I hear both sides...but mainly some artists don't think it is unfair since it really only works for really popular artists. So they get paid essentially for their previous work while others have to work from commission to commission. Honestly I don't know since I'm not an artist myself by I think it's pretty lazy to get paid just for having an account set there.

Honestly, I think it is a really good asset to have for artists who do set forms of work and stuff. It makes things a lot easier for artists, as well as even if it is just $1. I support any artist who goes on Patreon. :)

I think its ok, but I really dont understand it at all and I dont think its for me lol.
Its really great for already prolific artists that want to make a living off of their original ideas. It gives them an easy venue to utilize in working towards making a living off of their own work and concepts. But, just like it can be done well, it can be done wrong too and that is all very subjective and since there is no set structure on what an artist has to offer to their patrons, it seems a bit hit and miss. Another mentioned laziness, but I think thats of course all how it is handled!

I think you among other artists would benefit from it. My problem with it is that I hate subscriptions because it equates to me to shelling out money for something you can't keep. I learned my lesson with this one site of this artist I really like. But maybe I should be seeing it a better way, I don't know.

That's not to say they don't deserve the money, though.

its a good way to hold your art hostage

*Shrugs* I have mixed feelings about it. I feel like it's good for developers who do large scale games/animations and need a little extra funding to keep their project going. On the other hand a see a lot of artists using it as a means to make their content exclusive only to their Patreon supporters.

Which there is technically not wrong, I guess, I mean...there's no reason they SHOULDN'T be making money of their artwork. It just strikes me as a tad douchey to charge people who like your artwork simply for the privilege of viewing it, especially if you're already making money of commissions and the like.

Didn't think about that last point, are artists really double charging for a work like that? Wow, what a way to turn off your fans just for a buck.

But it feels like holding art hostage. It won't get nearly as many views, so it depends upon your angle I guess. I don't like the idea of a subscription, it's like turning an art gallery into Netflix =/

Yeah, though ive always considered art (especially like what I do) a luxury purchase so there's really no WRONG price other than what a customer is willing to pay


however when you personally have a hundred thousand watchers and set up a patreon with half of them paying you $1 a month for sub-par content it comes off as more of a scheme to not have to work than ripping people off. the value of your work is what you put into it, not about how you can trick your fans into paying hundreds for something youd charge $80 for as a commission.

Well, an artist i follow haves a Patreon and he uses the money he gets from there as a window to do less comissions and work on his own stuff.
Those who pledge have acess to High-res + multiple versions of the picture.

Sure, depends on what is "sub-par content" for you, but if you think you got too many comissions and too little time for your personal stuff,
they'd pretty much be paying you to follow through with your own art.

But that's just opinion.

This guy has a good art style but his patreon is an example of one I don't approve of:

https://www.patreon.com/AMWULF?ty=c

What I don't approve of is how he made all his current 64 creations exclusive viewing only to patrons. Like I have to become a patron just to view a post? That doesn't make sense.

Now this patreon is one that makes sense to me:

https://www.patreon.com/Temrin?ty=c

See with her patreon, almost all of her creations are available to public viewing with a few exceptions and you can view most of the image till you donate to get the full experience.

Let me know how those examples work for you.

well okay i have my own opinions on AMWULF and his business practices/art quality but that's besides the point.

i think that patreon is a great idea if you have a following and an earnest work ethic, but for the most part i think that the people with the large fan bases end up getting overpaid for content that was once free. I dont feel like one should have to pay to see ALL of someone's work, especially not things they do in their free time. you pay to get into a museum because that work has cultural significance and is typically (with the exception of most modern art) done masterfully. but this is FA, this is erotic furry shit. this is not worth the $800+ some people are making doing comics and pin ups, and then to also throw your non-paying audience under the bus is just a blow to the people who got you to where you are now.

If im going to do a project soley on patreon like a comic but put normal work on FA the way i always have that's one thing, but to spread it to every little drawing and sketch you do doesnt seem worth it to me, especially when 50% of the artists you follow start doing it.

1. I do hope we get to see a journal of your thoughts on him with your finals being over as I'm curious. I'm someone who wants to get his Beaver Box and Gator Box packs but has no idea how to get them or the date they get released since he had made teasers for the projects.
2. With the 2 comparisons, Temrin had the better patreon since she at least allows a lot of her projects to be viewed by non patrons to give a preview to them of something she has planned. Amwulf's wasn't the good one because as someone who enjoys his art style, I do draw the line where people make their creations all "You either be a patron or you don't get a preview of my creations even" and use that line of thinking. Then again, currently those 2 are the only patreons I recall visiting.
3. I would argue that while furaffinity is mostly erotic, there are a large collection of clean pictures too.
4. Alright, fair enough. Comics are worthy of something major you can approve of patreon work.

Oh, i wouldnt make a journal about Amwulf, thats a call-out and is suspension worthy, i dont have any personal beef with him I just think his whole business presence on FA. if you look at his page now every other shout is someone inquiring about a refund or a commission from over a year ago.

I feel that there's making money off your artwork and then there's MAKING MONEY OFF YOUR ARTWORK.

To clarify: I feel that about half of the artists that I've seen join patreon are trying to exploit their popularity. Raffles for instance, make me mad as hell. I don't like that they're going to ask for money just for a "chance" at getting some art done of them. It's a lot like gambling online. But I also remind myself that furry porn and art in general is a LUXURY. No one needs to spend money on art to live their day-to-day lives.

So if a person feels comfortable throwing money at an artist who's doing nothing extra to merit that monetary support, that's their business.

But I FEEL that it's bad business practice to ask for something in exchange for little to nothing in return. It sets up a tone of entitlement. A sense of "I'M AN ARTIST, I DESERVE TO BE SUPPORTED BY VIRTUE OF BEING AN ARTIST."

Again just my feeling. But for each of the aforementioned "bad examples" above, I see one good example.

Example#1: An artist who shall remain nameless who's working to get published in mainstream media (books and major-label publishing houses.)
Example#2: An artist who wants to live off their art, and still keep it affordable for as many people as possible. There are a few artists who I feel intentionally under-charge for the quality of their work, just because they're pushing themselves to produce progressively better and faster art.

Example#3: An artist who has a comic that they're posting for everyone to enjoy. Someone who is putting in the time and energy to make something for others, I believe should get a little acknowledgement in return.
Example#4: An artist who has a VERY LARGE existing body of high-quality artwork, who simply wants to art full-time, and enjoy a decent quality of life at the same time. This benefits everyone who supports them in that they get to enjoy more content, of higher quality and assuming the artist's work ethic is solid, at a faster rate of upload.

Someone who's honed and practiced their skills as an artist for over a decade and shown a comparatively massive and comprehensive developement as an artist is an achievement in and of itself. When the skill, talent, and raw creative potential is there, I believe in supporting it.

Someone who's just half-assing it, and hasn't bothered to grown or expand their skillset in years, who's STILL expecting the same level of acknowledgement and tangible support, doesn't get my support. That's just an attitude of entitlement, of believing oneself to be innately "worth it" regardless of the skills and work ethic of others in their field.


Sorry for the wall of text. But that's how I feel, and at least a bit of my reasoning that runs alongside it.

yeah i get what you're saying. I think in general a lot of people are flocking to patreon because of the general disenfranchisement that artist have faced over the years. Art has never been a rewarding pursuit financially so im sure there are plenty of the kind of people you listed who are misusing patreon because they feel they're owed huge sums for being better than someone else in a hugely competitive field.

Even though I myself am pursuing full time employment in art i never expect to be able to make 800+ a month simply doing 1 comic page like some people do. when your only motivator are the thousands of backers of people that understand nothing about art you simply wont grow. When your payment comes from a professional business that's hired you because you meet their standards you're actually earning that 800+

I think it's a matter of a slippery slope between skill level, motivation, popular trends in art as a whole, and personal sense of worth.

But my gripe is with those who are static, stagnant, and relatively lazy as artists, despite their current popularity.

yeah a lot of people find a formula that works and never stray from it in fear of alienating fans, but that stunts their growth

Hey Nikko, I was wondering what you think about artists who don't allow their creations to show up on patreon unless you become a patron? One artist who draws really hot gay art apparently doesn't allow his own creations to show unless you are a patron. I'm not talking about previews with censors, I am talking full on "This creation is only available if you are a patron" level.

Let me know your thoughts on that?

i think the entire idea of withholding content from fans is ridiculous. they're not a professional artist but they want professional treatment and payment but they havent earned it yet. i see it getting severe backlash soon and the patreon thing dying out

To be fair, I don't hate the idea for certain artists to use patreon for special bonus packs and art gifts but when you don't even let teasers show without people becoming patrons, that crosses the line for me.

I will find good examples of a patreon that is good in my eyes and the one I don't really like and get back to you.

Oh I can think of someone in terms of laziness, has big popularity and on a slippery slope with a patreon.

I think it's a good way for good artists to receive wut they deserve :) $$$