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1017459817-crop-duster-spraying-chemicals-over-cotton-field


« Last Edit: October 13, 2018, 16:02 by Sammy the Cat »

ShadySue

« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2018, 19:17 »
0
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Went through your clip frame by frame and I could see no markings or other logos or what have you.

Conclusion ~ resubmit if you can

And yes iSuck are incompetent clowns :D

HOWEVER!

You said you submitted a batch and other clips showing this crop duster you can clearly see the aircraft registration number  4X-AFC which will get the clip rejected.

https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1017459817-crop-duster-spraying-chemicals-over-cotton-field

Unlike Uncle Pete, my observation (from the outside) is that SS tends to be more lax about IP than iS, sometimes seriously lax.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2018, 21:26 »
0
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Went through your clip frame by frame and I could see no markings or other logos or what have you.

Conclusion ~ resubmit if you can

And yes iSuck are incompetent clowns :D

HOWEVER!

You said you submitted a batch and other clips showing this crop duster you can clearly see the aircraft registration number  4X-AFC which will get the clip rejected.

https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1017459817-crop-duster-spraying-chemicals-over-cotton-field

Unlike Uncle Pete, my observation (from the outside) is that SS tends to be more lax about IP than iS, sometimes seriously lax.

I don't think there's an absolute which one is lax or more strict, that's an opinion, the issue is more about WHAT. I can upload some subjects to iStock that pass and have no problems, the same will get rejected, never a chance by SS, for the last seven years. From the inside, uploading to both, you are still right, but it's a matter of agency lawyers and agency policy. Not as simple as lax or strict.

Now back to the case at hand.

Sammy might have the answer. Batch rejection because some have the planes ID showing. One was suitable, many others had the markings, now I have to say, the reviewer wasn't going to dig through a stack of infringing images to find one that would pass. We've been misled.

« Last Edit: October 14, 2018, 13:58 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #17 on: October 14, 2018, 20:11 »
+1
Just submitted a batch of videos of a crop duster over a cotton field. Nothing special. No logos on the plane. Pretty straight forward. Got the videos back for revision with a request for a property release. Now... Can't really understand if these clowns want a property release for the crop duster or the cotton field. Dear lord... Is there no limit to the incompetence of iStock reviewers???

Nice troll

« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2018, 09:44 »
+1
wouldn't say the problem is the plane design: a property release would not solve it!

So you're saying property release isn't needed for Boeing planes? Adidas shoes? Ford cars? I would think you need a property release for branded products. A plane is a branded product unless the manufacturer cannot be identified.
What I mean is that, should the problem be the aircraft, they would reject the photo for copyright/trademark. They would not ask for a property release (from the owner of the aircraft?)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
6746 Views
Last post August 17, 2010, 10:48
by Anyka
3 Replies
1578 Views
Last post June 29, 2013, 12:43
by Ron
7 Replies
1748 Views
Last post September 16, 2013, 08:30
by gillian van Niekerk
4 Replies
1502 Views
Last post May 28, 2016, 12:49
by PigsInSpace
2 Replies
843 Views
Last post March 01, 2017, 17:45
by philopenshaw

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors