The main benefit would be that it is easier to compare to other offers because it is the "standard" price model. Imagine someone buying adds, wherever he looks he sees what he has to pay for a click(CPC) or for an impression (CPM).
With the current model you just get a rough estimation on how many views you get. And you would still have to calculate the final price per visitor.
Usually the advertiser knows he can pay: $10 per 1000views and $1.20per click. So don't force him to recalculate his costs.
I know that this is more a professional view, but why reinvent a system when it works almost everywhere like this.
Usually ads are sold/priced per visitor/lead etc. and not just on a monthly basis. This doesn't change alot to your system but I would suggest to change it to that, because its easier to calculate this way.
So you could sell packages like: 10000 uniques/impressions for $xx,xx
You would need a system to track that, but that shouldn't be a really big task to program. You would also allready have a system that easily adapts to different visitor amounts.
Another model would be to just auction the ad-spot(s) in the forum. Have seen it working in a different forum. There is a monthly auction for a banner, starting with $5 and the highest bet at a given date gets the banner spot for a month.
Another idea to generate some income would be affilate marketing. I.E. amazon. You get percentage cut on all sales and there are many things that should work here. Coding / art books, software, drawing tables etc..
At first: The head seems a bit off. A bit to the right should look better imo, maybe even 1px towards the bottom.
2nd: The torso is currently centered, 4px for each breast. Usually you should see more from the front one. 2/3 & 1/3 is a good ratio. So.-> 6px for the front, and 2px for the right breast. Maybe 5px/3px looks better at this resolution, I am not sure.
While changing that, I would suggest that the torso-mid should move to the right and the legs should stay where they are, this way he should look more natural (bent over a bit).
I personally avoid *-SA in development because of the above mentioned problems too. And for the same reason I release my art as CC-BY.
I hope that if someone gets something for "free" he will someday return something to the comunity. A more restrictive licence wont change anything. If someone wants to just "take" it, he will do it with any other licence too. So I think its the best way to make it easy for all other developers.
Maybe he does not want to release his sourcecode, but releases his other art assets here because he was happy to find something useful.
While its true that not everyone is the same I just want to add that 2 years ago I couldn't draw a simple line and if I tried to draw something it looked like it was drawn by 3 year old.
Then I decided to learn to draw and bought a wacom tablet. Just some weeks later I improved so much that friends said to me "wow you are really talented, not like me...I wish I could draw like you". The answer was always the same: "I don't have any talent, just start to draw and you will improve."
Hmm, maybe your tollerance is too high for the selection with the magic wand tool.
Try this: Magic Wand Tool -> Set tollerance to 0,0 -> and now just click somewhere into the transparent area (inside the planet layer).
No need to invert the selection, this way you should have everything around the planet marked.
As a side note, you asked for textures, have you allready looked here at oga? Browse -> Textures ?
And I think NASA released alot of pictures into public domain. Could be helpful too.
select planet -> invert selection -> delete (the shadow layer) and export it as .png
Did that with Gimp2.8.2 (without any resizing/layer merging etc.) and it works without any flaws.
Don't know what went wrong with your image...
http://q87i.img-up.net/RedPlanet_ef50.png
The main benefit would be that it is easier to compare to other offers because it is the "standard" price model. Imagine someone buying adds, wherever he looks he sees what he has to pay for a click(CPC) or for an impression (CPM).
With the current model you just get a rough estimation on how many views you get. And you would still have to calculate the final price per visitor.
Usually the advertiser knows he can pay: $10 per 1000views and $1.20per click. So don't force him to recalculate his costs.
I know that this is more a professional view, but why reinvent a system when it works almost everywhere like this.
Usually ads are sold/priced per visitor/lead etc. and not just on a monthly basis. This doesn't change alot to your system but I would suggest to change it to that, because its easier to calculate this way.
So you could sell packages like: 10000 uniques/impressions for $xx,xx
You would need a system to track that, but that shouldn't be a really big task to program. You would also allready have a system that easily adapts to different visitor amounts.
Another model would be to just auction the ad-spot(s) in the forum. Have seen it working in a different forum. There is a monthly auction for a banner, starting with $5 and the highest bet at a given date gets the banner spot for a month.
Another idea to generate some income would be affilate marketing. I.E. amazon. You get percentage cut on all sales and there are many things that should work here. Coding / art books, software, drawing tables etc..
At first: The head seems a bit off. A bit to the right should look better imo, maybe even 1px towards the bottom.
2nd: The torso is currently centered, 4px for each breast. Usually you should see more from the front one. 2/3 & 1/3 is a good ratio. So.-> 6px for the front, and 2px for the right breast. Maybe 5px/3px looks better at this resolution, I am not sure.
While changing that, I would suggest that the torso-mid should move to the right and the legs should stay where they are, this way he should look more natural (bent over a bit).
I personally avoid *-SA in development because of the above mentioned problems too. And for the same reason I release my art as CC-BY.
I hope that if someone gets something for "free" he will someday return something to the comunity. A more restrictive licence wont change anything. If someone wants to just "take" it, he will do it with any other licence too. So I think its the best way to make it easy for all other developers.
Maybe he does not want to release his sourcecode, but releases his other art assets here because he was happy to find something useful.
There are so many more Gimp filters to explore... expecting a lot more helpful "textures" soon.
Thanks, very nice!
While its true that not everyone is the same I just want to add that 2 years ago I couldn't draw a simple line and if I tried to draw something it looked like it was drawn by 3 year old.
Then I decided to learn to draw and bought a wacom tablet. Just some weeks later I improved so much that friends said to me "wow you are really talented, not like me...I wish I could draw like you". The answer was always the same: "I don't have any talent, just start to draw and you will improve."
Pages