Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I have just had 3 pictures rejectd on IP grounds. The title of each was in the format <historic aircraft type> at <named museum>. There are many Adobe Stock pictures of historic aircraft, including all three types in my pictures. There are many pictures of named museums. There is no IP restriction at law which would prevent their publication.
I do not know if it was the aircraft, the museum, or the combination which caused the rejection. Any ideas?
If the museum is thrilled, get a property release.
Please note that not all of Adobe requirements are legal requirements, but also protective requirements against possible threads or simply rules applied by moderators considereing elements as identifiable, even if they are free of use.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Please share 1-3 examples. Often the IP is easy to miss (but Adobe see it).
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thanks. Headings were
Vickers VC10 at the Cornwall Aviation Heritage Centre at Newquay in Cornwall UK
Spitfire and Avro Shackleton at the Cornwall Aviation Heritage Centre at Newquay in Cornwall UK
English Electric Lightning at the Cornwall Aviation Heritage Centre at Newquay in Cornwall UK
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
In #2, the car badge and registration plate, perhaps.
In #3, the display boards.
Could be the insignia in each case.
But it may also be the name of the museums; these are IP and they are surely not granting their names for commercial use. As an experiment, you could try #1 without referencing the museum or location.
Be sure to use keywords that might be used by would be buyers, both experienced and randomly looking for old 'planes.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
There are identifying marks on each of the planes. It seems the Moderators don't care about "generic" planes, along as there are no logos, tail numbers, names, etc.
If you can eliminate the identifying marks, 2 of the 3 images will most likely be rejected for technical issues. The first has very underexposed, nearly black shadows. The second is in black & white which is not allowed.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thank you. There many other ID marks for historic planes on Adobe Stock, and the RAF cannot bar the use of their roundel (they lost a battle about that in 2004). There are thousands of B&W pictures on Adobe Stock (there are over 11,000 hits just for "B&W" and I have seen no restriction - can you point me to it please? Thanks again.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
If you hover your mouse over the images you see in the Adobe Stock database, you'll see the label "Editorial Only" on almost all of the images with visible logos. I suppose that the photographers did get a property release on some of the others, or perhaps there's just an inconsistency with Moderation of accepted images. Keep in mind that Adobe also acquired the assets of Fotolia and legacy images might not have been submitted to such scrutiny as Adobe does now.
Regarding black & white images, it is stated clearly on this page:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/editing-dos-and-dont.html
Don’t: Convert your image to black & white or duotone. Buyers want the maximum flexibility provided by the full color image.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thanks
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thank you. All possible, though the RAF lost a legal battle in 2004 about the use of its roundel and the display boards aren't legible. The museum would be thrilled to be featured, though it is about to be closed down anyway.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
If the museum is thrilled, get a property release.
Please note that not all of Adobe requirements are legal requirements, but also protective requirements against possible threads or simply rules applied by moderators considereing elements as identifiable, even if they are free of use.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
OK thanks
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You're welcome.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Obviously the pictures have been taken on a non public ground. You need a release from the museum. At least some of the pictures have also technical issues, but I suppose, the moderator found it easier to refuse on IP grounds.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thank you
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You're welcome.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Adobe has much inventory that is Editorial Use Only. It cannot be used for commercial purposes. It can only be used for journalism, blogs, news articles. Are you certain that what you saw was not Editorial use only?
Show us some examples.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
There are certainly some so marked but plenty of logo'd ones that are not. I will not be pursuing this on private property grounds. Thank you.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
All identifiable markings must be removed and may not be use in keywords or titles.
Regardless of the IP issues, the first two photos have technical and quality problems.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
@Chris220846169en7 wrote:
I have just had 3 pictures rejectd on IP grounds. The title of each was in the format <historic aircraft type> at <named museum>. There are many Adobe Stock pictures of historic aircraft, including all three types in my pictures. There are many pictures of named museums. There is no IP restriction at law which would prevent their publication.
You never know, but they probably introduced property releases. You can get accepted some pictures, that would get an IP strike, with the correctly applied property release.
You simply can't judge from other accepted pictures to your situation.
This said, your pictures also have quality issues as said multiple times here in this thread.
If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html