MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: IS accept photoes but SS reject due to inside of Building property release,why?  (Read 5017 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 18, 2013, 20:33 »
-1
 :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

The following is my photo on IS, why SS so strict, airport is king of public place, i think.
And i search a lot on SS, many commercial photo on SS of this airport, which are also don't have a property realse. why now reject mine?
I'm so confused.

Photos:
newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26417863-perspective-building-dome.php [nonactive]
newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26407508-perspective-building-dome.php [nonactive]
newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26410750-perspective-building-dome.php [nonactive]


ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2013, 20:45 »
-4
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

The following is my photo on IS, why SS so strict, airport is king of public place, i think.
And i search a lot on SS, many commercial photo on SS of this airport, which are also don't have a property realse. why now reject mine?
I'm so confused.

Photos:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26417863-perspective-building-dome.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26407508-perspective-building-dome.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26410750-perspective-building-dome.php
If you would take the time yourself and read some you could find your answer!

Quote
Post Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:25 pm        Reply with quote

Contributors,

As many of you know, Shutterstock has been accepting, though not requiring, property releases for the past few years. Rather than continue our policy of rejecting images when we feel that a property release is required, we are making our form of property release available for download, first in this forum and then generally on the site. There is no need to provide property releases with your editorial image & footage submissions. For more information on our editorial policy, please see the forum post regarding editorial submissions.

The laws regarding the necessity of property releases are in flux and do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If the subject of your image contains any of the following, please provide a properly completed and signed property release when your content is submitted.

* Modern Architecture
* Building interiors
* Unique and/or custom designed luxury boats, vehicles, airplanes, etc.
* Recognizable animals: race horses, unique pets, certain zoo animals, etc.
* Photos/video of building exteriors taken from private property
* Photographs of artwork
* Public places with photography policies: most stadiums, museums, amusement parks, etc.
* Famous landmarks & historic locations:
Will vary from site to site - please familiarize yourself with location's photography policy
(See our posting of current image restrictions for more information.)

The foregoing list is not all inclusive and should be used for general guidance only. As a photographer, it is your responsibility to do the research and determine if a release is necessary. Each specific instance must be considered individually. As a reminder, you are bound by the Terms of Service when you signed up as a contributor for Shutterstock. Please refer to the TOS for additional information.

« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2013, 20:47 »
+8
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

The following is my photo on IS, why SS so strict, airport is king of public place, i think.
And i search a lot on SS, many commercial photo on SS of this airport, which are also don't have a property realse. why now reject mine?
I'm so confused.

Photos:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26417863-perspective-building-dome.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26407508-perspective-building-dome.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26410750-perspective-building-dome.php
If you would take the time yourself and read some you could find your answer!

Quote
Post Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:25 pm        Reply with quote

Contributors,

As many of you know, Shutterstock has been accepting, though not requiring, property releases for the past few years. Rather than continue our policy of rejecting images when we feel that a property release is required, we are making our form of property release available for download, first in this forum and then generally on the site. There is no need to provide property releases with your editorial image & footage submissions. For more information on our editorial policy, please see the forum post regarding editorial submissions.

The laws regarding the necessity of property releases are in flux and do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If the subject of your image contains any of the following, please provide a properly completed and signed property release when your content is submitted.

* Modern Architecture
* Building interiors
* Unique and/or custom designed luxury boats, vehicles, airplanes, etc.
* Recognizable animals: race horses, unique pets, certain zoo animals, etc.
* Photos/video of building exteriors taken from private property
* Photographs of artwork
* Public places with photography policies: most stadiums, museums, amusement parks, etc.
* Famous landmarks & historic locations:
Will vary from site to site - please familiarize yourself with location's photography policy
(See our posting of current image restrictions for more information.)

The foregoing list is not all inclusive and should be used for general guidance only. As a photographer, it is your responsibility to do the research and determine if a release is necessary. Each specific instance must be considered individually. As a reminder, you are bound by the Terms of Service when you signed up as a contributor for Shutterstock. Please refer to the TOS for additional information.



He's here to ask for help, not be belittled by you.

« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2013, 21:32 »
0
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

The following is my photo on IS, why SS so strict, airport is king of public place, i think.
And i search a lot on SS, many commercial photo on SS of this airport, which are also don't have a property realse. why now reject mine?
I'm so confused.

