Author Topic: Microstock and editorial (Read 3817 times)

stockload · « **on:** April 09, 2017, 21:28 »

I'm very new to the microstock scene but I've been with Alamy since last year. I'm a bit confused about editorial images when it comes to microstock. With Alamy editorials become RM images, but since microstocks sell RF images does that mean they don't use editorial images? Or if microstocks sell them as RF wouldn't that require a model release from the person/property in the editorial image? Thanks.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #1 on:** April 09, 2017, 21:44 »

It's always been my understanding that RF can be commercial or editorial... being RF doesn't really define the content of the image, just the fact that it's royalty free. I don't think Alamy have to make all editorial images RM, but they choose to do so. I could be wrong... it happens from time to time.

Although, I'm sure unonimous will be along shortly to confuse the matter.

stockload · « **Reply #2 on:** April 09, 2017, 22:59 »

Hi SpaceStockFootage,
I kind of agree with you about "RF can be commercial or editorial..." But the part I have trouble with is that when an image is RF it can be used for anything. So if I shot an "innocent bystander" on a street corner as editorial that would be ok, but if someone obtained that same photo as an RF they could use it to promote something that the person in the image might object to. I'm not really sure...

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #3 on:** April 10, 2017, 00:27 »

Quote from: stockload on April 09, 2017, 22:59

when an image is RF it can be used for anything.

It can be used for whatever the royalty free license stipulates it can be used for, which is rarely 'anything'. Most sites will have a disclaimer on editorial images, stating that it can't be used for commercial, advertising or promotional purposes... but it's still royalty free.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #4 on:** April 10, 2017, 04:38 »

Quote from: stockload on April 09, 2017, 22:59

Hi SpaceStockFootage,
I kind of agree with you about "RF can be commercial or editorial..." But the part I have trouble with is that when an image is RF it can be used for anything. So if I shot an "innocent bystander" on a street corner as editorial that would be ok, but if someone obtained that same photo as an RF they could use it to promote something that the person in the image might object to. I'm not really sure...

You're confusing:
royalty free/rights managed
with
commercial/editorial usage terms

stockload · « **Reply #5 on:** April 10, 2017, 11:52 »

Hi Guys,
Yeah, you both make good points. But just to be clear, if I submitted a photo of a recognizable person with no model release does the agency automatically categorize it as editorial? Thanks again for your explanations.

steheap · « **Reply #6 on:** April 10, 2017, 12:09 »

This seems to confuse so many people that I wrote a blog post about it:
http://www.backyardsilver.com/2015/07/rf-versus-rm-versus-editorial-versus-commercial/

The general rule is that apart from 123RF where they do determine which images to mark as editorial, you have to specifically identify the image as such when you are submitting them.

Steve

Pauws99 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 10, 2017, 12:21 »

Quote from: steheap on April 10, 2017, 12:09

This seems to confuse so many people that I wrote a blog post about it:
http://www.backyardsilver.com/2015/07/rf-versus-rm-versus-editorial-versus-commercial/

The general rule is that apart from 123RF where they do determine which images to mark as editorial, you have to specifically identify the image as such when you are submitting them.

Steve

although you can load specifically as editorial which I think is the best course...if you load as RF and they consider it editorial they will class it as such. Notably also Adobe/Fotolia dont have an editorial category.