Photo.net announces a new subscriber benefit: selling your photography!

<p>I would offer a caution to anyone considering uploading high resolution images until the site is more secure. </p>

<p>The current option to "Block downloads of my images from browsers" only disables "save image as" if you right-click the image, but anyone can still right-click-save the entire page which will include the uploaded image. There are still other ways to grab an image even if no one likes talking about it. </p>

<p>On the question of results and resolution, this is addressed to Cara St hilaire's comment: PPrinting on canvas also is quite forgiving." With respect to Cara, the problem with large prints from low resolution has nothing to do with "forgiving." It simply comes down to subject matter ... a low resolution photo has far frwer pixels per inch than the same image in high resolution. In other words they hey are two different photographs, one, the high resolution one, sends significantly greater visual information to theviewers eye. They are two different photographs, one vastly superior to the other except in the rare exception of a photographer wishes a blurred, or soft, image in the name of style. </p>

<p>Just a couple of followup questions out of curiosity: </p>

<p>1) How are photos chosen to be displayed as a thumbnail on the home page (about 6) and on the "Photos for Sale" page one gets by clicking on the link at the bottom of that section? I see that some photographers have many photos shown (one in particular has 25 or more photos shown) and others have only 1 or 2. Is this primarily a random process?</p>

<p>2) Is the eventual "gallery" of photos for sale going to allow navigation to all photos marked for sale in some manner? If not, how will any person browsing the site find any particular photo(s), for example by a specific photographer or genre or perhaps keyword?</p>

<p>I have been doing my own printing using canvas as well as other media, for many years. The idea that canvas is more forgiving is simply nonsense. Low quality canvas with a loose weave may slightly disguise poor focus but that is about it. A lower resolution image is inferior, with no exceptions base on whether the image is printed on paper or canvas. Why anyone would sell a print of their image at a resolution of 1500 pixels rather than the 6000 pixels that the image came out of the camera at, is beyond me. While the idea is nice the executions is lacking. Zenfolio, Smugmug and a number of other sites offer printing services to those who use these sites to host portfolios. Every one of these companies that I am aware of, strongly encourage uploading full resolutions images for printing on canvas or any other media. No one I know of other than P.net, encourage printing from web sharpened low resolution jpegs.</p>

<p>I have read the entire thread. My first reaction to this exciting new feature was to ask the same question: how can you get a large print from an image that is limited to 1500 pixels on its largest edge? I have been a customer of CanvasPop and I must say first of all their colour rendering is excellent. I uploaded an image to their website for a 30"x40" canvas print which had a resolution of about 120 dots per inch, so clearly my image was about 3600x4800 pixels. This canvas looks great viewed from a distance of about 3 feet. The subject matter was a nature scene in the Rockies with Bighorn sheep in the foreground. This image is posted on photo.net, BUT noway could the photo.net image produce the same detailed print. I think it has been suggested that the photo.net image act as a thumbnail and that a hidden more detailed image is the one sent on to CanvasPop - this way noone can steal the detailed image from the photonet display. Finally, as for colour rendering, I compared my canvas print from CanvasPop with the image on my calibrated monitor and the colour rendering of the canvas was as close a match as my eye could measure. CanvasPop will accept images with a broader colour spectrum like AdobeRGB, you just have to let them know what they are getting. The CanvasPop printer is a professional Canon machine - time alone will tell if it is true archival quality as far as longevity of the print is concerned. I personally don't have any worries about it. But then, I am 77. <a href="/photo/17539312">http://www.photo.net/photo/17539312</a></p>

<p>Is no one going to answer what I feel are some fair questions?</p>

<p>Dennis, it is probably the weekend. I'd give it until Monday arvo.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Dennis, I think I can answer at least one of your questions: I just created a new folder labeled "For Sale" (imaginative, huh?), and loaded all the photos in there that I'm submitting for this program. One of the reasons for doing it this way is that all my other shots on PNet have borders and signatures, as well as different image sizes and resolutions, and I didn't want to mix them in with the CanvasPop items.</p>

<p>@Dennis - the photos on the home page are random sample from those on which is currently being curated by Photo.net admin & editorial staff. The suggestion made earlier where photographer selling creates a specific folder (ex.Photos For Sale) for those images made available to this program is a very good one and we encourage that so end users can view all they can purchase from you. <br /> We will be adding organization to http://www.photo.net/gallery/purchase-photos so you can sort, etc. We have a version we are currently working on and expect to have it launched soon. First step was to introduce program, get photos opted in. Next step was to organize photos available for sale & highlight on high traffic areas of site - which will be coming very soon. <br /> There have been a number of questions above on low resolution images and how they will translate to print quality. CanvasPop was chosen as a partner in this program for many reasons, but top of the list was because of their unwavering commitment to producing high quality products and their 100% customer satisfaction guarantee. In short, the program looks at the photo and only renders the canvas print sizes for the resolution provided. The program always suggests sizes based on a 150PPI. It takes in the aspect ratio and size of the image provided and suggests the optimal print when the image is at a 150PPI. IF in the off chance a canvas size is chosen by a buyer and there is an issue in producing that size print CanvasPop and Photo.net will make every effort to obtain a higher resolution image from the photographer to accomplish the intended task. Of course we did extensive testing with CanvasPop across a number of different scenarios and were very happy with the end results. Remember - as a subscribing member you can order your own canvas prints at cost - so we encourage you to try it out and see for yourself!</p>

<p>who has been selecting the examples of photos available to purchase on the sale page? random choices by PN? mine aren't up there. and i'd appreciate if someone responds to my question about the $50 fee for processing that the photographer must pay. payable for each photo you process for us?</p>

<p>Hi Donna - apologies for missing your question. I think there is some confusion on the $50 referenced in the terms of use and I will try to clarify. Photo.net will process payments to photographers if there is at least $50 due the photographer as a result of a sale(s). The only fee that would be associated with processing payments to photographers are standard Paypal fees OR if in the event Paypal is not used - there will be a $10 fee to process payments to photographers via check. </p>

<p>Donna, it needs some clarification, but I don't believe the $50 is a fee. The way I <em>think</em> it works: You sell a photo, and your 80% take amounts to $45. The minimum you can make and get an immediate payout is $50. So, you have to wait until you sell another photo for, let's say, $45 again. Now, your total pending payout for both sales is $90, $45 above the $50 minimum, and they can process the payout. If that is, in fact, the way it works, it should be stated more clearly.</p>

<p>Re selections for the sale page: I think this will be sorted out as the project progresses. Right now, we're kind of in Beta test mode.</p>

<p>Edit: Glenn beat me to it...</p>

<p>okay gents. is this it? once my 80% payouts surpass the $50, i keep everything above the 50$. Then do i start the process over again til my 80% surpasses the $50 again? let's propose that my first two payouts equal $60? i get $10. my payout always depends on the cumulation of $50 first, then the rest in payout. <br>

i think that might be a cool deal.<br>

But i think it's very important to know how and why PN chooses photographs that will help give fair exposure to everyone's work. it's tricky.</p>

<p>I will use 2 examples to illustrate payouts here -<br>

Example #1 -Donna sells a canvas print for $200 and the cost to produce that print was $100. The total profit on that sale was $100 of which you would have earned $80 (80% of profit). Because that sale produced an earned commission of <em>more than</em> $50 photo.net will issue funds to Donna. If Donna wanted funds via check, photo.net will either issue Donna a check for $70 ($80 commission - $10 check processing fee) OR issue the $80 via PayPal (minus their fee). <br>

Example #2 - Donna sells a canvas print for $80 and the cost to produce that print was $40. The total profit on that sale was $40 of which Donna has earned $32 (80% of profit on sale). Because that sale produced an earned commission of less than $50 the distribution of funds will wait until your account exceeds $50. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Personally (I'm trying hard not to be a curmudgeon here), I would like to know how a "random" process can result in one photographer showing 25+ images on the for sale page; a few others about 10 each; and most people whose photos are shown 1-3. The same person who has 25 currently (and has had 25+ since the feature appeared) currently has two photos out of 6 in the for sale section on the home page. It "seems" as though either you need a better random selection process, or someone is gaming the system.</p>

<p>Just curious. </p>

<p>Regarding exposure the gallery we are currently featuring photos opted into this program is being curated by admin and photo.net editorial staff. We are adding means to sort, search, find all photos available for sale as well as beginning to integrate them into high areas of traffic on site. At minimum we strongly suggest adding tags to your photos so they can be found by the keywords/tags you give them. Being found is half the battle! Please keep in mind this program is only a few days old so this program and it will grow over time!</p>

<p>Like I said, Dennis, Beta test. Give it some time... ;-)</p>

<p>Ok, curmudgeon mode is off :>) Thanks!</p>

<p>I too have what may be considered dumb questions!</p>

<p>Glenn indicates eventually a means to <em>sort, & search.</em><br>

So, from reading some of the other responses and questions, I have set up a folder of Photos for Sale.<br>

Should I be adding tags those photographs just as I do my others?</p>

<p>Are we talking about the anticipated search options to also be based on the images tags?</p>

<p>Also of pertinent information, the photos that I'm placing into the For Sale folder are reloads that have been resized, any framing removed, watermarks removed etc., etc..</p>

<p>Is this a good idea or not?</p>

<p>I'm trying to keep reloads to a minimum but, up to this point have always submitted my photos for web viewing! Now this appears to require a different approach!</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Also of pertinent information, the photos that I'm placing into the For Sale folder are reloads that have been resized, any framing removed, watermarks removed etc., etc..<br>

Is this a good idea or not?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It had better be, because that's exactly what I've done.</p>

<p>I know William, . . . I had checked your Portfolio and was following your lead!</p>

<p>Hope you didn't mind! . . . And, Thanks!</p>

<p>I had given it considerable thought but then started checking a few Portfolios for verification of what others were doing!</p>

<p>Jim, I'm flattered - thanks! Just don't blame me if it turns to doo-doo, OK? ;-)</p>

<p>No worry William, . . . Won't be my first Rodeo, . . . stepping in doo-doo!</p>

<p>OK, so now the real question is.... drum roll please, has anyone sold any photos yet? how many so far total on the site?</p>

<p>Sorry, I tried to read all the speeches, but it's hard. <br />I did not understand if you found a solution to this problem. <br />I have about 300 pictures already posted on photo.net with the resolution of 800x600 pixels. <br />It would be difficult and time consuming for me to reload all the photos in high resolution to enable them available for sale. And I do not even want to do, because I do not like posting pictures in high resolution. <br />You can not make sure that if I get a request for a print, I get an email that tells me, and then I can go to upload the photo in high resolution request? <br />It would be perfect!<br>

Thank you! <br />Ciao! Raffaella</p>