On 21/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >You don't use a photo without release for any commercial purpose. You can lose >your happy home. The stock house I work with won't accept any people shots >without detailed releases. And in special cases, such as with shots that >depict alcohol or tobacco use, the release has to specify how the person is >depicted. > >Shel Belinkoff wrote: > >> So, if y'want to publish a photo from years before, and y'can't find the >> subject, and a release is required, whadday do? Fake the release? >> >> Cotty wrote: >> >> > >> > >I've always wondered about that, actually, how does a photographer track >> > down >> > >people they may have shot years ago? >> > >> > You can't. >> > >> > Publish and be damned!
The original post asked about publishing people shots 'from years ago', and how would it be possible to track them all down to sign releases. I said that you can't, etc. A friend published a book: a retrospective of his work dating back to the 1960s, including the Beatles and many others. When I asked him about releases, he just looked at me blankly. 'How am I supposed to track them all down from 1962 ?? I suppose they could track me down, if they are still alive, and then I'll see them again in court.' The book is documentary work, although obviously made the author and photographer some profit, some commercial gain. This scenario is a far cry from shooting commercial stock pics? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
