Wanted to start this forum post as we were getting many questions and suggestions on the Beam NFT Gallery and Marketplace. Super excited after the initial launch, and great to see so many in the community getting involved and having some fun! Here will be far easier to keep track of such suggestions, and have a more focused discussion around some of the features to be added to both the NFTs themselves, and the marketplace as a whole.
From this forum post I hope we can achieve a few things:
- Have a ‘skeleton’ for the Beam Token Standard for NFTs (to be proposed later)
- Collate a list of features we would like to see on the marketplace
- Look to the future and how the NFTs and gallery can be integrated / work with the BeamX DAO
If you haven’t checked it out and played around, you can do so here BEAM NFT Gallery with the Web wallet installed (Beam Web Wallet - Chrome Web Store) or via the NFT Gallery in the Desktop wallet.
Multiples (seller can specify how many NFT to mint of one artwork)
MP3 NFT’s (with download option or mp3 player dApp)
PDF listings (authors of books, etc)
Categories - for example photography and art
Positive and negative voting
Direct selling or trading with other user
(Maybe a startscreen with higher rated NFTs, so people who just looking get great NFTs presented)
Auctions would be funny
(Maybe a rating of the Artist would be interesting?)
Donations to artists
Possibility to remove illegal stuff if necessary and possible
One solution could be to make also an Voting in mind with BeamX. Like the app called jodel.
We need to get listed all 100 Punks Collection, and need your help to here why its
important for us to have the full collection uploaded:
The artist prepared all 100 Punks that were really loved by the community.
Only 3 $BEAM Punks are available, others were bought by community already.
It’s the first collection of $BEAM Punks arts that is stored right on BEAM Blockchain, and its not fully uploaded.
All 100 Punks are exactly what the NFT marketplace is needing at this moment. I got a lot of feedback about my avatar. Even TheCryptoDog liked it.
The artist is agreed to donate 2% of the funds to Beam faucet (or any other community activity)
The artist plan to keep support Beam with future NFT collections, we need to show our support here too! (Already start a dedicated group around it Telegram: Contact @beam_nft )
Please support this suggestion, show interest so we can officially ask Beam Team to finish upload this collection.
this is cool! I definitely support this, also would add that it was not too clear that the uploading will be live only during the competition.
I want to join this post (and not still the attention here) as the punk collection is awesome!
I face a similar situation, I drafted a collection which I worked hard on, I’ve been following Beam fo a while and chose to wait with the collection and not post it on Beam and not on any other chain.
Now that Beam have NFT we dont have the option to mint new one.
We are the creator of Zeam Dog , we followed the competition guidelines and uploaded only up to 10 piece, while we had a larger, more impressive collection we wanted to upload.
We commit to upload this collection only on Beam chain, this whole collection (like the Zeam mini collection) will be Beam and privacy oriented.
We will also be happy to cover the minting cost!
Please help us convince Beam team to upload the this Beam dedicated collection!
Let’s draft a proposal we all like, our thinking is that the team should make voting to upload 3 collection each week, and the community will chose which collection will be uploaded in voting.
Re-posting from reddit, with elaboration…
I want to create an NFT of an .mp3 / .mp4 that can not be transferred unless a fixed royalty payment is made to myself and to all the other NFT holders. For example, I produce a video and distribute, say, 1000 NFTs. Those owners can then sell it on but doing so incurs a fee. Let’s say, the fee to transfer is 10 beam, 2 of those beams come to me and the other 8 beam goes into a pool that is divided among all the other NFT holders. This provides me an incentive to create highly shareable content and providing dividend to my fans.
It seems any of these post didn’t get the desired attention, we have made 2 collections ahead of the competition, and the post above have to complete upload the already made collection.
We respect & understand the team decision not to upload manually any more, but if the demands from artist is low I think they should consider uploading arts from artist who care and are active (referring to me and the post above by Vsnation), it will also keep the marketplace and the interest around it alive until Beta is out.
Is there an admin here collecting feedback? Organizing a poll/vote? As Im willing to pay for the fees & handling of uploading our collections. Beamers please support ! Team please consider !
Hey, I am collecting feedback here
My personal thinking is that rather than the artist themselves (the supply), would be good to hear / see people looking / wanting to buy (demand). It is a little tricky to pick and choose some to upload, when we have said we would put it on hold until self minting is enabled. But I’m sure the team would consider, given enough requests by the community.
This is a cool concept. I have one ‘question’ or concern maybe a better word…
When I want to just transfer the mp3 / mp4 with royalties backed in from one wallet to another, I would have to pay the royalties still? (even though ownership isnt being transferred, just changing wallets)
I think royalties are a big thing for NFTs, to enable artists some of the long term upside to their works sales, just wondering wether it’d be better to be backed into the token itself (what I think you have described) or be set on the dapp / marketplace end (similar to how it is done on Ethereum)
Yes, I think you should still pay even if you’re only moving to another wallet controlled by yourself.
There is no way to distinguish between two wallets owned by the same person, that can’t be gamed to avoid royalties.
I am thinking a small flat fee i.e. I make my money by encouraging lots of transfers, not from a few expensive ones. To me, this is the measure of a truly successful product i.e. you’re encouraging the re-sale while still making good money in a very distributed way. It’s a different approach to scarcity, in that there is still a limited pool but somewhere there is this discovery of what size pool can reach a million (or a billion) views / owners?
For example, with my vinyl collection, I might want to sell some yet some I want to keep. With mp3s, well, we just collect them and that’s it. But NFT’s take us back to that vinyl collection, we restore those same values. And then one day, years from now, an artist says, "I’m going to do a tour / public appearance and anyone with an old NFT gets backstage privilege etc.
Due to high demand we have decide to continue uploading some additional works to our currently running alpha version of the Confidential NFT Gallery. However due to technical reasons we will have to enfore some limitations on the files that can be uploaded at this moment.
So the rules are as following:
- Up to 10 works per author will be uploaded each week on Thursdays
- Each image should not exceed 50 kilobytes in size
- Image format should be JPEG (.jpg or .jpeg) only
- Image file names should correspond to the name of the piece exactly
- Images should be sent as zip archive to firstname.lastname@example.org email
- Artist name and public key should be included
- Artists will be notified in reply email once their submissions are uploaded at which point it is up to the artist to set the initial price
- In case images are not uploaded for any reason, artists will be notified on this fact
What a great news to wake up to, thank you for your consideration and attention to this matter!
Great to be heard
I like this forum already
I don’t like that everything is so centralized right now. What’s the point of a blockchain if we have to go through Beam Foundation to get things done.
This NFT launch should not have happened before the token standard was complete.
There isn’t even any instructions on how to take advantage of Beam’s unique privacy features for NFTs. So they’re just like centralized, public NFTs right now. Nothing unique about it.
I have two proposals in order to help regulate NFT’s.
Of course we want a decentralized and fairly censorship-free, private platform.
Given that the plan is eventually for users to be able to mint their own NFT’s directly, we should take steps to prevent spamming of too many NFT’s and also a way to filter and organize NFT’s, including ways to hide ones which may have inappropriate content.
First, we should require 50 BEAM to be staked in order to mint an NFT, similar to how 3000 BEAM is locked up when someone creates a new confidential asset. This would give each NFT a base value and prevent spamming, while also reducing the circulating supply.
Secondly, BEAMX holders may be able to vote to keep certain NFT’s in a type of hidden state, similar to how Odysee (LBRY crypto) filters out adult content by default, unless a registered user specifies otherwise.
I think the price should be based on storage rather than different prices for different types of data.
As for “hiding” NFTs I think this is the wrong word. I mean, it is there, immutable, and the NFT itself (image etc) is not actually stored on-chain (I hope!). Perhaps we can have flags that require a high threshold e.g. 75%. Such flags might include, “Adult”, “Political”, “Offensive”, “Whistle blower” and so on.
NFTs need to be more decoupled from Beam and the foundation itself.
The minting and gallery type functions should not be handled by Beam itself, but rather there should be multiple minting / gallery dapps. There are multiple ways to mint NFTs on Ethereum because an NFT is just a token standard.
One minting dapp may choose to store the image on IPFS, another may choose to store it on Arweave. And each of these may charge different amounts of money based on the economies of the storage networks that they use. Likewise, the different apps may have different highly curated galleries as well.
As @Vanilla-Ice-Beam mentioned, the “NFT” that is on-chain is simply a pointer to a file elsewhere. So any pricing should be aware that the only thing being stored is a pointer, not an actual file. Also keep this in mind when discussing moderation.
If Beam prices an NFT minting based on something like file-size, this is a big problem for decentralization and user choice. They are basically saying the only way to mint is through us and you must use our infrastructure to do it (IPFS storage costs).
Regarding spam prevention, I do think a standard mint price is probably the best way to go. Just make it standard like 20-50 BEAM as @Fiat_Lux mentioned because they are all the same “size” (being pointers).
I think the most essential pieces of the NFT evolution on Beam will be 1) ability to mint various file types - pdf - gif - mp3 etc and 2) the ability to mint multiples of a single item.
We need to strive to encourage artists, rather than put them off using Beam.