Is there any point in processing this?

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

Hello,

When I took these, I had not yet searched whether this mixer was copyrighted, which was a big mistake. Of course it is! When I crop most of it out (it's not the point of the shot), is it usable? It certainly changed the message I was trying to send and made this a closeup, which I don't think Adobe really gets excited about. =(

I don't wanna waste my time, obviously. 

Thanks for your expert opinions.

 

[daniellei4510]

Without seeing the uncropped version, it's difinately difficult to undersstand what is going on here. A medical procedure? A cooking recipe in a kitchen? You can always try, but I think you'd be at risk of having an effect on your refusal rate.

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

My big question is about the copyrighter mixer...

[Jill_C]

I don't think that this image would earn an IP rejection because the details of the stand mixer are not visible. However, it will definitely earn a quality rejection because it has chroma noise and blur and is not well composed. It's too tightly cropped such that it's difficult to see who's doing what...

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

I did not waste my time processing it because I wanted only one question answered.  I'm wondering if you actually read my post all the way through... I found a case on the internet where they sued someone because their mixer has the same shape as theirs so the shape is also copyrighted, not just the name. That's why I cropped it so tight.

[Jill_C]

I did read your entire post and answered your question. Go ahead and post it if you want to. It will be rejected.

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

I never said I was going to post it. I have about a dozen...I just grabbed one and cropped it. I paid no attention to focus or anything else because I only wanted an opinion about the IP aspect. As always, thank you for your response. I always appreciate your opinion.

[Abambo]

The mixer is probably a Kitchen Aid and is iconic. So yes, such a mixer could generate an IP violation, even if the logo is edited out. All depends on the picture and how prominent the mixer is. I recognized it, but I do not think how prominent it will be for the moderators. I know, however, that some assets get refused because of iconic looks.

However, especially because of the blur, as indicated by @Jill_C, this picture is difficult to get through.

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

Hello and thank you for the help. As I said above, I didn't pay any attention to focus as I was ONLY concerned about IP. I have others and would of course scrutinize if I thought it was worth the time and effort...

[Abambo]

You have others and the mixer may be pictured differently. I had an iPhone that got refused because of the round button.

[Nancy OShea · Accepted solution]

The trick to good food photography is camera placement and angle. Immersive camera placement, a few degrees above or below table level is more appealing to viewers than overhead shots.  Although overhead shots can be a good choice when you want to show the list of ingredients.

https://stock.adobe.com/search?k=making%20cake

Proper safeguards must be taken to protect IP.  For this reason, many food photographers & vloggers use generic hand tools on camera and reserve their Kitchenaid & Vitamix for off camera tasks.  Cheating. 🙂

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

Cheating's funny. But I wasn't trying to get "food", I was trying to get the woman, doing a household chore. Adobe seems to like people in the pics. I belive it may have been you (?) who told me there is a market for regular people doing regular things. Am I wrong about that?

Thanks for your response.

p.s. I should probably also mention that is my daughter getting ready for my granddaughter's birthday party. She was incredibly busy so I promised I would shoot without asking for any particular locations or changes of any kind. I was keeping my promise of trying to not get in the way, LOL. But, at the same time, I keep hearing that I should do something "different" so angle is something I can control. I'm more of a cenceptual photographer trying to change to meet Adobe's needs. I'm afraid I change slowly 😃

[Abambo]

You should talk your daughter into a modelling session. Shooting the “real world” never works well, and especially not for stock. Even for casual looking pictures, you should stage them. Even with “real” staff: https://geprolux.com/en/about/our-staff/

[ImaRetiredTeacher]

My entire family is in my portfolio, haha. They pose for me often, but I always seize any opportunity to practice. Rheumatoid Arthritis attacks my muscles so just the act of holding a camera up and steady is an enormous challenge. Every picture I take is important in keeping my muscles functional 😃 Everything I do is for a good reason, but I'm complicated so it's not always obvious! When I'm shooting for real, a tripod is almost always used due to my weakness =(  I miss the old days when I was healthy.

Thanks for all the good advice 

[Abambo]

You're welcome.

[George_F]

I was thinking the same thing as @Abambo, KitchenAid mixers are so iconic that I believe this has the possibility of running into IP issues.  I think this would be a photo that is on the fence, and could go either way.

There is a bit of the K in the KitchenAid logo showing on the metal band of the mixer as well, this should definitely be removed if you decide to submit it.  Or removed from any other similar photos you may decide to submit.

Although a few examples are black and white, IP in regards to stock photos has a lot of grey area in my experience.  I've found several instances of my model of car with the logos removed that is available for commercial licensing.  It is still very clearly that model of car though, and I can even narrow it down to within a few model years based on the wheels.

Cheers!