Thinking like publishers...
I, like a lot of others end up giving away the prints to friends
and making no money. I use a quality lab for panoramic images when
printing for myself and framing them. Its the cost that can be a killer,
when a 12x50 is $150 and about $100 for a 12x36 giclee Epson print. Its
not cost effective for a framed consumer print.
There is an art gallery interested in handling my panoramic photos
and they think they can sell them. They do not compete against the other
types of art they have or other photographers. Hence it is a good fit.
So I have sized the images to 17", 23", and 35". The smallest size
allows me to print them two up. The actual paper length is one inch
longer as I build in white borders for mounting to mats.
I have shown them Costco prints and they loved them. I love them
because they are low cost to print and look great when they turn off the
"auto color correct". The weak point is the paper choices are gloss and
lustre. I prefer a satin finish paper but it is not available. I have a
possible but limited market field to sell to.
So try taking a look at the art galleries in your area and catering
your images to the tourist trade. The images in serveral sizes will
allow the customer a greater choice in size. Obviously the completely
framed photo will command the highest price especially if you make it
look its best. You can still have some available at lower cost if it is
only matted, or if tube rolled. If you do tubes for selling, it is
advisable to place the print into a plastic bag inside. This is due to
the high acid content in cardboard papers.
Mail order the frames and mats. But cut the mats yourself if you
have the space and equipment. The glass can be pricey even for single
thickness, and archival glass is probably prohibitive due to cost.
My first rule on images or photos is the computer screen version
means nothing until you actually print the picture. None of my images is
on the web because computer monitors just do not do them justice for
I doubt there is a web based market for panoramics. Their fit into
normal publishing is just not there. All the publishers are trying to
make a web based profit model work - and failing mostly. Everyone wants
everything free, or so cheap the content provider cannot make enough to
make it worthwhile. Driving a potential buyer to your images will be
very difficult. This is why I recommend the gallery approach taylored to
If I do not go broke being unemployed, then I plan on getting a
decent monitor like the NEC or HP Dreamcolor. I bought a 64 bit quadcore
with 8 gigs of ram to replace my Windows 98 'puter. These barely
affordable upgrades will also allow me to finally work in 16 bit and
stitch more photos than four. I also added a second hardrive for backup
along with a portable. Before doing the monitor I will probably go for
the software ubgrades.
On 28 Jan 2010, at 21:48, Mathew Hargreaves
> I doubt there is a web based market for panoramics.