MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Crowd scenes commercial or editorial  (Read 1759 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 26, 2015, 21:21 »
0
I'm sure I recall reading a SS announcement about visible people and logos are acceptable as commercial if they are part of a bigger picture and not the focus. I searched the SS forum and blog but can't find that now. Am I mistaken or was there an announcement along those lines?

I already submitted clips like these as editorial, but if the above info is correct then it would probably be better to delete them and upload as commercial.
http://www.shutterstock.com/video/video.html?id=12199451
http://www.shutterstock.com/video/video.html?id=12199634


« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2015, 06:05 »
+1
That sounds highly unlikely.What context can one provide for people and crowds after all?Even shopping  or working crowds are editorial if a single face is visible,all across the agencies.
That's legality i dont think that context can bypass the laws regarding editorial media.
Maybe the announcement about  focus not on the people was literal.
All commercial crowd scenes i've seen are commercial because there has been a blurring filter on the people or it's just people's backs.

« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2015, 06:58 »
+2
IIRC there was an article on iStock a while back about acceptance of crowds and logos into the creative collection there. Again IIRC there have to be multiple different brands / logos, and /or the people in a crowd need to be "incidental" and not the main subject, with no individual standing out. I can't comment further because I haven;t submitted anything like that.


That's photographs though. I don't know about video. I suppose it could be trickier.



Possible that SS have the same rules.

« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2015, 07:49 »
+2
Even if SS accepts the video, I believe that the artist still has culpability if someone sees themselves or a company sees its logo. Probably depends on how the video is used and how much of the clip is used...fast glance where it is impossible to make any claims of "harm" versus a full 10 or 20 seconds could make a difference.  To be safe I'd go editorial.

Can you imagine a commercial piece on "crowds of drug users walk the streets of Taiwan" and they use your clip? It's just not worth the $23 bucks.

ShadySue

« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2015, 09:03 »
+1
Even if SS accepts the video, I believe that the artist still has culpability if someone sees themselves or a company sees its logo. Probably depends on how the video is used and how much of the clip is used...fast glance where it is impossible to make any claims of "harm" versus a full 10 or 20 seconds could make a difference.  To be safe I'd go editorial.

Can you imagine a commercial piece on "crowds of drug users walk the streets of Taiwan" and they use your clip? It's just not worth the $23 bucks.
What if an editorial piece used the clip with the same title? (They should put 'stock image' or somesuch disclaimer, but that doesn't always happen.)

« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2015, 10:24 »
+1
Even if SS accepts the video, I believe that the artist still has culpability if someone sees themselves or a company sees its logo. Probably depends on how the video is used and how much of the clip is used...fast glance where it is impossible to make any claims of "harm" versus a full 10 or 20 seconds could make a difference.  To be safe I'd go editorial.

Can you imagine a commercial piece on "crowds of drug users walk the streets of Taiwan" and they use your clip? It's just not worth the $23 bucks.

« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2015, 10:26 »
+1
Im sure people have more knowledge but doesn't culpability lie with the user of the picture - who I guess could sue the agency if he/she  was misled?

« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2015, 22:09 »
0
IIRC there was an article on iStock a while back about acceptance of crowds and logos into the creative collection there. Again IIRC there have to be multiple different brands / logos, and /or the people in a crowd need to be "incidental" and not the main subject, with no individual standing out.

Thanks, I was probably incorrectly remembering that one.

« Reply #8 on: October 27, 2015, 22:10 »
0
Lots of good points. Thanks for the advice.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
1935 Views
Last post November 26, 2013, 20:45
by riffmax
2 Replies
1716 Views
Last post September 10, 2014, 11:10
by Uncle Pete
12 Replies
5290 Views
Last post November 16, 2014, 12:21
by etudiante_rapide
9 Replies
2061 Views
Last post March 29, 2017, 20:52
by dragonblade
9 Replies
1998 Views
Last post November 12, 2016, 05:38
by Pauws99

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors