Posted by Bill Chambers on August 29, 2007 at 12:32 PM
I'm going to be doing a project where I'll be shooting a series of house doors in the historical part of town, and then making a print containing 20 doors. I'm sure the owners might be able to recognize their own doors, but don't know if anyone else would. Do I need a property release for this type of project? Thanks for any advice?
Posted by Wim Reyns on August 29, 2007 at 12:44 PM
I'm not really sure, but it cant harm to ask for a property release i'm sure the owners wont have any objections to make a photograph of their door ;)
Posted by Bill Chambers on August 29, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Hi Hank. I'll be selling them (or at least trying to sell them! ).
Posted by Robert Helms on August 29, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Bill, I can't give you an answer, but I'm glad that you asked this question. I'd like to know the answer to this one myself, but for a dif. subject. Your project is a cool idea that I'd like to check out once complete.
Bill,
You don't need a model or property release if your work is either photojournalism or art. If you plan to sell the work as a "art" (through a gallery or exhibit) you don't need any releases. However, you must have releases if any of the images will be used in advertising, marketing, editorial, stock..... If there is the slighest chance that the final work could be used for anything other than "art" than I suggest you get releases.
Hope this helps.
Posted by Ron Niebrugge on August 29, 2007 at 8:56 PM
Hey Carl, always nice to see another Alaskan here.
Bill in today's litigious society, it never hurts to have a property release, in fact many stock agencies will ask for one, but you do not need one even for advertising use.
There have been a number of instances where property owners have tried to prevent the marketing of photos of property (Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Hollywood Sign, Lone Cypress Tree) but in every instance the photographer prevailed. In fact, buildings are specifically excluded from the Copyright law.
Now if there is a painting, sculpture or trademark on the door, you would need permission from the artists or owner of the trademark.
Carolyn Wright goes into more detail on the subject at photoattorney.com - you might do some searching there, or consider buying her book.
Posted by Bill Chambers on August 29, 2007 at 9:21 PM
Thanks everybody for your help. I really appreciate it!
Posted by William Brozy on August 29, 2007 at 10:03 PM
actually - if you take the photos from the sidewalk it's OK. The sidewalk and all views (from the DOT, county, city, town rights-of-way) are public domain. It wouldn't have hurt to ask first...
Discussion
8 repliesSounds like a neat project.
You don't need a model or property release if your work is either photojournalism or art. If you plan to sell the work as a "art" (through a gallery or exhibit) you don't need any releases. However, you must have releases if any of the images will be used in advertising, marketing, editorial, stock..... If there is the slighest chance that the final work could be used for anything other than "art" than I suggest you get releases.
Hope this helps.
Bill in today's litigious society, it never hurts to have a property release, in fact many stock agencies will ask for one, but you do not need one even for advertising use.
There have been a number of instances where property owners have tried to prevent the marketing of photos of property (Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Hollywood Sign, Lone Cypress Tree) but in every instance the photographer prevailed. In fact, buildings are specifically excluded from the Copyright law.
Now if there is a painting, sculpture or trademark on the door, you would need permission from the artists or owner of the trademark.
Carolyn Wright goes into more detail on the subject at photoattorney.com - you might do some searching there, or consider buying her book.