In this digital age, I often wonder what card companies are limited to when it comes to the images they produce on their products. So often I will go through a set and wonder why certain (more exciting) scenes were not included. Do they have access to the entire film or series, or just certain parts of it? Especially seeing that so many sets are released well after public viewing.

Good morning. It varies ... for my current contract with C3 Ent., Inc. for The Three Stooges C3 actually has an archive database with high res scans of literally 1000s of publicity stills of The Three Stooges. As the licensed publisher I have access to the database and can pick what images I want to use and C3 sends me hi res tiffs of the photos. These are photos that C3 has permission from Columbia Pictures to offer to licensees for their products (whether the products are coffee mugs, calendars, trading cards, board games, etc. etc.). For some of the licensed projects I've done the licenser does NOT have the images and I have to create my own. For The Monster Times cards I did I had to scan the covers of the issues (I have a complete set) and then I cleaned up the images, color adjusted, etc. For Basil Wolverton's Barflyze I had the original Basil and Monte Wolverton book 'Barflyze' and I scanned the images DARK so white areas were gray and that allowed me to lay in all the color with Photoshop/Paint. You can tell with some card series that the publisher did 'video grabs' (which works when the licenser is also the studio that created the movie or TV series... then the video stills can just be sent to the licenser for approval). Images used in card series can come from several different sources -- from film cell source material (35mm film clips, developed into photographs ... publicity stills ... video grabs). Now, why on EARTH some card series seem to pick the most boring images from a film or TV show is somewhat of a mystery but could often involve the actors in the movie and what rights and permissions are available. As I recall, Topps' 1976/1977 King Kong card series had NO Jeff Bridges scenes... so that sort of indicates that Topps was limited to what shots they could use (thank goodness John Berkey's paintings were included otherwise would have been a very short set of cards!)... but if you go back further in time, to 1973, Topp's Creature Feature series utilized scenes with supporting actors that were 'tweeked' so that Rathbone and other actors who were NOT included in the license could be doctored with images of Topps' employees (have some fun and go through your 1973 Creature Feature cards ... you'll notice how sometimes the mismatched lighting, head size, etc. are hilarious as Topps circumvented supporting actor likenesses). Although I don't have a set, I believe it was ID4 widevisions that were very BAD video grabs versus publicity stills.
Point is... a publisher's source material for the card series can come from a wide range of sources and often it boils down to the rights the licenser has, versus the licensee, that determines what images the licensed publisher can use. I lucked out with Stooges ... massive archive of photos, all hi res, that I can use ... but some publishers, if they want to do a series, are 'stuck' having to pick and choose from either a limited source of images or conjure up their own and get permission that way.
Every series of cards will be different in that regard. And of course, I'm speaking only from my limited experience as a publisher.
Richard
RRParksCARDS

Richard

Wow! That is an incredible answer. Thank you!

Although I knew about some stars having their own image rights, it never dawned on me about that applying to cards. I can see where a card company has to decide just how far they want to chase the rabbit down the hole and still make the product profitable. Fortunately Jessica Lange didn't mind having her image on the King Kong cards. :-)

I recall some of the later Buffy releases had some really boring and even fuzzy images on the base sets. Then some autograph cards come out with some unflattering images and I wonder why the star would even sign them. I thought Claudia Christian's Babylon 5 profiles card was horrible. It sometimes gives the collector an impression that it was the only image to choose from.