Looking for design inspiration?   Browse our curated collections!

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 

Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Alexander Senin

9 Years Ago

Interesting article but just an information for the people who are out of touch with the issue.

 

Steven Ralser

9 Years Ago

I notice in the article they state apparel, and mention call centers. Wonder what this is about?

 

Frank J Casella

9 Years Ago

Thanks JC. I'm going to share this with my stock photo connections on LInkedIn.

 

Laura Fasulo

9 Years Ago

We have arrived, let the games begin!

I agree with you Philip that the article was heavily worded toward photography but still a great introduction to the licensing branch of FAA / Pixels.

 

Janine Riley

9 Years Ago

Great article.
Apparel.... hmmm.....

 

Laura Fasulo

9 Years Ago

@ Steve and Janine - the article's mention of Apparel refers to licensing of images for merchandise. Among the potential license uses, a company or individual may license one of our images to print on tee-shirts, hats and such.

 

Michael Dillon

9 Years Ago

Heck of a photo too JC good stuff.

 

Janice Drew

9 Years Ago

Good to see some press on Pixels.com. accompanied by JC's fabulous image. It's also nice to finally match a face to Sean's name.

Thanks, JC, for the information.

 

Frank J Casella

9 Years Ago

Laura you crack me up !! " We have arrived, let the games begin! " ... very true - that is what's so funny about it.


I wonder what Thomas Hawk is thinking now ... he's been trying to start a stock photo busines for a few years now. Think he's on his second or third try ( thomashawk.com )

One thing I noticed is this is a major push to transition to the Pixels site.

 

Thomas Zimmerman

9 Years Ago

Cool article, did they license the image from ya JC?

I keed...I keed.... :)

 

Walter Holland

9 Years Ago

Great article.

By the way, the slant on photography was determined by the publisher, not---I susspose---Pixels.com

 

Janine Riley

9 Years Ago

Thank you Laura - good point. Lol

Way to go JC on that image ! High five .

 

Gill Billington

9 Years Ago

Interesting article, great image JC!

 

Mary Lee Dereske

9 Years Ago

Yeehah! Love the exposure for all of us. Great photo, JC

 

Edward Fielding

9 Years Ago

Unfortunately it takes more than a fab url to take on a market leader. And no one can dictate prices. Prices are determined in a true free-market economy by the concept of supply and demand.

 

Joann Vitali

9 Years Ago

Love that image JC! Great article as well!:)

 

Warren Thompson

9 Years Ago

Nice shot JC! Thanks for sharing the article.


This photograph of New York City, shot by photographer JC Findley, is one of the images that will be available for licensing on the Pixels.com site.
Click ahead to see the founder of the new site. JC Findley

 

Les Palenik

9 Years Ago

Has anybody sold any image license yet?

 

Lara Ellis

9 Years Ago

Great article and photography! Exciting to be a part of this at its beginning! :-)

 

JC Findley

9 Years Ago

That is how I found the article, Google alerts me whenever my name appears on the web on a new page.... (Not REAL fond of the James Findley in Ohio that is up on murder charges....)

Perhaps the market dictates price, or perhaps you can adjust what the market is looking for by setting your price. Keep in mind art.com was the big 900 pound Gorilla when FAA came on the scene. Since they were the Big Kahuna at the time one could argue that their prices pretty much were the market prices. Yet, FAA with its completely new pricing structure was able to attract artists and then buyers even though many were priced WAY above what could have been considered market price. Now FAA is in fact the fastest growing PoD in terms of both artists AND buyers. Still to this day, there are numerous markets that go for the cheap buyer but yet, FAA still grows larger.

My prices here would make those who were only willing to pay art.com pricing snort coffee out of their noses and almost choke on their jelly donuts. Yet, I sell reasonable well on here. (I consider anything less than a thousand dollar month to absolutely suck, 1-2K is a good month, 2-3 is great and 3+ outstanding.) I have not had a sucky month since last April. The point here being is I did not price anywhere near what the market at that time dictated I should. I set what I wanted to set and let people decide if the market was really broad enough for that to work.

If you follow the path that people have always taken you will never lead. Take your machete and make your own path. Maybe people will follow you and maybe they won’t but it is much harder to fight a 900 pound gorilla if you do it on his terms and on his trail but if you don’t follow the rules as they exist at the moment, you might just win.

 

Gill Billington

9 Years Ago

Love your optimism JC and love the last paragraph, I'm taking my machete!

 

Sean Locke

9 Years Ago

"Broihier hopes that those looking to boost those paychecks will come his way to sell their work, and that purchasers will be willing to spring for more high-quality images."

Buyers are willing to spend money on high quality images, but Pixels is a self-curated site, which means there is no oversight, no vision to the collection, so there is not necessarily a "high-quality" ethos.

This isn't to say something "different" couldn't be created, say a collection of a all paintings to license, or all mixed-media, or something vetted for quality and then divided into collections like that. Then a buyer might say, "Oh, I need a painting I can license as to print to put on the wall of this TV show apartment" and then there might be a go-to resource for that. But that isn't really how this is being set up. It's just another big "here's a bunch of stuff" collection.

 
 

Lara Ellis

9 Years Ago

Thanks for the inspriation JC getting out my machete too! :)

 

Marlene Burns

9 Years Ago

I'm no good with a paring knife even....sigh.
Congrats on the exposure!

 

Donna Proctor

9 Years Ago

@ JC - yesterday I read another article about this where 2 images were shown . . . larger than 900px and would probably make good 11x14 for someone with skills. One was your NYC image and the other was of a black and white of a zebra on the ground. No attribution to either of you as the photographer.

Yep, congrats on the exposure!

 

Frank J Casella

9 Years Ago

JC your last post is spot on !!!!

 

Suzanne Powers

9 Years Ago

Nice article. Could you say when a company doesn't pay their people they will leave in droves! Do you know how many artists FAA has as compared to Art.com?

 

JC Findley

9 Years Ago

Actually never sold that one though its sister vertical version is my highest viewed image; approaching 50 thousand views with a few sales to go along with it.

I am absolutely fine with the larger image exposure myself.

 

Fred Larson

9 Years Ago

JC, love your attitude. Keep it coming!

 

This discussion is closed.