Author Topic: iStock -> Each Shoot with same model needs new release-> Is there a solutions? (Read 7652 times)

Dantheman · « **on:** March 28, 2012, 05:16 »

Hi,

I was in South Africa for a month and took a huge amount of photos there. Most of them are snapshots, but some also suitable for stock.

I'm uploading those to iStock at the moment and a lot of the photos are of my Girlfriend. Problem is that i would need a new release for each day, right?

This is really frustrating me, since printing, filling out and scanning the releases in again just takes for ages (all this for a hand full of shots).

Is there another solution that i am not thinking of?

I would be extremely thankful for all kind of tips

kind regards

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2012, 06:06 »

Quote from: Dantheman on March 28, 2012, 05:16

Is there another solution that i am not thinking of?

No, just that you don't know of:
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=648&Page=2

However, the question arises, does the iStock collection really need a month's worth of images of your girlfriend on vacation?

Dantheman · « **Reply #2 on:** March 28, 2012, 07:57 »

Quote from: sjlocke on March 28, 2012, 06:06

Quote from: Dantheman on March 28, 2012, 05:16
Is there another solution that i am not thinking of?

No, just that you don't know of:
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=648&Page=2

However, the question arises, does the iStock collection really need a month's worth of images of your girlfriend on vacation?

Haha

, who knows.
Well, if they accept them and they sell then i guess so. Not all shots taken on vacation must be snapshots!
For me this is a hobby at the moment and most pics are from travelling etc. and happen whenever i have time.

I guess i'll just need to be more picky on choosing the right pics and get releases for these.

Thanks for the link!

travelstock · « **Reply #3 on:** March 28, 2012, 23:53 »

Well this line from the link should help out:
"You can however specify a small period of time if a shoot is stretched over a few days. Certainly think days here, not several weeks or months. This period should be explicitly specified in the shoot date e.g. January 28th to 31st, 2012."

Why not sort through the "snaps" highlight the images you actually want releases for and and get her to sign a release for them - just remember to keep it to a few days (eg. release for Cape Town vacation shots, 5,6,8, 10 Feb) per model release, so you might still need more than 1 release, but probably a lot less than 30.

Dantheman · « **Reply #4 on:** March 29, 2012, 02:49 »

Quote from: holgs on March 28, 2012, 23:53

Well this line from the link should help out:
"You can however specify a small period of time if a shoot is stretched over a few days. Certainly think days here, not several weeks or months. This period should be explicitly specified in the shoot date e.g. January 28th to 31st, 2012."

Why not sort through the "snaps" highlight the images you actually want releases for and and get her to sign a release for them - just remember to keep it to a few days (eg. release for Cape Town vacation shots, 5,6,8, 10 Feb) per model release, so you might still need more than 1 release, but probably a lot less than 30.

Yes i also noticed this. I'm just wondering how detailed the shoot description needs to be. Would ,"Cape Town Vacation Shots from 3-5 February," be fine?

Until now i always wrote a more detailed description, for example: "Sunrise shoot at Clifton beach in Cape Town" etc.

Caz · « **Reply #5 on:** March 30, 2012, 15:16 »

Quote from: Dantheman on March 29, 2012, 02:49

Yes i also noticed this. I'm just wondering how detailed the shoot description needs to be. Would ,"Cape Town Vacation Shots from 3-5 February," be fine?

No, that's not a sufficient shoot description

jamirae · « **Reply #6 on:** March 30, 2012, 17:04 »

Well in that case I'd put something like "Cape Town Shoot, Feb 3-5"

I am no expert, but my descriptions are usually brief and I have never had a rejection because of the shoot description being inadequate.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #7 on:** March 30, 2012, 17:26 »

"female poses with various animals, aborigines and around hotel area"

It's not hard.

ShadySue · « **Reply #8 on:** March 30, 2012, 18:21 »

Quote from: sjlocke on March 30, 2012, 17:26

"female poses with various animals, aborigines and around hotel area"

It's not hard.

Last time I looked, Cape town was in South Africa, not Australia.

reckless · « **Reply #9 on:** March 30, 2012, 23:52 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 30, 2012, 18:21

Quote from: sjlocke on March 30, 2012, 17:26
"female poses with various animals, aborigines and around hotel area"

It's not hard.
Last time I looked, Cape town was in South Africa, not Australia.

Aborigines is a term that refers to indigenous people, no matter what clump of ground they live on.

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** March 31, 2012, 06:28 »

Quote from: reckless on March 30, 2012, 23:52

Quote from: ShadySue on March 30, 2012, 18:21
Quote from: sjlocke on March 30, 2012, 17:26
"female poses with various animals, aborigines and around hotel area"

It's not hard.
Last time I looked, Cape town was in South Africa, not Australia.
Aborigines is a term that refers to indigenous people, no matter what clump of ground they live on.

Technically; but it's not how the word is usually used in the vernacular.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #11 on:** March 31, 2012, 06:47 »

Well, it's how I used it, especially to get the alliteration.

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** March 31, 2012, 07:12 »

Quote from: sjlocke on March 31, 2012, 06:47

Well, it's how I used it, especially to get the alliteration.

[Memo to self: If you ever get a model, be sure you alliterate the MR. Helpful hint from SJL.]

gillian vann · « **Reply #13 on:** April 08, 2012, 02:03 »

Quote from: reckless on March 30, 2012, 23:52

Quote from: ShadySue on March 30, 2012, 18:21
Quote from: sjlocke on March 30, 2012, 17:26
"female poses with various animals, aborigines and around hotel area"

It's not hard.
Last time I looked, Cape town was in South Africa, not Australia.
Aborigines is a term that refers to indigenous people, no matter what clump of ground they live on.

true, but not many do use that term as our lot seem to have adopted it (ok, we forced it on them). you wouldn't use it a search term for any other country... would you?

gillian vann · « **Reply #14 on:** April 08, 2012, 02:06 »

The real bummer is having to upload a MR every time, instead of being able to link it to a bunch of images with a simple click.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: iStock -> Each Shoot with same model needs new release-> Is there a solutions? (Read 7652 times)

Dantheman

Sean Locke Photography

Dantheman

travelstock

Dantheman

Caz

jamirae

Sean Locke Photography

ShadySue

reckless

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

ShadySue

gillian vann

gillian vann

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors