DocAndersen
The picture is one I promised to Alex Ledante. It is an image of my father’s painting “Faculty Meeting.” My father was given the painting many years ago when he was teaching at Niles West High School. It now, well not currently but will again soon, hangs in our guest room.
The reality of subscription models continues to expand. Most of us are used to the model; we have home phones, cable, or internet that we pay for on a subscription basis. Amazon has some cleaning and healthcare/personal hygiene products that are on their subscription and based the Walmart Model of economic impact (better to sell more at a lower price than a few at a higher price.) they, Amazon lower the cost of good in the subscription model. SaaS, or what is more commonly called Software as a Service is that model for software applications. You pay for what you use. This is different in that the other side of subscription models is the monthly subscription model some SaaS providers use. In that model, you pay a fee every month for access to their applications. Office 365 and the Adobe Creative Cloud are examples of this. An AWS Cloud or Azure Cloud account allows you to start and stop VM’s in the cloud; you only pay when the VM is active. The other side of the model.
Services are interesting, often providing more functionality than we need. For example, Office 365 has a per mailbox charge. But if you get a license for Microsoft Office online (confusingly also called Office 365) you actually can use five copies of the Office Suite. You need a license for your iPad, Android Tablet and any computer you use office on. But the overall cost of that is less than what it cost to update and upgrade office every year as it was released. That subscription model gives you greater functionality at a lower cost. The other advantage of getting the Office 365 subscription for the Office Suite, is you pay once a year and have access to the application on five devices. All are automatically updated to the newest version of the software!
I wonder when a museum is going to learn the value of subscription models and launch a new service? Can you imagine a time when you could have a painting, such as the one in the picture I shared today, in your house? But, instead of an actual piece of artwork, you have an application on your cellular device or laptop and access to the Louvre’s library of art. Want to impress your friends at dinner? Hang the Mona Lisa in your dining room. Huge Dutch artist fan? Hang rotating works by Rembrandt and Van Gogh in your living room. The subscription would be a monthly fee. But you would get access to the art of the world. Much as you can interact with music streaming today.
$2.99 a month gets you the master’s paintings hanging in your bathroom!
-
Question of
Would you pay $1.99 a month to use images of famous art on your wall at home?
-
Yes
-
No
-
-
Question of
Would you pay $1.99 a month for access to someone like Alex Ledante’s art?
-
Yes
-
No
-
Beautiful painting and a nice concept to make it available online for a nominal fee.
There are several companies already in the space. It is really an interesting time!
Interesting concept. Would you educate me because I am dumb where tech is concerned? The subscription would allow easy access. Would it not make it so much easier for unscrupulous peeps to reproduce it without having to pay for it?
It would based on that you would need a device ID system. (sometimes call a UID, or unique ID). I suspect the easy way would be to grab the MAC address (hard-wired into all network cards) and use that to create the UID.
People that are willing to bend the rules are going to bend the rules. It is the one thing that I hate more than anything because it forced others to change.
Yes. I have to agree with you on that one. There is no absolute fool-proof system when people want to be “creative” ?
I worry that the ability to justify what we do on the internet is changing the very patterns of ethics we consider, perhaps even permanently modifying the ethics we apply.
I do not know and I cannot say anything about that. Our personal core values are the same with or without the internet. I mean, if a person wants to be dishonest, he/she will be dishonest even if you put him/her on your watch 24/7.
That is an interesting position. I will point out, however, that many people choose to be highly negative online because they are anonymous. They would never be that way in person.
Maybe. But I doubt it. Remember the Japanese proverb that said a person has 3 faces: one he/she shows to public, another he/she shows to family and friends and the third he/she only shows to him/herself. My assumption, therefore, is that people who exhibit negativity online are negative at the root. I hold to the belief that the character we see in virtual world is the character of the person that lives within ?. Oh, but that is just me ?
You have a good heart. The studies done at the University of Washington and repeated at the University of Chicago don’t bear that out.
Now, we could argue the nasty at the root thing. But people were more willing to post negative things online where they were not known. Things that they never said in the real world, even with the same stimuli.
Then those people are nasty at the root. Remember Jekyl and Hyde? Or the serial killer being portrayed by Zac Efron? People also did not think they will do hideous things. So, I guess, the Japanese proverb is true.
I hope not. I truly hope that they are simply mean because no one is watching. Rather than a core evil issue.
I do however defer to the wise pixie.
Exactly. A person is truest to him/herself when no one is watching, isn’t it? No, let us not call it evil issue. But see, some people keep so much pain and loneliness in their hearts, so much disappointment towards life. Being that, they project it as anger or bulliness or negativity towards object of blame. They are humans, Doc. Only that they quarrel with life and have trouble with acceptance – – – even acceptance of self. Some people who appear as haters are, at the core, hate themselves. Some people who appear as pixies are, at the core, old crones who are kids at heart ???
Or dusty, since pixies love to spread fairy dust!
In my heart, I hear your words. I can’t, however, accept them. I wish instead to believe that people who speed do so because they are in a hurry. Not because they disregard the law.
That people who post negative things just do so because no one calls them out. I can honestly say I’ve called a couple of the folks that post negatively in the facebook group out.
They have stopped posting negative things.
Did I remove a safe forum for them to be negative or did I change the behavior?
I follow a simple rule. If, in my heart, I feel that doing it is the right thing, then I express my feelings or views about certain issues. (I wrote a rant about legalization of abortion, didn’t I, even if it does not concern me.) Did you or did they? Does not matter, right? The answer to that question depends on whose view it is.
Good points all,
I know that the reality of where I am, and what I consider to be important is what I can control.
Thanks as always for helping me shape my heart Pixie!
I understand your passion and your loyalty, Doc, and really those are good things to have. Wise men say that a person must have a stand because tyranny and injustice happened when we do not know where we stand ?
My father always said, “stand up when others are being counted.” It was something that many in the US said during WWII. If a group counts people, make sure they count you.
If we do not fight for what is right, then what do we leave after us?
One reason I like you ? I respect people who show clear stand about anything and still keep an open mind to meet others halfway. I guess you have shown both of that.
My wonderful wife says I am sometimes a little stuck on rules.
Your wife, Mrs. Anderson, is unfortunately right ??? but I have the same problem as yours so I understand where you are coming from. It is a good trait, I still think so. But, sometimes, that same trait taxed the people we love to keep up with us (without us knowing it) and at times they have trouble keeping up and they feel guilty for not keeping up. Talking from experience ?
In the words of the 70’s song “Garden Party” by Ricky Nelson.
No matter how hard you try to please others (paraphrase) you will fail. In the end, you learn you’ve got to please yourself.
Because, more often than not, we are only as good as our last deed ????. Yet, I learned that we should not take anything in life personally because life, in itself, is impersonal ?
My grandfather used to always tell me “is that the hill you want to die on?” What he meant was is that where you are putting all your resources?
If so, do it. But remember, you can’t split the battlefield into two hills. One hill at a time,.
Your grandpa was a wise man ?
As an idea, the concept is good, but it will be accomplished.
It is just an idea. I was talking to a friend and we discussed it, it doesn’t feel like it is a great idea just an OK idea.
Sounds like a good idea, not sure of the workings of it as I have a lot to learn about this technical age.
Honestly, I can make the tech today in my basement. The reality is the market for that type of product.
Thanks for showing us the nightmare painting. I actually sell physical copies of my work, but hadn’t even considered a subscription based model…
I wonder if you shouldn’t. Although the model I’ve thrown out isn’t for the market I pitched to, there are many people interested in that reality.
There are three products in the market that offer the service today.
assuming the art is basically a screensaver?
There are some that do the art as a screen saver. The newer models actually use the art more as a display on a timed rotation. Screen savers can be dismissed, these wouldn’t be.
wait, a dedicated screen just for art?
yup/ I think the companies name is Mosaic but don’t hold me to that. I was doing some research for a government agency that wants to have a more modern look on their walls.
I suppose that’s an upgrade on showing cable news. You know Getty is going to pounce on that…
I believe the product on the market is backed by one of the major museums. That said I was looking at it more than three months ago. Lots to think about after that.
I know that Getty is trying to corner the image market, this sounds like something else they’d like to get in on, but who knows?
Both Moma and the Louver have headed down the path as well.
good for them, art should be out in the world
Very interesting idea indeed.
Thanks, on this one you are in a small group of people that thought it was a good idea. I’ve gotten a lot more negative (bad idea) than positive (good idea) feedback.
Very interesting idea. I’m interested in how many people would opt for it.
So far not many, but playing around with the art of the possible a little right now
Basically, it is an interesting idea, even though its use depends on taste and perception.
Just playing around with the art of the possible to see what people thought!
I know, sir. That’s also what I do in general…
🙂 we are, to use another old bird adage, birds of a feather then!