 Sherri McGee |
selling photos I would like to start selling my photos. I know you are not allowed to sell photos taken in a zoo, a person wearing an NFL jacket, a photo of a Nike sneaker, or someone else's artwork. Is there a website or book that discusses photos you can and can't sell?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rebecca A. Steed |
I don't know about books that discuss this Sherri, but I would not sell any photos of people unless you have a model release to do so. I know there are threads here at betterphoto that discuss model releases, but it is a win/win situation. The person you have photographed has given you permission to sell/use the photos of them so you won't get sued, and you potenially have a permanent model for future shoots. just something to think about...
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sherri McGee |
Becky, I know about model releases for people. I'm not a people photographer. I'm talking about other photos that could get me in trouble. For instance, can you sell photos taken inside a cathedral? Can you sell a photo of a swingset (without kids playing on it), crayons or a child's toy as long as you can't see the manufactors name. Can you sell a photo of a persons boat if you clone out the boat name? I know i'm being cautious to the point of paranoia but I would rather be safe than sorry. I am hoping there is somewhere I can read about this. I would like to sell some of my photos as stock photography.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jason R. Fortenbacher |
I can't answer all those questions, but I am an avid aviation photographer. If you do take a picture of something like a boat/airplane that has an identifying feature on it like tail number, you can clone out identifying features such as names and numbers. The best thing, though, would be to get a property release form. Use it when photographing homes, buildings, cars, airplanes, boats... anything like that. Hope that helps.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Well Sherri, the basics of what you're looking for in terms of the laws pertaining to when it is and when it's not necessary to get a release, is found in books discussing the law for photographers. Oddly enough, one is called "Photography and the Law" that used to be published by Amphoto. You'll also find a lot of good information in business practice guides for photographers like those published by ASMP.org (American society of media photographers) and NPPA (National Press Photographers Ass'n.) You don't have to be a member to buy publications from them. Both offer training in those areas for members especially on the release issues as they pertain to people, real estate property and just tangible personal property like toys, etc. And, you might find this hard to believe but there are actually books on stock photography including how to market and general rules that apply, although stock agents and agencies, including ones like Corbis and Getty have their own specific rules that photographers need to adhere to in terms of how various types of releases are handled and who pays the attorney fees if they're sued for a release-related issue. If you attend various continuing education seminars throughout the year on these issues chances are you'll get a break on your professional liability insurance (depending on who the carrier is) that covers you for attorney and other fees in the event you do get sued in such situations. And yes, it does happen periodically. ;>) Take it light
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Sherri, In microstock photography, 'generally' you can sell photos of objects if the brand name/logo is cloned out, for example on the swingset you mentioned. Some things get trickier, but you can ask on the Forums of the respective microstock agencies. Shutterstock even accepts Editorial shots, where you don't have to have model releases or worry about logos/brand names, because it is 'editorial' (like photojournalism). One way to get an idea of what is acceptable is to do a keyword search (like on Shutterstock/Getty or another stock agency) on the object/idea you want to photograph to see what is acceptable (make sure it is not model released). Of course, Marks suggestions above are great too. Like you, I generally don't shoot photos that require model releases, but there is plenty out there to shoot besides people! I have only ~ 257 shots and have to date earned (since April 2005 starting with only 3 shots) $7,682.59 and counting. For anyone who loves photography or illustration (vectors) and wants to investigate earning real money, you can copy and paste in this referral link: http://submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=6865 Carolina
|
|
|
|
||
|
Sherri McGee |
Thank you all for taking the time to answer this thread. Mark, I didn't find the book you mentioned at Barnes and Noble but I did find other books on Photography and the law. Carolina, I've read many of your threads on microstock. I was accepted at Shutterstock but I'm having serious doubts. It seems like a huge waste of time for such a small amount of money.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Carolina K. Smith |
Sherri, Sure...95% of the $7682 was from selling my own photos. Only 5% from referrals. The photographer will never lose out on the full amount of what Shutterstock pays... It is just a small (a few pennies) token of their thanks to spreading the word of their existence. If you love photography and are dedicated to improving your skills and vision over time, you can do well. It is harder to compete 'these days' compared to a year ago, as even some photographers who once only shot for the trads, or other professional photographers are seeing microstock as a viable venue for some of their work. I started in this with loving photography (still do!) and wanting to see my work spread. I am a fulltime professional in medicine. My hubby thought I was spending 'way too much time' at first. But as many photos began to be downloaded over and over and over, the dimes turned to dollars to tens of dollars to hundreds of dollars. Another reason I don't shoot people shots, even though those do quite well (the 'best' some would maintain) is that people can go out of style (clothes/hairstyle/etc), but many objects/nature/etc are 'timeless'. Now the thousands of dollars I have made is paying for top notch equipment (Nikon) that will likely last a lifetime (the lenses especially, not so much the camera bodies). I've had the joy/feedback that my photos have been used in sermons, textbooks, brochures, ads... As a busy professional in another field, I could never otherwise devote my time to marketing, etc. And I expect my photos to have a long (years) shelflife... My thinking is long term, and I plan to build this into retirement... even though adding just one photo a week seems not like much (tortoise and the hare...), I keep on because of my inner drive to express myself through photography, and I like the challenge of building this personal business all by myself. Unlike doing a photo assignment for someone else, microstock photography doesn't pressure you with deadlines or a quota. You can be an artist or a workhorse, you can fit it in with your lifestyle. Now my hubby is quite impressed. It's like saving your money... the investment can just keep compounding with stock photography. You have nothing to lose to keep growing your portfolio. I am trying to attend one photo workshop a year too, finding that those are great reenergizers for vision and it's great to keep learning. Well, I guess you can tell that photography and microstocking is a passion for me. Don't give up!
Best,
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||