FF Ultra Pro

I long ago concluded that an enhanced license would be the easiest solution to implement ... so I don't see this as a better option.

Imagine if you will that when you click on the "Open in Filter Forge" button that the next screen offers you the filter under standard licensing for free or under enhanced licensing for xxx dollars. You pick the type of license you want by checking a box and either proceed to download or proceed to checkout. It would also be appropriate to interject a page with the license selected being presented for acceptance as well.

Quote
Bella wrote elsewhere: Also, we would have to pack the HDRI lighting environments into every 8bf, which would increase its size to at least 12 Mb; and we cannot do it anyway because the HDRIs are licensed from Sachform and we cannot distribute them except as part of Filter Forge.

Yeah, I'm aware of that.....I'm just refering to the simple result filters.....

If I owned this program.....I would immediately go to work implementing a money-making incentive "carrot" beyond the copy rewards. I think that would magnetize this program to continuously bring in waves of new people.....with the incentive of making money if you create quality filters and stay with it. This would also create quite a "buzz" in the graphics market.....which surely would promote sales in a very positive direction.....

I think being able to export plugins would be a great idea

Quote
James wrote: I think being able to export plugins would be a great idea

Me too.....like Dilla mentioned, it would only be with simple result filters....but it still would be pretty good.....

Quote
StevieJ wrote: Okay, before FF slaps me.....I'll say it for them..... Big grin "StevieJ, why don't you shut your pie-hole and just enjoy the program.....you quality-filter-witholding, no-editor's-pick-getting, effect-snippet-submitting bastard from hell!!!".....

No please ... your continuing blasts have become a highlight of my boring existence.

Quote
StevieJ wrote: For $599.95......you get an FF version that creates stand-alone 8bf plugin filters.....and a whole new filter library that has no usage restrictions.....

my guess is there would be no library under this. i certainly wouldnt contribute to it. i'd just sell filters i made outright without going thru the library.

and i still think fred's dual library is the best solution to all of this. in the early beta days we almost desperately wanted all filters to be .8bf's. but, i think it's worked out better for FF that it isnt. but, with the advent of the new metals pack, maybe we will see something along the lines of an .8bf creator, but without the environmental lighting. maybe just simple filters could be done this way.

Quote
StevieJ wrote: I also think if FF doesn't do it, someone else will eventually come along who will catch on and take advantage of it.....

yes, i've been waiting and somewhat looking for this, myself. filtermeister and filterfactory and the other script writing creators are ok, but nearly as easy to use and as powerful as FF. eventually, someone else is going to come up with something along these lines that is GUI/procedural driven. it really isnt that big of a leap between a library of scripts which equal a component in essence, to just making them into a visual c kind of thing. well, better than visual c

Quote
StevieJ wrote: "StevieJ, why don't you shut your pie-hole and just enjoy the program.....you quality-filter-witholding, no-editor's-pick-getting, effect-snippet-submitting bastard from hell!!!".....

sort of reminds you of a bull in a china shop, doesnt he

here's the deal. first off, there is no reason to believe FF sales havent been outstanding. i've seen a LOT of talk about this on the forums, but it's all what we call dub-in. folks are dubbing in 'information' where no information exists so that they'll have information. even the recent holiday sales thing is fairly normal for any business, so taking that as a sign that FF is struggling, with no further evidence, is a mistake. it might be correct, but it just well might not. so, dubbing in is just a bit dangerous.

what we do know is that FF is still here. we see the regular admins posting and sending out emails and so on, onxy, bella, kochubey, vlad, etc. that means no particular or noticable reduction in staff that we can discern. we also know that there was a tremendous interest in FF during the beta. major software houses participated in the beta. we also know there has been a bit of a flap with the eula stuff, but in actuality, that is minor, except maybe with some of us here on the forums grousing away. that's fairly normal. we also know by watching that filter submissions are down. that may be due to the eula concerns, but even before the new eula proposals that submissions were starting to wane. so, i'd say it's more than just he eula stuff that is going on with waning submissions. i'd be more inclined to guess that it's more of a saturation/inspiration issue than anything else. we also are still seeing new folks come onto the forums. that's a good thing and shows an increasing interest, not a waning one. and i dont know about the rest of the authors and users, but i do use FF and post my works. i've done it so much that i get a bit apologetic about having done something in FF

now, i've never heard this spoken by anyone, so bear in mind that i'm doing a bit of speculating/dub-in of my own here. i dont think FF is in any danger of going bust. all during the beta i kept wondering who was funding all this. here was a staff of quality software writers a good administrator and some other support staff, but no sales had occurred yet. so, where was the money coming from to support all this? it didnt quite add up. so, my guess has always been that there's some independent wealth backing up FF or that everyone at FF had a day job. and again, that's just a guess. but, i really dont think FF is in any serious danger of going bust. the mac version is being worked on and there's still talk of version 2 for the pc. that generally doesnt happen with a company about to fold up.

like you, i do believe some sort of author incentive would help, but i dont think it's a make/break point of FF sales. and i also think FF isnt quite 'over the hump' yet as far as true stability. it generally takes at least three years, and often more, to truly stabilize out a new company, but that also doesnt mean that every company going thru that is necessarily on the verge of collapse.

you two, steve and fred, are both just bored you need a new game! prodding FF can be fun, i suppose, but it's sort of a tiring job why dont you both gather up all the authors and start an FF association? fred's got the tools and some connections and steve's got...uh, steve's got, well, er... hmmm, steve has...something, i'm sure

Quote
It's not difficult to convert FF script filters to 8bf format with some moderate knowledge of C++.....

Yup, with a team of 4 programmers and around 2 years of time it's perfectly possible if you're ok with reverse engineering that is specifically prohibited by the EULA if I recall correctly

Not that I'm trying to undermine the program or give anyone any ideas.....but isn't reverse engineering federally permissable in the United States irregardless of what is stated in the EULA.....like what that kid legally did with Apple's new cell phone programming in order to make it accessable to other service providers??? Just curious.....

Quote
StevieJ wrote: Well, I've said all that I can say about everything from my point of view.....and it seems like my suggestions aren't in the mainsteam of where FF wants to go with this.....

well, you're on the right track. authors do need a boost/incentive. but, FF has shown no willingness to take on more in this matter with being the host seller for authors, nor would i really expect them to want to. FF wants to create the program. that's their drive. authors want to create filters. that's their drive. whereas FF would benefit somewhat from helping promote authors, it would also have to take on extra expenses and i'm not sure there's enough motivation/incentive there for them. besides, the authors really ought to be taking this on themselves. that is their responsibility as things stand.

i've tried to get fred to take this on. he's got the software and a base of clients already and is currently the best candidate i can see, but he doesnt want the job. i'd be perfectly willing to do a 50/50 split with any admin person that wanted to do this sort of thing. they do the selling; i/we do the creating of filters/textures. and i think now that's going to be the only way it's going to happen in the near future.

it's not even important for the eula to be updated to do this, either. if a filter isnt submitted, we simply use those and those are FULLY covered by copyright law for the author. thus, ANY texture/effect created is covered and copyrighted. so, the author is protected and so would be the re-seller using those (with some contract between the author and re-seller).

now, that bypasses FF and the library, of course. but, if Ff wanted to jump in there somewhere down the road, why ok. but in the meantime, the means does exist if someone wants to step up. i could almost do it...almost. but i dont know the software business side of things... paypal, credit cards, e-stores, web site mock-up software and all that goes with that. i even have a fixed ip and decent internet connections for a server. i even have some free server software, but it's limited. so, my biggest barrier is knowledge here and a bit of reluctance in how much time i'd have to spend with bill handling and that sort of thing. i'm more a creative type than an admin type.

so, bottom line, all that's really missing here is someone that wants to make a buck by being the FF author association distributor.

yes, the filters in the freepack are still .xml (ffxml) filters, not .8bf. but, they sort of function similar to .8bf's in that they seem to be stand-alone, but arent. they simply include a low function version of FF itself to make them work.

but, that does open the door to FF to make some more money. they could easily sell some of these 'freepacks', instead of giving them away... say, $14.95 a piece or something and i'm sure that would look a LOT more appealing to some over #399.00.

I'm no expert on US (or any other country, since my work is usually owned by someone else, with that being fixed in a contract, by revealing the existence of which I curse my soul till the end of the days, so it's not my business generally) copyright law, but even while reverse engineering might be permissible, it almost assuredly allowed for educational purposes only. I hardly believe that reverse engineering FF to export the .8bf filters and selling them would count as "educational purposes"

Well, my intent in bringing this up was to suggest that FF create a version that produces stand-alone 8bf simple filters.....to cover that area before someone else does, expand FF's version offerings, and for FF to make it the "restriction-free" version.....thereby allowing FF to implement the new EULA in the current versions for authors who want the straight results of their texture filters protected.....like myself.....

Quote
onyXMaster wrote: Well, unless exporting filters is controlled by us of course, greedily collecting five-digit sums in U.S. Dollars for each exported filter

Ah ha!!! Now you are talk'n!!! Do something like that (on a lesser scale ) and create a reward level that starts to cut authors in on a percent royalty basis of sales.....then just sit back and watch the continuous stampede of new authors and quality filter submissions..... .....

StevieJ, I think that the problem is that selling just your own software is a lot easier than creating a shop and selling someone's others copyrighted work, splitting profits. Don't misunderstand me, I like the idea itself, but the amount of work and responsibility in this case is a showstopper for this one. Even better, there's no need for .8bf filters -- there could be a system that allows authors to package their filters (in a hard to reverse form) with a special build of Filter Forge that would work only with those filters -- think of even more functionality-limited freepacks, but not free and with your filters. It would require some (maybe a lot of) lawyer work, digital signature twiddling and an increased load on our development and support divisions.

Anyways, it's up to Vlad to decide whether we're doing something like this or not.

Well, Craig, I think we will need good out-of-house authors regardless of the scheme -- our business is making and selling Filter Forge, not making and selling filters, and there's a good rule to do your own business, not someone's else

ok, fred, i guess i misunderstood you about not doing it. and i think we can somewhat forget FF (vlad) wanting to do this. he's shown no interest in this at all that i can see. he's avoided the topic completely. and whereas i suppose that doesnt truly mean he's not interested, there has certainly been no bite to work with there. so, for the time being, i think we'll have to take that as a no go on FF's part.

and that leaves the authors themselves or someone else coming in and doing it. there are at least two sell-able products authors could provide, the filters themselves and the results of the filters. both require, with the current eula, that filters NOT be posted/published in the library and that's the real shame in this. i'd much rather see a plan/scheme that encouraged that, but we'd need FF's help on that, so i see what you mean about working with FF here.

and onyx, normally, i'd agree with you about 'doing your own business', but in the case of FF, authors and authoring are a natural extension of the base product and one promotes the other. FF promotes good authorship and good authorship promotes FF. so, 'doing your own business' in this case still applies, but the 'own business' part here is essentially symbiotic. authors are a natural extension of the company. we're just not paid very well the company fails if there's no good, base program, but it also fails if there are no good filters. all we're trying to work out here is that both authors and the company survive as well as possible.

we, (various authors) loved the incentive program. that was a distinct and direct reward (pay) for making good filters. but as an author earns more HU's he essentially puts himself out of business (as a filter maker). the incentives dry up at a fixed point. now, that really only applies as far as the relationship between the author and FF. of course we're still making filters, but there's no more reason to submit them to the library. and if authors go 'doing there own business', there's even less incentive to submitting filters, since now, we'd need to protect those filters to keep them exclusive.

so, everything i can see here points to a closer, more symbiotic relationship between authors and FF.

