Inspiring

Answered

Property Release Questions - Real Estate Photography

Forum|Forum|4 years ago
December 16, 2021
3 replies
998 views

I could really use some help / guidance regarding property releases and real estate photography. I have taken numerous photos of houses for sale for a few different realtors. I have sold the realtors, non-exclusive rights ot the photos to be used specifically for the advertisement of that property for sale. The realtor has the property owner sign a seller's agreement which includes a property release for the realtor to advertise photos of the house as part of their marketing program. Do I need to have the property owner sign a separate, specific property release for me to sell my photos of their houses on Adobe Stock? I think I know the answer already, but was hoping that perhaps I could find a way to use some of my past real estate photos to add to my portfolio.

Where I really need more guidance is around Adobe Stock's statement:

Examples of properties that don’t require a release: 

If your content features generic houses or interiors that don’t have any identifiable features, like the photo below, you’re in the clear. 

Now, I have tried submitting a few photos that I thought would fit into the generic category (making sure to scrub house numbers, or any other obvious identifiable markings) but they have been refused citing that a property release was required. Should I just assume that I always need a property release and that every house is identifiable?

Your feedback is appreciated.

-Rob

Contributors

This topic has been closed for replies.

Correct answer Mat Hayward

This is not a generic view of a random home that could be found in any cul-de-sac in the world. The house is completely identifiable based on the view, the design of the room/windows and the furniture. Definitely a property release would be required here.

Kind regards,

Mat Hayward

T

Test Screen Name

Legend

Would you like to find intimate pictures of your house, your furniture used to sell hamburgers or cleaning products, to illustrate unfashionable decor in a "before and after" article, or to promote policitcal parties you don't agree with? Clearly a house is going to be recognisable by its owners, and they could certainly sue... so you would need a release signed for ALL potential purposes. Sadly, like a lot of photos (e.g. street scenes, cars...) it's virtually impossible to use them as stock, no matter how excellent.

Abambo

Community Expert

The realtor has the property owner sign a seller's agreement which includes a property release for the realtor to advertise photos of the house as part of their marketing program. Do I need to have the property owner sign a separate, specific property release for me to sell my photos of their houses on Adobe Stock?

-Rob

By @reedesign1912

The release signed by the seller is restricted to the sales process. I'm even not persuaded that a separate release is not needed, but why not.

You can't use that release for your own needs, however. Best is to get a “stock property release”, but with pictures of the past, that could be difficult.

As a side note: This is my personal view based on what you described. In no way, I give you a guaranty that my opinion is correct and enforceable. And for the records: I'm not an Adobe employee.

As for the refusals: If you are really confident that there is no identifiable element on the picture, post one and let others look at the picture. You know, moderators are humans and humans err.

Edit: some corrections applied.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

reedesign1912Author

Inspiring

Thank you, I assumed as much regarding the property releases and you're right it is too difficult to go find sellers who have moved on to get the releases signed now. It would be best for me in the future to get releases signed when I am taking the photos. As for the rejected photos, I have learnt very quickly not to take it personally and just to move on. It's often not worth the time to stress over it - just work on doing better in my next photos.

-Rob

Rob R, Photographer

Abambo

Community Expert

(...) you're right it is too difficult to go find sellers who have moved on to get the releases signed now. (...)

-Rob

By @reedesign1912

The buyers would need to sign the release now, as the sellers are no more owners. You sell with all strings attached, but you can't add strings afterwards.

ABAMBO | Hard- and Software Engineer | Photographer

Nancy OShea

Community Expert

@reedesign1912,

I can't comment without seeing examples that were rejected for IP reasons. It might have something to do with surroundings or even the construction materials. I don't know.

Nancy O'Shea— Product User & Community Expert

reedesign1912Author

Inspiring

Thanks Nancy. Now, I will point out after reading through a lot of questions about rejections in these discussion boards, I am well aware that my photo would probably be rejected for technical reasons, including the purple fringing on the tree trunks, grain and softer focus. But this one was rejected for missing Property Release. I just thought it was a generic enough interior sunroom that I wouldn't need a property release.

Any thoughts?

Rob R, Photographer

M

Mat HaywardCorrect answer

Inspiring

This is not a generic view of a random home that could be found in any cul-de-sac in the world. The house is completely identifiable based on the view, the design of the room/windows and the furniture. Definitely a property release would be required here.

Kind regards,

Mat Hayward

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded