Author Topic: Exciting News! We've launched FocalPool (Read 30845 times)

sgoodwin4813 · « **Reply #50 on:** February 05, 2015, 17:22 »

NorArt,

Thanks for answering questions. Due to previous experiences most here are pretty skeptical of new ventures until there is some proven success, but are usually willing to encourage anyone trying to make things better. I like your concept and hope it is successful, but I think you will need to do a few things (in addition to marketing and sales) to get much interest from contributors. To reiterate points made already:

1) Getting ftp submissions working that read IPTC data, plus batch editing will be key - I doubt many people will submit much if it is through a web form only.

2) Most of us probably submit images to be licensed RF commercial, RF editorial, or RM so an easy way of assigning standard licenses for each of those would be helpful - you could post here for the text of each of those to get lots of feedback.

3) And of course the VAT and income tax situation is very important as mentioned many times already. You may have to hire someone to work on that as it seems to be quite complex.

That's my two cents for now. Good luck!

Ariene · « **Reply #51 on:** February 05, 2015, 17:28 »

After some time playing I must say I like this site look a lot!

Next details in fast words, that I couldn't find and I'm sure clients will look for it too:
- let searching separate RF and RM licenses,
- it could be usefull to open file review when click mouse scroll wheel (at least mine can open new file this way on other sites

)
- fix the problem with small window with word "Licensed". It shows up when I edit pricing, located below 1000px, eclipse next size editing...
- please give me option to choose when I want to do payment. I know it's to early to talk about it, but worth try

I mean I wish to change my minimum payout limit higer than default sometimes to hold on transfer.
- option: manage your gallery, move chosen images to the top/down of your gallery (one up/down), show by date/recent added or oldest, by pricing, author's favourite, etc... or/and more advanced - set up catalogs. All visible to customers.

rimglow · « **Reply #52 on:** February 05, 2015, 18:00 »

Do you covert the highest res JPEG version to TIffs, if we want to sell TIFFs.
Or, are we supposed to upload a Tiff version and you convert them to different size JPEGs?

NorArt · « **Reply #53 on:** February 05, 2015, 18:06 »

sgoodwin4813, I really appreciate your suggestions.

Quote

1) Getting ftp submissions working that read IPTC data, plus batch editing will be key - I doubt many people will submit much if it is through a web form only.

We are currently working on a FTP submission and batch editing.

Quote

2) Most of us probably submit images to be licensed RF commercial, RF editorial, or RM so an easy way of assigning standard licenses for each of those would be helpful - you could post here for the text of each of those to get lots of feedback.

We have a standard RF and RM license. And there will be a preset pricing options too if you don't want to do custom pricing.

Quote

3) And of course the VAT and income tax situation is very important as mentioned many times already. You may have to hire someone to work on that as it seems to be quite complex.

I think you’re right. Honestly, we’ve been so focused on the developing the platform that we haven't really had a chance to look into this matter. However, we will take your advice and hire a specialist.

Thanks

NorArt · « **Reply #54 on:** February 05, 2015, 18:11 »

rimglow,

Quote

Do you covert the highest res JPEG version to TIffs, if we want to sell TIFFs.
Or, are we supposed to upload a Tiff version and you convert them to different size JPEGs?

If you want to sell Tiffs the original Tiff file must be uploaded. From that it's converted to different resolution Jpegs.

rimglow · « **Reply #55 on:** February 05, 2015, 18:43 »

Quote from: NorArt on February 05, 2015, 18:11

rimglow,

Quote
Do you covert the highest res JPEG version to TIffs, if we want to sell TIFFs.
Or, are we supposed to upload a Tiff version and you convert them to different size JPEGs?

If you want to sell Tiffs the original Tiff file must be uploaded. From that it's converted to different resolution Jpegs.

Okay, but it looks like the metadata doesn't travel with Tiff uploads. If I include a Clipping Path, with my Tiff, will it still be there for the downloads?

