Is art worthless on the Internet?

People will pay for some crazy things but cry foul over paying for artwork

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize News

Today Stardock Design released its first "Master" Dream to the Dream (animated wallpaper) gallery. It's the one Microsoft showed off at some of its events.  As some know, Microsoft worked with Stardock to make some of the animated wallpapers for use with Windows DreamScene. Windows DreamScene (the software) is a feature for Windows Vista Ultimate users.  Most of the content we created for Microsoft hasn't been released yet (it will be available from Microsoft).  In the process of creating the animated wallpapers for Microsoft, we made a bunch of extra ones for WinCustomize.com which had nothing to do with our work with Microsoft.

So far, Stardock Design has released 6 free .Dreams and 1 premium .Dream.  On top of that, Stardock has released DeskScapes as freeware and DreamMaker as freeware.  And of course, we host the Dreams here on WiniCustomize which, on their own, used over 2 TERRABYTES of bandwidth.  So from our vantage point, Stardock's been "the good guy". Providing lots of free stuff, lots of free software and providing a free site to get it on. 

But Stardock's also a business. The costs of producing all this has to be made up somewhere or else we wouldn't be able to keep doing it.  But some people seem to be very vocal in their outrage that artists won't work for free. They'll happily pay Microsoft $400 for Windows Vista Ultimate but cry bloody murder about paying third party artists $4.95 for content.  My Xbox 360 cost quite a bit too but amazingly, the games aren't free. Those "greedy" game companies! 

Here's some of the comments on Blissful Sunset:

"It's absolutely ridiculous that they're charging for this-- it's just wrong. But for people who own Vista Ultimate, just wait, I guarantee you that this will come w/ the final Dreamscene when it's released. "

According to this user, it's morally wrong for artists to be paid for their work.  He's quite incorrect about Blissful Sunset coming with the final.

Another user wrote this:

"The implication (with MS showing it at official events) is that this development is work that was part of your contract with MS and therefore has already been subsidized and is in fact being paid for by all of us by our shelling out extra bucks for Ultimate edition."

This falls under the "no good deed goes unpunished" category.  Microsoft was looking for high quality content to show off during their demos but didn't want to give away some of the stuff that will be coming in the final release so they asked us if they could show the extra content we made. We agreed to let them. After all, it's pretty cool to see your work up on stage. But this person (and others) have tried to argue that we should simply give away all the animated wallpaper for free that we've made because we made the ones that come with it.  How does that make sense?

Over at Valve's Steam website, a user posted "Stardock sux" and writes:

"This is just unbelievable. Stardock is now charging us for what is supposed to be a FREE Vista Ultimate Extra"

This line of thinking is equivalent to saying that someone who bought say Half-Life 2 via Steam is somehow entitled to HL2: Episode 0 and HL2: Episode 1 and so forth. After all, they paid for Half-Life, why should they have to pay for additional content?  In fact, that's been one of the trends in the "outrage" group. Sure, there's 18 dreams that are free. But they shouldn't have to pay for anything because they bought Windows Vista Ultimate. I just totally can't grasp that mindset.  In what universe does someone buying a version of Windows entitle them to free software and content created by third parties?  Heck, my cell phone tries to get me to pay money for additional ring tones!

So here's what's going to happen -- one of these 2 things are going to occur:

Possibility #1: Users decide animated wallpaper is worthless.  In that case, Stardock Design won't be creating any more for consumers. Remember, Stardock Design currently has a 6 to 1 ratio in free to premium content.  At that point, consumers would just have to hope that individual artists  --who understand that there's no chance they'll ever be able to even make some extra side income from their efforts-- will take the time to create spectacular animated wallpapers that loop perfectly and are encoded in high quality at high-definition. Maybe that would happen but I wouldn't count on it.

In addition, since the bandwidth bill would still exist, users would have to buy WinCustomize subscriptions to download after awhile.  So the "free beer" crowd would have to find their content elsewhere. But don't count on these being available on most sites. At 50+ megabytes a pop, it's a lot of bandwidth. Someone has to pay for it.

And of course, that would mean the software would have to start charging for extra features. Want to pay 3D dynamic content? The user would have to get the "Pro" version.  The point being, the costs of producing, supporting, and developing this stuff has to come from somewhere. Personally, I think a system which nearly everything is free but a handful of premium content isn't free is a pretty good arrangement for everyone.

Possibility #2: Enough users decide that there's value to animated wallpaper. If something comes along that is of exceptional quality happens to ask for a few bucks, then it's worth buying.  In that event, what would happen is that it would attract more and more talented people who would submit lots of free ones in the hope of eventually being able to occasionally release premium ones to help recoup their time and costs. It's worth mentioning one more time - Stardock Design's free to non-free ratio so far is 6 to 1. If other studios and independent artists of great skill start to do the same, that sounds like a win-win.

So far, the results have been good. In the first 4 hours of "Blissful Sunset" we sold over 200 copies of it. Whether that trend continues remains to be seen. There's always a big bump at the beginning. The typical WindowBlinds Master skin has an initial bump and then eventually trends to around 5 per day after awhile.  But even 5 per day, put over time, is worth it.  The author's share of that ends up being around $3,500 per year per skin (not counting the initial bump) -- enough to buy a new computer.  But skins are different because it's an established thing.  Animated wallpapers are brand-new. How things progress with animated wallpaper remains to be seen.

 

First Previous Page 3 of 10 Next Last
BX
Reply #41 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:30 AM
Nice words FB!!!!

You can not make everyone happy ... simply. Who doesn't want to purchase, shall not purchase.


NightTrainthedark
Reply #42 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:35 AM
MOST ART does NOT cost ANYTHING.


Rediculous statement.
Island Dog
Reply #43 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:40 AM
Why not.. I am happy to see you guys nickle and dime yourselves into oblivion


Nickle and dimes would be charging for every single skin on this site, and that is not the case.  There are literally thousands of free skins available for download on Wincustomize, even for programs that aren't made by Stardock, but a few premium skins for a reasonable price is somehow "nickle and diming".......I don't think so.




NightTrainthedark
Reply #44 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:40 AM
The more I think about this, the more I get bothered. I hope this thread is a very intelligent twist on marketing and Stardock isn't really taking the whines seriously.
kenwas
Reply #45 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 6:53 AM
The more I think about this, the more I get bothered. I hope this thread is a very intelligent twist on marketing and Stardock isn't really taking the whines seriously.


Agreed. The whining is silly. Dreamscapes will either be successful or not based on people wanting it on the desktop after the "newness" factor has worn off. If the public decides against it, it will not matter if the Dreams cost or are free. If the public likes it, then good dreams will and should be sold. Time will tell. Best of luck to Stardock with this venture.
MySecret
Reply #46 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:05 AM
Is art worthless on the Internet? Heck no !~! Regardless of whether it is quality or worthless in my eyes it will always be up to the artists if they believe they can receive money for it. I recently saw a painting consisting of 4 red stripes priced at $6000.00 yes six thousand dollars

But the argument given in whether I pay or not has nothing to do with my paying 5 bucks for a cup or coffee or if I have to save pennies in order to eat until the end of the month. Those comparisons & arguments are insulting whether it is about an animated wallpaper or a master windowblind.

Before you jump all over me....please read....First Frogboy has repeatedly stated legitimate and reasonable arguments for insisting on what is a very small amount to pay for quality & time consuming works.

So Please keep the arguments based on facts. Inform users on those costs, the learning curves, the programs needed and the amount of time it takes. Most of us have no concept of those issues.

Acknowledging that people were blindsided by the request for money....albeit a very legitimate request goes a long way in soothing the future customers willingness to pay. And they were blindsided. No where in any of the advertising was any information given on the cost of making dreams nor a hint that they will have to pay for the * highest quality dreams. Telling them to pay up or in other words shut up *only creates animosity. And word of mouth spreads faster than any amount of high quality advertising ever will.

Regardless of their age, income or maturity they still are potential customers and if we are lucky great additions to the Wincustomize community.

As it always has been & always will be people will balk at spending their money, but lets treat them with respect even if we don't agree with them. Saying I understand your argument and giving them facts on the costs will never satisfy everyone but it goes further than telling them what they should be spending their money on.

I am proud that Stardock is a part of this new technology and hope that they will indeed make enough money to make this newest endeavor worthwhile. I think that this is the coolest site on the net and the potential for new skinners to work their way up to master shows the high standards that Stardock has set. And of course we are the beneficiaries of this concept. Keeping up with the newest technology will keep Stardock on the cutting edge for years to come.

So it would be great if someone would post an article on making dreams, the howtos, the programs needed ect. and time involved.

I understand everyones frustration on some outrageous arguments given for Not paying...but think it not write it Please...I can not put in print some of my responses to some of those comments....I would be banned ....There is no angel sitting behind this keyboard And most of your comments are indeed mild compared to the original comments but lets not argue with them...don't give some another excuse to attack

It's My Secret

c242
Reply #47 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 7:06 AM
Same sh*t, different day.

MOST ART does NOT cost ANYTHING.


Hm, I know of some fine pictures, I want for free. So please would anyone give me some Lichtensteins, Warhols, Picassos and of course Dalis for free to decorate my flat ? And while You are at it, some really cool sculptures would be nice, too.
Jafo
Reply #48 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:16 AM

Wincustomize was not created to benefit the consumer it was created solely to sell your programs.

Sorry, you are wrong.  Not sure where you were back then, but I was there, as were many others here still.

Wincustomize.com was born out of the dying embers of skinz.org simply because the CEO of Stardock was a fellow skinner, just like many of us here, who all dreaded the loss of skinning's community, and at that time skinz was the epicenter. [Deskmod, Customize.org were up and down like yoyos, and Devart was only in its infancy...and was intended to deviate from skinning towards mainstream art].  Stardock already had its own sites for programs/coporate identity, etc., but with the impending death of skinz a lot of us were praying for a 'miracle'....shoot eFront's management [or have them charged on criminal counts] and magically get skinz.org back.....

Fortunately for us all, Frogboy decided to 'simply' divert funds from his business into what he [and we] perceived as a hobby.

Ever since then Stardock has been called everything from fascist to evil, and anyone arguing the contrary has been labelled a 'fanboy' and summarily dismissed/ignored.

Numerous debates arise from time to time as to whether 'skinning' is Art, or not [or Design].

Generally everyone conluded it WAS an 'artform', so, [even if not] it had an intrinsic value ...as any creative design would.

Placing a value [price] on it was always going to be contentious....but....

Think it through like this... You are an individual with a personal identity.  You wish to promote YOURSELF to the world at large...so you ask [commission] a person to design a Logo.... a Company Banner....a tailor-made suit....a house design [my trade]...a skin for your computer's GUI.

How much do you think this 'personal one-off' will cost you?

Price will NOT be 'shared' by volume.

How much for that Windowblind skin made JUST FOR YOU....never to be released elsewhere...just yours?  $5? no. $50? $500 $5000 $50,000?

Where you answer correctly is where you are based in reality.

OK, now ditto with an animated high-def wall image.....come one....have a stab at it.

And instead, this product's cost is to be shared amongst others sensibly....so $5 is the determinate.

Probably equates to the cost of an 8x10 print of Dali's clocks [and you still haven't bought the frame]....

Jeff Gamble
Reply #49 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:51 AM
I dont post often, but I felt compelled to NOW!

I support Stardock's need (and right) to charge for premium content.

Of course I'd like everything to be free... New cars, boats, maybe Rolex should give away their watches!

It's a topic I've seen on many other sites: "Why isn't it free?"

Some people just dont get that downloadable content takes time and resources to produce, just like anything you would buy from a walk-in store.

Now I plan to purchase 'Blissful Sunset', right after I go to my job, where I hope to get paid for the time I spend working!
kenwas
Reply #50 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:23 AM
How much do you think this 'personal one-off' will cost you?

Price will NOT be 'shared' by volume.

How much for that Windowblind skin made JUST FOR YOU....never to be released elsewhere...just yours? $5? no. $50? $500 $5000 $50,000?

Where you answer correctly is where you are based in reality.

OK, now ditto with an animated high-def wall image.....come one....have a stab at it.

And instead, this product's cost is to be shared amongst others sensibly....so $5 is the determinate.


I have no issues with the sale of Master animated walls, Master Blinds or for that matter anything that Stardock wants to sell. Just fine with me. A business is a business. The existenace of WC is something that we can thank Brad for as well and anything that helps with overhead absorption is also just fine with me.
But what are you talking about in the above quotation? No one that I know of is getting "personal one offs" but rather product that any one can buy.I agree with your basic point just don't get this analogy t all.
boodahbellie
Reply #51 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:32 AM
What these whiny asses don't understand is that it takes time to create these things. Time away from our families and sometimes our "real" jobs. Being a graphic artist myself, I completely understand this issue. I have only been using Stardock apps for about 8 months now and plan to start doing some skinning on some level, but haven't found the time. The guys who do find the time should be rewarded with an occasional sale of their goods, provided they are of sale-able quality. There are a couple of skins and DX Desktops that I would have gladly paid for, but got them for free on WC. Not to mention the fact that there is always FREE advice from some of the creators on the chat channel #stardock. These guys are just hanging out, happy to provide assistance with editing or customizing themes. I'm grateful the these people and Stardock exist to bring us all this great content, mostly FREE.
warreni
Reply #52 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:40 AM

Well, I don't have a vested interest in this particular thread, because I don't have Vista.   

However, I see legitimate arguments on both sides, just as Excalpius stated earlier.

1) Poor timing


Well, like I said, I and many others have not yet bothered to upgrade, so we have no use for DreamScene content--ergo, we're not buying it at this point.


Bait and Switch


It does seem a bit disingenuous, even if this weren't the intent of Stardock or Microsoft, to charge for demo content. I understand Frogboy's explanation of how this scenario unfolded, and it seems perfectly reasonable, but it seems as though some alternate arrangement could have been made (such as a one-time payment from MS?) to compensate Stardock for use of their content for this specific purpose. I think this particular piece of work may constitute a special case because it was used to showcase the DreamScene functionality of the new OS.


Having said that, I have and will continue to pay for premium content that I like from both Stardock and third-party users for two reasons: 1) I like it and 2) time=money and it costs time to produce quality content. As an example (and I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings here--this is strictly a matter of personal preference), I purchased the Fortune suite the other day because it looks cool and because I was one of those kids who was always fascinated with that folded blue paper suspended in liquid inside a fake 8 ball. I would not purchase the Texas Hold 'Em suite, because it doesn't really interest me.

Let's face it: if Stardock and master skinners gave away everything for free, how long would this site be in operation? Stardock's reason for operating this site is, as Jafo stated earlier, the same reason that most of us are here today and reading these posts. We enjoy tweaking the appearance of our desktop and/or laptop computers. Altruism has its limits, though, and if Stardock began losing money by the bucketload on WinCustomize, then it would be foolish of them to continue operating it, at least in the same way that it works at present. I believe that the majority of WC users, infrequent visitors/complainants excepted, share the view that the occasional purchase of premium content or subscriptions is a small price to pay to support our "skin" habit.

Well, that's my nickel and my dime, so go buy some 11-cent candy.   

Jafo
Reply #53 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:44 AM

Kenwas .....unfortunately consumers [non-skinners/artists] can be oblivious to the REAL time/effort [and thus cost] involved in a skin or art creation.

When they/you/we pay $5 for something created that is not its cost of manufacture/production.

That is the cost of volume delivery, based on market projections of 'take-up'.

In simple terms, I design houses.  My output becomes a multi-thousand dollar piece of paper, Like Dali's clocks it has a very real and very HIGH value, a product of its uniqueness [originality] and, in the case of the drawing...practical application to the process of a specific building construction.

The 'original' is thus VALUABLE, its prints are priced as mere replication/distribution costs.

My unique output is therefore two prices.... thousands for the 'original' that the client never actually OWNS and a couple of bucks a sheet/copy for the prints that he DOES get to own.

To equate this directly with the Dreams price-point cost retrieval, I could charge nothing for the original...and just give the client a bill for $200 for each sheet of paper [print].

The cost of the 'original' [Dream design/creation] is simply being spread to a greater number of 'prints' because it is a product that has a greater potential customer count than my house dwg [which would be 'one'].

That doesn't sound any simpler, really....I'll stop now....

kenwas
Reply #54 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:03 AM
I'll drop it here as well as it goes off topic for the thread. I am more than familiar with cost allocations and absorption and where they end up on a P/L versus a balance sheet. Once again, I wish you a great day!
JunkInternetMail
Reply #55 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:16 AM
@
All you guys who think my statement about art is a joke...you're half educated and even less than half intelligent.

If you added up all the artwork created in the world and put it into 2 categories:

PAID vs FREE

Free would win because ultimately only the highest quality or most rare art sells for a price.

Too bad you guys cannot separate the trees from the forest and pick the most rare art in the world to use as your counter to my argument. Sucks to have your poor arguing skills...it's just not in your forte.

@
Frogboy

2GB? Are you on drugs dude? I've downloaded officially 79MB of FREE stuff.
I've bought over $100.00 of stardock apps since 2004.
Regarding your absolute BS # of 2GB if you factor in your site which takes about 100mb just to "load" into my browser I guess that might be possible as I visit your site daily.
Regarding my sharing, I tried to create MANY bootskins for free that were of popular themes but they were rejected because of "copyright" issues. So now before you guys all go and say I simply edited someone else's work -- learn how art is created and why it's created. Inspiration comes in many forms and people appreciate stuff that is not 100% "original" daily...including a premium dream scene that's idea is clearly RIPPED from a wallpaper found on this site (not created by WC or anyone at StarDock)...but no one in my corner throws criticism at that so let's hold comments back about what counts as sharing and what doesn't.

At any rate, the fact that WC let's people voice their opinions on this site has become something of a moot point. Why?

1) nothing we say is ever taken into consideration by the execs at either company
2) it's their site and business they will do what they want and it's not our call
3) anytime you get an admin avoiding key points only in attempts to hack someone down and divert the public's attention to useless squabble it's clear the intentions of the owners of this site: take money when possible and when criticized -- shut down the vocals ones.

I'm really shocked at you Brad. After seeing you present stuff at demonstrations, viewing your presentations on video, reading various articles, etc, I can finally see just the quality of person you are when someone presses you creatively and intellectually. Far be it from me to judge you, I'm only making observations. What I can say though you do not fit the stereotype of the: assertive, free-thinking, and less than aggressive typical artist. Instead, you're letting people see you sweat when pressed with hard issues that ultimately don't make or break your hard work here. That's lack of professionalism...
RomanDA
Reply #56 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:22 AM
I am so sick of people thinking because its ART or SOFTWARE that it has no REAL Value in the world.

I have been trying hard to make some part-time income from the gadgets I have been GIVING away for years. Its a hit and miss proposition, i have found people will shell out for something "cute" but something that has a lot of functions and is closer to a PROGRAM then a GADGET they shy away from, why? what has more VALUE? something CUTE that took me 2hrs to make, or something that is amazingly complex and versatile and took MONTHS to create?

For example, the Holiday Countdown that i have made and am giving away FREE here on this site HERE has a download count of 1381 (as of 2/21/07). That version took me somewhere around 70 hours to make work, and work without problems (if that is possible).

The PRO version HERE took me an additional 100+ hours to work out all the problems with making it work for USER events, with custom graphics, etc. So lets do a little math, say I make $25/hr, the FREE version COST ME $1,750, thats my time given away to anyone who wants to download it. add to the that the PRO Version costs ($2,500) and you have $4,250 for 1 gadget. Its selling for a whopping $6.95 ($5.95 if you had a code to use!), so i would need to sell 612 of these (give or take) just to BREAK EVEN. So when you ask someone to GIVE AWAY their work to you because you feel you are entitled to it, i only have one thing to say.. GO MAKE YOUR OWN "ART" and then you have room to talk.

If you have never made a skin, or even a simple gadget to see how long these things take, then "shut the hell up" you have no right to tell anyone they should or shouldn't charge for THEIR work.

YES it is WORK, not a HOBBY. Most of us started out doing this as a hobby, and we have fun with it, and i still do, if i didn't i wouldn't be spending hours making tutorials, and posting free content, but it is work, its time spent on something that i could be doing something else or hell, doing nothing.

It all boils down to this, if you like it, and feel the author made something worthwhile, and have the $, BUY IT, support them, and they might feel like what they are doing is worth the work and effort, if not, then dont expect them to keep pushing out quality work, because everyone needs to make $, sorry thats the way life is, and if we are spending hours, days, weeks, or even months on a project, then you have the right to do whatever you want with it.

RomanDA takes a min and calms down...
Zargon
Reply #57 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:03 AM

Having said that, I have and will continue to pay for premium content that I like from both Stardock and third-party users for two reasons: 1) I like it and 2) time=money and it costs time to produce quality content.

I think this says it all.  I am confident that warreni is not the only one who feels this way.

Jan71
Reply #58 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:28 AM
Just bought it to see if it exceeds my expectations. it is still downloading ...
Brad, what most people put off, me too when I first saw the prize tag, is the fact that in all communication towards the public MS and Stardock came forward as one team.
I read somewhere that Microsoft contacted Stardock to help them to create first class content.
In this light, most people expect you getting paid by Microsoft to do this.
Especially as this dream in particular was showed off by Microsoft to demonstrate Dreamscene on Vista Ultimate.
If on the other hand you have been paid to deliver a defined work, and this is indeed an extra, you have all the rights in the world to charge for it.
No one is obliged to buy it.
I am just afraid I will be changing dreams regularly, just as I do with wallpapers.
Never thought about paying for a wallpaper as there is so many beautiful free stuff around.
Jan
Supporter of Stardock since the OS/2 era
Adamlenn127
Reply #59 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:28 AM
So, in summary, I do think that Stardock should charge for its premium content and I hope all of us buy the occasional one we like. However, I don't think it was a good idea to charge for the very same video that got everyone excited during all the demos. Oops!

My two cents...and my $5 for the animated wallpaper.

Supporting the artists, DreamScene, and Stardock. Peace.



I agree with Excalpius I am on the WinCustomize side. I think it is fine to charge for the premium content. If I had Windows Vista Ultimate right now, I would go perches the background right now.
Xan
Reply #60 Wednesday, February 21, 2007 12:19 PM
Ahhh hello???? What are you guys smoking at Stardock with your scenario one and two crap???? IF you are goign to do that sort of BS then please follow through. I totally agree w/ most of what you have said in scenario one but you did not go to its conclusion. So after stardock starts charging all sorts of money for .dream files, dreammaker pro, dreamscene extra special deluxe pro (now with more colors...), etc. less and less people will come by to the site and interest will ultimately die in .dream files (there will always be the minority vocal fanboys but that will be all that is left)... Since they ahve laready paid for the program there is no new revenue coming to stardock from them so bottom lines get hurt and programs have to be discontinued...



So says Shadowlord, who, according to his profile, has submitted nothing of his own and has no wc subscription or hasn't bought anything.

By his rationale, he's a customer because he uses free stuff.

Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
  • Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
  • It's simple, and FREE!



web-wc01