studio36uk wrote:
With or without Art+Commerce, Vogue is acquiring substantial rights to the images.

You mean, the right to display them on Vogue.it?

Well, that's kind of the point of the whole thing

There is no wording in the "consent to use" that you have to agree to before uploading that even mentions a license to do anything other than display the images on Vogue.it.

http://www.vogue.it/photovogue/en/ConsensoFoto.aspx

That's less than we agree to when we upload images here!



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

orias wrote:
if you are not paid for your submission,  chances are, that you're just entering a cheapo cattle call thats looking for free labor and mediocre talent. 

people shouldnt waste their art, skills and vision

https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=843233

-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote:
You mean, the right to display them on Vogue.it?

Well, that's kind of the point of the whole thing

There is no wording in the "consent to use" that you have to agree to before uploading that even mentions a license to do anything other than display the images on Vogue.it.

http://www.vogue.it/photovogue/en/ConsensoFoto.aspx

That's less than we agree to when we upload images here!

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

[in part]
"... In addition, photographs must be original and submitted by the authors themselves, subsequent to having read and acknowledged the general conditions governing participation and privacy as well as the signing of a “no-objection” by the subjects of the photographs concerned. ..."

That is not the whole agreement. It also incorporates the "... general conditions governing participation ..." by reference. The T&Cs. Find them and you will have a better answer.

By the way the "no objection" phrase they use there is peculiar to Italian law in respect of human subjects appearing in the photographs. It is analogous to, but not exactly the same as, a model release.

Studio36

studio36uk wrote:
And this as well. Your images become their intellectual property asset.

I don't suppose anyone actually reads the T&C's when they submit the images. Too busy mentally masturbating over the fact that their image might appear on Vogue's website I guess.

Conde' Nasty [sic] are well known as one of the biggest rights grabbing asshole outfits in the friggen world!

Studio36

mentally masturbating  [sic] , Really?
  Ive read everything through in both English and italian before uploading images as well as looking over the  A&C contracts and agreements with my lawyers , both here in Chicago and I Barcelona , It bothers me more that you would think someone would be so 'casual' in regards to their work.
 
If I was THAT paranoid I wouldn't be posting online at all.
And on the same hand I am not a novice to think I shouldn't be vigilant .
  Again I made the choice to submit my work to their site , I am not using their logo on my website nor do I mention it as the OP has pointed out others do.
  In regards to my legal options , I've made my choices as well , both of these being my business .

Honestly , I know you mean well , but I 'm not a beginner .
Thanks for the Rant.
Yea welcome to the Matrix.

V Laroche wrote:
http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/

It's a website where you upload your photos and Vogue stamps them with a logo. I have been noticing more images stamped with the Vogue logo on models' and photographers' MM portfolios lately. This is quite silly since I could photocopy one of my hermit crabs, upload the image to this hosting site, and have it stamped with the Vogue logo. I feel bad for the models who put these up on their ports-- they obviously believe the photog got their photo published in Vogue! I feel so embarrassed for them and feel bad that they were misled by unscrupulous photographers.

So I made this thread to be a white knight. NOW YOU KNOW.

Also, feel free to upload amusing photos and then post them here with the Vogue logo on them. I think this has opportunities for LOLs.

Interesting that models actually put they were published in Italian Vogue. Though to me, still an honor if ever an image was featured on Vogue.It, but come on!..this isn't the actual publication and secondly, it is the photographer that gets the feature, the model simply took part in the making of said image.

When I have seen often is "published in Italian Vogue" or "Featured on Vogue.It" ..err...featured/published alike, who else was part of such a lovely task? Photographer? Stylist? Designer? ...irritates me to no end when the excitement out weights the proper credit due.

orias wrote:
if you are not paid for your submission,  chances are, that you're just entering a cheapo cattle call thats looking for free labor and mediocre talent. 

people shouldnt waste their art, skills and vision to get the same trophy as everyone else

perhaps the folks here are not familiar with the fact that you are a photographer as well as a model. So i'll challenge you to upload ten of your best images to the site and see how many are approved. (if they are approving just anyone or anyone image)

I've uploaded 10 and had two included in the site, which means in my experience, it's more difficult for me to get images on the Photo vogue site, then in four of the galleries where my work is physically exhibited.

So no, "photo vogue" is not a published credit, but it is honorable to included on the site, plus the images become viable to be used in the magazine.
I for one am proud my images are included there...

like this one: http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Portf … 7d53/Image

and fyi, Orias is one of the three models in the pool ~

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
perhaps the folks here are not familiar with the fact that you are a photographer as well as a model. So i'll challenge you to upload ten of your best images to the site and see how many are approved. (if they are approving just anyone or anyone image)

I've uploaded 10 and had two included in the site, which means in my experience, it's more difficult for me to get images on the Photo vogue site, then in four of the galleries where my work is physically exhibited.

So no, "photo vogue" is not a published credit, but it is honorable to included on the site, plus the images become viable to be used in the magazine.
I for one am proud my images are included there...

like this one: http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Portf … 7d53/Image

and fyi, Orias is one of the three models in the pool ~

QFT+100000000

I'd like to extend that challange to everyone else claiming it is "easy" .
Nice job DS !!

Cuica Cafezinho wrote:
Interesting, what they choose.

http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Portf … e86d/Image

Love It !!
http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Profi … 7a72a/User 
His whole body of work is beautiful,
  the ascetics & composition alone are amazing ..


Looking through the site and as well as the A&C site is inspirational , the views and captures are incredible.


But see this is my point ,  One man's Trash is an other's gold.

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
perhaps the folks here are not familiar with the fact that you are a photographer as well as a model. So i'll challenge you to upload ten of your best images to the site and see how many are approved. (if they are approving just anyone or anyone image)

I've uploaded 10 and had two included in the site, which means in my experience, it's more difficult for me to get images on the Photo vogue site, then in four of the galleries where my work is physically exhibited.

So no, "photo vogue" is not a published credit, but it is honorable to included on the site, plus the images become viable to be used in the magazine.
I for one am proud my images are included there...

like this one: http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Portf … 7d53/Image

and fyi, Orias is one of the three models in the pool ~

for one they dont want peoples best images.  i've talking with many many many acceptants and nearly all of them have said the same,  they seem to pick random outtakes. 

as a client viewing most peoples ports on there, i would overlook THE VAST MAJORITY as talented prospects,  but those same people have ports on sites like this that literally blow me away.   

would you have intentionally picked those 2 photos as representative of your skill and body of work that you'd change your port and website to exclusively show those because you are so proud of your accomplishment in them and you're that honored by their skillful acknowledgement in selecting those for you to represent yourself to their world with?

for 2,   i shoot commercial work and do not give my images out for free. i dont do trade shooting at a photographer as i lack the free time to devote to that art form. 

for 3 i dont like th eidea of someone choosing how i represent myself to the world.  i wouldnt want facebook to randomly choose 2 posts to showcase my world.  i dont see how this is any different. 

for 4 i did submit a fun photograph awhile ago before it was cool apparently,   they accepted it.  it wasnt image of the day or anything, however it was publicly viewable and stamped right along.  however it clearly was deleted when i deleted my account or is floating around their archives until it suits them to use it for something lol....  i was no longer was interested in their growing community of pretend elitists lol

for 5 as someone who used to know me,  you know me well enough to know i have never in my life needed external validation and in fact i avoid attention like the plague.

for 6 they may have upped their standards since they began, i havent bothered with them in close to a year. Howeer judging on the acceptances that i've been browsing tonight on their site, it hasn't improved by leaps and bounds.  clearly the more people flood there to gain acceptance, the more choices for photos they'll receive and the better their image selection will appear

studio36uk wrote:
-That is not the whole agreement. It also incorporates the "... general conditions governing participation ..." by reference. The T&Cs. Find them and you will have a better answer.

Having read through everything available on the site I see no evidence of a rights grab and don't have any qualms about uploading low-res images there, certainly no more so than uploading them here or to Facebook!

As for the Art+Commerce side of things, that's a separate legal agreement for rights-managed licensing of the images for editorial use by Conde Naste and other clients. I've signed up for it and all the paperwork has been approved but I haven't got around to uploading any hi-res images yet. I guess I should get onto that ASAP!!



Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

S W I N S K E Y wrote:
perhaps the folks here are not familiar with the fact that you are a photographer as well as a model. So i'll challenge you to upload ten of your best images to the site and see how many are approved. (if they are approving just anyone or anyone image)

I've uploaded 10 and had two included in the site, which means in my experience, it's more difficult for me to get images on the Photo vogue site, then in four of the galleries where my work is physically exhibited.

So no, "photo vogue" is not a published credit, but it is honorable to included on the site, plus the images become viable to be used in the magazine.
I for one am proud my images are included there...

like this one: http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Portf … 7d53/Image

Yes from what I experienced - especially after the whole Art+Commerce thing - is that they are rejecting close to 80%-90% of submissions. Due to this you can see two interesting things on their website.

1) On their "How does it work" section, you will dozen if not hundreds of people whose photos have not be approved commenting that their photos have "disappeared" and that something must be broken.

2) Sort of in correlation with the high rate of denials, if you look though the ports of photographers who have signed up with the service - any photographer can sign up -  you will see a large percentage of them have not had a single photo approved as of yet.

However selective, any photo chosen should not be promoted as "published" nor should anyone describe yourself - as I have seen some people on MM do - as being "Vogue approved" or what not.

Paul Tirado Photography wrote:
However selective, any photo chosen should not be promoted as "published" nor should anyone describe yourself - as I have seen some people on MM do - as being "Vogue approved" or what not.

agreed

you can feel glad to get your image approved if thats your thing,  but you certainly shouldn't use their subjective site image preferences from a free submission form on a social network looking to gain more members to validate your skill or worth when representing yourself to the professional community


***********************************
also dude you know i love your avatar and that has renewed a small fraction of faith in them that they accepted it

JAE Photography PA wrote:
I have four photos approved.  I don't really count it as anything. I just find it to be some stupid fun game to see what I can get past the editors.

lol carefree is the way to be

JAE Photography PA wrote:
I have four photos approved.

That's two more that SWINSKEY.

orias wrote:
yea 90% of the models or photographers i know that have submitted to them have had an image stamped and accepted on in.  they post the credit on their page as if it has some sort of actual artistic or commercial value. 

i understand the need to be validated,  however a true alidation would be worth way more than hundreds of fake ones in my opinion  

i feel the same with some of the playboy stamps where photogs shoot a model who submits it to win her a free contest and the logo is on their for the site announcement of the winner.  Then they claim to be a playboy model or photographer.

if you are not paid for your submission,  chances are, that you're just entering a cheapo cattle call thats looking for free labor and mediocre talent. 

people shouldnt waste their art, skills and vision to get the same trophy as everyone else

Well as th reject over 90% of what is submitted you must know some good photographers, or they are making a copy of the "unapproved" images.  Look at the names on the site and click a few, I think most are empty profiles with nothing approved.

As for what they accept, it's been coverd in their FAQ.  An image has to move them or tell a story, most of the world does not speak Italian (i.e. their readership even) and that is all they look for.  So some random fashion image (or worse glamour) is unlikely to catch their eye, hence why you see so much else approved

AJScalzitti wrote:
Well as th reject over 90% of what is submitted you must know some good photographers, or they are making a copy of the "unapproved" images.  Look at the names on the site and click a few, I think most are empty profiles with nothing approved.

As for what they accept, it's been coverd in their FAQ.  An image has to move them or tell a story, most of the world does not speak Italian (i.e. their readership even) and that is all they look for.  So some random fashion image (or worse glamour) is unlikely to catch their eye, hence why you see so much else approved

i do know a lot of amazing photographers, but even most of them were upset with how quick their work was accepted and no longer perceive the site of much value because of that and how many of their collegues got accepted also.   The more people to be rewarded with something, the less appealing it is. 

its cool for someone to tell you that you're pretty,  but i wouldnt walk around with a sticker on my chest that said Steve called me pretty.... for one steve has subjective standards that are not industry representative.  for 2,  steve calls most girls hot and i'd hate to clash with a bunch of girls in my field wearing the same sticker

orias wrote:
its cool for someone to tell you that you're pretty,  but i wouldnt walk around with a sticker on my chest that said Steve called me pretty....

That would make a good T-shirt, though.

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
That would make a good T-shirt, though.

remind me to wear that when we grab a coffee sometime haha... try not to fall prey to steves propaganda and swoon in my presence

so if i get a photo into photovogue and then get the same photo in a playboy contest, could i superimpose both stamps and be twice as awesome?

V Laroche wrote:
I saw a girl who linked to the Italian-language version of the site (http://www.vogue.it/photovogue/) and said she had been "published in Italian Vogue." Bullshit!!! She didn't speak Italian and therefore didn't understand the nature of the website. Do you remember her? She was mad because she thought the photographer was making big bucks off of images from a TF shoot and she thought she should be compensated since the shot was published!
I have also seen other models crowing about how they "made it in," as if it's an accomplishment. I don't want to single them out because that's embarrassing.

--Even it the photographer DID get images in Vogue, they're not likely to get "big bucks" out of it.

orias wrote:
so if i get a photo into photovogue and then get the same photo in a playboy contest, could i superimpose both stamps and be twice as awesome?