lol, CF; i hadnt seen anything cherryO/S in a long time. it'll never get off the runway. VR modules pretty much make a mac emulator obsolete

Quote

Kraellin wrote: there are at least two sell-able products authors could provide, the filters themselves and the results of the filters. both require, with the current eula, that filters NOT be posted/published in the library and that's the real shame in this. i'd much rather see a plan/scheme that encouraged that, but we'd need FF's help on that, so i see what you mean about working with FF here. and onyx, normally, i'd agree with you about 'doing your own business', but in the case of FF, authors and authoring are a natural extension of the base product and one promotes the other. FF promotes good authorship and good authorship promotes FF. so, 'doing your own business' in this case still applies, but the 'own business' part here is essentially symbiotic. authors are a natural extension of the company. we're just not paid very well the company fails if there's no good, base program, but it also fails if there are no good filters. all we're trying to work out here is that both authors and the company survive as well as possible. we, (various authors) loved the incentive program. that was a distinct and direct reward (pay) for making good filters. but as an author earns more HU's he essentially puts himself out of business (as a filter maker). the incentives dry up at a fixed point. now, that really only applies as far as the relationship between the author and FF. of course we're still making filters, but there's no more reason to submit them to the library. and if authors go 'doing there own business', there's even less incentive to submitting filters, since now, we'd need to protect those filters to keep them exclusive. so, everything i can see here points to a closer, more symbiotic relationship between authors and FF.

I couldn't have said that better myself.....

Fred, I'm actually trying to get FF to do something like what you are already doing.....and be a competitor.....

Taking what Craig was saying one step further.....most authors don't have their own websites nor are they going to put the effort into making one in to sell their filter work. I think alot of authors would if FF made it easy for them to do by offering "storefronts" as a reward level beyond the copy rewards.....

I am thoroughly convinced that the combination of the new EULA (creating tangible copyrights) and Storefront reward level (providing an easy way for authors to sell their copyrights) would continuously bring in waves of new authors, drastically increase the number and quality of filter submissions, and keep authors here doing it.....

I for one would certainly start submitting better quality works and participate in a program like this.....as I think many other authors here would do as well.....

From everything that I've read, I don't think that FF is currently in a position to even think about doing something like this right now.....and all energy is being put into the Mac version and hopefully version 2.....

Quote
Kraellin wrote: oh my god, fred, i just looked at your site. boy, have we authors been screwing ourselves! ok, welcome to reality, craig! lol. all this texture selling just sort of hit home. FF is getting screwed, too! my lord, this goes a whole lot further than i'd ever imagined.

Ahh let me say this...WELCOME TO REALITY craig...

Craig, I don't profess to know all the markets for seamless tiles but, just in the sign and wide format printing industry, there are going to be millions of dollars spent for ready-to-use seamless tiles. I do know that you can tour around on any of the major sites primarily selling stock photography and not have any problem finding seamless tiles ... many of them generated with Filter Forge.

I've been sounding the wake up call here since August. The hottest thing in the sign industry is vehicle wraps. Sign shops are getting thousands of dollars for wraps and most of them start with high resolution, repetitive backgrounds.

Quote

StevieJ wrote: LOL.... That's why I've been "screaming" at FF for the new EULA and storefront reward levels.....for FF to compete with Fred and others.....instead of giving copyrights away so Fred and others can undermine the need to buy this program..... Please take no offense, Fred.....but my sole intent is to see this program be extremely successful.....so the program will continue to be enhanced to help my own work. I make alot more from my own work than I could ever make from selling filter work.....and I'm all for making some extra "pocket change" while trying to help this program along.....

I take no offense and am in favor of FF continuing to develop. There are lots of ways to move that along. But when it comes to where the money will be spent, I think the lion's share will be for ready-to-use tiles. I might feel differently if FF was out there in the reseller channels competing head on with Alien Skin.




The most requested tile, natural camouflage, we get will be in our new collection. Filter Forge was used partially to generate it but most or the work was done in Photoshop. The above shows how a sign shop would be using it.