Is Furaffinity Any Good for Posting Furry Art Now?

Disclaimer: this is not a hate post for artists, and don't tell u.s.a. to just "suck it up it's their art", I mean in that location was a time women didn't accept rights, so should all women have left America just because information technology was "the government'due south nation?" The indicate is: people tin practise what they desire, only that doesn't brand information technology right. Don't say I'one thousand "entitled", I just don't exactly find it off-white for somebody with mediocre or bad art to charge besides much intentionally, then human activity snobby about it, and add pointless things equally "DLC". If you have "the right to practise whatever you want", why don't I?

Anyways, what greedy things practise yous see artists do? I notice these things:
-Charge extra for NSFW. Similar I don't run into how it'southward whatsoever harder for artists to make NSFW than SFW. They're just trying to gain off of perverts and that's it. Not all perverts are rich, and in fact, many are not. They leech off of NSFW material and don't have equally loftier-paying jobs equally those with cleaner minds and greater capability to go a high-paying chore.
-Advertise their commissions in other peoples' places.
-Put minimal endeavor into max-toll commissions.
-Accept their time on overpriced commissions.
-Sell fine art based off of the idea "I need money" rather than "I'm charging for a service, and so I shouldn't charge 20 dollars for my less skilled fine art."
-Guilt trip every bit an excuse to overcharge commissions.
-Become extremely angry over whatsoever critique of an artist's prices or fine art and hide the comments.
-Put money into useless things from committee profits, like fursuits, especially if they're overpriced.
-Being snobby and in it for the money, especially if they don't demand information technology much. MAYBE I'd buy overpriced fine art if artists were at least sincerely kind.
-Putting no personal value or decent customer service backside the art.

Overpriced = charging also much based off an artist'due south skill level or because they're pop. Sure, this is objective, but there should be redlines by professionals to decide an artist's anatomy skills, checks of coloring/blending/shading etc, and the originality of an fine art style. People Can get away with slight overpricing, but it isn't exactly good marketing or client service. Others tin can become abroad with doxing, stalking, and other stuff, so what makes unfair client service whatsoever good? And things can be 'bad', but they can be spoken against too.

As an artist, and as someone with some friends who are professional person (full time!) artists, I'll endeavor to shed some perspective on this.

1) "Hirsuite" art is already ridiculously underpriced. If you compare to other fandoms or scenes, especially the comic and graphic novel scene, y'all'll meet this is true. As an case, take a look at the prices for the original line-art of the comic series Squarriors (some may exist NSFW-violence): Squarriors original fine art issues 3-iv · Ashley Marie Witter · Online Store Powered by Storenvy Information technology'due south nonetheless drawings of animals, but the starting price for many of these is $500/$250, and information technology's "just" pencil work. That'southward triple or more of what I've seen for the same type of fine art in the fandom. Only make no error, that artist absolutely deserves it. I'd argue most "furry" artists deserve way more.

2) As for someone with "bad" art charging too much: Every bit the saying goes, "everything is worth what the purchaser volition pay for it." If you see high prices for 'garbage', the next thing is to see if people are really buying information technology. Maybe they aren't, and this artist will slowly learn a valuable lesson. If they are, peradventure in that location'south some other appeal to information technology? I've seen lilliputian cartoon creatures on DeviantArt selling for $seventy+ a pop, merely the entreatment of buying them is to bring together a customs of people who all own these piddling cartoon things. /shrug

three) You and other clients may non like it, simply unless y'all state explicitly in your contract with an artist (and, more than importantly, PAY for it), the artist owns the rights to their images in the end. If yous want exclusive rights to an image, yous need to pay for those rights. Otherwise, the creative person still owns the original slice, and has the right to produce prints, use it in their portfolio, etc. See the Squarriors pencil drawings I linked before? You can buy the originals, but they've already been used to produce a comic that'due south already been printed hundreds of times.

In the fandom, we don't encounter a ton of issue with this, considering there's an overall "gentleman'due south agreement" that the artwork beingness produced is of people'south personal characters, and they don't want these images re-used in other means. Simply if a given creative person takes dozens of (arguably cheap) fursona commissions, it's within their right to produce prints of these works, even a book collection. Y'all just don't see equally much of this considering, again, the "civilization" here has a respect for people'southward characters, so people would experience bad-mannered buying art of someone else'southward character unless information technology was part of some open up, agreed-upon project.

And y'all, the client, practice NOT have the same correct to produce prints and turn a profit of this work, unless you buy those production rights. Your $40 headshot commission is simply to pay to go the work done and go a copy for yourself; the artist owns the royalties/production rights. There'south probably ameliorate legalese language for this, but you go the idea. If you lot don't want an artist printing something you paid for, ask them for a contract where you too buy the rights.

four) I don't do NSFW work, and my reason is, in addition to not wanting to (personally), NSFW is not the nicest thing to have your proper noun and art style fastened to. The fandom hither is very liberal-minded, only not everyone else shares the aforementioned sentiment. "Clean" hirsuite art can oft still be shared publicly and used as an art portfolio example, but NSFW is oft tucked away. That'due south a lot of lost acquirement for an creative person to spend time on a slice they tin can't necessarily promote or distribute or sell prints of.

So, even if an artist is cool with shouting from the rooftops virtually their NSFW works, let'southward be honest: At that place's that little bit more than item involved in cartoon them, if you grab my drift. Just like an artist has the right to accuse extra for wings or clothing (you're adding whole actress limbs or pieces with details onto a base course), they have the right to charge extra for "those" details.

5) I agree information technology's tacky for an artist to 'beg' nether the notion they "demand money" or have whatsoever other emergency to pay for. I do note, though, that this fandom has a civilisation of openness and support, and then it's not that tacky for an artist to effectively announce a Go Fund Me-esque drive for funds through their commissions. That aside, I hate to burst your chimera, merely artists accept bills to pay and need to do things like eat and pay hire. It's a sad fact of life, but the money isn't greed so much as necessity. And, often for what you're getting, the artist deserves it. And and, as mentioned before, yous're likely already getting a massive discount merely considering it's "furry."

Why do yous retrieve it's upwards to you to decide if an artist truly "needs" the money or not?

(part 2 next...)

bowerivere1942.blogspot.com

Source: https://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/what-are-some-greedy-things-artists-do.1625134/