Looking for consistency and clarity in Adobe decision making.

[donaldb61355424]

I am still trying to learn and understand Adobe rules, but it is difficult when they seem inconsistent, arbitrary and only provide the incomprehensive phrase "Technical Issues." It is their company, and so it is their rules, and I am willing to abide; however, it would be helpful if there were an appearance of consistency and fairness.

Two examples:

• A series of photos of a restored antique square grand piano built in 1867 by Chickering $ Sons.
  • In the photos with the manufacturer's name clearly visible, Adobe accepted some yet rejected others for "Intellectual Property Refusal." All were accepted immediately by another stock company.
  • I cloned out the manufacturer's name, including the photos Adobe accepted with the name clearly visible, yet all of those were rejected by Adobe for"Technical Issues."
  • Chickering & Sons made pianos from 1823 to 1983.  The company is now defunct.  How would one get permission?  And why?
• A series of photos of some teens in front of a large concrete graffiti wall. 
  • Adobe accepted all except for one, which was because of Intellectual Property Refusal.
  • On the other hand, they did accept two photos with a larger square area of graffiti, including some clear choice words, than the one they rejected.
  • How would one get permission to shoot years' worth of graffiti under an old concrete railroad trestle about a half-mile from any road?  And which spray paint artists?  All?  Majority?  Most recent?
  • All graffiti photos were accepted immediately by another photo stock company.

I do not want to be difficult; I am just trying to understand.

[RALPH_L]

Describing the photos does not help us. We need to see the photos.

Also, please bear in mind, there are several different reviewers and often they do make different 

decissions.

As far as the graffiti goes, if it is identifiable, it needs a release. 

[ricky336]

Hello,

The photos you're describing I think is rather a grey area, so the reviewer in some cases are erring on the side of caution.

That's why it is safer to stick to subjects where it is clear you need a release - either model or property, and that you can easily get one, or subjects where it is clear you don't need one. Such issues now are becoming more complex, especially nowadays that almost everyone has a camera and takes anything that moves - or doesn't move.