I think you should just start http://www.stevecalledmepretty.com/ and be the one dispensing stamps.

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
I think you should just start http://www.stevecalledmepretty.com/ and be the one dispensing stamps.

not a bad idea!  then i could get a bunch of awesome photogs and models to submit their photos for free to drive my traffic, membership, forum activity, advertising income, and later stock image income from them   

they'll get the stamp of course and the ability to say that they are one of many who i called hot... pretty awesome braggin rights and no cost to them ;P

Art of the nude wrote:

--Even it the photographer DID get images in Vogue, they're not likely to get "big bucks" out of it.

You don't have to tell me. There were quite a few in attendance encouraging her though.

Dan OMell wrote:
I love this thread.
First of all, after OP complained, the awesome Joseph Francis tested the challenge and immediately was PUBLISHED in Vogue Italy. Great news. If she didn't, he probably would never try!

I repeat, published! Look at http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Istruzioni :
"... section will enable you to upload on Vogue.it your photographs[...] The best ones will be shown on a daily basis on PhotoVogue's home page and the best three will be also published in the magazine.

When you submit your image, it's immediately stamped, yes. But if during 24 hours the image isn't selected even for your own online portfolio on PhotoVogue Italy, it 1) erased from your online folder and 2) stays in their cache for maximum 2 more days, and then disappears. So, if some shitty guy saved the link to the submitted image that is never accepted (they usually review all of them during 24 hours max.), he can fool around for not so long at all.

I never claimed to be published in Vogue Italy, but I think it's Ok to provide the link to your image(s) accepted by PhotoVogue Italy. Why not? It's not a big deal. Why so much emotions about that? PhotoVogue Italy is definitely not Vogue Italy Magazine, but still some very minor part of their enterprise. I think nobody will be overly confused or deceived. To me, the most important part is that you can submit your images FOR FREE, damn. A lot of shitty publications or stupid shitty competitions require you to pay per each image to just submit!

The VERY big deal is to get what Francis actually did. And he was really published in Vogue Italy now, not just got 2 images accepted for his port on PhotoVogue Italy.

No. Francis didn't upload that unicorn photo. I think the model  must have uploaded it and that image was up as picture of the day already when I started this thread.  I think. I am feeling discombobulated now.

HAS the image actually come out in the print edition of Vogue Italia? I don't understand what you are talking about.

Dan OMell wrote:
I love this thread.
First of all, after OP complained, the awesome Joseph Francis tested the challenge and immediately was PUBLISHED in Vogue Italy. Great news. If she didn't, he probably would never try!


The VERY big deal is to get what Francis actually did. And he was really published in Vogue Italy now, not just got 2 images accepted for his port on PhotoVogue Italy.

Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

But I actually uploaded those pictures two days ago after seeing this thread:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=867730
in which the OP of that thread was in the Picture of the Day 3 days ago.

I happened to get Picture of the Day today and by coincidence this thread came along on the same day.

V Laroche wrote:
http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/

It's a website where you upload your photos and Vogue stamps them with a logo. I have been noticing more images stamped with the Vogue logo on models' and photographers' MM portfolios lately. This is quite silly since I could photocopy one of my hermit crabs, upload the image to this hosting site, and have it stamped with the Vogue logo. I feel bad for the models who put these up on their ports-- they obviously believe the photog got their photo published in Vogue! I feel so embarrassed for them and feel bad that they were misled by unscrupulous photographers.

So I made this thread to be a white knight. NOW YOU KNOW.

Also, feel free to upload amusing photos and then post them here with the Vogue logo on them. I think this has opportunities for LOLs.

Try it. They are VERY selective. While it's NOT Vogue magazine it is not all that easy to get them to approve your images.

R Michael Walker wrote:

Try it. They are VERY selective. While it's NOT Vogue magazine it is not all that easy to get them to approve your images.

Thanks for jumping in while the iron's hot, bro.

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:



Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

But I actually uploaded those pictures two days ago after seeing this thread:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=867730
in which the OP of that thread was in the Picture of the Day 3 days ago.

I happened to get Picture of the Day today and by coincidence this thread came along on the same day.

Ah ha! That explains it! I was so confused.

V Laroche wrote:
No. Francis didn't upload that unicorn photo. The model uploaded it and that image was up as picture of the day already when I started this thread.

Nov 23 12 06:23 pm you started the thread.
Nov 23 12 06:25 pm by Francis: "I'll try it."
Nov 23 12 06:26 pm by Francis: "Holy crap! You are right! I'm pic of the day, no less! http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/"

that's why I was initially a bit confused, sorry.