Photos:
newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26417863-perspective-building-dome.php [nonactive]
newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26407508-perspective-building-dome.php [nonactive]
newbielink:http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26410750-perspective-building-dome.php [nonactive]
If you would take the time yourself and read some you could find your answer!

Quote
Post Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:25 pm        Reply with quote

Contributors,

As many of you know, Shutterstock has been accepting, though not requiring, property releases for the past few years. Rather than continue our policy of rejecting images when we feel that a property release is required, we are making our form of property release available for download, first in this forum and then generally on the site. There is no need to provide property releases with your editorial image & footage submissions. For more information on our editorial policy, please see the forum post regarding editorial submissions.

The laws regarding the necessity of property releases are in flux and do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If the subject of your image contains any of the following, please provide a properly completed and signed property release when your content is submitted.

* Modern Architecture
* Building interiors
* Unique and/or custom designed luxury boats, vehicles, airplanes, etc.
* Recognizable animals: race horses, unique pets, certain zoo animals, etc.
* Photos/video of building exteriors taken from private property
* Photographs of artwork
* Public places with photography policies: most stadiums, museums, amusement parks, etc.
* Famous landmarks & historic locations:
Will vary from site to site - please familiarize yourself with location's photography policy
(See our posting of current image restrictions for more information.)

The foregoing list is not all inclusive and should be used for general guidance only. As a photographer, it is your responsibility to do the research and determine if a release is necessary. Each specific instance must be considered individually. As a reminder, you are bound by the Terms of Service when you signed up as a contributor for Shutterstock. Please refer to the TOS for additional information.



tks for rely. My quesetion is IS accept and  Even in SS, there are many similar photo also without a property release.

« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2013, 21:34 »
0
I don't think Shutterstock shows if an image has a property release.  I know they do for model releases.  Unless they've changed that.

« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2013, 05:28 »
0
for example newbielink:http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&searchterm=hong+kong+airport&search_group=#id=19077259&src=Z9Jr7w9-IY84dpGoT0gXzw-2-39 [nonactive]
It doesn't have a release information.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2013, 05:52 »
+1
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #7 on: August 19, 2013, 05:56 »
+5
:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

The following is my photo on IS, why SS so strict, airport is king of public place, i think.
And i search a lot on SS, many commercial photo on SS of this airport, which are also don't have a property realse. why now reject mine?
I'm so confused.

Photos:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26417863-perspective-building-dome.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26407508-perspective-building-dome.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-26410750-perspective-building-dome.php

Every agency is different.
Rule #1  Never ever compare your files with Someone else's. If SS reject don't turn back move on with something new.
Don't try to understand, they don't even understand themself!
Most of the agencies are lost in "translation"

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #8 on: August 19, 2013, 09:08 »
0
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.
You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:

    accident and fire scenes
    children
    celebrities
    bridges and other infrastructure
    residential and commercial buildings
    industrial facilities and public utilities
    transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
    Superfund sites
    criminal activities
    law enforcement officers

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #9 on: August 19, 2013, 09:14 »
+1
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.
You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:

    accident and fire scenes
    children
    celebrities
    bridges and other infrastructure
    residential and commercial buildings
    industrial facilities and public utilities
    transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
    Superfund sites
    criminal activities
    law enforcement officers
Depending on country, these may also be sold as editorial. Doesn't mean the agencies have to accept them, though.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #10 on: August 19, 2013, 09:51 »
0
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.
You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:

    accident and fire scenes
    children
    celebrities
    bridges and other infrastructure
    residential and commercial buildings
    industrial facilities and public utilities
    transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
    Superfund sites
    criminal activities
    law enforcement officers

Depending on country, these may also be sold as editorial. Doesn't mean the agencies have to accept them, though.
Correct.

For photogs in the UK

http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html

« Reply #11 on: August 19, 2013, 13:05 »
+1
Hope this helps a bit.

http://www.stockartistsalliance.org/stock-releases

Cheers,
Jonathan

suwanneeredhead

  • O.I.D. Sufferer (Obsessive Illustration Disorder)
« Reply #12 on: August 19, 2013, 16:51 »
0
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.
You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:

    accident and fire scenes
    children
    celebrities
    bridges and other infrastructure
    residential and commercial buildings
    industrial facilities and public utilities
    transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
    Superfund sites
    criminal activities
    law enforcement officers

ROFL, try THAT in the United States these days! HA HA HA, I wouldn't try it for a billion bucks.

« Reply #13 on: August 19, 2013, 16:57 »
0
/
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 11:14 by Audi 5000 »

Ron

« Reply #14 on: August 19, 2013, 17:03 »
+1
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.
You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:

    accident and fire scenes
    children
    celebrities
    bridges and other infrastructure
    residential and commercial buildings
    industrial facilities and public utilities
    transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
    Superfund sites
    criminal activities
    law enforcement officers

ROFL, try THAT in the United States these days! HA HA HA, I wouldn't try it for a billion bucks.
a couple weeks ago I was at a small landmark and got questioned why I was taking pictures but the officer was nice and said "I'm not saying you are a terrorist."  See no problem here in the States.
The perception of what is 'nice' is seriously different in the USA then what we consider to be nice.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2013, 17:10 »
+1

Permissible Subjects
...
    law enforcement officers

ROFL, try THAT in the United States these days! HA HA HA, I wouldn't try it for a billion bucks.
My photojournalism tutor told that a couple of years before our class he sent students out to a local square to photograph 'cafe society'. A policedman approached one of the students to ask what he was doing, and he was able to finish his explanation "... and now some of my clssmates are photographing you talking to me".  :)

« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2013, 17:28 »
0
/
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 11:14 by Audi 5000 »


gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #17 on: August 19, 2013, 17:38 »
+1

You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:


that's the part that is tricky, cos I suspect the definition of public space (like train stations, museums and parklands) is a bit grey.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #18 on: August 19, 2013, 17:48 »
-2
i'm not sure why you think airports are public spaces? they most certainly are not! the land may be govt owned but the whole thing is usually leased out to private corporations.
You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:

    accident and fire scenes
    children
    celebrities
    bridges and other infrastructure
    residential and commercial buildings
    industrial facilities and public utilities
    transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
    Superfund sites
    criminal activities
    law enforcement officers

ROFL, try THAT in the United States these days! HA HA HA, I wouldn't try it for a billion bucks.
No problem shooting the Law Enforcement Officers.

It is a violation of your civil rights for them to harass or threaten you in any way in the States.

I have had my run in with Big Bob the Cop who thought his chit didn't stink and thought he was god almighty ruler of all mankind, but a few calls and speaking to the State trooper in charge of the district I was in and he was looking like a fool and a sad puppy dog with his tail between his legs when I met up with the District Trooper in charge of him on location. 


ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #19 on: August 19, 2013, 17:55 »
-2

You can still shoot them but the selling part is where the law takes over.

Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary, the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully from public places:


that's the part that is tricky, cos I suspect the definition of public space (like train stations, museums and parklands) is a bit grey.
You can shoot anything you want that is private property as long as you are not on that private property and you are on public property.

You can shoot a train station from private property but not while you are on it.

Anyone who has been around railroad tracks knows that railroad property wherever it is is private property always has been and always will be.

Museums are a bit tricky but you are often always able to take pictures just not allowed to sell them.

Parklands most parks that you go to will let you take all the pics you want but with the govt cutbacks they may start enforcing the photography rules they have requiring the obtaining of a permit?

« Reply #20 on: August 20, 2013, 02:52 »
0
TKS, everybody
But I still want to know why so many picutres without property release?  Is it because they are to summitted before the new regulation?

« Reply #21 on: August 20, 2013, 06:09 »
0
/
« Last Edit: May 12, 2014, 11:14 by Audi 5000 »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #22 on: August 20, 2013, 06:17 »
0
And bear in mind that there's a peculiar iS anomaly where people have taken photos in an interior for the main collection and it hasn't needed a release or permission, but in the same or similar interior for an editorial photo, they've required a permission note.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
12724 Views
Last post August 17, 2010, 10:48
by Anyka
4 Replies
2174 Views
Last post November 07, 2011, 19:10
by Jo Ann Snover
3 Replies
5039 Views
Last post June 29, 2013, 12:43
by Ron
4 Replies
2292 Views
Last post May 15, 2014, 01:34
by Phadrea
26 Replies
9550 Views
Last post April 09, 2017, 22:50
by YadaYadaYada

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors