MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: New stock agency - FAA / Pixels.com  (Read 20179 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 21, 2014, 06:55 »
0
FAA is getting into image licensing via their Pixels.com label.

http://fineartamerica.com/showmessages.php?messageid=1800498&showall=true

Similar to Picfair model, the artists set their own prices and then pixels com adds 40% on top of it before invoicing the buyer


Ron

« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2014, 07:06 »
-1
As far as I know there is nothing published about it yet. Someone saw the page header with the word stock and assumed something.

Unless there is news, your link goes nowhere.

Here is the META tag of pixels.com

<title>Pixels.com - Stock Photography - Royalty Free Images - Rights Managed Images - Art Licensing - iPhone Cases - Canvas Prints - Framed Prints - Greeting Cards - Posters - Originals - Buy Art Online - Sell Art Online</title>
<meta name="description" content="Pixels.com is the premier online marketplace for buying and selling stock photography, royalty-free images, rights-managed images, iphone cases, canvas prints, framed prints, posters, acrylic prints, metal prints, greeting cards, and more.   It's also the easiest way to stay in touch with your local art scene!   Our interactive website is designed to bring together photographers, visual artists, art galleries, and art collectors from all over the world.">
<meta name="keywords" content="stock photography, royalty free images, rights managed images, art licensing, image licensing, iphone cases, canvas prints, framed prints, art, art prints, fine art, fine art prints, posters, acrylic prints, metal prints, giclee, giclee prints, print on demand, greeting card, greeting cards, artist, artists, gallery, galleries, paintings, prints, photography, sculptures, digital art, tapestries, textiles, mixed media, ceramic art, glass art, jewelry, buy art, sell art, art for sale, prints for sale, free trial, art community">
<meta name="verify-v1" content="OLivyU9G1h3SOcBk3hsINOnBW+wWgL0mdkkuNK31lYs="/>

Ron

« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2014, 07:09 »
0
By the way, its very dumb to update your meta tags, before publishing the news. People are internet savvy these days. You cant expect that to go unnoticed.

« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2014, 07:20 »
0
>:(
« Last Edit: May 23, 2015, 21:55 by DF_Studios »

« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2014, 07:33 »
+1
Quote
As far as I know there is nothing published about it yet.
The link that I posted, is a fairly long thread with Sean's announcement and many artist's posts on FAA forum.
It is not an official announcement of working system yet, more like a beta test.


Ron

« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2014, 08:13 »
0
Its probably a private thread, and thats why I am being rerouted. I will log in and read it.

Ok, now it makes sense.

What I was talking about, there was a thread last week about the meta description showing stock , etc, but there wasnt anything published yet.

Sean had changed all meta tags, before he went public. So the news leaked by his own doings.

EmberMike

« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2014, 08:18 »
0

For those of us who aren't registered and can't log in, what's the deal? Sean is involved or something?

Ron

« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2014, 08:31 »
0
Interesting move.

There are some concerns on releases but stock agencies only ask for a model release to CTA. You dont need to provide a MR or PR at all, you just need to have one to CYA. I submit to a Dutch agency who only asks if the image is suitable for commercial use. I need to decide if it is, if I have the proper releases but I dont have to provide them. Its the photographer who is liable, not the agency.

I am covered anyways as my entire stock portfolio is released, and otherwise its editorial use only. If Pixels.com allows me to license individual images, I am sorted. All I have to do is opt in for Royalty Free license, set my price at 10 dollar per image, and let the $$$ come my way. I like the flexibility on the pricing and licensing. Smart move.

I am not sure if it will upset the stock industry, I think it wont because to do that you need buyers. If the buyers dont turn up, a revolutionary pricing and licensing system doesnt mean anything. I am definitely not going to do the marketing. FAA can fund the marketing from their own pockets. And if they dont do marketing, I am 100% sure this wont take off. Shutterstock spends tens of millions of dollars on marketing. Dont think for one second that not marketing Pixels.com will get you anywhere.

I will opt in though, making a few extra dollars is always welcome.

Ron

« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2014, 08:34 »
+1

For those of us who aren't registered and can't log in, what's the deal? Sean is involved or something?

I dont know if I am allowed to copy from a private discussion. I will recap. Sean is launching a stock agency from pixels.com. Announcement to follow.

He thinks it will upset the stock industry with a revolutionary pricing and licensing system. You can set your own price and you keep 100%, they will do a mark up of 40% and keep that.

You can also set your own licence, RF, RM or completely custom. Plus you can opt in/out individual images.

That has never been done before, but as I said, I am not sure if it will upset the stock industry, I think it wont because to do that you need buyers. If the buyers dont turn up, a revolutionary pricing and licensing system doesnt mean anything. I am definitely not going to do the marketing. FAA can fund the marketing from their own pockets. And if they dont do marketing, I am 100% sure this wont take off. Shutterstock spends tens of millions of dollars on marketing. Dont think for one second that not marketing Pixels.com will get you anywhere.

« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2014, 08:46 »
+8

For those of us who aren't registered and can't log in, what's the deal? Sean is involved or something?


That's Sean McDunn (FAA creator) not "our" Sean -just in case anyone gets confused  ;D

I'm with Ron, no idea if it will take off or not but I'll opt in and see if I get some sales. Regards, David.

ETA Missed the Mc off his surname!
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 13:42 by Newsfocus1 »

Ron

« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2014, 08:49 »
+2


That's Sean Dunn (FAA creator) not "our" Sean -just in case anyone gets confused  ;D


Good call, lets keep that clear !  :D

« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2014, 08:56 »
+4

For those of us who aren't registered and can't log in, what's the deal? Sean is involved or something?

