Welcome Dialog

Welcome to the Community!

We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.


Adobe really bugs me!

Community Beginner ,
Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Especially when one considers the renumeration they pay, bearing in mind, I have sold/licensed one solitary image so far.

I have had a number of my images rejected by Adobe for one reason or another and again today I had a further two images rejected for legal issues. I did point out these images were for editorial purposes, even so they were rejected.

I find this strange because many images that are rejected by Adobe were accepted by Getty (I look on Getty as the benchmark für stock photos) and are on display/for sale/licensing with them. Is Adobe being too over cautious?

Perhaps it is me? I am a photojournalist, decided in 2016 to expand into creative photography as this is not dangerous like journalism.

Here are the 2 images (greatly reduced in resolution) in question today.

isar canal baden 72px.jpg Isar Canal Rafting 25%.jpg

So where is the problem with these, bearing in mind they are for editorial purposes? I welcome your comments.

The final question that does arise, is it worth working with Adobe - why do I bother?

DAStagg

freelance photojournalist

TOPICS
Contributor critique

Views

382

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Adobe Community Professional , Jun 27, 2017 Jun 27, 2017
Adobe don't accept photos for journalism/editorial, only creative release (for the average contributor anyway). So in this case YOU would need a model release, and since (I guess) it would be rather impossible to get model releases for everyone, the photo wouldn't be accepted based on that alone!So, as a rule of thumb, unless you can get model releases for people, don't bother submitting them. However, if the faces aren't shown, and you are showing part of a body, chest, hands, foot etc., then y...

Likes

Translate

Translate
LEGEND ,
Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

https://forums.adobe.com/people/DAS+Photography  wrote

I had a further two images rejected for legal issues.

[snip]

So where is the problem with these, bearing in mind they are for editorial purposes? I welcome your comments.

i would assume because you don't have their (the people in the images) permission to use it

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Yeah, Adobe is really strict about getting model releases.

And, not that it matters since they were rejected for legal reasons, but you also have areas that are a bit over-exposed in both images too.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

For editorial purposes, ie the press, one doesn't need a release. Remember, I am a journalist.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Adobe Stock is not aiming at journalists. That is one of the biggest difference between a stock repository like Getty and Adobe Stock. The market for whom they are aiming is entirely different.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

https://forums.adobe.com/people/DAS+Photography  wrote

For editorial purposes, ie the press, one doesn't need a release. Remember, I am a journalist.

Adobe stock is world wide... some countries don't allow journalist to ignore the law

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Jun 27, 2017 Jun 27, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Adobe don't accept photos for journalism/editorial, only creative release (for the average contributor anyway). So in this case YOU would need a model release, and since (I guess) it would be rather impossible to get model releases for everyone, the photo wouldn't be accepted based on that alone!

So, as a rule of thumb, unless you can get model releases for people, don't bother submitting them. However, if the faces aren't shown, and you are showing part of a body, chest, hands, foot etc., then you would not need a release!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Jun 27, 2017 Jun 27, 2017

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

I am happy now. Thanks for the informative answer.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines