Curating News and Updates

  • RekindlePhoto avatar
    RekindlePhoto 3 Mar 2014 21:59
    I had a couple that were sent back as incomplete because I forgot to go to the stupid time consuming other page to attach the model release. I attached the release and re-submitted.

    Damn I wish the model release was on the data input page too !!!!!!
  • ionescu avatar
    ionescu 6 Mar 2014 16:57
    Recently I uploaded an editorial image of a local star, a picture taken in a public space during a public event. I asked in the 'note to curator' field that the file be marked for editorial use only. Guess what!? The file got rejected for missing release and I am instructed on how to upload one. No problem. But the curator insists that I should do what I already done: to mention in the 'note to curator' field that the file should be marked for editorial use only! That's nuts! As far as I know, there was not such a request for filling the 'note to curator' field asking to mark the image as 'for editorial use only' and the files missing a needed release were automatically marked as 'for editorial use only'. Just a waste of precious time for both sides. The file IS EDITORIAL.

    p.s: on another site(usually more strict about the rules) the file was up in less than 24 hours. yes, the world is changing.
  • Changed 6 Mar 2014 16:58 by ionescu ""
  • RekindlePhoto avatar
    RekindlePhoto 7 Mar 2014 22:56
    remember that P5 has told us they decide what is editorial. The checkbox about people or business really is meaningless. Over the years many times since they started they have told us the checkbox really does not mean anything.

    ... remember that squirrels are people too ;)
  • ionescu avatar
    ionescu 10 Mar 2014 19:27
    We should have like buttons on comments.