Re: [PanoToolsNG] thinking like publishers
- Interesting ideas.
I believe most failures come from "expecting" your clients to come to you
based on your work and their imagination from how they can use your product.
Elimination client barriers is the key. Effective utilization of our product
by general businesses is well below 1% in my opinion and that's nobody's
fault but our own... and maybe apple's.
not not really..
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Don Bain <dbain@...>wrote:
> On Jan 28, 2010, at 7:02 AM, Fernando Costa Pinto wrote:
> >> And let's agree not to give our work away. We need to think like
> >> publishers, not just cameras-for-hire. "...
> > Could you explain your idea better ?
> Certainly, I think this is an area of general interest.
> [Please, everyone, read to the end, then contribute to the discussion
> positively. Let us try not to get mired in nit-picking arguments or
> attempts at humor.]
> Many of us have tried making money with a traditional website
> featuring VR panoramas. Years ago I made hundreds dollars a month from
> ads (such as Google AdSense), and franchise selling of books and
> posters. But that has dwindled as commissions have gone down and
> competition has gone up. Now it would take a huge amount of traffic to
> cover my development costs (travel, cameras, computers, production and
> hosting) and maybe even make a profit. Others have had the same
> experience. It is better than having nothing coming in, but not a good
> business model for most of us.
> Other ways of presenting panoramas on the web, such as 360Cities,
> reduce your costs for hosting, but you still have the other
> development costs and do not get the ad revenue or franchise sales. (I
> recognize that 360Cities offers a number of indirect revenue
> possibilities also.) Other sites and proposals use this model of
> donated content - you do the work, they get the revenue - Google has
> made billions this way.
> For many of us the publicity and gratification of having our work
> displayed on the web is enough. But again, it is not a good business
> model for an individual panographer. Both the ad-revenue-but-
> unprofitable personal site, and the donated-content sites are in
> essence giving our work away.
> So how to make a living producing panoramas?
> I think the most common way is to get someone to pay you to take
> panoramas. Then it is up to the customer to make money from it - you
> get paid up front and maybe royalties. But a lot of this business is
> at the lower end, what I think of as the IPIX syndrome, so it is a
> constant struggle to convince customers that it is worth paying you a
> reasonable price for quality work. It is similar to the "regular"
> photography business, but with a product less well appreciated and
> Another way is to sell your work directly, either in digital or
> printed form. Some leaders in the field do very well at this (and will
> be talking about it at the Tucson 2010 Conference). Selling through
> your own website doesn't seem to work very well until you get well
> known, so it involves selling through stock agencies, galleries, or
> art fairs.
> There are other ways to make money with panoramic photography (such as
> DVD virtual tours), but I think these are the main categories. In
> summary, publishing your own website but not covering costs with ad
> revenue, and donated-content sites amount to giving your work away.
> Shooting on assignment or freelance is being a "camera for hire" (not
> a bad thing, but not what all of us want). Shooting for stock or
> galleries is a straightforward business (not giving away it away or
> being hired) but tough to break into.
> So what do I mean by thinking like publishers? I think we should,
> probably as groups and companies not individuals, try to find ways
> that we can get paid directly for showing our work on the web or
> otherwise delivering it to end users.
> The web is a wonderful innovation in public education - which is why I
> got into it in the first place. Never before has so much information
> (and entertainment) been available so easily, and most of it for free.
> But it has a downside. Every newspaper and magazine in the world has
> suffered from the competition and they are grasping for new business
> models. We are in the same boat - everyone expects content on the web
> to be free! Micro-payments for high quality imagery have been tried
> and failed, paid subscription websites only seem to work for the Wall
> Street Journal and porn.
> I do not have a ready answer, I am just posing a question. How do we
> publish our work in a reasonably rewarding way?
> Many of the traditional publishing houses (books and magazines) are
> looking to e-book readers (Amazon Kindle and now Apple iPad) as a way
> to sell their content. I think the iTunes App store and Google's
> Android Market hold promise for selling to the hand-held device market.
> It is an interesting paradox. Many people are unwilling to pay for the
> New York Times on a website, but other people are happy to pay $13.99
> a month for a subscription on their Kindle. Similarly, despite
> widespread illegal downloading, millions of people are willing to pay
> for music by the song on iTunes. The same trend is apparent in movies
> and television shows.
> I am convinced that we have "compelling content", maybe not on a par
> with Hollywood movies and porn, but we know that people like our
> products. The challenge is to find the right delivery method and the
> right price point so we get paid for it.
> I hope we can explore these topics further at the conference in Tucson
> in April.
Southern Digital Solutions LLC
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]