That's Sean Dunn (FAA creator) not "our" Sean -just in case anyone gets confused  ;D

Whew!  I thought I missed something, lol.

I think a buyer would be happier to license work, if he thought the agency vetted the releases, instead of just hoping the contributor was in line.  It's easier to "trust" XYZ agency as an entity, then Bob from Somalia, or whatever.

« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2014, 08:58 »
+3
If you are a member of FAA you can see the private thread when logged in. I'm putting some stuff on it at reasonable prices, up to $50 (before mark-up) for full-size files. The prices are going to be all over the place, with people setting what they like. Someone's already said book publishers can afford $2,000 for a cover image.   

I actually don't think this is going to work, it doesn't seem to be well enough thought-out, but if applying a pricing profile to a few hundred images brings in some extra cash that's OK by me.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #13 on: March 21, 2014, 09:00 »
0

For those of us who aren't registered and can't log in, what's the deal? Sean is involved or something?

Here's the part that most people will want to know for now. All the other details will follow.


5. When a buyer purchases one of your licenses, you keep 100% of the price that you set. We're going to take your price and mark it up by 40% before we show it to the buyer. For example, if you want to sell a Standard License for $100, we're going to show it to the buyer as $140. When the buyer purchases the license, you'll keep the entire $100 that you wanted. For the math aficionados, that means that you're keeping $10 / $14 = 71.4% of the sale price.



ps you can join FAA for free and read these messages. I don't have a pay account.

ShadySue

« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2014, 09:01 »
+4
In theory, it's an interesting move, but considering the apparent total lack of regard for IP by some people who upload to FAA, it could also be a lawsuit waiting to happen.
I think a lot of American companies selling to e.g. the UK don't realise a 'disclaimer' isn't worth what they might think - it could easily be (based on previous cases I've read about, IANAL) that the agency could made to share any liabilities.
Also I wonder if they're going to market themselves - FAA doesn't, though it does generally have good SEO.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 09:32 by ShadySue »

ShadySue

« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2014, 09:06 »
0
. (repeat post)
« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 09:32 by ShadySue »

« Reply #16 on: March 21, 2014, 09:14 »
0
That's weird.  So, if I "want" $9, then the price shown is $12.60?


Ron

« Reply #17 on: March 21, 2014, 09:14 »
0
If you are a member of FAA you can see the private thread when logged in. I'm putting some stuff on it at reasonable prices, up to $50 (before mark-up) for full-size files. The prices are going to be all over the place, with people setting what they like. Someone's already said book publishers can afford $2,000 for a cover image.   

I actually don't think this is going to work, it doesn't seem to be well enough thought-out, but if applying a pricing profile to a few hundred images brings in some extra cash that's OK by me.
I will do the same.

I do believe its an advantage being a stocker supplying to an art site, rather being a painter now getting into stock, in terms of how stock licensing works and how to best approach this new venture.

Ron

« Reply #18 on: March 21, 2014, 09:14 »
0
That's weird.  So, if I "want" $9, then the price shown is $12.60?
Yes

« Reply #19 on: March 21, 2014, 09:20 »
+1
So, I guess you are getting paid 71.4%. That's pretty good. They should say that instead. It is much more enticing.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #20 on: March 21, 2014, 09:24 »
+2
And looking into the crystal ball, if this works and 1000 more sites copy the concept (which will happen as sure as the Sun rises in the East every day)

Someone will offer us 110% and take 30% of the sale. Impossible? Heck no, competition. We sell for $10 if it sells we get $11 and they get $3. Which looks good but it's really just a math game.

What I'm getting at, is someone will come up with a way to make a little less and give us more. Annual bonus, rebates, something. And it will happen as soon as Pixels.com shows it's making a profit and is a success.


That's weird.  So, if I "want" $9, then the price shown is $12.60?

So, I guess you are getting paid 71.4%. That's pretty good. They should say that instead. It is much more enticing.

True, but the point is, WE set the price, WE get 100% of what WE decide the price should be. They take a service fee off the top. Not out of our price and commission.

I don't care if they take 10% or 40%, the buyer pays the premium. It could affect prices and sale, but we are still in control of our own pricing.


« Last Edit: March 21, 2014, 09:27 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #21 on: March 21, 2014, 09:39 »
0
So why exactly are we handing over 40%?

« Last Edit: May 23, 2015, 21:55 by DF_Studios »

« Reply #22 on: March 21, 2014, 09:41 »
0
Forgot a couple

To pay for screeners to make sure our work is displayed with similar quality?  no
To pay for screeners to double check our work for potential problems such as trademarks and copyrights? no

« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2014, 09:45 »
+1
I don't care if they take 10% or 40%, the buyer pays the premium. It could affect prices and sale, but we are still in control of our own pricing.

The buyer _always_ pays the premium.  As you said, it's a math game.  You're in control like you are at Pond.  Whether you add the premium in before what you want or after what you want, it doesn't matter.  If they say they're going to a 100% premium, then your "price" just went up by 50% or so.

« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2014, 09:50 »
+2
No Watermarks! Always a problem.


Microstock InsiderEnvato Elements

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
6985 Views
Last post May 16, 2009, 17:14
by Phil
5 Replies
2522 Views
Last post May 02, 2011, 19:16
by RacePhoto
212 Replies
38103 Views
Last post September 06, 2012, 13:46
by JPSDK
2 Replies
2777 Views
Last post April 29, 2013, 15:19
by Simply
2 Replies
2163 Views
Last post August 27, 2013, 08:36
by williamju

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements