Photochain

Photochain is a decentralized, revolutionary Stock Photography Platform on Blockchain with fair Conditions, lowest Fees on the Market and full Control over the Content for the Contributor.

About Photochain

Photochain is an Ethereum-based decentralized application for stock photography that allows creators to monetize their photographs. It is stated that “artists will receive up to 95% of the final selling price of their digital work”. PHT tokens (PHOTON) will be used for transactions within the Photochain ecosystem (tokenization of photography services).

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

2.4
Product
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

2.0
N/A
2 - Small audience / niche market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.

Product

Photochain is written in Javascript and is a web-based client that currently interacts with the Ethereum blockchain via the Infura API. A proof-of-concept is available on the Photochain website and it is stated that the prototype is for “illustrative purposes only and allows the user to test Photochain Concept on a real Ethereum blockchain testnet (Rinkeby)”. Photochain’s target user base is somewhat limited (content creators) compared compared to other projects. There are a few projects that aim to use blockchain technology in order to assess photograph ownership rights and compensate content creators accordingly. The Photochain GitHub page can be found and contains fairly high levels of activity and content.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

2.0
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

3.0
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some plans to decentralize.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.

Use of Blockchain

PHT is an ERC20 compliant token and is used as a means of exchange on the Photochain platform. The platform’s governance structure is discussed fairly thoroughly. It is stated that “Photochain Governance offers a team of moderators that will, especially in the initial phase of the DApp, be needed to resolve claims.” Thus, the platform (at its initial stages) will be somewhat centralized. The voting mechanism is discussed in the whitepaper and states that all decisions will be made by authorized users. The criteria to become an authorized user is not specifically outlined. However, the main goal of the organization is to develop the platform in a direction that will “guide the Photochain DApp toward DAO” (decentralized autonomous organization). There is no clear need to create a custom token other than to generate funds for the platform.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.0
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is 33 pages in length. The technology plan is presented with moderate levels of detail. Data storage strategies are discussed (the platform will use the IPFS protocol). The business plan is moderately detailed. The fee structure is clearly outlined. There is some content which addresses the current market landscape and the justification for the platform. Rights-managed and royalty-free license models are discussed. Revenue projections are also included in the document. However, a thorough comparison between Photochain and its competitors is absent from the document. Overall, the whitepaper focuses on discussing the logistics of how the platform will operate and contains satisfactory levels of technical and business-related details.

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

3.2
Roadmap
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.

Roadmap

The roadmap on the Photochain website spans from April 2017 to Q3 2018. There are 10 milestones presented overall, 8 of which have already been achieved. Notable milestones already achieved include development of the prototype and preparation for the token sale. The platform’s mainnet release is planned for Q2 2018 and improvements are planned afterwards. The future developments in the roadmap are fairly vague.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

2.2
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.

Compliance

The whitepaper does not contain a disclaimer or thorough discussion regarding risk factors and legal considerations of the platform/token sale. On the Photochain website, there is a privacy statement and terms of service thats associated with the use of the website . KYC will be used for the token sale.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

2.8
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.

Company and Team

The core team of 12 individuals is listed on the Photochain website, along with profile pictures and links to social media profiles. Four individuals comprise the development team, three of which provide their personal GitHub pages (with fairly high levels of activity). The C-level executive team members have sufficient information provided in their respective LinkedIn profiles. However, nearly all lead team members are concurrently involved with other projects/organizations, thus commitment to the project is questionable.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.2
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

1.0
N/A
1 - Very greedy (e.g. uncapped).
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well defined and reasonable.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.

Token Sale

The total number of PHT tokens is 230 million (79% is for the token sale, 14% is for the team, management, and legal fees, 4% is for advisors, and 3% is for the bounty program).
The soft cap is 170 million PHT and the hard cap is 230 million PHT, where 1 PHT = $0.12 USD.

The allocation of funds is described with fairly high levels of detail:
* 30% Marketing
* 30% IT Development
* 8% Infrastructure
* 10% Copyright and Licensing
* 5% R&D and Platform Evolution
* 4% Legal, Accounting and Audit
* 4% Cooperations with Photo Agencies
* 4% Allocation to contributors
* 3% Business Development
* 2% Conferences and Meetups

Product

Photochain is written in Javascript and is a web-based client that currently interacts with the Ethereum blockchain via the Infura API. A proof-of-concept is available on the Photochain website and it is stated that the prototype is for “illustrative purposes only and allows the user to test Photochain Concept on a real Ethereum blockchain testnet (Rinkeby)”. Photochain’s target user base is somewhat limited (content creators) compared compared to other projects. There are a few projects that aim to use blockchain technology in order to assess photograph ownership rights and compensate content creators accordingly. The Photochain GitHub page can be found and contains fairly high levels of activity and content.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

2.0
N/A
2 - Small audience / niche market.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.
Product Score:
2.4

Use of Blockchain

PHT is an ERC20 compliant token and is used as a means of exchange on the Photochain platform. The platform’s governance structure is discussed fairly thoroughly. It is stated that “Photochain Governance offers a team of moderators that will, especially in the initial phase of the DApp, be needed to resolve claims.” Thus, the platform (at its initial stages) will be somewhat centralized. The voting mechanism is discussed in the whitepaper and states that all decisions will be made by authorized users. The criteria to become an authorized user is not specifically outlined. However, the main goal of the organization is to develop the platform in a direction that will “guide the Photochain DApp toward DAO” (decentralized autonomous organization). There is no clear need to create a custom token other than to generate funds for the platform.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some smart contract functionality.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

3.0
N/A
3 - Potentially disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

1.0
N/A
1 - None really, just fundraising.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Centralized with some plans to decentralize.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Use of Blockchain Score:
2.0

Whitepaper

The whitepaper is 33 pages in length. The technology plan is presented with moderate levels of detail. Data storage strategies are discussed (the platform will use the IPFS protocol). The business plan is moderately detailed. The fee structure is clearly outlined. There is some content which addresses the current market landscape and the justification for the platform. Rights-managed and royalty-free license models are discussed. Revenue projections are also included in the document. However, a thorough comparison between Photochain and its competitors is absent from the document. Overall, the whitepaper focuses on discussing the logistics of how the platform will operate and contains satisfactory levels of technical and business-related details.

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

3.0
N/A
3 - Covers most key issues; a few holes.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

3.0
N/A
3 - Readable, takes some time.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

3.0
N/A
3 - Basic honesty with some hype.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

3.0
N/A
3 - More information required.
Whitepaper Score:
3.0

Roadmap

The roadmap on the Photochain website spans from April 2017 to Q3 2018. There are 10 milestones presented overall, 8 of which have already been achieved. Notable milestones already achieved include development of the prototype and preparation for the token sale. The platform’s mainnet release is planned for Q2 2018 and improvements are planned afterwards. The future developments in the roadmap are fairly vague.

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Vague, noncommittal.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

4.0
N/A
4 - Realistic.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

3.0
N/A
3 - Imperfect but available, or using substitutes.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

3.0
N/A
3 - Getting there.
Roadmap Score:
3.2

Compliance

The whitepaper does not contain a disclaimer or thorough discussion regarding risk factors and legal considerations of the platform/token sale. On the Photochain website, there is a privacy statement and terms of service thats associated with the use of the website . KYC will be used for the token sale.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

2.0
N/A
2 - Primarily, with few additional rights.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

3.0
N/A
3 - Prototype / MVP / alpha.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal, superficial or hackneyed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

2.0
N/A
2 - Insufficient or unprofessional.
Compliance Score:
2.2

Company and Team

The core team of 12 individuals is listed on the Photochain website, along with profile pictures and links to social media profiles. Four individuals comprise the development team, three of which provide their personal GitHub pages (with fairly high levels of activity). The C-level executive team members have sufficient information provided in their respective LinkedIn profiles. However, nearly all lead team members are concurrently involved with other projects/organizations, thus commitment to the project is questionable.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

2.0
N/A
2 - Lacking in key areas.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

3.0
N/A
3 - Correlated to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Company and Team Score:
2.8

Token Sale

The total number of PHT tokens is 230 million (79% is for the token sale, 14% is for the team, management, and legal fees, 4% is for advisors, and 3% is for the bounty program).
The soft cap is 170 million PHT and the hard cap is 230 million PHT, where 1 PHT = $0.12 USD.

The allocation of funds is described with fairly high levels of detail:
* 30% Marketing
* 30% IT Development
* 8% Infrastructure
* 10% Copyright and Licensing
* 5% R&D and Platform Evolution
* 4% Legal, Accounting and Audit
* 4% Cooperations with Photo Agencies
* 4% Allocation to contributors
* 3% Business Development
* 2% Conferences and Meetups

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

1.0
N/A
1 - Very greedy (e.g. uncapped).
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

1.0
N/A
1 - None or nonsensical.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well defined and reasonable.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.
Token Sale Score:
2.2

Use this code to share the ratings on your website