Maximilian · « **Reply #56 on:** February 06, 2015, 15:03 »

I think focalpool main goal is to get customers make a request:
YOU REQUEST / PHOTOGRAPHERS SUBMIT / YOU CHOOSE

I am not much interested to work for "free" (submit images at request):
REQUEST / my submit / buyer choose other one`s photo
= 0 money earned and time wasted.

What do you think. Will focalpool work as microstock agency also?

KnowYourOnions · « **Reply #57 on:** February 06, 2015, 15:07 »

wait...isn't this the same as ImageBrief?
http://www.imagebrief.com/

NorArt · « **Reply #58 on:** February 06, 2015, 15:53 »

Quote

I think focalpool main goal is to get customers make a request:
YOU REQUEST / PHOTOGRAPHERS SUBMIT / YOU CHOOSE

Our main goal is to create a platform that gives photographers many ways to make a sell.
The request mechanism is more a way for clients to directly communicate with photographers what they're looking for if they can't find it. This is meant to compliment the existing library, not replace it.

raresaturn · « **Reply #59 on:** February 06, 2015, 16:57 »

I like it. I've uploaded a few images, mostly goes smoothly but I've been getting some Upload errors with code PER. What's PER mean?

NorArt · « **Reply #60 on:** February 06, 2015, 17:40 »

Hi raresaturn,

Thanks for your feedback. We did have few unusually uploading errors which we're fixing right now. PER is just an internal code for us to know the cause of the server error and get to the bottom of it faster.

Mantis · « **Reply #61 on:** February 06, 2015, 18:28 »

Quote from: KnowYourOnions on February 06, 2015, 15:07

wait...isn't this the same as ImageBrief?
http://www.imagebrief.com/

It looks an awful lot like Imagebrief. Image brief for me has not generated anything. Got shortlisted a few times and that's it. This looks very much the same.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #62 on:** February 07, 2015, 02:37 »

There is no USP, they have no significant marketing and they dont deal with EU VAT. 3 reasons why this going no where.

Ariene · « **Reply #63 on:** February 07, 2015, 04:29 »

Ron, what is USP?

enstoker · « **Reply #64 on:** February 07, 2015, 04:34 »

Quote from: Maximilian on February 06, 2015, 15:03

I think focalpool main goal is to get customers make a request:
YOU REQUEST / PHOTOGRAPHERS SUBMIT / YOU CHOOSE

I am not much interested to work for "free" (submit images at request):
REQUEST / my submit / buyer choose other one`s photo
= 0 money earned and time wasted.

What do you think. Will focalpool work as microstock agency also?

"0 money earned and time wasted."
This is 100% truth.
And for pure truth, Maximillian received minus from just another MSG truth hater.
I wish that in this situation, I could give more than only one agree (plus).

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #65 on:** February 07, 2015, 04:41 »

Quote from: Ariene on February 07, 2015, 04:29

Ron, what is USP?

A unique selling point. ie., why would a buyer go there to look for images.

For example, Canva's USP is their built in design tool and easy access to images for that tool.

NorArt · « **Reply #66 on:** February 07, 2015, 13:26 »

USP for Sellers:
FocalPool is a self-service platform where you sell your photos in the marketplace while maintaining complete control over pricing, licensing, management.

USP for Buyers:
Search the FocalPool marketplace to buy the photos you’re looking for. If it doesn’t exist, request it directly from photographers.

Holmes · « **Reply #67 on:** February 07, 2015, 13:51 »

You should hire Jo Ann Snover for consulting. she knows her stuff and keeps it real. then come back and present when she signs off on it.

currently, it is a half-baked idea

Maximilian · « **Reply #68 on:** February 07, 2015, 14:06 »

Quote from: Holmes on February 07, 2015, 13:51

You should hire Jo Ann Snover for consulting. she knows her stuff and keeps it real. then come back and present when she signs off on it.

currently, it is a half-baked idea

I think the idea is cool.
At the same time, the business model is also my problem.
The "USP" sounds nice and promising.
But the "USP" must be 100% prepared by the seller.

Right there is my problem.

Let's say the customer wants a photo of a white dove on a roof of the castle X.

A: I see in my portfolio pictures of doves and B: The castle is around the corner ..
this is a perfect thing.

