fchan

discussion

Conversation over an FCHAN store

Pages:1 41 81
1Report
stevefarfan at 15 Mar 2007: 12:25

Lets talk about ALL aspects of the possiblity of an FCHAN store, including topics and ideas like:

-Making sure customers get what they want
-Earning the trust of Artists and giving them a good deal on products they sell thru the website.
-The technical and financial aspects of downloadable material.
-The amount of images per a dollar that would be acceptable
-Art quality that would be acceptable
-The benifits to fchan from the extra money (IE less ads that have nothing to do with the furry subculture)
-Prices that people would realistically purchase downloadable art at.
-Ways to submit art and removeal at a later date (if the artist so chooses)
-Website Security
-If the DNP list is enough to satisfy artists who would join the store.

Expect this thread to have ALOT of text walls.  Everybody who's interested  is looking for indepth, thoughtful, and researched dialogue.
_____________
-Idea first thought up by Tenchi.

2Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 13:34

Heh, I wrote this in response to the other topic, but I'll copy and paste it here. :3

>>1
Alright, awesome!  Thanks a lot, Tenchi!

Now, there are many different aspects of this topic address about, but first I want to talk about why I think this is such a cool idea! ^^

For one thing, as far as I know, nothing like this has ever been done before.  I mean, fortunately we have a lot of talented artists willing to spent their time and effort on making art available to the community, but fchan has the unique opportunity to bring together a lot of different artists for one project.  Which is awesome, because that way we can come up with something that appeals to many different varied interests.

Also, this could give artists the opportunity to participate in something they may not normally get the chance to do.  It would be neat to see artists get into this and get the chance to work with each other.

Speaking of which, I think the primary concern at this point is whether artists are willing to do this or not.  Honestly, that's kind of the "make it or break it" point, if nobody really feels like doing this that's pretty much the end of it.

And it is important that artists be able to freely contribute or not contribute as they wish.  It's fchan's policy to respect the rights of artists and that means they have the final decision.  But with that being said I do think this could be a very good opportunity for artists.

Well, before I get ahead of myself, do we know what the plan is?  I think there are a lot of different ways we could go, and none of them are really exclusive.

I mean, would we set up like a /pay/ board, and basically make it another pay-per-month subscription site? Or would willing artists to collaborate on a themed portfolio or CD? 

As a little side note, although the link gives me a 404 error at the moment I believe Yiffstar came out with a line of merchandise for the site.  That would be a fun thing to see fchan do, although I can't vouch for how successful it would be.  For the record, I would definitely buy an fchan T-shirt (I would just never wear it in public). :3

We'd have to discuss anything like price or the like after we figure out what exactly we'd be selling.

Getting back more to the point, I think that anyone that has a #Artist tag and is willing to participate should be allowed to.  I think that covers any quality issues that might come up, not to mention it might promote more artists to get tags. ^^

I don't really know what exactly to talk about without getting some more information, so sorry if it seems like I was rambling.

But I think the most important question at this point is: Would any artists be willing to participate in a commercial fchan project?

Bah, sorry I couldn't post this sooner, my computer hates me. >_>  Hopefully everything works out!

3Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 13:48

The files HAVE TO BE of sufficient quality. We have the bandwidth, we have the hard drives, we don't want near-thumbnail sized pictures that print out smaller than a postage stamp.

If you wanna sell digital, you start with at least computer desktop size. I'd rather buy one expensive proper digital copy than a CD full of useless junk. Quantity doesn't replace quality.

4Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 13:56

One method of a DRM for pictures would be to have people create an account, then embed the purchase number into each sold picture in multiple random places.

If the same file is found elsewhere, the account can be suspended. That forces the pirates to modify the picture to corrupt the data, which leads to degrading of the image quality and thus the bought version has an advantage over the copy.

5Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 13:58

>>4
I don't exactly understand how that would work (being rather un-computer savvy myself) but it sounds brillant.

6Report
Humus at 15 Mar 2007: 14:02

I may be wrong, but how would this solve an artist's income? I mean, selling the art (from what I've heard, at an extremely cheap price) is an issue. Sure, it's easy to buy an art CD and make copies to put up on the Internet, but it's a hundred times easier to copy a picture you bought and post it anywhere for free. And when it's free it's not bought. So... What is the purpose of this Fchan store, to support Fchan, support artists, or open everyone up for an even easier way to leech artwork?

Just my personal thoughts on the matter. :3

7Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 14:09

For an artist, it's cheaper to sell digital, because they don't have to deal with printing costs and management. If the F-store handles all the money transactions, then the artists won't have to get expensive "merchant" bank accounts and so forth.

They get a bigger slice of the pie than previously, even when they sell cheap.

>>5

Basically, you make a computer program that modifies pixels all around the image. It's called modifying the least significant bit, so the difference doesn't show up by looking at it.

The only way to get rid of the data is to guess where it's hidden and change it, or simply corrupt all the pixels, so the data vanishes.

8Report
Humus at 15 Mar 2007: 14:15

>>7

The cheapest commission for me would be $10 for a single sketch. Albiet, I don't charge a fortune for my skills, but someone in the other thread mentioned an artist would draw up to 25 images for only a dollar. To me, that's a lot of effort to earn a buck. How do you believe the system would work?

9Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 14:17

>>7
Alright, awesome!  If we can get a program to do that, it sounds like it would be a really good idea.

So then, would the fchan store be sort of like a middle-man?  I mean, istead of artists going through setting up something on their website to sell their art they could upload it to the fchan store which would sell it for them?

Or perhaps more of a subscription thing?

In any case, I think if we keep the system fairly simple (like posting on fchan) it would be easy for artists to submit and remove art.

10Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 14:24

Although the issue with the banking is soon becoming obsolete, because the EU has mandated the use of IBAN codes internally and other countries are expected to follow.

It means you just add a country-spesific code to your account number and people can send you money directly by issuing a transfer order.

11Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 14:41

>>9

It's not a miracle cure, still. For example, downsampling the image a certain amount would erase the data, and you would still have an acceptable copy that is only 30% - 20% smaller, assuming the original was at a print-ready resolution.

The embedded data can have means for fault tolerance, so the pirate has to mangle the picture a lot to get rid of it, but in the end, just resizing it to an uneven portion like 2/3 or small enough like 1/2 should remove the data completely and they still have a perfectly viewable copy.

You can also inject metadata into the file container itself, but that too is quite easily removed without touching the image data.

What it does is make it more complicated to pirate stuff so not everyone can do it, and even that slight advantage can turn people towards the original when they know the copied version is propably not the whole deal.

With the DRM comes the problem of piledriving accounts to use spare ones when one gets shut down. That could be helped by introducing a nominal sign-up fee, but that in turn would drive out potential customers.

In the end, you could offer a free "internet version" that is optimised for web viewing. eg. low to medium res + high compression, and then a proper print version with a pricetag. That would eliminate a great deal of the need to pirate the print version in the first place.

12Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 14:48

>>9

The store is not constrained to single mode of operation. It can host artblog-style subscription galleries at the same time as it sells printable digital art and other goods.

13Report
stevefarfan at 15 Mar 2007: 14:56

Oh, number 8, sorry for the mix up. The main point is that you draw these images once, then sell that same set to alot of people.

If you have 30 people buy your artwork at 20 dollars each, it's 600 revenue for you.  If 3000 people buy your artwork at 1 dollar, it's 3000 revenue.  (You probably already know this, but revenue is the money before subtracting the costs of creating the product, taxes, and other fees.)  Because the market isn't huge, and quality is very important... maybe 2 dollars would be a good idea for a downloadable set of images. If you go higher than that, you risk competing with physical comic books. (if you have something like 25 images)

I'm not against image protection. Even if you gave the items the equivalent of a serial number, that wouldn't really stop it from being shared.  I think you'd have to create a special image format that can only be seen thru fchan or a new program.  I've heard awhile back about some galleries where if people right click to save... the image file gets marked with a big red X.  So that it's not really viewable.  I don't know if such a program really exists.

14Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 15:00

>>8

The artist's skill and routine pretty much determines how much effort is put into a piece. At my level, I can draw 25 stick figures in less than 5 minutes and would be happy to do that if that earned me a dollar. (In the OP's case, it was a dollar per hour. He actually got almost $300 for the 25 pages and I doubt he was exactly sincere with the 300 hour work time.)

The better you are, the easier/faster it is to draw simple stuff and the more you earn with your time. I don't think we should make any amends to "struggling artists" who struggle to hold a pen the right way.

15Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 15:08

>>13

Proprietary image formats are a really dumb idea and you can still screencap copy the image anyways, or scan the image you just printed.

The image tagging would be only to discourage copying. Not to prevent it. There is no way of stopping people pirating the art, but with images, it is possible to make it harder with dynamically created tags. It also makes random individuals feel less like handing out a copy to strangers.

16Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 15:18

>>13

Instead of drawing the image once and selling a lot, how about setting up a money pool and once enough is thrown in, the piece is released for download.

I propose an opt-in system where the subscribers announce how much they want to contribute and when the required sum is gathered up, each subscriber gets a notice to pay up.

For example: Artist X has spent 30 hours drawing a piece. He sets up a preview image, opens the pool and announces he wants 200 dollars for the work. People throw in their contributions, the shop releases the picture and the artist makes $6.70 per hour minus the store provisions.

17Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 15:27

>>16

An whenever a piece gets sold, any new subscribers are welcomed by a nigra that says "The pool is closed" :D

18Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 15:57

Right, so by far we got three options for the artist to choose from.

1: pay per piece (auction or fixed price)
2: subscription (artblog, sketchblog, webcomic...)
3: pool payment

#1 Creates the most revenue with large volumes. Creates piracy and is greatly influenced by it. Good for really popular artists.

#2 Gives a small but steady monthly income that is propotional to the audience and fanbase. Creates some piracy and is influenced by it.

#3 Gives an artist-chosen one time payment that reflects the real worth of the piece and the work put into it. Good for quality artwork. Is not influenced by piracy at all.

Number three has a chance that the piece doesn't sell at all. When that happens, the artist may switch the piece to #1 or reduce the pool sum.

19Report
itoril#e0pMofP/AM at 15 Mar 2007: 16:09

>>2 "Would any artists be willing to participate in a commercial fchan project?"

It sounds interesting. If it goes anywhere, count me in.

20Report
Tenchi at 15 Mar 2007: 16:47

Sorry I have been busy, I think there needs to be clarification of what a merchant account is for, it's for accepting credit cards, checks and money transfers. There can be more then a few ways to accept money. also the initial idea was for a shopping cart type deal. all of 18's ideas are possible and there is no set size, so you don’t have to buy 1 comic @ a time, you can have comic packs. And honestly, DRM isn’t worth it. I have seen and defeated every type of DRM I have come across .  The best thing to do is have high quality scans or digital originals with small \ annoyingly watermarked thumbnails for previews. Also artists don’t have to put there items up immediately as they are produced, wait till you hard copies are sold or slows down enough and then sell on Fmart. Any further ideas ?

21Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 17:01

Not too small, or you can't see what you're buing. A preview that has an overview and a zoom-in to details would be great. That way you don't get people editing the watermarks out, because part of the image is obstructed by the zoom-square.

22Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 17:08

>>20

Option #1 really requires that a DRM system is present, because you can make identical duplicates of the purchased file with no restrictions whatsoever. One guy buys it and then torrents to the rest.

If removing the DRM requires some effort and has some effect on the image quality, then more people feel the real deal is worth more.

Though, that means that option #1 is not a sane business strategy. It's like selling sand on a beach without the DRM.

23Report
T-man at 15 Mar 2007: 18:16

Honestly the DRM issue has been made a moot point as unfortunately such technology in pics doesn’t exist, either way there are still many people who don’t pirate or don't know how to. part of the reason I think the fchan store is viable is because I think much like Doujinshi, the normal person only see’s like 1-2% of what is produced.  So one of the largest advantages would be the store will kind of also be an artist directory. The hardcore furries pirate a lot, sure. But honestly for me it wasn’t really worth the hassle. That’s the other point of the fmart, if it makes art easily accessible and cheap enough , people will buy from there instead of pirating, the other thing about pirating, many of them do I for the challenge I know I did.  Make it easy all around and the main players loose interest.  Make it hard and legit users loose interest. Windows is a prime example of this, nothing has pushed more windows users to Linux then the anti piracy crap and DRM they are forcing on the consumers.  Make it easy and make it attractive and people well come of their own volition.

24Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 18:43

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography

The technology does exist. All it takes is to know how the file is constructed to build a program that alters the data. Google for it and you'll find several programs that do it. None of them does it for this purpose though, but building your own shouldn't be an impossible task.

Applied the way I suggested, it's a non-invasive DRM. The customer doesn't see it, it won't stop him using the image in any way, but if he lets away the bought file as it is, he gets burned for redistribution once the image is spotted elsewhere.

25Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 19:00

All I know is BASIC, but even with that, I could create a program that takes an uncompressed image and hides another image in the least significant bits. The image should consist of a repeating ID number. Even if you compress the result with JPEG, there should be enough data left in the higher detail areas so you can pull it back.

26Report
Nick at 15 Mar 2007: 19:53

>>4 >>5 >>7 >>9 >>11 >>13 >>22 >>23 >>24 >>25

DRM of any form (including these vague references to stenography) is made of complete and utter *fail*. No joke.

If you're seriously considering some kind of Fchan store, image redistribution is something you simply have to understand WILL happen. You can't stop it, only discourage it. At the *very* least, people can capture their screen with the image on it.

This is why, unless you have an insane volume (ala online music stores with their millions of titles and millions of users) or a very specific "authentic" audience (scientific journals or books perhaps) selling electronic media online is not a viable business option.

Sorry. Neat idea, but limited user base and limited source equals doomed to failure.

27Report
somberfox#Y5tgt8uBeE at 15 Mar 2007: 20:07

>>26

All furry stuff that is sold for money is pirated, no matter how it's distributed. All prints, magazines, etc. are scanned, CDs are uploaded... How is DRM any worse than these?

28Report
somberfox#Y5tgt8uBeE at 15 Mar 2007: 20:11

>>27

Sorry but double posting, but I meant online business, not DRM.

29Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 20:32

>>26

If you don't want DRM, then the only viable options are Subscription and Pool purchase. Without DRM to create an artifical advantage for the purchased copy, the business is based solely on trusting on the people's good will. You might as well put up a donation bin and hope for the best.

Using steganography as a DRM method is actually the only possible way to make the legal product more appealing when working in a pay-per-piece sales model.

In the music world, the "DRM" is currently botched up so it's harder for the customer to use the legal copy. They can't use singled-out copies, because they can't ban anyone who's caught leaking the files. We can.

30Report
stevefarfan at 15 Mar 2007: 20:43

Another neat idea is a commission zone.  You have a list of all these artists listed randomly. 3 thumbnail sample pieces of art (one penciled, one inked, one colored) next to their name or alias, a 150x150 avatar icon, a short 256 character message, their prices, fetishes they allow, and if they are currently available for commissions.

A link to their website and an e-mail address can be placed as well.  To the point and nothing extra.  Otherwise it'll just waste bandwidth and people's time.

A user control panel can be created so the artists can edit these things.

The artist has to pay 5 dollars a month to be placed in the list.  It always shows randomly at first, but can be searched by name, fetish, commission slots available.  Artist must be B quality or higher to be allowed to be listed. (sure less can be accepted, but the reputation of the site goes down if quality standards aren't high enough)

This saves people the time of having to ask "who drew this art, does s/he take commissions, what's the e-mail, I wonder how much it costs, blah blah blah" in threads.  Also saves time from having to search so many websites for commission prices and quality artists.

31Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 20:51

>>26

The thing is, what you get by screencapping is, the program just reads the framebuffer and gets the exact same data that was in the file. (Assuming you're using the same bitdepth as the image)

All the hidden information gets carried along in the screen capture, so you can't copy it in 1:1 pixel size. You have to scramble the image somehow to destroy the carried information.

32Report
at 15 Mar 2007: 21:11

>>31
save it as a jpg, done.

33Report
Nick at 15 Mar 2007: 21:28

>>31

Not really.  All you need to do is modify the image in the *slightest* way and the special information is gone.

If the information is not visible then all you have to do is export it to another image format and it's gone. If the info is a visible part of the image then all you do is resize the image in the slightest and it's gone. Crop 5 pixels around the outside and it's gone.

My point is that this type of watermarking (more apt than DRM) simply is not robust. There isn't a copy protection scheme that hasn't been busted up and broken.

34Report
Tenchi at 16 Mar 2007: 01:31

I think we are getting off track here, only respond are yelling DRM! DRM! seriously read my post (23)  where I make the point that if u want to pirate it, yes it can be done.  People don’t want to use special software to view what they downloaded and probably want to fap to, this gets back to the whole “Make it hard and legit users loose interest” We know SOME people will pirate it, probably before it appears in the fchan store. (refer to what I said about waiting for hardcopy sales to die out, basically its saying you really don’t have more to loose by posting it up in fmart by that point.) and of course we can add the option to email author for an original hardcopy and any artists art sections can have a link to their commissions page.  Also can I have people who are interested this drop a line to fchanmart@gmail.com

35Report
at 16 Mar 2007: 08:53

http://fchan.hentaiplanet.net/crit/res/3370.html

Here. See for yourself if steganography is the shit or not. It can be done in 5 minutes with photoshop.

36Report
at 16 Mar 2007: 09:56

>>32

Saving as a JPEG doesn't work. Proof in >>35

37Report
at 16 Mar 2007: 11:14

I'm not reading most the replies above but I saw DRM so let me say this...

DO NOT USE DRM

I've talked to many many pirates and people who pirate, they say the one thing that encourages them to pirate more than anything is DRM. Only a small(11%) said they would pirate no matter what. The other 89% said they would buy the material if they thought it was worth the money(quality work) and did not have unnecessary restrictions to using the files(DRM). If you want to do this idea...don't use DRM or you are guaranteed not to make any profit.

I can say...i'd never buy digital content that put restrictions on me. It's bad enough i'm not getting a physical copy of what I spent money on...having my right to make backup copies taken away is anti-consumer, period. Punishing the honest for what the dishonest do is the biggest spit in the face that can be done in any industry and encourages piracy. Why? The DRM will be broken through and the file will no longer be limited by stupid restrictions thus...no reason to buy the file anymore out of a mixture of spite and disagreement with the content creators protection schemes(principles).

38Report
at 16 Mar 2007: 11:48

>>37

But you do get a physical copy. You can do whatever you want with the file, as long as you don't give it away. It's a regular jpg that prints like a regular jpg and you can use it like a regular jpeg. No rootkits, no special programs, no restrictions on how you can use it.

Only if you give it away to a 3rd person, and that person in turn gives it to someone else and we eventually find the leak, we can trace it back to you.

The moral of the story: don't share illegally or you'll get banned. Makes you think twice about posting the exact same files after you have bought them.

The lifestyle pirates can still pirate the art, but they too will get their accounts closed. Their only choise is to edit the image, and that reduces the quality, so the real deal is better than the pirated copy. If you print and scan the picture, the bought version is still better.

So who cares if people bypass the DRM.

39Report
at 16 Mar 2007: 12:06

The tag/watermark DRM system doesn't restrict you in any way.

It just makes it possible to punish you when you do the illegal and share the file to the whole internet.

40Report
at 16 Mar 2007: 13:00

>>38
DRM is equated with anti-copy protection which has been shown to give trouble with people in the past. Remember the whole iTunes downloaded songs not working in other MP3 players thing? That's what people compare with the word DRM.

What you are saying is ok but using the word DRM...it's going to turn people off. I suggest you come up with another term for it and explain the system and how it works.

92Add Reply
Name Sage? - captcha =
First Page - Last 40 - Entire Thread

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage