Other places you may find me:
- National Novel Writing Month (since 2007)
- DeviantART (since 2006)
- Fanart Central (since 2004)
A lurker by habit, I alternatively go by "Stratelier" on some sites.

Do I "take requests"?

TLDR the answer is "no, obviously" ...
...BUT.
My gallery suffers from chronic "artist's block" so I actually consider myself open to doing small, quick, "low effort" sketches on request. I don't create art as a source of income, which gives me more flexibility in exactly what I want to do with my art. Even if the answer's usually no, go ahead and ask me!

This being said, if you have an idea just burning your head to get itself out and be seen and it "just can't wait" ... I'm sorry but maybe go toss it into one of those AI image generators (Stable Diffusion, etc) to see if it can satisfy that craving?

Wait. Did you ... really ... just promote "AI art"?
No, but two things first:

If an idea for some art really feels so urgent that you can't force the time do it yourself or (actually) commission an artist to do it for you, maybe you are not taking the idea (and your art) seriously enough?

Besides, my outlook on this hot new controversy is complicated and evolves over time. See this journal for details -> https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/10853809/

I refuse to deny there being some type of actual skill in manipulating an AI model into making an interesting result (e.g. example tutorial), but the skill of engineering a good model prompt IS NOT (and could never be) the skill of actually using media to create something yourself (especially traditional/physical media). Prompting an AI is like running a dog through an agility course: you may be the one leading the dog, but it's your dog who's doing the actual course.

So ... what's your actual stance on generative AI?

Part of the problem is how that "generative AI" and "analytical AI" are (from the computational perspective) basically just inverse operations of each other (like speaking vs. listening, or reading vs. writing). Any model that performs one can be reversed to do the other.

There may be legitimate places for using generative AI models on well-defined tasks that are incorporated as some small part of a larger (and human) artistic workflow -- but, currently, AI image generators are being promoted as not merely a "tool", but a "complete solution", a "quick and easy path" to get results without any of the usual process . . . when creating art is ABOUT that process on its own merits!

There should always be a firm line between something that a human spent their time producing, vs. something that was machine-generated (even if only at the request/prompting of a human). dA chose to require a generative-AI label (even if their rule is not strictly enforced); FA has chosen to prohibit it outright. I actually do prefer FA's rule over dA's approach (though it's still better than nothing).

Random tip to finish things off: Draw the tail first, THEN add legs. You're welcome.