FF embedded

i've mentioned something like this before, but not sure as an actual feature request. so, this is the formal request.

i'd like to be able to embed any given filter within a website and allow others to use that filter from online.

i dont know how feasible this is, but theoretically, it shld be possible to do, especially considering how the free packs were done.

basically, i'd like to be able to add/embed any filter into a web page and have access to all of the controls that that filter has and have the same GUI that the filter has and have all the presets as well. it would even be nice to allow other presets to be added.

now, i dont know if FF would have to be installed on the server/computer where that web site existed in order for this to all work, but given the free packs and how they work, i wouldnt think it would be completely necessary.

now, i also see this as having almost no chance of being acceptable to FF inc., since this would almost be the same thing creating .8bf's in one sense. all filters could essentially be given away free without having to buy the program. so, this request is somewhat hopeless. but, i still like the idea of it. one could have a web site where others could come and use a given filter without having to buy the program. they'd be limited to whatever was there, of course, and one could also charge for such a service/site. but maybe it could be done in such a way to get around that problem. i could even see FF inc. doing this as a demo system on their own web pages. and it could certainly be a way for others to make money by offering filter use to others that dont want to buy a $300.00 program.

so, i dont know. there's certainly not a lot of incentive here for FF inc., i do understand. but given that i could give FF use away through remote access, i dont know. and given that if one could do this, it would also help promote FF and given that one could also use it as an incentive for becoming an FF reseller, it's not all negative to FF inc.

Why would you not just offer renderings of the particular tile through your own website or through a royalty arrangement such as we offer?

hi corvus,

yes, when i first arrived at FF i thought all filters would be .8bf's also. and, i even argued for this. it would have been a decent way for FF to make their income and authors to make some also. and, you can go back in the threads and find some of these discussions. i dont recall the exact reasons given now.

but, i do know that piracy would tend to be an issue, if nothing else. i think it also had something to do with be .xml type files, but that's just a dim memory now and not really sure of that. the arguement also doesnt hold up as well now that FF has a $99 version. that makes it a bit easier for those that cant or dont want to shell out the $300. but quite honestly, i forget the reasons

and hi fred,

glad you stopped by. to answer your question, i'm not sure. i just had this idea that it would be kind of cool to be able to embed a filter into a web site and let folks play with it. on a commercial consideration, it would make more sense as a demo thing, but i wasnt even thinking so much commercially as i was just being able to do it and have others try one's filters out. i have quite a few online friends and i've told them about FF many times, but, they dont all necessarily rush out and buy it. and yes, one could download the demo and try it, but that takes a bit of time and a bit of harddrive space and not everyone has broadband. so, i thought it would be cool to be able to let folks have a play with a filter or two online. let them try them out. and, if i were a re-seller of FF, it would make even more sense to be able to offer some sort of trial. and if i were selling my own filters off on my own site somewhere, this would make a perfect way to show them off before folks bought them. but, that's all commercial. the real reason i posted this request/musing, was that i just thought it would be fun to do

oh, and corvus is reading my mind a bit here. i was indeed thinking more along the effect filters rather than the texture filters. both would be nice to be able to do, but mostly i was thinking of a deal where one could try out the filter by uploading one's input image and then playing around with the controls on the filter to be able to get some cool effects on one's imported image.

also, if you ever see anything of mine that you like and could use, do contact me. i dont make my email public here, but the contact by email thing here on the forums will reach me.

Quote
Kraellin wrote: one could download the demo and try it, but that takes a bit of time and a bit of harddrive space and not everyone has broadband.

----It's only like 23megs or something, what is that like 1/2 an hour tops with dialup, and like 4 minutes with basic dsl ? Your basic idea is fine, it's just there's no need for it, this isn't PS3, the 'demo' doesn't take 14 hours to download ha-ha. *If* there was a way to use some kind of flash/java front end for it, and still protect the underlying FF code, then maybe they'd do it, but that seems like more hassle then it's worth when people can just download a little file and try it themselves for 30+ days eh.

jffe

Quote
Kraellin wrote: havent every one of you gone to one of those online sites where you can draw something via your browser?

----Yes.

Quote
Kraellin wrote: not everything has to be about money

----But FF is.


----It's a good idea, and surely something FF thought of and discarded along the way for whatver reasons, same as Stevie wanting them to sell textures for pennies when they sell the texture making software for dollars. If FF was free, or ad supported, then sure, they'd want to make it export .8bf files and have an interactive online page to use it etc., but it's not, and they have a very small and generous demo already.

jffe

Quote

Kraellin wrote: oh, and corvus is reading my mind a bit here. i was indeed thinking more along the effect filters rather than the texture filters. both would be nice to be able to do, but mostly i was thinking of a deal where one could try out the filter by uploading one's input image and then playing around with the controls on the filter to be able to get some cool effects on one's imported image. also, if you ever see anything of mine that you like and could use, do contact me. i dont make my email public here, but the contact by email thing here on the forums will reach me.

As a FF user I understand the benefits of effect filters well enough. Not so sure a web surfer would though. I find myself using them as much or more than I use textures. Here, for example, I used a quilt effect to make a quilted camouflage tile.

As far as working with filter artists, we have contracted with three from here who contacted us and are willing to work with anyone else interested. I generally do not seek out artists though by initiating contact. For whatever reasons, typically no great interest in licensing work for sale in return for royalties on the part of the artist, that has not proven to be a good use of my time.

So if selling licenses for textures is something that you'd like to consider, I'll be happy to discuss it with you or anyone else ... but you have to raise your hand first and say you're interested.

Our policy would be primarily directed at real estate and branded products. This is mostly a stock photography issue though but one company in particular has made a lot of waves. That being Volkswagen of America who succeeded in obtaining patent protection for the new VW Beetle. They enforce it and do not allow an artist to sell a recognizable work or a photographer to sell a photo in which that particular vehicle can be identified.

In real estate, we would not be concerned about a private home and would wait a C & D from an attorney. We would decline an identifiable commercial property though.

I recently inquired with the Bicycle Playing Card company (who owns all the major brands of playing cards) about their policy regarding stock photography that included their cards. The response was dead silencet but insomuch as they claim trademarks on much of their designs, and in reviewing the stock photo sites, I would say that we won't be doing any random bomber tiles of their playing cards.

Hope that explains this issue satisfactorily.

A "C & D" is shorthand for "cease and desist". Typically when an infringement occurs the infringing party gets a demand letter from the owner's attorney that the infringer cease and desist what they are doing. If the infringing party complies, that is usually the end of it.

There is an increasing amount of infringement going on these days with the advent of super-seller websites like istockphoto, fotolia, shutterstock and others who build large online content (in the millions of pieces) libraries by allowing anyone to upload files and offer them for sale. They do very little policing of this and only on receiving a complaint. I recently had to spend about 8 hours of my time getting some of my clipart removed from Fotolia and Shutterstock that was illegally uploaded. After all of that, neither is willing to provide the name and address of the individual they have been paying royalties to when my artwork was sold.

So they are facilitating the infringement and are counting on small pockets not being able to afford a court action. I can hardly wait until Getty Images or Jupiter Media decides to take them to court.