Skip to main content
A
Anonymous
January 3, 2023
Answered

intellectual property releases

  • January 3, 2023
  • 2 replies
  • 726 views

I have a lot of cityscape and building photography. It's probably one of my favorite things to do. However, I can't upload most of them because I have never successfully gotten a property release, and I don't think it's from a lack of trying. I have tried finding the property owners online, but I have not received a response. After nothing for a month, I revisit the site and come in with printed-out forms, and politely explain to whoever I can there that I have an image of their property and if they are happy with it, I'd love for them to sign a release form. If it's a shop or cafe or something, I normally buy something I can actually afford so I'm not completely wasting their time. Here are 3 examples - and all attempts go something like this.  1: sure you can use it how you want! I don't really want to sign a form but you have my permission (very nice and friendly, but that doesn't help me, unfortunately) 2: the person you need isn't here. When are they likely to be here if you don't mind me asking? I don't know/come back at such a time. If it comes back at such a time, I'm met with either going back to number 1, or 'oh I'm not who you need to speak to please email this address you've already emailed' or 3, and this is the rarest but has shaken me up, having security called, marched out and banned from the premises. I think I'm on about attempt 30, all separate buildings. How are people getting their property releases because I'm honestly getting tired.  Do photographers generally have to pay for these releases or is there a better way of asking? A few times I've just retaken the picture in a way that it's not the entire subject or not recognizable, but I'm still waiting for my first sale so that's not really working.

This topic has been closed for replies.
Correct answer Test Screen Name

A book talking about a town will be making "editorial" use of local pictures, which has entirely different references. But when you sell stock you are selling it for ALL purposes, so for example, a building could be used in a derogatory way (e.g. a "before" shot for an upgrade business; a burger joint could be un unappetizing one; an office building could be hell for its workers etc. etc.) Who would give permission for their building to be used that way?

A second consideration: with all the releases in the world Adobe still won't accept a building with any signage or logos; that's a separate rule. 

2 replies

Abambo
Community Expert
AbamboCommunity Expert
Community Expert
January 4, 2023
quote

How are people getting their property releases because I'm honestly getting tired.  Do photographers generally have to pay for these releases or is there a better way of asking?


By @26842475

When doing jobs on assignment, you sometimes get releases. Occasionally, you get releases when doing a photography job for free. And then just do jobs that don't require releases.

 

Sales is a different affair. You get sales, when the picture you're offering has a value for the buyer. Easy said, difficult to realize. I'm setting in pictures, not because I think that they sell, but because I took the picture and I have the time to upload. Some pictures don't sell, some pictures sell. Some pictures I like don't sell at all. Some pictures, that I did put in because I had them, sell. As long as you do not need to live from this, it's fun, add-on revenue or simply nice.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer
    George_F
    Community Expert
    George_FCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    January 3, 2023

    As long as a building isn't a focus point of the photo or the only building in a photo, you might be ok without a release.  I have a few submitted as an entire city skyline that are accepted without a release.  You may also be ok if the building is nondescript and not recognizable.

     

    If I were a business, I'm not sure I would sign off on my brand or likeness being used for any commercial purpose.  I'm not surprised to hear there is some opposition.  There may also be some question about who actually owns the IP rights, such as a business renting a building for instance.  Is it there building owner or business who signs the release, or both?  Perhaps the design is so unique the Architect owns the IP?

     

    I would guess a majority of photographers either submit these as Editorial Use Only, or use them in other ways that don't need a release such as prints.

     

    Sorry this has been frustrating for you!  I hope the process gets smoother 🙂

    George F, Photographer & Forum Volunteer
      A
      Anonymous
      January 3, 2023

      I do understand that about making it not the focal point, but I still get maybe %50 of those rejected and a lot of them just don't look right without it. And yeah I somewhat understand but it makes me wonder how people write books etc with this kinda stuff in. Normally, I try and seek out the landlord. Yeh, eventually I'll probably just have to upload them all in the hopes of editorial value.

      T
      Test Screen NameCorrect answer
      Legend
      January 3, 2023

      A book talking about a town will be making "editorial" use of local pictures, which has entirely different references. But when you sell stock you are selling it for ALL purposes, so for example, a building could be used in a derogatory way (e.g. a "before" shot for an upgrade business; a burger joint could be un unappetizing one; an office building could be hell for its workers etc. etc.) Who would give permission for their building to be used that way?

      A second consideration: with all the releases in the world Adobe still won't accept a building with any signage or logos; that's a separate rule. 

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
      Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices