BritePic — photography may never be the same

BritePic.jpgAdvertising start-up AdBrite has launched an elegant way to put ads on digital photos, a potentially revolutionary way for photographers to make money.

The feature, called BritePic, was released five days ago, and 144,000 pictures have already been uploaded to AdBrite’s system to claim it, co-founder Philip Kaplan tells VentureBeat.

BritePic uses software to implant ad code directly into digital photos, and provides a host of other nifty tricks that will make the photographer’s trade easier, and more creative. It lets them insert watermarks, add captions, and more. Until now, most photographers have a difficult time tracking where their photos are used — not to mention demanding payment for them when there is so much ripping off going and when much art if for free anyway. This way, photographers get more money the more times it is viewed, even on other sites. For every dollar an advertiser pays for an ad on the photos, AdBrite keeps 30 cents, the photographer gets 70 cents. Adbrite tracks the views, and bills the advertiser accordingly.

Scroll over the photo below to see how the ad pops up.

Judging from the reception so far, people are digging it, said Kaplan, who built the feature. He said 61,000 photos were loaded yesterday to claim the feature. Today, by mid-day 50,000 photos were uploaded. Kaplan has a creative gene — he was founder of Fuckedcompany, a site that chronicled the hardships of the dot-coms after the burst of the Internet bubble.

Until now, the format for embedding images into a web page uses a simple code definer. AdBrite’s BritePic lets you adds more code that you can play around with to customize. Here’s how it works: You register at BritePic, upload a picture, give it tags (so that AdBrite knows what sort of advertising to seek for your photo from its advertising clients), and then answer a few questions. Do you want to add a watermark? Do you want to show the advertising? How big do you want the photo? BritePic generates some code, based on your answers. It then gives you a preview of what the photo looks like. If you want, you can change the code by hand, to resize the photo, change caption, etc. It gives you a visual dashboard (see below), so that this is easy to do.

BritePic code also includes Flash player to show the image with the additional features. Check out the menu in the bottom left of the image above, which includes code needed to embed the photo elsewhere, a zoom to get a closer look at the photo, etc. Techcrunch had an early review of BritePic here.

BritePic doesn’t host image files, so you’ll need to give it a URL where it can pull your photo from. If you’re using photos for a Wordpress blog, you’ll need to tinker with the code slightly (Kaplan says BritePic will be posting such instructions shortly).

What’s remarkable is that this hasn’t been done before. Kaplan said the company worked for seven months on a video feature that is similar to this, which you can also find on the site. However, he then realized the photo version would be more popular. The number of images dwarfs the number of videos on the web.

Kaplan said it is almost like a digital rights management (DRM). Sure, techies can get around the ad code (they can view source code and revert to original html), but they’re unlikely to bother, he said. The feature encourages distribution.

htmlgenerator.jpg

Next Story: Google extends into TV, signs deal with Dish Network
Previous Story: Thefind, the search engine, not as clean as we thought

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , ,

Photo of Matt Marshall

About the Author, Matt Marshall

Matt Marshall is editor and CEO of VentureBeat. Follow him on Twitter at @mmarshall, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.

  • so 'right-click, copy image location' won't just give me the image location with britepic? how about a ff extension that 'reverts' that functionality? doesn't sound too hard.
  • Marcus
    Print Screen... Start->Run->MSPAINT...

    Ctrl+V...

    Crop..

    File->Save As ... Stolen.jpg

    Adios adbrite.
  • Marcus-- no way. That's too much work for the average browser. Way too much work for me. Only coders and dorks will do what you just said. And coders won't because they generally have respect for other people's work. Leaving dorks.
  • raj
    i do not understand what is the big deal here...it is just javascript like adsense code, where you are also providing your image url to overly ads on the pic...

    i do not see any innovation than just hype here!!!
  • If you ask me any photographer that would peddle their images to adbrite for CPM ads needs a new profession.
  • This is quite interesting but not new. VideoEgg pioneered this and have overlay ads running on their videos for sometime now.

    The technology is similar to what Slide does with images with the difference being the overlay content is ads instead of your own descriptions.

    Of course, all three use Flash to do the job.
  • Marcus
    Lets not forget here... the people using these images obviously understand a little bit about HTML as they're apparently copying code and pasting it into their 'site'. It wouldn't be much more difficult to print screen it.

    If the average 13 year old girl on myspace can figure out ways to steal images and put them on her myspace... so can people using this service.

    Besides.. who in the hell would use an image with all that clutter and ad's built into it in any sort of respectable marketing campaign..

    I just don't see why anyone would want to have an image with ad's built into it anywhere within their marketing materials or site.

    I can't wait to see PUD put his own company in the F'd Hall of Fame.
  • It will work. Any time you introduce a new ad format you make money. Why do you think AdSense has so many different layouts? The problem with AdBrite, for me anyway, is the brand itself, less-than-sparkling if you know what I mean.
  • Paul
    Disagree; I think this is a pretty great idea, and it is surprising nobody came up with it sooner.

    When you're a content creator, what you need is good distribution. If you're doing it for fun, Flickr, Shutterfly, &c fill your need just fine.

    But if you want to do it for profit, you need three other ingredients:
    1. High quality -- technically (so people get a picture usable in their medium)
    2. Reliable selection mechanism (so people find your work)
    3. A way to monetize the transaction if someone uses your high quality, easily discovered image.

    Now, if I'm a great photographer and I make money on my work when people use it in their ad campaign, I suppose I choose not to include a logo - but I probably do include a watermark or some other identifying digital characteristic so that people can be held to account for the usage.

    And how much better is it if someone else (BritePic) is doing all the accounting, collection, and fighting for my money? 30% seems like a small price to pay for all that additional market and basically no additional work.
  • Hi...Thanks for the nice read, keep up the interesting posts about free web layouts..what a nice Saturday .