Author Topic: Discussion Group for a possible new Business Model .. (Read 15935 times)

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #25 on:** June 10, 2009, 17:18 »

My concerns, David, are/were more about the work that I am/will be putting into creating a fully functioning e-commerce site that does everything. Actually, the work that my (friend) webmaster would put together. Once I have a library or libraries of images and the capability to market, sell and collect from customers (shopping basket, paypal account, etc), where, how, and why do I connect to the API (search engine)? Will I need to keyword everything and upload thumbnails to a central location? HOW is the API going to link to me?

Do I really need the API after developing my fully-function e-merce site? I think I like this but can't seem to wrap my simple mind around it. May be my problem is age-related? $:-\$

hqimages · « **Reply #26 on:** June 10, 2009, 17:34 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on June 10, 2009, 17:18

My concerns, David, are/were more about the work that I am/will be putting into creating a fully functioning e-commerce site that does everything. Actually, the work that my (friend) webmaster would put together. Once I have a library or libraries of images and the capability to market, sell and collect from customers (shopping basket, paypal account, etc), where, how, and why do I connect to the API (search engine)? Will I need to keyword everything and upload thumbnails to a central location? HOW is the API going to link to me?

Do I really need the API after developing my fully-function e-merce site? I think I like this but can't seem to wrap my simple mind around it. May be my problem is age-related? $:-\$

I suppose you could use your own api for your own website, as long as you can separate your images from the others on the server.. I feel like it's all backwards.. first stop should be, have each person develop their own web site to sell their own images, next stop put those images out as a communal database for distributors.. but, I guess you could start with the image storage, develop the api to adhere to usernames, and then each contributor can build their own web site using it, and decide for themselves whether they want to allow distributors access to the api for their images also, or not..

Adeptris · « **Reply #27 on:** June 10, 2009, 17:43 »

Quote from: hqimages on June 10, 2009, 17:07

I think you're missing the creation of a web site for each contributor under their own url also.. otherwise, what's the difference between this method, and new web sites such as zymmetrical where they set their own price too..

Free website tools would be included but not the core, the difference is now you upload the same image, in different keyword and attribute templates, accepting different prices from many websites, this new model you upload only once, then via the API the different agencies can request you image thumbnail and data to add to thier library, this does not waste your time or assets uploading to get a rejection for 'not what we are looking for' or 'we have to many of this style'.

Now you upload many times and spread your assets all over different servers, new model upload once, set the price and keep control.

David

(Long day)

hqimages · « **Reply #28 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:00 »

Quote from: Adeptris on June 10, 2009, 17:43

Quote from: hqimages on June 10, 2009, 17:07
I think you're missing the creation of a web site for each contributor under their own url also.. otherwise, what's the difference between this method, and new web sites such as zymmetrical where they set their own price too..

Free website tools would be included but not the core, the difference is now you upload the same image, in different keyword and attribute templates, accepting different prices from many websites, this new model you upload only once, then via the API the different agencies can request you image thumbnail and data to add to thier library, this does not waste your time or assets uploading to get a rejection for 'not what we are looking for' or 'we have to many of this style'.

Now you upload many times and spread your assets all over different servers, new model upload once, set the price and keep control.

David (Long day)

I getcha now! I don't think I'm on the same wavelength though.. this model still forces the contributor to be dependant on distributors, and I feel it doesn't have enough going for it.. I don't know.. you'll see the same users sell their image from this at 20 euro let's say, and the same image at SS for 20 cent. I feel like if photographers were given their own web site with a checkout, without competition, it would shift in their mind the balance of power or dependancy on distributors..

I can see it's handy to have one copy of an image as opposed to many, and uploading to one site instead of many, and ok, people can set their own prices, but prices will need to be standardised then because people will keep undercutting each other until the big fish are the only ones left.. and if the price is standardised to a value more expensive than let's say, istock, but the same images are on istock for 200% cheaper, the api will be useless.. I think photographers first need to sell from their own web sites, and feel the power of it

They might even sell from their own web site exclusively if it works, and THAT is when you get a communal api that is WORTH a lot, and can actually result in new websites, re-selling images at a set price, that are NOT available anywhere else cheaper. You want it, find the photographer, or find a distributors web site..

melastmohican · « **Reply #29 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:06 »

Would not be nice if in future IStock understand our API and you can register your site with them instead of uploading individual images. We can give them 25% for this :-)

hqimages · « **Reply #30 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:12 »

Istock are already doing this model, they now 'share' their 'communal' database of images across to photos.com.. and I'm sure there will be many more sites to come.. they will end up with the top 6 sites, all with the same istock images at different prices.. SAME images, DIFFERENT prices.. I find it a joke really.. oh and always less commissions to the artist, that's a given.

That's why, this idea, I get it, and maybe it is good, but it would only be good for an agency that can undercut the cheapest microstock site.. because the same images go around and around.. I wish photographers would get the concept of setting a price, and not going below it, but it's impossible not to go cheaper, with such massive competition between each person for downloads.. that's why I would love to see photog with their own web sites, and promoting themselves to their local community of business people too, then perhaps having a communal search engine, that searches the images yes, but re-directs the buyer to each photographers own web site to checkout.. again the images have to be only available via their web site, or at another web site at the same price or higher, it doesn't work if they undercut themselves.

melastmohican · « **Reply #31 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:29 »

This model will not prevent some photographers from setting very low prices. They are free to do that. Maybe there will be competition between photographers eventually when they notice that setting very high prices will produce not results. However nobody is forced to that form the beginning.

There sites that act like that already but they parse agency websites and harvest image thumbnails. When you want to buy images you are redirected to original image page.

Imagine that they do not have to do web scrapping but there is clear API to get images. Even agencies with tons of images can implement this API and act like one huge contributor.

hqimages · « **Reply #32 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:33 »

Quote from: melastmohican on June 10, 2009, 18:29

This model will not prevent some photographers from setting very low prices. They are free to do that. Maybe there will be competition between photographers eventually when they notice that setting very high prices will produce not results. However nobody is forced to that form the begining.

Right, and the people with the most images can afford to go the lowest, so they will wipe out the other image contributors, that's why I think step 1 is to get your own web site, sell it yourself, promote it yourself, think local. Step 2, figure out how to bunch this group of web sites built on the same platform and all at different prices, together to buyers, in a way that doesn't encourage low pricing, or undercutting the competition.. what you could do is have a search engine that searches all sites, but you can only have your images indexed by the engine, if your images are priced over a certain amount..

melastmohican · « **Reply #33 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:41 »

I think we have to agree on completely open model or maybe we can establish lower limits but then who is going to say what is too low?

If API is successful I think we will have large number of contibuting sites and one or few rogue contributors will have no affect on prices. Think about it as if was a stock exchange :-)

hqimages · « **Reply #34 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:47 »

Quote from: melastmohican on June 10, 2009, 18:41

I think we have to agree on completely open model or maybe we can establish lower limits but then who is going to say what is too low?

If API is successful I think we will have large number of contibuting sites and one or few rogue contributors will have no affect on prices. Think about it as if was a stock exchange :-)

You see, the API won't be successful, if the same image under the api at x amount, is available elsewhere for cheaper.. it will never work if that's the case.. what you could do is only allow contributors with exclusive images that perhaps they are already selling via their own web site, share those images across the api or global search feature.. or you could state that only images not available elsewhere for cheaper are allowed to be shared, eg you could price it at zymettrical and still be allowed to share with the api as a non-exclusive image because the price is the same..

melastmohican · « **Reply #35 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:52 »

This should be contributors individual decision if he/she keeps uploading same files to other agencies it's not a fault of the API, it's bad strategy. Some people already differentiate, do not upload to subscription sites or upload only smaller files there. It's strategy too.

hqimages · « **Reply #36 on:** June 10, 2009, 18:56 »

Quote from: melastmohican on June 10, 2009, 18:52

This should be contributors individual decision if he/she keeps uploading same files to other agencies it's not a fault of the API, it's bad strategy. Some people already differentiate, do not upload to subscription sites or upload only smaller files there. It's strategy too.

It's a fault of the API. If we want to have people re-sell the images, as many people as possible, then it has to be more competitive than what's out there. Since we can't be competitive in price, since the cheapest price is free

we need to be more creative, with things like exclusive images, or this image is NOT available anywhere else for cheaper. That will give re-sellers the confidence to invest in, and build, their own web site around our images.

melastmohican · « **Reply #37 on:** June 10, 2009, 19:03 »

It was discussed here before. Everybody shall stop contributing to all agencies and put images in one place where it's priced right. It's not going to happen. We will to take down 1000lb gorilla at once. Agencies can survive without some of the contributors while these people might have businesses around selling photos and they will go down if they do not sell for a while. I believe in gradual transition. Let's say that at first we put our "best" shots in our system only and give scraps to agencies. If it takes off we can lower "other contributions" until everything new goes to our system.

hqimages · « **Reply #38 on:** June 10, 2009, 19:21 »

Quote from: melastmohican on June 10, 2009, 19:03

It was discussed here before. Everybody shall stop contributing to all agencies and put images in one place where it's priced right. It's not going to happen. We will to take down 1000lb gorilla at once. Agencies can survive without some of the contributors while these people might have businesses around selling photos and they will go down if they do not sell for a while. I believe in gradual transition. Let's say that at first we put our "best" shots in our system only and give scraps to agencies. If it takes off we can lower "other contributions" until everything new goes to our system.

No not all the images, that's why this needs to be baby steps
Step 1, have your own web site to sell downloads of images at your own price, keep contributing to all your agencies
Step 2, having made a few sales on your web site, perhaps locally if you can promote it that way, to people who wish to support you as an artist, even if they do know they could get it cheaper elsewhere, you begin to think it might be a good idea to have some images on your web site only available from there, and use it as a selling point to your customers, exclusive images
Step 3, you have made more sales on your own exclusive images, new customers have found their ideal image on your site, and know they cannot get their hands on it any other way, now you are ready to mark that exclusive image for sharing
Step 4, once marked for sharing, you recieve more downloads referred to you by various distributors web sites, and you keep track of what commission you owe them, and you are responsible for paying them once they reach a certain amount

Adeptris · « **Reply #39 on:** June 11, 2009, 01:45 »

Great Input,
It seems the idea is getting discussed here and in the Group site, for now we should not get bogged down in fine detail at this stage, that will be dicussed at each stage.

Quote from: The KISS principle

KISS is a modern acronym for the empirical principle "Keep it Short and Simple," or the more recent and disparaging "Keep it Simple, Stupid", KISS states that design simplicity should be a key goal and that unnecessary complexity should be avoided.

Initail process is to agree that the concept is really viable, and discuss the foundation this has to be a solid engine where modules can be devloped for the different outlets.

I see the debate on pricing, the idea is to have different price bands with levels, these will have a lower and upper level, where the photographer places an image will be thier choice, but the image will only belong to one price group, so if you have 10,000 images or 10 the revenue per sale would be the same if they are all in the same Price Band and Level, that is what the buyer has to pay you.

If you contribute to one of the microstock agencies and your same image is on sale via the engine, you might choose a price band of microstock and a level of medium, you would now be competing with your own images, but any sales will come at 100% to the photographer at the time of sale.

I do not see there is a problem as many already have the same images with Shutterstock and Istock, there is a difference with the sales price to the Customer and revenue to the photographer.

An Idea has been floated that we set the retail selling price and a rebate value that will be paid to the Agent, this can also be discussed as it would allow for a fairer system for direct sales to the public via blogs etc:, currently the Music CD and Video DVD Sales work use this model, the price is set the same and global for all outlets, then discounts and rebate % are agreed with each merchant or Agent.

David

hqimages · « **Reply #40 on:** June 11, 2009, 03:38 »

many already have the same images with Shutterstock and Istock, there is a difference with the sales price to the Customer and revenue to the photographer.

This is a huge problem, for example, istock have now shared their photos across to photos.com, so instead of a nice 5 credit sale, the photographer now gets 30 cent, the reason this is happening is because istock wants to undercut shutteerstock. If we don't tackel this issue with an idea based on fair trade, with an api to include EXCLUSIVE images not available for cheaper anywhere else, it will NOT work.

Adeptris · « **Reply #41 on:** June 13, 2009, 07:20 »

I have now connected DWL to the Bloggers of the world, it's part of a plan to get indexed by Google and a bit more exposure for this idea.

http://digitalweblogistics.wordpress.com/ (Link added to microstockgroup)

The logo has been designed to give Digital Web Logstics an identity!

There is some positive feedback from twitter contacts, and a few more are now following and other tweeters are forwarding my tweets to their contacts, all good networking and publicity.

David

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Discussion Group for a possible new Business Model .. (Read 15935 times)

WarrenPrice

hqimages

Adeptris

hqimages

melastmohican

hqimages

melastmohican

hqimages

melastmohican

hqimages

melastmohican

hqimages

melastmohican

hqimages

Adeptris

hqimages

Adeptris

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors