What is Stock Photography?
Stock photographs are images, which have already been created and are immediately available for license and download or otherwise delivered. Using stock photos is faster, more efficient and many times less expensive than assigning a professional photographer to take the picture. Except that if you have to find and hire a right model and staff within a tight time frame or you should assigning a professional photographer to take photos of certain places that is specifically hard to photographing in certain season of the year and so on…
Stock Photographs and Stock Images, such as Vector Arts, Drawing and other Graphic Illustrations are Copyright Protected.
What is Royalty Free Stock Photography and what does ROYALTY FREE mean?
Royalty free does not mean that free of charge. The term "royalty free" is used to describe a license for intellectual property like the photographs or images, which are sold here. So, the royalty free means that you pay once for an image that can be used for multiple projects over an unlimited period of time. Basically: you pay only once a flat rate and the desired image is yours for any purpose besides reselling. The flat rate prices of our Royalty-Free images are based only on the image size and resolution of the image.
When should I choose royalty-free images?
Because of the royalty-free images are less expensive and are sold in large numbers, royalty free images have absolutely no control over who uses the images, for what purpose or during what time period. So your biggest competitor could use the exact same royalty free image you are using or someone not in the same field could have their ad appear on the same page as yours, with the same photo. Does it matter if your project uses the same image as someone in the same industry? Sometimes it doesn’t if the image is used inside on a small press-run, local project. But if it’s a higher profile image, like the cover of a brochure, or national print ad it would be very embarrassing to have your competitor use the same image. Our clients typically choose to use the royalty-free images for smaller, complimentary uses rather than making them the primary focus OR choose from our Exclusive Royalty Free Image Collection.
What is Rights-Managed Stock photography?
Rights-Managed (RM) images are licensed for a single project for a specific time frame distributed within certain territories.
When should you choose a rights-managed image?
Clients generally choose rights-managed images when the image will be used for a high-profile project such as print advertising, brochure & catalog covers, retail products and more. Higher licensing fees & the fact that the use of rights-managed images is tracked, help prevent a potential for conflict with your competitor using the same image or seeing the same image in other uses within the same media.
Visco Images uses a “Simplified RM license” to brake down the Rights Managed images’ fee and to keep you all the benefits of using Rights Managed images.
All of Visco Images Stock’s images, both rights-managed and royalty-free are the highest professional quality obtainable. This allows you to make large size reproductions. We allow you to download highest quality (lowest compression) .jpg file, but in some cases - based on your special request, - Visco Images could provide you with the original .tif file. Ask for availability.
What is the Model Release?
A model release, known in similar contexts as a liability waiver, is a legal release typically signed by the subject of a photograph granting permission to publish the photograph in one form or another. The legal rights of the signatories in reference to the material are thereafter subject to the allowances and restrictions stated in the release, and also possibly in exchange for compensation paid to the photographed.
Publishing an identifiable photo of a person without a model release signed by that person can result in civil liability for whoever publishes the photograph.
Note that the photographer is typically not the publisher of the photograph, but sells the photograph to someone else to publish. Liability rests solely with the publisher, except under special conditions. It is typical for the photographer to obtain the model release because he is merely present at the time and can get it, but also because it gives him more opportunity to sell the photograph later to a party who wishes to publish it. Unless a photo is actually published, the need (or use) of a model release is undefined. And, since some forms of publication do not require a model release (e.g., news articles), the existence (or non-existence) of a release is irrelevant.
Note that the issue of model release forms and liability waivers is a legal area related to privacy and is separate from copyright. Also, the need for model releases pertains to public use of the photos: i.e., publishing them, commercially or not. The act of taking a photo of someone in a public setting without a model release, or of viewing or non-commercially showing such a photo in private, generally does not create legal exposure, at least in the United States.
The legal issues surrounding model releases are complex and vary by jurisdiction. Although the risk to photographers is virtually nil (so long as proper disclosures of the existence of a release, and its content is made to whoever licenses the photo for publication), the business need for having releases rises substantially if the main source of income from the photographer's work lies within industries that would require them (such as advertising). In short, photo journalists never need to obtain model releases for images they shoot for (or sell to) news or qualified editorial publications.
Photographers who also publish images need releases to protect themselves, but there is a distinction between making an image available for sale (even via a website), which is not considered publication in a form that would require a release, and the use of the same image to promote a product or service in a way that would require a release. Whether or not publishing a photo via the internet requires a release is currently being debated in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It is likely that any and all exposure to the public of unreleased photos via any vehicle will constitute civil liability for the photographer. As such, in a strict sense, photographers of unreleased photos, especially photographs primarily depicting recognizable people, have no meaningful claim to copyright in and to such works, since inherent in the constitutional right of copyright is a "right" to "copy", meaning to publish. Since most legal advisors now argue that any photo of a person for which a signed model release does not exist leaves a publisher susceptible to civil action, it cannot be argued that any "right to copy" inheres to such images. As a result, the thrust of current laws will gradually efface from public view all but commercial photographs (photographs commissioned to assist in the marketing of products) and so-called "news photographs," which have not historically been required to secure releases from their subjects but which bear the additional burden, should their legitimacy be legally challenged, of proving that the event photographed was "newsworthy" in nature.