What do you think guys, about working for nft. Selling only one copy of an image for a good one time payment?

As I understand it, you only sell the NFT 'rights' whatever they are.

The copyright, and therefore the ability to sell your images as stock, prints etc., stay with the original artist.

I'm currently rebuilding my website fotovoyager.com with a view to selling images as NFTs independent of the agencies.

I don't really understand how it works yet, but one step at a time.

I suspect that if it takes off, the agencies will be trying to sell those rights for you, taking their usual unreasonable percentage.

Quote from: fotoVoyager on November 15, 2021, 08:41

As I understand it, you only sell the NFT 'rights' whatever they are.

The copyright, and therefore the ability to sell your images as stock, prints etc., stay with the original artist.

I'm currently rebuilding my website fotovoyager.com with a view to selling images as NFTs independent of the agencies.

I don't really understand how it works yet, but one step at a time.

I suspect that if it takes off, the agencies will be trying to sell those rights for you, taking their usual unreasonable percentage.

I don't think so. As far as I know, you sell your "product" completely and it becomes buyer's asset for good. NFT transaction does not resemble the distribution strategy of stock agencies, that's why you hear high amount of money circulating around on NFT markets.

Looks like, unless your expressly transfer the copyright, you still own it, as the author:

(Sorry, that link doesn't work now, as you have to register to read it).

However, from what I've read generally, you do keep the copyright unless you choose to transfer it.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d96ed012-8789-4e87-bc1d-70ba76569c0f

No, you only transfer the block chain rights, not the copyright. Seems bizarre, but there you are.

That's also how I understood it.
Pretty worthless if you ask me, because the only thing that is being sold are blockchain bragging rights.
Crazy world, and for first time I really think: I'm too old for this crap.

Now, some creatives are making very decent money with NFT's, but I guess they are well established and famous in their real world niche too.
Others seem to look at NFT's as an investment. Not sure how they are doing. I'm afraid a lot of them are losing (real) money.

I still have to see the first typical microstock contributor earning money with NFT's.
There's a lot of talk, but no results. At least, as far as I know.

Yeah, your essentially just selling an entry in the blockchain, that happens to come with a jpg. At best, you have a non-exclusive, non-commercial license for that jpg. 

Here's a link to an article on the subject that may be of interest:

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/nov/06/how-nfts-non-fungible-tokens-are-shaking-up-the-art-world?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB

With a simple Google search, anybody can find and download the file associated with an NFT for nothing, and store it on their phone or computer, but only the owner has the right to sell it.

Lets see, people spending Tulip bulbs to buy another Tulip bulb, by selling them to stupid collectors who don't own anything, but a right to sell the NFT to some other sucker?

https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/crypto/heres-how-much-electricity-it-takes-to-mine-bitcoin-and-why-people-are-worried/#:~:text=Bitcoin%20mining%20used%20more%20energy%20than%20Argentina%2C%20according,A%20wall%20of%20mining%20rigs%20in%20Quebec%2C%20Canada.

I'll quote the important part, you can read if you want:

"Bitcoin, Ethereum, Dogecoin and other popular cryptos reached record or near-record highs this year, raising concerns about the amount of energy needed to mine the coins. Warehouses of Bitcoin mining rigs run 24 hours a day, consuming more power than the whole of Argentina. As the energy bill for crypto mining rises, so does the amount of carbon and waste, adding to the growing climate crisis. "

And as posted earlier: "The Digiconomist's Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index estimated that one Bitcoin transaction takes 1,544 kWh to complete, or the equivalent of approximately 53 days of power for the average US household. "

This will be interesting as the people who want to disrupt economics and fiat currencies, are likely to also care about saving the planet. How can they justify their diametrically opposing beliefs.

This is entertaining, one of the largest causes of climate change is Bitcoin? 

The energy consumption is due to the Proof of Work mining adopted by Bitcoin and Ethereum. The NFTs are primarily powered by Ethereum which is making a big move to Proof of Stake mining which will require considerably less energy. NFT networks powered by XRP and Cardano and even Solana are far more environmentally sustainable. So it wouldn't be fair to bash all the cryptos equally. There are good ones that are environmentally conscious and which use less power than even cash or digital transactions.

Now whether it's wise for photographers to pour all their time, energy and money into mining NFTs? That's a different story. I don't think it's an alternative to even microstock at the moment and perhaps won't be one even in the distant future. But in a few years' time, it might compete with Fine Art photography outlets and if it takes off like people are hoping it would, might even render them redundant in a decade, just like the internet did to the telegram and fax machines.

Good points, but if it takes Crypto Coins to buy these, it takes mining to make those coins. On the other side, I see a crypto currency machine in the grocery store now. That's pretty funny. We don't mine, anyone can walk up to a machine and buy coins. Someone is making a commission on those trades.

The Staples Center is no more. Soon, it is going to be renamed as Crypto.com Arena. The name change is the largest naming rights deal ever at an estimated $700 million and it will begin to be called Crypto.com Arena beginning on Dec. 25, 2021.

Staples Canter for everyone who doesn't know the US, is the LA CA sports arena, which is used for all kinds of other large events. Staples is an office supply and printing company, Etc. Makes me wonder how much they paid for the naming rights?

I'm still watching the Crypto bubble, but after that bursts and things level out, crypto could be useful for something beyond trendy high risk investing.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 18, 2021, 11:01

I'm still watching the Crypto bubble, but after that bursts and things level out, crypto could be useful for something beyond trendy high risk investing.

Yeah, like the dot com bubble. It burst but the internet flourished after because of the extensive adoption during the bubble.

Dot com is a modern development and useful, the nutty reactions and overly optimistic investing was something else. I'd say the same will happen eventually for Crypto. Some people who think it's a wild investment opportunity will get burned bad. But I'd agree, after the fad goes away, there are serious and various positive ways that crypto coin can be useful for a long time into the future.

Just diverging a little, crypto dot com says they can buy, sell and trade 138 different kinds of crypto currency. This will be like auto manufacturing, computers, and all kinds of other products that had spectacular growth. Oh Microstock? Anyway, then  the market goes flat and I mean level not through the floor, and eventually only the best and the strongest will survive. Bitcoin and Etherium are two that I'll predict will be solid when the number drops to about two dozen viable crypto currencies.

Now about the value of those other 104 that no one will use or want?   

You might want to add a couple of zeros to that 138 to get the total amount of coins that are currently out there!

Nah.  There�s no need for it.  No benefit.  Just an over complication.

Nah.  There�s no need for it.  No benefit.  Just an over complication.

That's what they said when "emails" started becoming a thing back when. Everything digital is going to be on some form of a block chain in a few years. It's inevitable, whether we like it or not. And like with any new technology, the people who benefit the most are early adopters.

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on November 21, 2021, 13:18

Nah.  There�s no need for it.  No benefit.  Just an over complication.

That's what they said when "emails" started becoming a thing back when. Everything digital is going to be on some form of a block chain in a few years. It's inevitable, whether we like it or not. And like with any new technology, the people who benefit the most are early adopters.

That's right! I'm surprised than so many microstock photographers are so shortsighted. Having in mind they adopted to microstock so successfully back in the day. Guys, ask your kids for advices, it is time