artistprogram_

For me, the mint-fee is too low at the moment. I think the already low earlier Zora fee was great. Not as much as a latte so affordable, but still enough to engrain the idea that art has value into the minds of the wider public. Now we're back to Web2 mind-set of content is free. That's not a good thing.

A teller / of stories, that is me. / Curious to learn new ways to see. / Proud dad of two. Now, what / about you? | Builds https://paragraph.xyz/@trpplffct

I think this is a very important point. It ingrains the idea that art has no worth. I understand that the price is based on a plan to have art more accessible to the masses that we all hope will one day join in but why is it always artists that have to pay this price? Everyone else involved gets their cut while artists have to play along in hopes of a payday some time in the future.

Reneecampbell.eth 

Reneecampbell.degen.eth

* https://bio.site/ReneeCampbell 

*  /flora 
* /reneecampbell 

Creator of Worlds

Founder @pkok | Art lover, Art collector | /pkok /pkokcurated /art-collectors

I’m not selling my photos for 30 cents. I’m arguably one of the best macro photographers in the world. So where do we go from here?

Would you still not sell it for $0.35 if 100K people wanted to get your photo?

I appreciate the theory around this Sunny, but it is not becoming practice. For me at least. For now, the fact that Zora went with that 35 cent meta means my meager income on Zora is slashed even further. And to earn the same, I have to work much harder.

And... 30 cent is dangerously close to 0 when it comes to how people experience the value of art. With the price of a latte, it's already much more impactful in terms of changing that aspect, changing the idea that art has value.

No, I don't think so, tbh. I have deliberately chosen what I call the abundance model: low price, higher volume. A consumable that people still want in their wallet. But that also has to do with collector groups and maybe a heritage of fine art culture. I'm not in the fine art business, and if you want to make it in the art as collectible business, you have to make fine art type stuff. 

Where the difference of interpretation may lie, though, is that I am not a Zora app user (I don't have an iPhone). So, for me, nothing has changed, apart from the reward I get. And I am not treating it as a consumable. For things like moshicam, I can totally understand that model. Low effort, instagram like creations, consumed by doom-scrollers. But to me, Zora is not that. It's still the website where I have my market stall with my poems that I want to push for an affordable price that helps me pay my bills and also puts bread on the table of the market location owner.

This consumable theory is really trashing that model.

I think we're talking about two different things; art as a collectible & art as a consumable; collectible = higher value but low supply & consumable = low value but high supply. Both have humongous potential in a digital economy. 

Base is prime to be the leader in the art-as-consumable product because of low transaction fees & less friction.