pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: I'm done uploading to iStock for a while... More model release issues  (Read 5401 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 26, 2013, 00:10 »
+2
I'm effectively giving up uploading content to iStock unless I'm really bored.

iStock's upload process is the longest and most difficult of all microstock sites, which already made me put it at the bottom of the list for which site got my uploads.  Lately I've had many difficulties regarding model releases, which I've not had ONE problem elsewhere (which includes most microstock agencies and one RM-only agency).  I believed I finally got it all settled when I got this rejection notice:

"Note that model releases cannot be reused and a new one should be completed for each new photo session."

This model release happened to be for my girlfriend.  Using iStock's guidelines, I would have to make a new release every week.  So iStock wants me to manage up to 52 model releases per year per model?

I know my earnings are peanuts compared to some contributors, but this site is no longer welcoming to me.  I get the feeling iStock moderators will delete this thread (which I posted on their forums hoping for feedback.  Don't laugh!) because they do not want feedback from their contributors.

Bottom line:  The model release policy is ridiuclous and needs to be updated.  I can't be the only one encountering problems like this?


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2013, 03:36 »
0
That's been the MR rule at iS for a good couple of years now.

Added: you've got 213 images on iS since mid 2008, fewer than half requiring MRs. You must have a very low 'effort' threshold.

Your question won't be deleted, the questions have been asked many times since the introduced the new release policy. It's supposed to protect models, e.g. say you had a model and were shooting an exchange, e.g. they modelled for stock in return for you shooting intimate photos for their private use, but then you uploaded the intimate photos as stock.

Of course, where that breaks down is that I can't see what would stop the person who would do that just adding the other info to the release, e.g 'model in pyjamas in bedroom' which was the agreed shoot, after signing being altered to 'model in pyjamas in bedroom; topless, nude in studio'. Of course the honest tog with integrity wouldn't do that, but they wouldn't have uploaded the intimate photos in the first scenario either.

I pointed that out on the forums at the time (which puts the new release rules at over 2 1/2 years), but no-one could see the issue.  ??? ::)

« Last Edit: July 26, 2013, 06:10 by ShadySue »

« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2013, 06:05 »
+4
That's been the MR rule at  iS for a good couple of years now.

Yep.  And good insurance for when you break up :) .

« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2013, 12:13 »
+2
Everything about IS is a royal pain.   I guess I should say 'was' because I quit submitting there a long time ago.


tab62

« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2013, 12:42 »
-2
Okay, Yuri can you fix this issue for us....

« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2013, 15:25 »
-2
'
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 11:49 by Audi 5000 »

tab62

« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2013, 16:41 »
+1
By basically removing the upload limits they want folks to submit images thus why not make it easier for us to use a single model release per model instead of having to redo a release each time (okay, different day) we shoot the model.  Yeah, it is their right on what they require on the releases and I do play by their rules but it would be nice if they changed their rule- enough said...

T

« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2013, 12:03 »
+4
It's a dumb release policy, and the major reason I don't contribute to iStock. I'm not filling out 500 different releases for images of my own kid. No other stock sites require such a ridiculous release policy and all of them have managed just fine that way for years.

And then there's the uploading and keywording system they have that is a decade out of date.

Not worth worrying about since iStock is a sinking ship.

 

CD123

« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2013, 12:47 »
0
I haven't submitted to IS before and have generic property and model releases for my current portfolio. Some images where now rejected because it was not their releases I used. This just meant that I can not upload any images requiring releases to them (which unfortunately is a very large portion of my port). I also do not intend to add a third type of MR/PR to be signed in future, with every submission.  I already use 2 different ones, which between them cover all the sites I upload to, EXCEPT IS. 
Guess IS will just stay a bottom earner for me then, but I am fine with that. At least with the few images I have there I earn at the top end of my bottom feeders.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2013, 16:17 »
+1
actually I think for your girlfriend this is acceptable, for my kids it's a PITA. I have a year long MR for my kids for each year that all the other agencies accept. their rules I guess.

w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2013, 17:57 »
+3
I no longer have any MR problems with IS as I simply stopped uploading any images that required them.  Did this for two reasons.  The first is what has been noted here .. it's a royal pain in the ass to have a different MR for each and every shoot and really serves no useful purpose, regardless of what IS claims.  Secondly, and of greater importance to me, is I don't want my model's images to suddenly appear on Google+ for all to see and with no control over how they may be used.  No matter how remote the chance this will happen, it's just not worth the risk.  I owe it to my models to protect their images as best I can.  That's why I removed all of my people images on D-day.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2013, 21:04 »
0
^ good point, I now put my special models and kids on stocksy.

Ron

« Reply #12 on: July 29, 2013, 02:25 »
0
I had an image accepted  with an old none IS release, and it was accepted. I expected it to be rejected for the MR, it was a test, and shocked it got accepted

« Reply #13 on: August 18, 2013, 22:42 »
0
So if you use the same model frequently, make a master copy of the release and then individualize the shoot info, date, and the model signature.  This can likely be done on EasyRelease as well, although I don't do electronic releases.

Before I started uploading people photos to istock, I knew the rules.
If you don't want to abide by the rules, good, don't upload or keep getting rejected.  Less competition.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3047 Views
Last post September 24, 2009, 21:35
by madelaide
2 Replies
3011 Views
Last post January 24, 2011, 03:24
by lagereek
1 Replies
3998 Views
Last post June 30, 2011, 20:04
by Mantis
1 Replies
1402 Views
Last post October 07, 2011, 09:03
by leaf
8 Replies
4960 Views
Last post December 05, 2013, 16:07
by heywoody

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle