Jump to content
Sue J Hill Photography

Release for animals/insects in Zoos, WWT, NT

Recommended Posts

Hi, first time contributor and still learning the ropes.

I wondered if you needed a release signing for pictures of animals/insects/birds in zoos, WWT Wetland Centres, National Trust etc.?  If the subject doesn't identify the surroundings is a release from the property still required?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that several zoos do not allow pictures of their animals be used for commercial purposes period.

So, first you'd have to take the photo with such shallow depth of field that one cannot tell what the surrounding are, and also stay away from larger animals that might be recognizable. (I.e. one may not get away with pandas from the San Diego Zoo.) Insects are probably less of an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've taken a bunch of students to the LA zoo over many Years. never a problem I have  LA ZOO, and Wild animal park near SanDiego in my port. No problem.Some zoos are weird. just avoid them. you pay to get in. Tell them to Take a Hike or give your money back. they will walk away. I also go at feeding Time.LA Zoo is owned By the people of Los Angeles.Is it Africa?...No. does it cost $10,000?. No.Do I respect those that go and do wildlife from a Topless truck? Yes , Of course. If your output is a possible 38 Cents??? Hmmmm Is this your Lifes calling? Great Get a sponsor and go.Insects?.....please.

CAT 2105 D CD79  WHT FLAMENGO 4.JPG

CAT 8667 CD309 SILVERBACK GORILLA 2.jpg

CAT 3104 CD119 LION 10.jpg

CAT 10080 CD346 CHIMPANZEE AND CHILD.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not had a problem with captive wildlife, as long as the background is not recognisable.  

WWT - should be fine as the majority of birds are wild any, again if identifiable background submit as editorial.

NT is another matter, I believe if taken on public property it's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The San Diego Zoo does not allow people to sell photos taken there because they have their own library of images for sale. So, just because Laurin got away with it so far, doesn't mean they won't one day pipe up about things they find on stock agencies. Large animals, like chimps, are very recognizable to their keepers.

Here is a quote from an email someone received from SD Zoo after posting images on Flickr:

"Although photographers own the copyright to their images, as a condition of admission to the San Diego Zoo and Safari Park we limit the use of these images by contract which is stated on the admission tickets as: Visitor agrees not to commercially use any photography or recordings in any form taken at the Parks, and Visitor grants permission to the Parks and their agents to utilize Visitor's image and/or sound recordings for any purpose whatsoever in perpetuity.

It is a breach of this contract to sell or use these images commercially and/or promotionally. San Diego Zoo Global relies on exclusive images of our plant and animal collection in order to raise money for our worldwide conservation efforts."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Benedek Alpar said:

Come to Transylvania, Romania, every corner in the woods we got bears 

 

6 minutes ago, Amanda Wayne said:

You have clearly never been to Alaska!

No, sorry ...! I know there still are bears, foxes and mooses and deers around ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recognisable backgrounds such as key elements in an animal's enclosure or a stage if there is a show going on tend to be a bigger issue than just the animals themselves, but on OTHER sites marking them editorial is enough to get past that.  On here, it seems to depend who is reviewing your image.  My friend and I have come to suspect there are some animal rights activists on the review team who outright reject anything that even looks captive.  Strangely, orca photos from SeaWorld are almost guaranteed to be rejected (they keep coming up with oftentimes BS excuses every time I try.  If I fix previous errors, they come up with a new one), but when I posted some from an aquarium in Japan, no drama whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Puffin's Pictures said:

Recognisable backgrounds such as key elements in an animal's enclosure or a stage if there is a show going on tend to be a bigger issue than just the animals themselves, but on OTHER sites marking them editorial is enough to get past that.  On here, it seems to depend who is reviewing your image.  My friend and I have come to suspect there are some animal rights activists on the review team who outright reject anything that even looks captive.  Strangely, orca photos from SeaWorld are almost guaranteed to be rejected (they keep coming up with oftentimes BS excuses every time I try.  If I fix previous errors, they come up with a new one), but when I posted some from an aquarium in Japan, no drama whatsoever.

No captive animals? I can for sure state that's not true. Sea World? Probably cause it is a listed restriction - https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/Known-Image-Restrictions-Places-and-Landmarks-North-and-South-America:

Known Image Restrictions - Places and Landmarks - North and South America

SeaWorld

  • Marine mammal parks with locations in Florida, California, and Texas

  • Owned by Busch Entertainment Corporation

  • Images from the parks (including animals, shows, and attractions) are unacceptable for commercial use

  • Acceptable for editorial use with a proper caption

  • Shows and performances within the park require press credentials

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oleschwander said:

 

No, sorry ...! I know there still are bears, foxes and mooses and deers around ....

