I agree, but I also see where some artists want to paid for all the art they do to which I would respond then by all means sign up to be an artist for sites like Sexyfur, but if you are a freelancer and do commissions then I don't think one should be paid twice.

Some argue it from and art gallery sense, to which I can get, but at the same time art galleries function a bit differently than art gallery sites like FA, usually there is only a single piece of art at the gallery, they are physical productions which in !ost cases can be seen as a photo on the museum website, but often these pieces need to be seen in person to be experienced, where digital art is experienced solely visually and not something that is "physical" unless one where to sell a print of it.

It is a very complex and nuanced system being that Patreon was intended as a site to help creators keep creating for the public like some YouTube channels do so they don't have to rely on ad revenue.

If you do patreon exclusive stuff as a reward thats fine but putting out stuff that is edited so that you have to pay. No thats wrong... Im one for free art for all, art is for the people not material gain. Also i can name a rather well known person who rage quit in a classic butt hurt furry way over people calling him out about his pay wall *cough* togo-the-thief*cough*

He did offer high resolution files to his supporters, which is a typical low tier perk. Art is made in some cases for material gain otherwise there would not be graphic designers or card artists or even your run of the mill museum artists. Cities commission artists and sculptors for huge pieces to put onto the city parks. If all artists resigned to that sort of thinking artists would not be able to make a living as an artists, and we would not have all the great art that comes those artists. Reptile hobbyists sometimes become private breeders because not only are they successful with keeping reptiles but they can use those skills to turn profit.

But then you have video game artists, storyboard artists, animation artists, musicians, and even writers. Are you trying to say that all forms of art should just be free and open to the public? You still pay for books and music, yes? People can also pay for art. Economies are changing, yes, and keep in mind that there are those people who do not want to take commissions directly but would rather make their own works and be paid for them like any other artist of other art forms. If someone made sculpture, would you ask for it for free if you did not commission it?

So please tell me if I am wrong in thinking that people should not be paid to make art?

Btw my awnser is below as i forgot to hit reply...

There's a difference between a paid profession and a pay wall.

Businesses hire artists to do art for them, and these are no different than commissions. Since they are buying it, they have the right to request that it is kept private or not posted freely by other parties. Nobody loses to this method because it is an entirely private process, commissioner and artist. But art that has been created freely, for whatever reason, and would (if Patreon didn't exist) normally be posted to public sites for all the artist's fan to enjoy, but is instead locked behind a wall that only a fraction of said following can afford to pay a monthly subscription to, is punishing all of those other people who have been following the artist and supporting them through favourites and comments and appreciation of their hard work and creativity.

Sexyfur, Clubstripes and Fur After Dark are legitimate paysites. They are established business models formed specifically for that purpose. An artist can apply to the site and form a contract with them to supply art for viewers to pay a subscription to view. Those who have set up the site have done so to sell a product, like any business they must buy that product and then sell it to the public. Once again, it is a commission process and it is up to each individual artist to choose whether or not such a business model is good for them or not.

But with Patreon, many artists have seen a way to set up "box kit pay sites" of their own. What was once a street full of happy people free to go in and out of houses (artist galleries) to enjoy the multitude of wonderful artwork, is now becoming a depressive view, a street packed of disappointed, long time followers locked out of their favourite houses, forced to watch as only a few who have the right keys (Patreon subscription) can freely wonder in and out of the boarded up structures to see what's inside.


Even the artists who supply art to the major paysites post art to public sites. Some only do SFW stuff, and some only do sketches. But this is how they have been doing their business for years, long before Patreon came along. It is their business, their career. They are paid to make art for those sites. And now that Patreon is here, half the artist community have seen a way to cash in, by ceasing virtually all postage of art to public sites and forcing people to pay to view their art. Now, you might think that it's not as bad as it sounds, what with many Patreons only cost 1-5 dollars a month. And it might not be if there was a very low number of artists doing this. But so many artists have flocked to Patreon, not just pay wallers but artists who are using it for its true, intended purpose, that one simply can't hope to be able to afford to enjoy all their favourite artists' work. After being generous with what little money one can afford, to support artists they legitimately wish to support and help with a monthly Patreon pledge, how can they be expected to pay a subscription to other artists just to be able to see that person's art? And on top of that there is the constantly fluctuating market that, if you're not living in America, can restrict how many Patreons you can pledge to even further due to exchange rates.

The sheer number of artists setting up their own personal pay wall with Patreon is staggering and only serving to stifle the art community. The rich get all the goodies and the average Joe gets left out in the cold, maybe with some scraps if they are lucky.

I am not disagreeing there are problems with the box kit paysites that you are describing, I am pretty much against those, but I do understand the need to make money if you don't want to take commissions directly. Like again youtubers for example still share their stuff while asking for help on patreon to keep ads on the pages down and can hopefully go sponsor free and have the community sponsor them instead.

Also understand many famous painters did a lot of art freely and still had to make money someone so art galleries would often pay the artist to host their work while the gallery made people pay for tickets, Patreon in some ways removes that middle man, and if done correctly could be made into similar model by showing previews here or doing smaller res version here or expanded images on patreon, etc. Actually museums though have the advantage of displaying installation art which you have to actually walk into experience where digital art you just kind of look at.

I can see both arguments for those that still want to do art, but not take direct commissions and sometimes you have to let the market run and see where it gets them. Again, I am totally against the straight paywall, as Fluff-Kevlar has a great model for it and I have not seen a true commission from him in how long now, and he still posts smaller versions of the art freely and at a later time, so he really rewards his patrons, but doesn't anything away from those that can't support, which is why I stuck with him for so long.

There are down sides to it as I am literally never home when he streams so I never get to participate in those, but oh well, chances of me even winning the wheel for the request is now slim to none as it is, so I don't really care.

And this is exactly the point. What Fluff Kevlar is doing is what Patreon was made for. The devs of Patreon stated this when it was first brought on the scene. It was made to be a donation system that allows people to support their favourite artist while allowing said artists the freedom that comes with not having to rely so heavily on taking commissions. Fluff gets to enjoy creating all the art he wants to make, and we, his loyal fans, get to enjoy that art. But some artist have taken that purpose and bastardised it into a paywall, almost flatly saying "well, I'm going to make my own art now but if you want to see it you're going to have to pay for it" and that is what the problem is.

Like I said, I see both sides of the argument, I like the perks that are given by FK, but I understand why some want to have almost total freedom over their work like a Youtuber might, who still release their works but then give extra perks, and in some cases it is not much. Like Kurzgesat - In a Nutshell, which I think you only get a personalized birdy thing.

I can see where someone like Alankar below is coming from, because technically nothing in the world is free, there are a lot of hidden costs. I don't think there is an objective right or wrong way, just that there are different approaches to it and some work better than others and some that people agree with and some that people don't.

Not even FK's is perfect, and there are some that I disagree with, such as some of the stuff offered to $25 tier patrons, though at the same time I could not think of anything better to offer. The problem comes in whether or not the artist is successful with their business model.

I didnt say you shouldnt get paid for art i meant to say that the material gain shouldnt be the driving factor behind art. Hence art is for the people. When an artist put their prices up so much that a vast majority of their followers can not justify the cost of commission. Then thats art for material gain. For instance sixthleafclover is my all time favorite artist but i can not justify (never can alot of people) 2000 pounds to have some chemicals slapped onto a canvas when i have other priorities to pay for like rent and geeding my pets!

sixthleafclover also works in the professional field on top of what she does for the furry community and I think she has rightfully earned the right to charge those prices, and last I checked it was not 2000 pounds but 1500 USD which is actually 1026.10 GBP. I think that is fairly reasonable considering her skill level, her position and status, the medium she is using, the speed at which it is produced. 14 days for a painting that you can mount on your wall is pretty damn fast.

There is a saying from my art teacher, things in life are usually only two of three of these things: Cheap, Fast, and Good. So if you want cheap and fast, it is not going to be good, think low end fast food. if you want good and fast it is not going to be cheap.

Yes we have a lot of things that we need to spend money on other than art, but that does not mean an artist is greedy for charging rates like that, do you know how much a single full set of oil paints costs that are of high quality make? A single tube of acrylic paint is about 5-10 dollars, oil paints are more expensive. Canvas also cost money and so does gesso and the stretcher boards and the staples. Traditional art cost A LOT of money when you are doing painting, take that into account to. I actually suggest you try pricing out just the material cost of one of her paintings and then tell me it is not worth the price.

Ive had this agrument before and i cba to repeat it.

So you just don't care that buying all the supplies to make a painting at her level could easily have costed well over what she charges for it in up front cost just for the supplies, not even the time it would take to make it.

That is truly sad and why the ubiquity and proliferation of digital art has destroyed traditional artists. Because people no longer understand the material cost of traditional media work.

Put simply, art is not a necessity. You don't NEED to buy art. Art is a luxury, and artists are skilled individuals who should be paid accordingly. Art should not be disposable, and artists shouldn't practice for 10-20 years only to charge minimum wage. If you believe that sixleafclover's talent is the equivalent of "some chemicals slapped onto a canvas" then you're not their market.

I have to agree 100% with the concept of this post, so I'm not gonna waste time writing a novel about my reasons for doing so. All I have to say is, "It's about time someone said something about what's going on over there". If I could reach through the screen, I'd gladly shake your hand.

I don't agree with this, Simply for the matter that other sites like sexyfur etc. CONTRACT the artist into doing art for the site which will then be hosted behind their paywall. That means they have to do x number of drawings in x amount of time. Using something like Patreon gives artist an option to still make revenue outside of commissions, while not being signed into a contract, allowing them to do it at their own pace. Most artists will release previews, censored or lower quality art publically. And if the viewer enjoys what they see, they have the option to donate via patreon either one time, or recurring. Gaining access to the artists more polished work. It gives the incentive for an artist to continue to release quality work as they're able to make some income, which contrary to popular belief. Is required to survive in this modern day and age. No income = no internet, food, or shelter.

So what if an artist hides behind a paywall offered as a free service? It's their choice how they want to release the art. You're not the one drawing it after all. And it's not like you're being forced to buy it. If you have an issue with wanting to see someones work but have to pay? Then don't bitch and complain. Either pay or deal with it. This just shows that self entitlement the majority of youth shows today. If you were the one making the art. You can do what you want with it. But you're not.

If it's that big a deal for you, wait for it to either be publically released or leaked. It always happens no matter what. But don't make a journal trying to sound like you have the moral high ground about something you have no business complaining about. You yourself stated you have no artistic ability and you slapped this together in paint. So why does someone who states they have no ability, have the right to complain about people they again have stated have said ability?

Grow the fuck up.

There have been issues with people coming in and disappearing quickly to steal any of the posted polished works, which has caused a lot of issues for artists, so many will now send out messages with a link to a file for the past month's works only, and you have to request previous works slowly, making this situation more nuanced.

I also think we are saying we are fine with artists sharing low res stuff and having a patreon to give perks like high res files, we are not arguing against that, we that the economy and market is not like old century art galleries where that is the only place you could see someone's art. I see both sides, but it is kind of bothersome when you enjoy an artist's works but they don't even post a low res version. Censored versions and previews in some cases are done in such a way that you no longer can even appreciate their works, and if you can't afford it, then that kind of sucks and sometimes it can back fire and disincentivize people from supporting them.

Making is essential, and people have good art, but how they distribute that art and make money on it is their choice, though I don't think one can reasonably expect that they will inherently succeed at it, that is why I stopped doing commissions and why I likely will never try Patreon is because I do not have enough followership to even make it as an artist. So I do it as a hobby now that I could make extra money at.

It is a very complex and nuanced situation and think both extreme ends are not the way to go.

And that mentality is perfect. You either use something or you don't. You're the artist so what you do is entirely up to you.

The ones who go through the issue where they hand out a link to a download, or whichever that has the patreon content. Is seen as secondary safety. It's so they can catch the people who do try to release their works which cuts into their profits. As many people who do use patreon use it as a means to suppliment income, or is their entire means of pay. So they have to go through hoops to try and find the specific individual who's leaking their content. which is then removed from their list.

Most artists who do this, will create 5 or 6 slight alterations to a single picture. and divide them evenly between patrons. This way they can compare the leaked art to who got one, and reduce the possible thieves by a fraction, and they then repeat until they have found the originator of the leaks.

Well Fluff-Kevlar already does alternate version and only posts a few publically, so he really tries to make Patreon worth it to the patrons, and I think he and any similar business model is pretty good, comics works a little differently if that is all you are doing, so it such a complex issue that it is finding the right economic balance because we no longer live in a an age where great painters are sponsored by wealthy individuals, and so I believe that people could share their art in an open free to use gallery, because regular galleries would normally pay an artist a set amount to show their work or give a percentage of admissions to their special gallery. I am not entirely sure how galleries these run in terms of the specifics. FA has not like a gallery that people have to pay to use and share their art, they still have employees and overhead, but they get that through ad revenue and artists paying for ad space, But also consider that a lot of museums these days have virtual galleries that you can access for free, so I think that is where a lot of people get a bit more uppity with Patreon being used a blanket paywall when artists stop even sharing stuff here. You don't have to share everything, but enough to have people be interested, but with virtual galleries, if you get to see enough and you see pictures of installations, it entices one to want to actually visit or support it in someone to help it keep displaying great art.

So, yeah, that got a little bit more long winded than necessary.

I am also not entirely surprised with those methods either.

Daily reminder that yiff.party is a thing.

Looks like it's not much of a thing anymore...

Yeah It's still a thing, you just need to access it differently.

And how would one go about doing that? :p