Author Topic: I can't describe?????????? (Read 7626 times)

stokfoto · « **on:** April 05, 2010, 06:15 »

Lately I have been getting a lot of rejections from IS for the shoot description on model release not being good (or descriptive )enough .I am quite puzzled.What do you guy write in this section. I usually include the terms like stock photo session xx(number) but they kept rejection these. As far as understood they want me to include exactly which photos are model released so probably they want me to include detailed info on every single shoot I do of the model. but what they are missing out is that on the MR I am using it already indicates that all the photos of the model taken on that date are released. do you have any tip on make the long story short a brief way to describe. because I usually do variety of subject at one session and including them one by one as part of the description is quite t time consuming and boring.

thanks for your input in advance

Phil · « **Reply #1 on:** April 05, 2010, 06:22 »

last few I've done was 'studio isolations on white and black', I did get 2 out of about 50 images rejected for not enough description though

stokfoto · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2010, 06:27 »

Quote from: Phil on April 05, 2010, 06:22

last few I've done was 'studio isolations on white and black', I did get 2 out of about 50 images rejected for not enough description though

Thank you Phil for your reply, yes it happens to me too some of the files that has exactly same description go through while some get rejected and this makes me think that there must some particular reviewer(s) who are stricter on model release issues than others.

FD · « **Reply #3 on:** April 05, 2010, 07:09 »

I never had a rejection on IS for shoot description but I address content, rather than technique (studio, isolated). For instance: various medical and business concepts in professional wear, emotions and portraits in studio, urban fashion outdoors in casual poses.

Kone · « **Reply #4 on:** April 05, 2010, 07:29 »

I do short description of image.

Graffoto · « **Reply #5 on:** April 05, 2010, 08:38 »

I have never had a rejection for the shoot description either.

Mine usually go like this: Studio Shoot/Fashion or Beach Shoot/Lifestyle

This identifies where the shoot takes place and what type of images are to be produced.

That said, I recently had an image kicked back at me because the keywords indicated a beach shoot, but the model release stated a studio shoot. The facts were, it was done in studio. I dragged in a bunch of beach stuff (sand, rocks, seashells) to recreate a beach indoors.

I explained the details in the description and resubmitted. The image is now still pending approval $:-\$ .

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #6 on:** April 05, 2010, 09:07 »

My release doesn't include a space to describe the shoot. It's never been an issue before but last week 14 out of 15 images were rejected for "no description on the release." The 15th image was accepted. It really is just a lottery system when it comes to what they require on a release.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #7 on:** April 05, 2010, 11:16 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 05, 2010, 09:07

... It really is just a lottery system when it comes to what they require on a release.

I don't agree - although mistakes do get made.

The key thing they're trying to avoid is uploading shots that weren't covered by the release which might later lead to legal trouble.

So if you did some stock shots in a business setting and some partially clothed glamor shots that were intended for the model's personal use saying "studio shoot 456" doesn't really help. Saying "various office, business, workplace stress shots" would clearly mark which shots were included (and prevent you from uploading the personal shots).

Caz · « **Reply #8 on:** April 06, 2010, 03:13 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 05, 2010, 09:07

My release doesn't include a space to describe the shoot. It's never been an issue before but last week 14 out of 15 images were rejected for "no description on the release." The 15th image was accepted. It really is just a lottery system when it comes to what they require on a release.

The new requirement for a description (and date) of the shoot was announced back in August 2009. It applies to all images taken after 1st September 2009. It shouldn't be a lottery, if your images are taken after that date and your model releae doesn't include a meaningful description then you ought to be getting a request for a new model release instead of an acceptance. Here's a link to the article announcing the new standards, and there is also a forum discussion linked in the article
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=648

FD · « **Reply #9 on:** April 06, 2010, 03:31 »

Quote from: jsnover on April 05, 2010, 11:16

So if you did some stock shots in a business setting and some partially clothed glamor shots that were intended for the model's personal use saying "studio shoot 456" doesn't really help. Saying "various office, business, workplace stress shots" would clearly mark which shots were included (and prevent you from uploading the personal shots).

Correct. I regularly mix a personal shoot with a stock shoot, as part of the "reward" for the model (TFP). That's why an explicit description of the shoot content and especially the wear is necessary.

stokfoto · « **Reply #10 on:** April 06, 2010, 05:43 »

Thank you all for useful information and tips.

One think I'd like IS to implement is that I'd like to have a model release replacement option until the files get reviewed. because once you attach a release to a file that is in pending queue it gets locked and there is no way to change it I had uploaded a whole series of photos with the same release and after getting the first one rejected I either had to wait until the rest is rejected or had to remove and re upload the files,which is just waste of time and upload limits (sometimes) as well

ShadySue · « **Reply #11 on:** April 06, 2010, 06:11 »

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 05:43

Thank you all for useful information and tips.