V Laroche wrote:
HAS the image actually come out in the print edition of Vogue Italia? I don't understand what you are talking about.

It will! Just click the link. I provided the quote from their site and emphasized by bold print this part for ya.

Dan OMell wrote:
Look at http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/Istruzioni :
"... section will enable you to upload on Vogue.it your photographs[...] The best ones will be shown on a daily basis on PhotoVogue's home page and the best three will be also published in the magazine.

V Laroche wrote:

Please explain the point of uploading a photo to that site, then downloading it with the logo and publishing it on one's MM port or website. Why not just link directly to one's v.it portfolio if one is so proud of the illustrious honor of having a portfolio hosted there?

The point is to give yourself status by associating yourself with the Vogue name.

There is no one who's opinion really matter who's mislead by what's happening here.

There is a little judging so it does mean more than putting up a photo in an MM port or on Tumblr.

Vogue gets free advertising from any photo that's above a certain threshold. It's a good deal all around.

When your resume has only a couple of items and one is Vogue, do you really think people reading that resume don't grasp how implausible it is to have shot the Iowa Dairy Queen Owners Association's annual catalog and a cover or editorial in Vogue and nothing else?

MC Photo wrote:
When your resume has only a couple of items and one is Vogue, do you really think people reading that resume don't grasp how implausible it is to have shot the Iowa Dairy Queen Owners Association's annual catalog and a cover or editorial in Vogue and nothing else?

Apparently, some do not. Additionally, I imagine in a scenario involving a lower-level fashion photog, it might be misleading. When a model posts it, there's often no context like that.

Anyway, as I said, there are a NUMBER of models who are confused about it and seem to believe that their face is peeking out of every newsstand in Italy. Some have been published in less prestigious magazines and perhaps they think of Vogue Italia as a shitty younger cousin of Vogue that that would accept them. Or something. I don't know how their minds work-- I do know that the desire to believe can be very powerful.

So YES, I DO think that people are misled, because they are running around MM saying so. Or maybe lying. Either/or.

V Laroche wrote:

Okay, so would you consider an image on that website to be "published in Vogue"? Cmon that is absurd. It's not the same at all. There are also hundreds, nay thousands of girls on Playboy.com but they're not Playmates.

Definitely not "in". "On" would be the correct term.

Photo Vogue seems to be the name of the page. So "on Photo Vogue" seems reasonable.

Published is a weird choice of words. When you upload it yourself and they don't reject it, that's not really "published". "Self-published" is more accurate.

They way Paige has it written is clearly the best way to make it clear.

V Laroche wrote:

Apparently, some do not. Additionally, I imagine in a scenario involving a lower-level fashion photog, it might be misleading. When a model posts it, there's often no context like that.

Anyway, as I said, there are a NUMBER of models who are confused about it and seem to believe that their face is peeking out of every newsstand in Italy. Some have been published in less prestigious magazines and perhaps they think of Vogue Italia as a shitty younger cousin of Vogue that that would accept them. Or something. I don't know how their minds work-- I do know that the desire to believe can be very powerful.

So YES, I DO think that people are misled, because they are running around MM saying so.

I don't believe that anyone who's opinion matters is mislead.

I don't believe that people who are published on the website truly believe they are in print in Italian Vogue even if they say they are. I think they are aware that they are writing something that's using a technicality to mislead other people and they aren't misled themselves.

People who see a model's port and read one of these credit who think the model was in Italian Vogue are not experienced at what they do and are not going to influence anything of relevance through their mistake.

It's annoying seeing people getting away with stretching the truth, but it really doesn't matter in the bigger picture.

V Laroche wrote:
No. Francis didn't upload that unicorn photo. The model uploaded it and that image was up as picture of the day already when I started this thread.

No, I uploaded it a couple of days ago.

Dan OMell wrote:
Nov 23 12 06:23 pm you started the thread.
Nov 23 12 06:25 pm by Francis: "I'll try it."
Nov 23 12 06:26 pm by Francis: "Holy crap! You are right! I'm pic of the day, no less! http://www.vogue.it/en/photovogue/"

that's why I was initially a bit confused, sorry.

I was being a little goofy with that but one minute (6:25 - 6:26) would have been much less time than required to pick a photo, sign up, sign in and upload.

Melodye Joy wrote:
...irritates me to no end when the excitement out weights the proper credit due.

That's really your own issue.

They are having the excitement that anyone would have over their biggest achievement, and it's probably their biggest achievement. Why not let them have their moment? It doesn't harm you.