I always thought communists should be ignored if possible, shot if they make a nuisance of themselves.

Haha, he was mostly saying how he wouldn't pay for something, if he could draw it himself with time and effort. I don't feel that way; if I payed someone to draw, say, one of my characters, I'd get their view to the character baked in. that matters. To me at any rate.

I mean, take Kiss-The-Thunder. There are other artists that could technically do the same drawings she does - but it wouldn't be the same, because she puts a piece of her soul in there that can't be copied. That's what I would pay for in a commission.

( "would" because I'm totally broke, and can hardly afford food right now. But when I have money, I'm willing to spend it on letting other artists make art for me, even when I could maybe make it myself in a few years.)


But yeah, people go on about "art should be free" and kind of seem to forget how the artists are supposed to eat.

Oh, and if you could afford her, who would you commission, and what references would you use? Not asking for any particular reason.


I understand what you mean, you're not just paying for the effort alone, you're paying for perspective and the bit of personality that comes with each piece....

pirates are neo-communists

No, pirates are thieves, plain and simple. Communists share everything. Pirates only share other people's things and property, not their own.

was a priate party in swedne and theri act was that none has a ownage of anything and had to share, with i call em neo commies

I think that if some one is selling something that you want, buying it is perfectly fine, expecting it to be free just because theoretically *you* could do it with the training required, is bullshit entitlement.

Mm, the point was a bit lost on me. Of course it's fine for anyone to just... not buy stuff. But if they want it for free with that explanation, er, that's just really bad logic. Kind of...
So... Since you could do this if you were less lazy, the guy who wasn't lazy shouldn't get paid?
What. XD

And even if I can draw most of what I want drawn myself, there are many artists I'd like to commission when I have more money, just to see how they would go at my characters. I mena, interpretation and such is a part of it.

Oh I was mostly saying that the person who wants the art to be free just because they could do it if they wanted, is a lousy excuse. I myself would commission a person when I have the money, part to see how they would do it, and because I don't want to dedicate the time to do it.

By that same argument;
Is it worth paying for art that you can't emulate yourself? I'm not sure of the point they were trying to make.

I'll admit I've downloaded my fair share of music off the internet. I don't like the concept of paying for art, but I do understand that some pieces are desirable enough to be sold. (Hell, artists gotta eat too)

Well, yeah. I have copied cassettes and CDs, too. Mind that when I have a bit more money, I'm likely to buy whatever I can of those in real legal copies, because I just like having that. Same with books /comics online.

Even when we have several talents, we usually have time and energy only to really develop and specialize in one or two of them. And...
I could work as hard as my brother, but I would probably still not become a speedway driver of his class. And he could work his fingers to the bone without ever reaching the levels of artistic expression I will reach. We have basic dispositions, that we can gear toward one or other special skill. I think a society works best when people acknowledge what they're best suited for and go for that, because then we can exchange favors (indirectly, with money, though yes, a society that didn't need it would be splendid for the record) and get much better art AND cars.

...I'm drawing myself, and writing. Most of the things I want drawn, there's no point in paying someone else for, because I'll be able to do it fine myself.
But when RockGaara inked and colored that Mario x Sonic pic you commented on last, I was so friggin' excited. It was awesome watching her complete my lines with hers and colors. I couldn't have had that much fun just coloring it myself, though I technically COULD have colored it sufficiently well. I'm not sure I'm getting across what I mean, but...

It's about how much fun you have. I have more fun, a richer life, if I pay people to do some things for me after they specialized in things I don't have time to specialize in... On account of specializing in my own way. :p

...and, pardon double posting for not getting everything in, even when I have the skill myself, some other artist's unique expression may be something I want to see, and if I pay them for it, they can spend time developing those skills that they otherwise would have to spend making money some other way. That's why I personally, with the society setup we have today, like to pay for the art I enjoy (books, movies, drawings, music etc) whenever I can.

I see nothing at all wrong for an artist to profit from her work. If people are willing to pay for her work, then people must see value in that work.

If these other people think they're better artists, then they should just charge more for their work. It sounds to me, though, that they're just jealous because they know people aren't willing to pay that much.

Even if they are right, there are all sorts of jobs that "anybody" can do, but that doesn't mean they do it for free. An artist's creation takes time and effort, which in my opinion is valuable in itself, not to mention all the time and effort involved in reaching this level of skill in the first place.

Mm, I'm inclined to believe it's something like what you say there. The people who say these things tend to either not be artists at all, or not be very well-practiced artists.
What this latest guy said was basically that since, theoretically, he could get as good as them with enough work, he didn't feel like paying anyone to draw things for him. I wasn't sure if he meant he didn't desire the art in the first place, or if he meant he wanted it, but wouldn't want to pay.
...thing with that is, like you point out, that they DID put in the effort and he didn't, obviously. Effort is work; work should be paid for. :P

I can admit right off that most artists, I wouldn't commission even if I could, because I see nothing in their art that "pulls me in". But those that do, I would like to buy art from later, because a theme or character can turn out so differently depending on who draws it.

Yes, exactly. Take cleaning: it requires a lot of work, timing and a good eye. You need to work up a tempo and a way of seeing what to do first, etc.
And there are people totally inept at cleaning. Just can't see where to start; get lost in details and slow down; don't get the stains off; leave dirty corners and water stripes behind and put the paper rolls in backwards. Some are born cleaners and love keeping things neat, and get better by pure habit.
Some have a basic spark of story telling skills, and get better at drawing, singing or the likes. (Some have a basic singing voice, some don't. Some are tone deaf and will never be able to make a tune sound good.)

My brother's aiming to be a pro speedway driver; I'm aiming to tell stories. If we switched, I do think the result could never be as good as now, when we aim for the one thing we both are naturally skilled at and also love to do. I think that goes for everyone.
...I can choose to put all my effort into drawing and writing skills, and still have amazing food sometimes, because someone else put all their effort into cooking skills. If that makes sense. If we all get space to get specialized at the thing we're the best suited for, everything we do will be better. I feel like that's a real nice society to strive for.

Free art, piracy, copyright infringement, torrents, entitlement complex, etc. Throughout history, artists have never been well paid for their works.

It's all about the perception of property. If you can't hold it in your hand, it's not worth anything. Businesspeople have to repeat time and time again that... well, time it money. The commoners simply don't understand that. Artists should be paid for their current skill, their time making art, and also all the time they spent developing their skills over the years. But, it's just pencils and papers to the masses. That stuff is cheap.

They download art for free, they copy music for free, they get software for free, but they pay $150/month for satellite TV they don't even watch, and that's on top of their $1,500/yr smart phone bill.

Now, I can see part of his point. I don't feel like buying art that I know I could do better. But there's artists who put their own spin on anything they draw, and those, I would pay for, because they add something, you know?

Let's say that I was not an artist myself. That I'd devoted all that time and effort to welding, or acting, or anything else that requires years of practice. By paying someone else to draw, I would leave myself free to get good at other things, and them to get better at drawing. We can only get really specialized-good at one or two things in life, so I think it's great if one picks and chooses them and we have an exchange of special talents.

But I also think you're on to something with the "property" aspect. To pay for work - for the way you're treated in a restaurant, for the environment and quality of performance in a theatre, for things that people do - seems to be foreign to some people.
I mean... When I have a cup of coffee in a coffee bar, instead of at home, I'm not paying extra for the coffee - I'm paying for nice chairs and tables, and a smile from the staff; feeling welcome.
Cleaning is work; it leaves no product, but it leaves a nice environment to work /study in. Art does leave a product - the illusion on the paper /screen, though like you say, it doesn't speak of all the work behind it. (to some people, obviously)

Even the art I do for *myself* isn't free! I consume paper, pencil lead, printer ink, and electricity!

If it has no value, like most of the stuff I do, or punk rock, then yes, let it be free.

There's a lot of people talking about "free art" these days, like people in my generation who want all music to be free. They seldom have good plans for how the artists /people making the music will get to eat.

XD has different value to different people, I bet. For one person, my art is pointless - for another, it's entertaining or comforting.
We all have different needs and tastes. Someone obviously needs punk rock, since it exists. ;p

Considering that most recent music wouldn't be worth what one paid for it even if it were free, I'm not sure how much I blame them for that point of view.

Punk rock exists for the same reason as gonorrhoea, to punish people for their unwise choices. People picking up their instruments for the first time are just as unlistenable as one would expect them to be.

True, but also if this was the atetude why arent anyone going to plant and harvest own potatoes whete, hunt and butcher a cow then cook it?

All things costs if somone has wasted time to crate it, if you want some to work for free then one should create a proposittion for slavery then ;)

thoe qualaty is not encurage in this fandom, a here its about fame and popularaty (and flashy images) that rises the pricetag, and that is all down to brag factor also.