But the everyday case is more like this:
We are looking for a senior couple on a park bench, next to them a financial building (bank) be displayed.

1. Photo "older people on park bench" search in my own database - found (2 minutes)
2. Photo "Property / Building Bank" search in my own database - found (2 minutes)
3. Edit the photo and insert the building into the people image
(eternal time required for design) (45 minutes)
4. 122 photographers and designers have done the same. (122 x 49 minutes)
5. Bought is No. 111.
6. 121 have earned 0.00 euros.

Ariene · « **Reply #69 on:** February 07, 2015, 14:42 »

Quote from: Maximilian on February 07, 2015, 14:06

4. 122 photographers and designers have done the same. (122 x 49 minutes)
...
6. 121 have earned 0.00 euros.

If I were this one and earned 500$ I definitely would try!

121 another photographers is not a lot, when we competite on micros with milions images everyday...

ShadySue · « **Reply #70 on:** February 07, 2015, 14:45 »

Quote from: Ariene on February 07, 2015, 14:42

121 another photographers is not a lot, when we competite on micros with milions images everyday...

OTOH, the 121 could have wasted time on making a specific image which might never be wanted again.

NorArt · « **Reply #71 on:** February 07, 2015, 14:50 »

Quote

USP" must be 100% prepared by the seller.

I respectfully disagree that we have to choose sides between buyers or the sellers. I think we’ve come up with a platform that both can benefit from.

Here are couple of things we’ve done to reduce the time wasted by photographers trying to fulfill someone's photo request.

First, on FocalPool you can see how many people are interested in a specific request even before anything is submitted. Before you spend time to search your database, you can decide if the request is too crowded and whether or not it’s worth your time.

Second, the reputation system I mentioned before also applies to the buyers/requesters. If someone consistently makes a request and either does not follow up or is too needy or somehow abuses the system. It will reflect on their reputation therefore as a photographer you’ll know who’re you working with.

Thanks for suggesting to talk to Jo Ann Snover regarding FocalPool. I will try to contact her.

Maximilian · « **Reply #72 on:** February 07, 2015, 14:55 »

I know a lot about this sytem.
This system is very interesting for customers.
Low prices.

In graphic design, there are 99designs.com
Odesk.com Personnel sector or freelancer.com

In all of these a bunch seller suggest to a client.
Without exception.

In graphic design, it is the worst. Because the customer is not satisfy with seller/ contributors references. Customer wants to see final results. Therefore, I find my example above should be viewed very critically.

If it succeeds focalpool to minimize the risk for seller, then this could be very interesting. Above all, along with the database of our stock pictures.

NorArt · « **Reply #73 on:** February 07, 2015, 15:25 »

Maximilian

I agree that some of the other services focus only on the client and it's obvious why. At the end of the day, they have to show revenue to their investors and clients are the ones with the money.

But most clients in advertising, marketing companies don't prioritize low prices. They care about the project vision a lot more than saving couple of dollars. I worked with many of them in Los Angeles in the past decade and their main pain-point is wasting too much time searching for the images they're looking for. Believe it or not, they spend more money on the search itself than the actual cost of purchasing the image. Many straight up told me that they would happily pay 3 or 4 times the price of the image just to find it sooner.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #74 on:** February 08, 2015, 06:51 »

I've been in advertising for decades and I find this practice disgusting. Asking people to work for free on the off chance their images will be chosen is disgusting. If you need the subjects from two different images in one, buy them both and pay someone to do the retouching. Or get in touch with the photographer and offer to pay them to retouch. If you can't find what you need hire a photographer. When these people spend hours searching, they get paid for their time.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Exciting News! We've launched FocalPool (Read 30845 times)

sgoodwin4813

Ariene

rimglow

NorArt

NorArt

rimglow

Maximilian

KnowYourOnions

NorArt

raresaturn

NorArt

Mantis

Semmick Photo

Ariene

enstoker

Sean Locke Photography

NorArt

Holmes

Maximilian

Ariene

ShadySue

NorArt

Maximilian

NorArt

Shelma1

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors