This might open a can of worms. :) Anyone interested in selling digital files? I know some customers want that. I think some online services sell downloads. I, for example, when shifter kart racing, had an option to buy prints or digital files from the guy contracted to do the races. I bought the files ($100 for a CD-ROM with my pictures only, I think about 15) instead of the prints. As I get into motorsports photgraphy myself, I can see my customers wanting to do the same thing I did.

Smugmug might offer thumbnails, "web images", and full-size options. Charge a certain amount for the download itself, with pro users adding in their profit.

Originally Posted by mercphoto This might open a can of worms. :) Anyone interested in selling digital files? I know some customers want that. I think some online services sell downloads. I, for example, when shifter kart racing, had an option to buy prints or digital files from the guy contracted to do the races. I bought the files ($100 for a CD-ROM with my pictures only, I think about 15) instead of the prints. As I get into motorsports photgraphy myself, I can see my customers wanting to do the same thing I did. Smugmug might offer thumbnails, "web images", and full-size options. Charge a certain amount for the download itself, with pro users adding in their profit.

The can of worms I would imagine is the rights to the photos. What you allow the buyer to use them for, be it personal, commercial, etc.

Doug

Originally Posted by dugmar The can of worms I would imagine is the rights to the photos. What you allow the buyer to use them for, be it personal, commercial, etc.

Good point. So far, its personal use photography only. (i.e. not commercial photography, not advertising, etc.).

When I bought digital files of myself racing, the photos were hi-rez jpg's, but with a copyright notice on the bottom right. And they would only sell me the files of me, not of just anyone. So I could not buy all the races photos, and then simply give them to everyone.

I know savy kids could be downloading my photos from smugmug.com already. I don't show originals, but the large files are good for screen savers and emails. Wondering if allowing someone to legally buy a photo is a good idea. Or if the price per download would have to be so high to counter the lost print sales that nobody would pay anyway.

Yes, I could watermark the photos, but I find the current watermark too intrusive and a blatant signal that "I don't trust you".

Originally Posted by mercphoto This might open a can of worms. :) Anyone interested in selling digital files? I know some customers want that. I think some online services sell downloads. I, for example, when shifter kart racing, had an option to buy prints or digital files from the guy contracted to do the races. I bought the files ($100 for a CD-ROM with my pictures only, I think about 15) instead of the prints. As I get into motorsports photgraphy myself, I can see my customers wanting to do the same thing I did. Smugmug might offer thumbnails, "web images", and full-size options. Charge a certain amount for the download itself, with pro users adding in their profit.

I would not like that. I originally signed up on Smugmug because viewers could download the original image uploaded. I (like most people anymore) have family all over, and it was too much work to email photos to everyone. Everyone wanted different sizes based on thier internet connection and some wanted zipped files while others didn't. I was spending 2 hours just to send pictures of my daughter. Smugmug has been such a great find for me...I don't want that aspect of the service to change.

That's my 2 cents.

Laurie

Originally Posted by mercphoto This might open a can of worms. :) Anyone interested in selling digital files?

Yes, I would like to do that. I do event pictures and I know there are lots of people who would like to have the digital shots. If I could put a _small_ copyright at the bottom I'd be perfectly fine with that -- this is not a fine art market.

It's not a case where it would really cause me to lose sales. The people who would buy a download would most likely never order prints anyway. I'm willing to take the small chance that they'll crop out my copyright and try to use the photo in some way they shouldn't. I expect that for my market the chance is vanishingly small and outweighed by the possibility of making more money off downloads.

For those concerned because they like the way things work now, I'm sure this would be a feature that you had to specifically turn on (and maybe for pros only), so it shouldn't be a concern.

Originally Posted by scrooks Yes, I would like to do that.

Some want to sell, some want to share. This particular feature is not a huge deal to me (not as much as the watermarking, or restricting large images is), but maybe a compromise is pro users can decide to charge or not for downloads. If they charge for a download, smugmug should keep a cut of the fee, given the fact they are handling the money transfer and bookkeeping for the sale.

But I'd rather see a move on the watermarking issue first. :)

Originally Posted by mercphoto Some want to sell, some want to share. This particular feature is not a huge deal to me (not as much as the watermarking, or restricting large images is), but maybe a compromise is pro users can decide to charge or not for downloads. If they charge for a download, smugmug should keep a cut of the fee, given the fact they are handling the money transfer and bookkeeping for the sale. But I'd rather see a move on the watermarking issue first. :)

I wouldn't mind having that as an option for pro users. That way I can keep my personal photos the same for family, and then just set a download price along with other portrait prices for professional galleries...? I already charge for making a cd of images for the customer. That would make it possible for them to only purchase the images they want, and it would be onle less thing for me to do...lazy, huh?

I agree that the watermark is a little intrusive. Don't know what else to do for that though...