One think I'd like IS to implement is that I'd like to have a model release replacement option until the files get reviewed. because once you attach a release to a file that is in pending queue it gets locked and there is no way to change it I had uploaded a whole series of photos with the same release and after getting the first one rejected I either had to wait until the rest is rejected or had to remove and re upload the files,which is just waste of time and upload limits (sometimes) as well

That's not going to happen, as it's important that the actual MR is reviewed at the same time as the photo.

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** April 06, 2010, 06:13 »

Quote from: FD-amateur on April 06, 2010, 03:31

Quote from: jsnover on April 05, 2010, 11:16
So if you did some stock shots in a business setting and some partially clothed glamor shots that were intended for the model's personal use saying "studio shoot 456" doesn't really help. Saying "various office, business, workplace stress shots" would clearly mark which shots were included (and prevent you from uploading the personal shots).
Correct. I regularly mix a personal shoot with a stock shoot, as part of the "reward" for the model (TFP). That's why an explicit description of the shoot content and especially the wear is necessary.

I'm guessing that not too far down the line, there's going to have to be a different way of doing the MRs, because it seems to me that at the moment, there's nothing to stop the unscrupulous from adding extra things to the description after the model has signed. And since the main point of the MR is to protect the model, and to protect the photographer from claims by the model, that will have to be tightened up.

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #13 on:** April 06, 2010, 06:59 »

Quote from: Caz on April 06, 2010, 03:13

The new requirement for a description (and date) of the shoot was announced back in August 2009. It applies to all images taken after 1st September 2009. It shouldn't be a lottery, if your images are taken after that date and your model releae doesn't include a meaningful description then you ought to be getting a request for a new model release instead of an acceptance. Here's a link to the article announcing the new standards, and there is also a forum discussion linked in the article
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=648

Prior to that they announced that a PO Box was an acceptable address but I still get rejections for having a PO Box in the address. Legally there is no reason to need the shoot description or shoot date on a release. In fact it can limit the release because if you take images of a 2 year old in a green dress and then the same child in a red dress you technically need 2 releases for that shoot. The same would be true if you have 3 people in a shoot. One release for when you have all 3 in a shot, one for when only 2 are in the image and one for when the person is alone.

I use a variation of the PPA's release and modified it to add the photographer information and a witness signature, as most RF sites have a requirement for this information.

Phil · « **Reply #14 on:** April 06, 2010, 07:12 »

the problem I see is like Sue pointed out, you can change it afterwards.

Also if doing stuff on the fly with the kids (like my last shoot) they can be changing clothes and looks and props, while I am shooting 1 or 2 others and we can go from 1 little angel to 4 naughty

kids in 10 minutes and then 20 minutes we are on something totally different. Using a realistic description I could have 30+ model releases for the 4 of them (my neighbour (who is my only neighbour and 500m up the road) is going to get pretty sick of signing releases

stokfoto · « **Reply #15 on:** April 06, 2010, 07:17 »

Quote from: ShadySue on April 06, 2010, 06:11

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 05:43
Thank you all for useful information and tips.

One think I'd like IS to implement is that I'd like to have a model release replacement option until the files get reviewed. because once you attach a release to a file that is in pending queue it gets locked and there is no way to change it I had uploaded a whole series of photos with the same release and after getting the first one rejected I either had to wait until the rest is rejected or had to remove and re upload the files,which is just waste of time and upload limits (sometimes) as well
That's not going to happen, as it's important that the actual MR is reviewed at the same time as the photo.

I mean you should be able to replace a model release until the actual file (photo etc)gets reviewed . many other sites offer that I don't see why IS couldn't do it ? As long as you attach the release to the same file they could be reviewed at the same time and I don't think it would necessary change anything in the review procedure .

ShadySue · « **Reply #16 on:** April 06, 2010, 07:31 »

Sorry, I boobed somehow, so I'll bolden what I actually added in this post:

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 07:17

Quote from: ShadySue on April 06, 2010, 06:11
Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 05:43
Thank you all for useful information and tips.

One think I'd like IS to implement is that I'd like to have a model release replacement option until the files get reviewed. because once you attach a release to a file that is in pending queue it gets locked and there is no way to change it I had uploaded a whole series of photos with the same release and after getting the first one rejected I either had to wait until the rest is rejected or had to remove and re upload the files,which is just waste of time and upload limits (sometimes) as well
That's not going to happen, as it's important that the actual MR is reviewed at the same time as the photo.
Once an image is grabbed by inspectors, it's "locked for editing", so you can't edit keywords either at that stage. I have no models, so I don't know at which stage you can or can't change releases. But really, what you describe is nothing different to for instance missing a tiny logo in a series, and not being able to change and resubmit subsequent images while they're in the queue, you'd have to remove them from the queue and start again - I can't remember for sure if that affects your upload limit, but I don't think so. I guess it's to teach us to get it right before uploading.

I mean you should be able to replace a model release until the actual file (photo etc)gets reviewed . many other sites offer that I don't see why IS couldn't do it ? As long as you attach the release to the same file they could be reviewed at the same time and I don't think it would necessary change anything in the review procedure .

stokfoto · « **Reply #17 on:** April 06, 2010, 07:34 »

[/quote] ShadySue I'm guessing that not too far down the line, there's going to have to be a different way of doing the MRs, because it seems to me that at the moment, there's nothing to stop the unscrupulous from adding extra things to the description after the model has signed. And since the main point of the MR is to protect the model, and to protect the photographer from claims by the model, that will have to be tightened up.
[/quote]

thanks for response Sue No offence intended but I have seen your portfolio on IS which is filled with very nice colourful nature and wild life images and hardly involving model shots I imagine you couldn't have had many rejections for model release issues . But you can imagine how frustrating it could be --especially after going trough all the uploading process. --- and get a photo rejected because of such issues based on paper work. (I know how important that is so that's why I started the thread to figure out best ways to fill those paper in.)

stokfoto · « **Reply #18 on:** April 06, 2010, 07:48 »

Quote from: ShadySue
(quoted text)Once an image is grabbed by inspectors, it's "locked for editing", so you can't edit keywords either at that stage. I have no models, so I don't know at which stage you can or can't change releases. But really, what you describe is nothing different to for instance missing a tiny logo in a series, and not being able to change and resubmit subsequent images while they're in the queue, you'd have to remove them from the queue and start again - I can't remember for sure if that affects your upload limit, but I don't think so. I guess it's to teach us to get it right before uploading.(quoted text)

you were faster than me:) just after I hit to post button your last post arrived. once again thanks for your opinion but I don't agree because repacling a model release and the acutual file is a different issue ( in fact with StockXpert you could even replace an uploaded file before it gets reviewed and it would save you time from doing all keywording and categorizing as well.)

as for upload limits in some cases it does affect your upload limits. for instance the series of photos I uploaded were uploaded 10days ago and when the first one rejected if I decide to remove the photos I would loose my limits to replace the files. but if the review were done within the same week of upload date than it might not affect your upload limits. usually files don't get completely rejected for just MR you receive the notification then you are given an option to upload a new release but even that causes delay in approval of your files. as your photo has to go back into pending list

ShadySue · « **Reply #19 on:** April 06, 2010, 07:53 »

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 07:48

Quote from: ShadySue
(quoted text)Once an image is grabbed by inspectors, it's "locked for editing", so you can't edit keywords either at that stage. I have no models, so I don't know at which stage you can or can't change releases. But really, what you describe is nothing different to for instance missing a tiny logo in a series, and not being able to change and resubmit subsequent images while they're in the queue, you'd have to remove them from the queue and start again - I can't remember for sure if that affects your upload limit, but I don't think so. I guess it's to teach us to get it right before uploading.(quoted text)

you were faster than me:) just after I hit to post button your last post arrived. once again thanks for your opinion but I don't agree because repacling a model release and the acutual file is a different issue ( in fact with StockXpert you could even replace an uploaded file before it gets reviewed and it would save you time from doing all keywording and categorizing as well.)

as for upload limits in some cases it does affect your upload limits. for instance the series of photos I uploaded were uploaded 10days ago and when the first one rejected if I decide to remove the photos I would loose my limits to replace the files. but if the review were done within the same week of upload date than it might not affect your upload limits. usually files don't get completely rejected for just MR you receive the notification then you are given an option to upload a new release but even that causes delay in approval of your files. as your photo has to go back into pending list

So I guess we just have to read and understand the rules and get it right before uploading. I realise that that sounds smart-ass. I can assure you I've had my fair share of rejections, and don't always 'get it right before uploading'.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #20 on:** April 06, 2010, 08:00 »

Quote from: Phil on April 06, 2010, 07:12

Also if doing stuff on the fly with the kids (like my last shoot) they can be changing clothes and looks and props, while I am shooting 1 or 2 others and we can go from 1 little angel to 4 naughty kids in 10 minutes and then 20 minutes we are on something totally different. Using a realistic description I could have 30+ model releases for the 4 of them (my neighbour (who is my only neighbour and 500m up the road) is going to get pretty sick of signing releases

It's not that hard. "Outdoor shoot with group of children in various outfits playing sports and having picnic".

RT · « **Reply #21 on:** April 06, 2010, 08:25 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 06, 2010, 06:59

In fact it can limit the release because if you take images of a 2 year old in a green dress and then the same child in a red dress you technically need 2 releases for that shoot.

Ummm no, just add "various outfits" in the description, one person - one release.

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 06, 2010, 06:59

The same would be true if you have 3 people in a shoot. One release for when you have all 3 in a shot, one for when only 2 are in the image and one for when the person is alone.

Ummm no (again) - 3 people 3 seperate releases is all you need, when all 3 are in the shot you send a copy of all 3 releases, when there's 2 in the shot you send a copy of the 2 relevant releases etc etc - in description add "incl. group shots"

ShadySue · « **Reply #22 on:** April 06, 2010, 08:39 »

Quote from: RT on April 06, 2010, 08:25

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 06, 2010, 06:59
The same would be true if you have 3 people in a shoot. One release for when you have all 3 in a shot, one for when only 2 are in the image and one for when the person is alone.

Ummm no (again) - 3 people 3 seperate releases is all you need, when all 3 are in the shot you send a copy of all 3 releases, when there's 2 in the shot you send a copy of the 2 relevant releases etc etc - in description add "incl. group shots"

Remember to stich the appropriate releases together, e.g. in Photoshop, before sending.

RT · « **Reply #23 on:** April 06, 2010, 09:06 »

Quote from: ShadySue on April 06, 2010, 08:39

Remember to stich the appropriate releases together, e.g. in Photoshop, before sending.

Or use Deepmeta which does it all for you

Caz · « **Reply #24 on:** April 06, 2010, 09:51 »

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 06, 2010, 06:59

Legally there is no reason to need the shoot description or shoot date on a release. In fact it can limit the release because if you take images of a 2 year old in a green dress and then the same child in a red dress you technically need 2 releases for that shoot. The same would be true if you have 3 people in a shoot. One release for when you have all 3 in a shot, one for when only 2 are in the image and one for when the person is alone.

I use a variation of the PPA's release and modified it to add the photographer information and a witness signature, as most RF sites have a requirement for this information.

I understand what you mean, but whether or not they are "legally" required doesn't matter. iStock has said that they require them, so in order to avoid having your release rejected by iStock, you need them. You don't fill out different releases for different dresses in the same shoot. That's the point, your one release for the shoot should describe the images that the model has agreed to release for stock. So your description on the one release should describe it all - eg : child outdoors in various outfits playing sport/eating lunch/swimming/feeding ducks - whatever describes the shoot.

lisafx · « **Reply #25 on:** April 06, 2010, 13:09 »

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 07:17

I mean you should be able to replace a model release until the actual file (photo etc)gets reviewed . many other sites offer that I don't see why IS couldn't do it ? As long as you attach the release to the same file they could be reviewed at the same time and I don't think it would necessary change anything in the review procedure .

You can replace the release prior to inspection. Use this link: www.istockphoto.com/file_modelrelease_upload.php?id=##### (replace with id)
Courtesy of JoAnn Snover in this thread:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=31810&page=1

stokfoto · « **Reply #26 on:** April 06, 2010, 13:58 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 06, 2010, 13:09

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 07:17

I mean you should be able to replace a model release until the actual file (photo etc)gets reviewed . many other sites offer that I don't see why IS couldn't do it ? As long as you attach the release to the same file they could be reviewed at the same time and I don't think it would necessary change anything in the review procedure .

You can replace the release prior to inspection. Use this link: www.istockphoto.com/file_modelrelease_upload.php?id=##### (replace with id)
Courtesy of JoAnn Snover in this thread:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=31810&page=1

that's great ! thank you so much Lisa! and thanks to JoAnn as well. for very useful information:)

lisafx · « **Reply #27 on:** April 06, 2010, 14:06 »

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 13:58

that's great ! thank you so much Lisa! and thanks to JoAnn as well. for very useful information:)

Happy to help

I don't know why IS doesn't make this info widely available...?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #28 on:** April 06, 2010, 17:32 »

I've kept an image in my queue at "Needs Model Release" with the link for the last 3 years, just to have it handy.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: I can't describe?????????? (Read 7626 times)

stokfoto

Phil

stokfoto

FD

Kone

Graffoto

NancyCWalker

Jo Ann Snover

Caz

FD

stokfoto

ShadySue

ShadySue

NancyCWalker

Phil

stokfoto

ShadySue

stokfoto

stokfoto

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

RT

ShadySue

RT

Caz

lisafx

stokfoto

lisafx

Sean Locke Photography

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors