Frogboy Frogboy

Is art worthless on the Internet?

Is art worthless on the Internet?

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

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.

 

63,921 views 190 replies
Reply #76 Top
I can't imagine why anyone would think they should get everything for free. I bet they're more than happy to put in a 40 hour a week for free - NOT. I'm sure it was a failing in their upbringing.


just what i think thanks!

They should be sterilized before they have a chance to procreate.


oh that's mad bad Lantec it's not kind!
Reply #77 Top
The ones that really burn my ass are the ones that claim they can't afford it.


Some of us actually can't.

I have no cable, no long distance telephone and eat one meal a day just to survive; so, don't generalize here as some people are actually telling the truth when they say that. If I could afford cable, I'd choose Wincustomize & Object Desktop subscriptions instead.
Reply #78 Top
I cannot beleive people are complaining about paying $5 for an exquisite piece of art. Seriously. What's more important to you people? You can't even get a good lunch for $5 anymore, and yet you bitch about this stuff?!
This whole dreamscene thing and the content that's up on wincustomize is one of the primary factors in my desire to get Vista Ultimate (what can I say, I like my eye-candy!)
As soon as I get Ultimate I can assure you that I at least will be buying blissful sunset. If Stardock Design continues to produce stuff of such high calibur I don't see any reason I won't be making more purchases either.
Reply #79 Top
I have no cable, no long distance telephone and eat one meal a day just to survive; so, don't generalize here as some people are actually telling the truth when they say that.


yeah man i agree we said the truth and if anyone want the sold of my bank account at this time=
-900€ ok i can't buy this staff and in more i haven't vista at this time for the same reason my first interest that my daughter can find eat on the table. I take time to make free staff to share it here for free ok! and for those who believe that skinners here are some money. every month i have 1500€ to live with my wife and my daughter. when i listen people who don't/can't make any staff complain on a staff at 5 dollars i'm seriously
Like i have said at the top if you wouldn't pay for it good but don't complain on the price all staff (and good in more) can't be free.
Reply #80 Top
I'll pay for digital art, but generally only as a personally-commissioned piece, or as part of a product which I want for other reasons. Digital art is widely available, and so very cheap. Something I can hang on my wall (not my wallpaper) is a different matter.
Reply #81 Top
Hey let's face it,95% of the content on this website is free. I for one would not complain about anything on this site. it's all good. As far as skinners getting paid, I AM 100% for it.They give most of their work away for free! And when and if they want to charge for their work, that is their decision. They being for example treetog,adni18,and gef.[of course their are much more but you get the point]are incredible artists! I am more than happy to give them my money!What's it worth to you to pimp out your pc? To me,PRICELESS!!!
Reply #82 Top
Well this debate is not something I usually like to get involved in, but I do understand and see both sides. As a skinner I understand the amount of work that goes into creating something like this and know the amount of time required. and on the other hand I understand what some other people are saying and understand their point of views. This ia all so very easy to solve. If you like it and would like to support the product, you should purchase it. and if you dont then you just done purchase it. There will always be free paraphenlia for those who do not wish to buy anything and hopefully there will be for those who wish to support the artists enough premium content to make everybody happy. I myself will probably purchase it in the future as I wish to buy a new computer first. However no matter which way you look at it, we should all be grateful to all the talented artists out there who put in all the effort to do the best they can for everyone....  
Reply #83 Top
i don't mind if someone doesn't want to buy it. different strokes. what i don't like is some ass on the internet telling me that it's morally wrong for people to have the option to buy this stuff.

the argument isn't whether these premium dreams should be free or not. the argument is whether they should even exist at all. do these morons really think that these high quality dreams would be simply given away? no, they'd just not be made at all and people like me would be stuck having to download the latest crummy video someone turned into a 'animated wall'.

fascism is always ugly. it's particularly ugly when it's practiced by a bunch of holier than thou parasites.
Reply #84 Top
Some of us actually can't.


If you can afford to shell out $400 for ultimate, you can afford $5 for an animated wallpaper.

Reply #85 Top

Stardock Design has released 6 free .Dreams and 1 premium .Dream.

....Direct quote from Frogboy's initial post [see top of page].

That can be rephrased.....

Users currently have TWO options.

They [the prospective users] can either have SIX .Dreams for FREE, or pay just $4.95 and get ALL SEVEN.

How on earth is that a bad deal?

[By the way, that question is one of those rhetorical types, OK?]....

Reply #86 Top
Why do you think that because they charged for one Dream they will triple their prices? They do everything they can to make people happy and still keep their business running! I don't understand why you complain about it! It is pointless to argue it back and forth with you though because people that think like this are stuck in their ways! They can't be reasoned with! I know because I had a friend that was like this! It is just sad that people won't open their eyes! LIFE IS NOT FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!! I couldn't be any clearer about the truth than that! That is all I am going to say!
Reply #88 Top
Well said!


Well said!
Reply #89 Top
If you can afford to shell out $400 for ultimate, you can afford $5 for an animated wallpaper.


That's exactly what I was thinking!
Reply #90 Top
I'm charging $5 for every complaint   
Reply #92 Top
I bet not EVERYONE has shelled out $450 for Vista.
I don't think most people are complaining about the $5 as much as they are complaining about being shown some false advertisement (I guess you could say).
Being shown something while on display, making everyone want it. Then when they get it, they don't actually get it. I can see why people are a bit pissed.
Me, honestly I don't care. I do believe the people who made this should get paid. I just think this could have been done a little better.
But keep up the good work and I can't wait for the Rotating Earth dream if it ever comes out.
Reply #93 Top
Cheap or not, ok I'm cheap, $5 dollars is steep. I'd rather pay $20 bucks for a six month subscription for the premium content. Regardless of the price a preview or 3 day trial is a must.
Reply #94 Top
How much does Stardock get from the $5?
A skinner has to give so much free stuffs (Benefit (Profit) Of Stardock) to hopefully reach the master tittle.
I wonder if Stardock still want a share from the masters' profits?
Or is it just a Thanksgiving kind of act on the part of Stardock?

  
Reply #95 Top

How much does Stardock get from the $5?
A skinner has to give so much free stuffs (Benefit (Profit) Of Stardock) to hopefully reach the master tittle.
I wonder if Stardock still want a share from the masters' profits?
Or is it just a Thanksgiving kind of act on the part of Stardock?

WinCustomize.com and the skin author split the the net revenue 50/50.

Reply #96 Top
Well for what its worth, and i dont charge for my opinions (yet ) I say good luck to stardock and the artists who can make money from these ventures. As frogboy said, most of the stuff here is free, Admittedly some is not of the highest quality, but a lot of it is. (Also worth noting that everything ive loaded has worked aprrt from inexperience from this user) The cost of premium items is also very reasonable given the time and skill needed to produce these things (and ya dont have to buy em if ya dont want em ya know), and the items you pay for all, in my opinion, are of excellent quality, whether i like them or not is another question, so all power to em keep up the good work
Reply #97 Top
If you can afford to shell out $400 for ultimate, you can afford $5 for an animated wallpaper.


Agreed.

But, I haven't and can't. So, again don't the throw everyone into the same assumptive boat. All I was saying is that not everyone who says they don't have the cash is full of shit.

If I do upgrade it will be at cost for Ultimate or nothing through a barter type of deal.
Reply #98 Top
I am going to make a large post answering a number of the points others have brought up. Apologies for not using direct quote/reply to your posts.

Most content on WC is free. It will stay free. However, life is not free, and sometimes in life you actually have to give something back to the people who give you stuff. Like, money.


The point isn't whether life is free or not. The point is that there is no value in buying WindowBlinds if I have to pay for skins for it. And note that I am not arguing whether we should pay for skins. I am just pissed off at the holier then thou attitude of the OP and acting as if they are doing us a favor with this site! People are drawing up all sorts of half-assed analogies... I am just going to address two brought up in the original article: 1. HL and 2. RingTones

When I buy HL I get a fully functional product that I can use without buying anything else. Same thing with ringtones. I can use my cell phone with all of its functionality without ever buying a ringtone in my life. However, if I buy WindowBlinds and there are no skins available I can NOT use it whatsoever.

A more correct analogy would have been saying I bought HL the game but now valve wants to charge me for the graphics, story text, voices, etc. (i.e. Skins) since I only bought the engine that runs the game (i.e. WB). Or you buy a cell phone and you get no ringtones since you bought a cell phone (WB) not the ability for it to ring (skins).

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.....
End of quote


I was right here and you are illustrating my point EXACTLY! With all those sites gone there would be no skin databases and no way for an "average user" to get a skin easily. Now, if I am Joe Blow user why would I by WindowBlinds? Just to use the crappy skins that come with it? Of course this would sell to some people (like the idiots who constantly are trying to make windows look like Mac...) but for most people what sells WB is the fact that they can get 1000s of skins to suit their taste. With those sites gone users could not do that... So Stardock could have sat on the sidelines and watched their programs go down the tube OR they could fund their own skin site to enhance their product. Now, once again there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with this. It is a SMART business move but this whole "we are so good..." crap and "I can not believe people think we should provide value for their money (i.e. GREAT FREE SKINS)" BS is what pisses me off. A little honesty is all I ask. SD is here to make money and that is it. What they do, they do for money not for the consumer. So they should get off their high horse and just admit it and stop posting crap like the OP did about how they are all benevolent.

And I personally think that Stardock should release GREAT FREE PROFESSIONAL skins/IP/etc. Why? Because it enhances the value of their product (i.e. WB, IP, etc.) which we pay for and make us want to buy it the next time around/renew subscriptions. I certainly am not willing to pay on both ends (i.e. both for the program and the skins). If SD wants to give away their programs for free and then charge for content that is a whole other point... And so far with dreamscene they are doing that, which to me, is perfectly fine.



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.
End of quote


Once again I am not trying to price art, or the value of the skin... My beef is directly with SD and their holier than thou attitude. As an artist you can charge whatever you want for your work... Whether the market will bear it or not is a whole other story.... However, I will attempt to address the point

I have no idea what you mean by "Where you answer correctly is where you are based in reality." However, I did recently commission a logo design for my company and we are talking in the $500-1000 range depending on how many times we have to revise things and how good of a job they do.

MY industry (medicine) pays well. However to earn that pay we go through anywhere from 12-20 years of post high school education. During that time the hours we put in is easily twice to three times what anybody else puts in if they were going to do the same number of years of post high school work (i.e. if you got a grad degree in design, engineering, etc)... What is more we come out into highly stressful situations and we are trusted with people's lives. I've lost count of the number of times I have rushed to the OR with my hand in someone's chest, pumping their heart, so we can crash on bypass. Given, all of that I still make less per hour then the above artists is making on our logo for the amount of work she is putting into it...

How much do you think the artist effort is worth?

But then again I am not arguing if $5.95 is too high or not... So sorry for the digression...


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.


$25/hr? What are you smoking? Exactly how did you come up with your spare time is worth $25.00? Or are you trying to say that you do this as a full time job (i.e. 40 hrs/wk) and that right now you are homeless, super skinny, and on the edge of death because of the time you spent????

To summarize:

1. SD needs WC for its own survival and is not doing the consumer any favors
2. Premium content on WC was created to benefit SD and not the users and/or artists. Why? because with high quality skins/icons/objects/widgets/what ever being made on other platforms people were not looking at the crap on this site. So Stardock needed a way to get those ARTISTS to make content for Stardock's Programs. Their idea: pay the ARTISTS to create content for their programs, and they are paying them through the user community by charging for skins. What is worse they are even taking a cut for themselves (above and beyond costs...)
3. SD is here to make money. More power to them. However, get off your high horse and just do that. The time spent spewing BS about how benevolent you are can be spent getting new features/program out of the door.
Reply #99 Top
The point isn't whether life is free or not. The point is that there is no value in buying WindowBlinds if I have to pay for skins for it. And note that I am not arguing whether we should pay for skins. I am just pissed off at the holier then thou attitude of the OP and acting as if they are doing us a favor with this site! People are drawing up all sorts of half-assed analogies... I am just going to address two brought up in the original article: 1. HL and 2. RingTones

When I buy HL I get a fully functional product that I can use without buying anything else. Same thing with ringtones. I can use my cell phone with all of its functionality without ever buying a ringtone in my life. However, if I buy WindowBlinds and there are no skins available I can NOT use it whatsoever.


Are you suggesting that the existence of skins that aren't free negates the existence of the ones that are?

How about trying this: When you see something that isn't free, just close your eyes and pretend it isn't there. Sheesh.

1. SD needs WC for its own survival and is not doing the consumer any favors
2. Premium content on WC was created to benefit SD and not the users and/or artists. Why? because with high quality skins/icons/objects/widgets/what ever being made on other platforms people were not looking at the crap on this site. So Stardock needed a way to get those ARTISTS to make content for Stardock's Programs. Their idea: pay the ARTISTS to create content for their programs, and they are paying them through the user community by charging for skins. What is worse they are even taking a cut for themselves (above and beyond costs...)
3. SD is here to make money. More power to them. However, get off your high horse and just do that. The time spent spewing BS about how benevolent you are can be spent getting new features/program out of the door.



1. Stardock could do what every other similar company in the past has done and just had a private Stardock library. You might argue that Stardock needs some sort of skin library for its stuff but paying for a site of this magnitude is way beyond what they n eed to do.

2. You're an idiot.

3. Stardock is here to make money. They sure are. And people who don't make stuff will have to pay people for stuff. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

But whining about it just makes you look like an obnoxious leech.
Reply #100 Top
$25/hr? What are you smoking? Exactly how did you come up with your spare time is worth $25.00? Or are you trying to say that you do this as a full time job (i.e. 40 hrs/wk) and that right now you are homeless, super skinny, and on the edge of death because of the time you spent????


Actually $25/hr is fairly conservative and generous. Personally I'd divide each specific component of the process such as Project Mgm't, Graphic Design, Programming, R&D,Marketing, etc. Just because someone is not working or is doing this in their spare time doesn't make it any less of a business than a full-time enterprise.

A business is still a business and costs are still costs. So, don't ask someone to bend over and grab their ankles because you don't want to pay fair market values.