NonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 3360 times:
I think I've decided I want to sell my photos on a.net. (Since I can apparently make a fortune off the Hooters photos alone. ) Is it still possible to participate in that, or is it still in the testing phase? If I can, how do I sign up, for lack of a better term.
To those of you that are already selling your photos, how's it working out for you? How is the functionality of the process? If you don't mind telling, how much do you make off it, say every month?
YEGPIX From Canada, joined Mar 2002, 159 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3288 times:
I haven't got a clue. Since the beginning of the photo sales addition I joined it and I still haven't heard anything yet. I am wondering though, is anyone making anything off this? Has anyone sold anything yet that we know of?
EGBB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 3239 times:
Only two out of the three are making money from picture sales and its not right in my opinion that the photographer has up to now not received a penny or any information as to what has been sold.
I have twice requested that the 'buy print' option be removed from my pictures but with no luck.
This is because of the concerns I have with customers being able to order to large size images from a 1024 size image which will for sure be of low quality
(I know of mouse mat orders of my pictures)
I accept it was started as a 'test' way back in April and as ever Johan is busy with other things but I expected the test to be a couple of weeks at most before changes were made and sales stats were made available to the photographers so we all know what is being sold etc.
I support the photo sales as another way for Johan to make some cash for the site and at the same time deal with my small personel photo sales but it has to be as was first stated a 50-50 partnership and if photographers have concerns they should at least be acknowledged.
The original post was:
Ikarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 3193 times:
Nonrevking: Try selling prints at www.auctiontransportation.com - most of their sales might be slides, but there is a category for prints...
Anyway, I won't be buying any hooters shots (ever), but it's rather likely that sometime between October & December I'll order a number of large (poster) shots for my next room... (or, I'll get someone else to order them as Xmas presents)
I think I should start assembling a wish list of photos soon
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 659 posts, RR: 17 Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 3186 times:
Here's a twist ... while checking up on previous uploads, I noted one of my shots as marked for sale. Since, like Derek, I do not think the small images make satisfactory prints I have NEVER marked any of my uploads as for sale.
So I did a search for my shots, with the "only sales" option marked and was surprised to find 30 or so images as available for sale. Curiously, almost all the shots so marked are of BritAir/Air France commuter types - which make up a small proportion of my uploads. They also span a wide range of dates. This would suggest that this is not a random computer error.
I have asked Johan to remove the sale option from my shots and look into providing an explanation of what has happened. Meanwhile, if you have not elected to sell your shots through A.net, you might want to check that the same thing hasn't happened to you.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 659 posts, RR: 17 Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3109 times:
Perhaps I should emphasis that almost all my shots which were marked for sale had been uploaded long before the printing scheme started, and haven't been updated (by me at least) since - so that rules out any current issue with the upload mechanism or upload scripts.
Johan has replied to me and kindly sorted my shots out immediately, but is currently at a loss to explain how it could happen. What worries me is that the photos so marked were definitely themed which raises the possibility of a collector being somehow able to change the "buy" status to suit.
Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3096 times:
Who cares??? We get this site for free, we're allowed to exhibit our photographs for free. Many of us have gotten benefits from showing our work on this site that we could never share (like flights, special access etc). Without this site we'd never get that - and don't say that there are other sites out there, because non of them generate the interest that airlines.net does. If the site can make a bob or two out of selling prints, which can be used for the betterment of the site, great. Why get so bent out of shape about earning a few cents here, a few pennies there?
EGBB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3078 times:
The good news after sending Johan another email today the 'buy print' option has now been removed from all of my pictures.
As far as I am concerned I am again in full control of the end product i.e. the print quality of any orders even if it is just a mouse mat.
I am sure the last thing Johan wants to do is upset me or any other photographer who uploads onto Anet but when you raise 'real' concerns that affect not just you personally but many photographers and people who order the prints then yes, I think this should be given either priority or be delegated to another person to sort out if Johan is too busy with other site matters rather than feeling you waste your time sending emails or posting in the forum and feeling like you’re talking to a brick wall and causing ill feelings.
Who cares??? We get this site for free, we're allowed to exhibit our photographs for free
Sorry but I do care when someone places an order for one of my pictures in good faith only then to be disappointed in its quality on arrival.
Would this person ever order again one of my pictures in the future?
As for the money side well I think as a mater of principle then yes it does mater
It was stated by Johan what the terms of the arrangement would be between him and the photographers so yes he should stick to it.
If you agreed a money deal with someone would you not honour this agreement?
But the money is not my main issue if it was would I have asked Johan to remove the ‘buy print’ function from my pictures?
As for any money that has been made by Johan on my picture sales I donate it now to the server fund or to any charity of his choice to show this is not my main concern but I still think it is an important issue for many others who have entered into this arrangement in good faith.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 659 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3031 times:
I'm with Derek on this - it is definitely not a money thing, its a quality thing. 1024px images cannot produce what I would consider an acceptable 8x10 print. If I won't accept it, I don't think it is right for me to take any amount of money (small or large) off customers for the same unacceptable product.
I'm 100% behind the sales idea in principle, and when Johan allows it, I will happily upload 3000px images for people to purchase, and A.net is more than welcome to their cut.
But I'm not entirely sure what Andy's "who cares" comment was directed at - if it was on the reporting back of print sales, well yes, I'm inclined to agree to just let things take their course.
Administrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts. Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3009 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW SITE ADMIN
My next big project is taking the Photo Sales to the next level. It's still in testing and it's been postponed much too long but there's been a lot of issues taking up all my time lately. Server problems, crew issues, the newsletter problems to name a few.
Our programmer Tarq is working on a system where high quality images can be uploaded and used as base for the prints while not shown anywhere on the site. The system is basically working by needs my final attention. I will do that as soon as possible. Photobox have recently improved their service and I am hopeful we'll soon be able to offer you stats online. Before that happens, photographers needs to be connected to their username and password. Photographers without username in the forum will be given one free of charge.
As for the issues reported by Colin Work, we are looking into what might have caused that - I presume it's a bug in a script somewhere. Also, let me strongly disagree with him on the quality concerns. Photobox automatically disables people from buying big prints of not-so-big digital images. Try it out yourselves. This means that they will print only those sizes that will give a good result. There is no need for anyone to not include their photos in the print sales due to quality concerns, that is fully taken care of by Photobox. If your photo has a low resolution, it will only be available for sale in a small size.
Those of you that wants to add or remove your photos from the photo sales beta testing can do so by contacting me and I will deal with it ASAP. Please understand that I am quite busy though and that it might take a few days to get it fixed.
Regarding the revenues, no one has yet reached the 50 Pound limit when the payment is to be made in accordance with the original agreement. A total of 443 orders have been made so far. More info will be available in the future.
For those of you that express trust and patience in the posts above, thank you - I will not disappoint. I know you have waited patiently for a long time for me to get this moving but please give me time to finish the newsletter stuff and other things that needs my immediate attention. Once that is done I will be able to work concentrated on the photo sales.
Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 659 posts, RR: 17 Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2949 times:
Johan - your input on this is much appreciated, but I stand by my comment on quality.
Photobox will allow users to purchase up to 16in x12in from a 1024px print without warnings ... by my calculations that equates to a resolution of 64 dpi!
Yes, Photobox are good, but not miracle workers - their resolution guidelines suggest the 1024 is the minimum required size, but 2000px + is their preferred size.
I've been using P.box quite a lot since Gary pointed them in my direction some time ago, with various print sizes and orginals of varying resolutions. My experience suggests that "quality" prints can be produced with resolutions as low as 120dpi - lower than that shows a significant loss of sharpeness and evidence of pixelation and other artifacts.
This would equate to a maximum print size (width) from a 1024px image of about 8.5 inches. Obviously individuals standards will vary (and I'm often surprised how poor a quality some people will consider acceptable), none the less, my original statement stands - if I find the quality unacceptable it seems highly inappropriate for me to offer such prints for sale.
Granite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5550 posts, RR: 65 Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2896 times:
Despite seeing great quality of some of my images printed in a few commercial industry aviation magazines, I would not be happy offering my images for prints off the Airliners site at the resolution uploaded.
All my private sales and personal stuff have been uploaded to Photobox at 300dpi. Been processing my images this way since the start and happy with the quality.
Depending on the image size, roughly a 4.0MB image is uploaded for printing.
Looking into the future, I will be thinking about offering images for sale.....but not all of them. I would like to select the ones I want to offer and those ones willbe uploaded at hi-res.