Things People Say To Artists...

[ginkaruja.livejournal.com]

And commissioners as well...

I hope this is allowed....
I am trying to compile a list of things people have said to artists and commissioners that have a negative view/stance on various subjects surrounding art. Mediums, pricing, marketing, art itself, methods, etc.  Anything and everything, even if it seems minor. What arguments have you seen out there?
Please number/point if you have more than one to share.

Examples of what I'm looking for:
-Digital is worth more than traditional.
-Art isn't a real job. (Everyone knows this one)
-Digital art is cheating.
-Patreon is a scam/paywall.

Variations on the same thing and details are welcome because sometimes it can add another dynamic to the opinion that must also be tackled.

Comments

[okojosan.livejournal.com]

Traditional takes more skill than digital and is therefore worth more is one I've seen.

[greenreaper.livejournal.com]

Well it is! :-p

Actually, I would say it tends to take more time, and is therefore likely to cost more, all other things being equal. Of course, they often are not equal - maybe you don't have your computer/tablet around but do have traditional materials, or vice versa, or just want to work in a particular medium today…

[isotope cross (from livejournal.com)]

I've actually love traditional pieces. I like having a hard copy that I can feel and hold and keep safe somewhere. I'm just odd?

[greenreaper.livejournal.com]

Nah, you're not odd. They also represent a single act of creation. It's one reason I don't buy prints, despite being a valid "hard-copy" - it encourages the creation of new works (often by new artists).

[ginkaruja.livejournal.com]

I think buying prints still encourages creation of new pieces, though. For me, any money coming in, through prints or originals, is going to be encouragement to keep creating and will allow me to buy supplies.

[greenreaper.livejournal.com]

Well, maybe. Though that gets into a whole mess of issues relating to the tension between the goals of the artist vs. their fans/customers (who themselves may have disparate goals).

For example:
* Does more/better art get made as a result? Better in what sense?
* Does it reduce the price of the art product [specific] fans want?
* Are topics restricted in some way as a result of print sales?

Prints may decrease the price of originals, because the artist can get back some of the effort in creating the piece through print sales. But making, framing and selling prints also takes time which is not dedicated to the production of original furry art, resulting in fewer pieces being made. On the other hand, the resulting pieces may be technically better, if the sale of prints means that more time can be invested in a particular piece.

An artist may be encouraged by print sales to sink more time into art. But it could again result in the creation of fewer pieces (because the artist can cover their costs with prints), or less-diverse pieces (because some work does not appeal to a large enough group that it can be marketed as a print, or is not even permitted by some print services (https://inkedfur.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/9000004674-what-we-won-t-sell-on-your-behalf)). This may mean prints are bad news for those with specific interests, because the artist has an incentive to charge more for them, or refuse to do them at all.

Some artists do commissions only when they are not able to make money (or enough money) in other ways. This is against the interests of commissioners, who might seek to discourage the artist from seeking to make money through, e.g. Patreon - or even actively undermine them - with the goal of getting them to return to piece-work. This may be selfish, but also logical, because to them it isn't enough that the artist is making art - they have to be making the product the customer cares about. (These issues are similar to those faced by companies, who often can't please all stakeholders while achieving their own goals.)

Of course, it is probably not in the interests of a commissioner to have artists decide that furry art is ultimately unprofitable and spend all their time working at Burger King. But for some, it may not matter if the artist can only afford to eat at Burger King. (Given a large enough market where furry art is a commodity, this may happen in any case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_wages).)

[ginkaruja.livejournal.com]

I think a lot of this is generally specific to fandom artists, and really isn't surprising considering that the fandom is built around personalized art to the degree that it is. On the other hand, the fanbase of artists need to realize that manipulation isn't the way to go, and you really shouldn't annoy creators.

For me, I'm moving away from furry art as any source of income. It hasn't worked for me, it's not going to any time soon, if it ever does, and my realism is far better anyway. So, I'm seeing more sense in doing things that inspire me to push myself, and take some time to also work in mediums that are typically faster to increase my portfolio and thus the type of prints I'll have available, while carving out a niche market. There's going to be a lot of other things also going on with that which do extend past prints, but I think that overall, it's going to be better and more successful for me in the long run.

Technically, though, prints shouldn't decrease the value of an original in traditional, because the original still holds investment value and is sort of the 'master key'. Prints, signed and LE, can hold some investment value, but it's NEVER going to be the same as the original. And with the variety of print services in there, depending on what the artist is producing, they may not have to worry about matting and framing-many artists don't even sell frames with originals because it just adds to shipping costs and often times the buyers will change the frames anyway. If they do, it's usually a cheapy.

[greenreaper.livejournal.com]

Seems like a reasonable plan. I mean, a lot of artists basically use furry art as a step to support themselves in part as they work their way up to a more feasible art career, just as they might a regular part-time job - and there's nothing wrong with that. Maybe the people you've been working for will be disappointed, for a time, but they can probably find someone else to fill the 'position' in due course.