I understand you were using hyperbole. Back home in Indiana, deer and squirrel are about as wild as we get. Being here in Alaska and having almost weekly reports of bear encounters definitely made me rethink my conception of the wilderness. Even so, the presence of wild animals dwindles every year. The bees and orcas are dying off. The salmon and tuna numbers have plummeted. Humans are slowly, though with exponential speed, decimating our own food supply. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the individual animal or the place you photograph the animals is identifiable, or you identify them in your title or keywords then you will need a property release for commercial use. 
https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/en_US/kbat02/Why-was-my-content-rejected-for-Property-Release?q=animals&l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1

Quote

 

Animals

  • Exotic pets, unusual animals, race horses, and certain zoo animals require a property release from the owner
  • Everyday pets and animals do not require a property release
  • Images that mention the name of the zoo, safari, or wildlife preserve in the metadata require a property release from an authorized person at that institution

 

 

ttps://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/en_US/kbat02/000006642?q=animals&l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1

  • Quote

    Zoos or private wildlife parks

    If they are not recognisable, so the could be from any zoo anywhere, then you'll be OK with out a release. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Amanda Wayne said:

I understand you were using hyperbole. Back home in Indiana, deer and squirrel are about as wild as we get. Being here in Alaska and having almost weekly reports of bear encounters definitely made me rethink my conception of the wilderness. Even so, the presence of wild animals dwindles every year. The bees and orcas are dying off. The salmon and tuna numbers have plummeted. Humans are slowly, though with exponential speed, decimating our own food supply. 

There is no beepocalypse. That was 2006 and colonies have increased since then. It was just another one of the environmental scares brought out by the doomsayers.  Colonies are at a 20 year high. The research and studies show that centuries-old, periodic phenomenon.  https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/07/28/beepocalypse-myth-handbook-dissecting-claims-of-pollinator-collapse/

I was reading up on fireflies this Summer, because there were so many here and in the woods when I was camping. I started to see how they "will be extinct in ten years". ? And some of that prediction was written 15 years ago. As a result of reading, I also discovered that the lightning beetles are short lived, maybe a few days, but the offspring live in the soil and need grubs and worms, to survive. I encourage grubs and anything the beetles eat, avoiding chemicals on the lawn, garden and woods.

Redlist that tracks and promotes wildlife preservation, the source for listed, threatened animals. "The Killer Whale, as the taxon is presently defined and recognized (Society for Marine Mammalogy 2017), does not meet any of the IUCN Red List criteria for a threatened status. "

This doesn't mean we shouldn't stop the poachers or not protect Orcas, but it does point out how the scare tactics of some news for clicks will drive a new story, which will go into the belief system, when the facts don't support the social media wave.  http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/15421/0

These are just random notes on why people here will slip in that Bots or AI are making reviews, as their image was rejected... then it becomes an accepted fact, being repeated over and over. Don't people do fact checks, or are they so driven by news that they just repeat things without at least s summary verification or look at the truth? AI or bots wouldn't be so random and inconsistent. Humans are. Reviewers who don't know what's right or wrong, will reject just to be on the safe side. Personal opinions and bias will also get rejections. Bots have neither! ?

Anyway we aren't all dying because the crops are going to fail ,because the bees are mysteriously dying off. That was ten years ago or more.

If SS says they don't take zoo animals from specific locations, why does it become such a debate that they should, or ways to evade detection and risk your account, over some usually, common and over produced, zoo animal photos. The agency makes the rules, and they are pretty clear and simple.

271,930 Lion stock photos and photography are available royalty-free

How many do you think the buyers need and why would yours be the one of 271,931 that would be important and make money? Really?

My suggestion is, find something that's not in a cage, easy to find and shoot (that's why there are so many photos already) and possibly leave the work of animals in nature to people who go on safari or travel to the wild. Zoo animals? It's been done and over done.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet the j pod off the Olympic peninsula coast is dying off. J50 just died of starvation because of overfishing it's food supply. Yes, it was a story that rode the coattails of the mourning orca mom story from the same pod and is the only reason it made global news. Yet, the problem is related. Both are, from a biologist theory at least, a result of a lack of their preferred food.

The salmon numbers here in Alaska (land of world class fishing) was way down this year. They even shut down fishing the kenai river completely to sockeye during the peak tourist season to try to increase the numbers that made it up to the spawning ground. Yes, I referenced bees without doing any research. I'll admit that. I typed up a quick response and threw in the bees to bolster the point I was making. Maybe orcas on the whole global level aren't endangered, but in areas where fishing is king, we are creating ripples in the food chain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of zoo animals vs wild animals selling, I have a grizzly shot I took at a rescue park. It sold. Yet the dozen or so wild black bear in their natural habitat have not. There are better grizzly images, way better! Brown bears frolicking in Katmai and snatching salmon from the streams while their adorable babies watch. Yet someone needed a grizzly in captivity image. It's overdone, sure, but it sells. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My images are mainly wildlife and they do sell regularly - maybe not in huge numbers compared to many in here, but I do make money.

("271,930 Lion stock photos and photography are available royalty-free")

("How many do you think the buyers need and why would yours be the one of 271,931 that would be important and make money? Really?")

Maybe, but if thats your passion (and it's mine), you can do fairly well with wildlife -  you won't become a millionaire, but if you've got the passion - it's well worth it (imo).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, mandritoiu said:

In the woods? Come here in NJ! We have them on the streets and in our backyards.

This clip was made in my neighborhood:

 

Same here. A month ago ago one scared little , maybe two year cub was shooted on the street, local authorities are just not capable to handle this situation. I understand that agressive ones must be eliminated, but not on the main streets, not in front of childrens. Huge deforestation  in the last 29 years, a lot of trash everywhere i look, negligent human behavior, no wonder bears don t want to eat anymore ants. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mandritoiu said:

I thought you are a micro photography aficionado who knows how to appreciate "the best work".

 

 

Love insects - I'm nowhere near your quality @mandritoiu, but I appreciate the detail that goes into these tiny little creatures - may not be good for stock, but amazing for those who are interested in life / nature that we cannot see with the naked eye.  I admire those who are able to show us what we are missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...