I Don't Work for Free.

[EricKei]

I don't think I could live with myself if I managed to easel an artist out of their fair pay for a piece of artwork.

Art pun, or teensy typo? You decide.

I must agree, tho. I find it un-palette-able when i encounter people who go out of their way to NOT pay others for their work.

[wolfie]

A bit O/T, but how would a situation like this be handled (my time frame is several years in the future - would be after I replace the Peterbilt of Natural Selection).

Someone wants an image that needs to be printed on a particular piece of equipment (i.e. the vinyl printer for truck graphics). They find out what kinds of file it will accept, and the artist's software will produce the same type of file, but Murphy LOVES to find incompatibilities. Since the commissioned art would be useless if that particular equipment won't print it, the customer wants to do a compatibility test first. For the compatibility test, ANYTHING in the same file type, with the same resolution, would be suitable - an existing drawing, or snap a picture of the neighbour's dog and do a "save as" in the appropriate file type, then watermark the hell out of it.

Would it be OK to have as a first step a nominal fee (to cover the time) to get a 6"x6" 300 DPI image that includes a face (watermarks OK, as is re-using a piece cut out of an existing image - wanting to see if graphics company's printer can handle the "target" resolution of the file type saved by the artist's software)? Once the compatibility test passes, that's the time to negotiate for the actual image. After all, if the customer can't use the commissioned image for its intended purpose, it's useless to them, so there's no point in having it done.

[wolfie]

My response below:
[I]"Here is a visual image of my commissions price chart guide. https://www.furaffinity.net/view/8916873/

I followed that link, and have a suggestion for a change to the guide: I could recognize that you had written descriptions as to why each category of image was priced the way it was, but due to the image size and the font (black background, black text with a white outline), the text was unreadable. I tried right-clicking and "view image" in case it was being shown at a reduced size, but no joy.

Since the image was approximately half the width of my screen (I run 1024x768), it looks like there's room to make it larger, so the descriptions would be readable. If not, could you have 2 versions of the image - the original, and a larger one (with note on the page "click to see larger version") where the descriptions are readable?

[TheTigress]

A bit O/T, but how would a situation like this be handled (my time frame is several years in the future - would be after I replace the Peterbilt of Natural Selection).

Someone wants an image that needs to be printed on a particular piece of equipment (i.e. the vinyl printer for truck graphics). They find out what kinds of file it will accept, and the artist's software will produce the same type of file, but Murphy LOVES to find incompatibilities. Since the commissioned art would be useless if that particular equipment won't print it, the customer wants to do a compatibility test first. For the compatibility test, ANYTHING in the same file type, with the same resolution, would be suitable - an existing drawing, or snap a picture of the neighbour's dog and do a "save as" in the appropriate file type, then watermark the hell out of it.

Would it be OK to have as a first step a nominal fee (to cover the time) to get a 6"x6" 300 DPI image that includes a face (watermarks OK, as is re-using a piece cut out of an existing image - wanting to see if graphics company's printer can handle the "target" resolution of the file type saved by the artist's software)? Once the compatibility test passes, that's the time to negotiate for the actual image. After all, if the customer can't use the commissioned image for its intended purpose, it's useless to them, so there's no point in having it done.

That would be perfectly fine because it makes sense that you would want to know that it will work before getting a full commission.

I followed that link, and have a suggestion for a change to the guide: I could recognize that you had written descriptions as to why each category of image was priced the way it was, but due to the image size and the font (black background, black text with a white outline), the text was unreadable. I tried right-clicking and "view image" in case it was being shown at a reduced size, but no joy.

Since the image was approximately half the width of my screen (I run 1024x768), it looks like there's room to make it larger, so the descriptions would be readable. If not, could you have 2 versions of the image - the original, and a larger one (with note on the page "click to see larger version") where the descriptions are readable?

The full size image should be 1280x1280. I think you need to hit "full view" under the image or left click on the image for the full view to automatically show. Let me know if that fixes the image size issue.

[Zellie Crescent]

From what I saw on the price guide your stuff is absolutely awesome, they cost a pretty penny but it'd be worth it.

[wolfie]

The full size image should be 1280x1280. I think you need to hit "full view" under the image or left click on the image for the full view to automatically show. Let me know if that fixes the image size issue.

Mea culpa. I'm used to links that say "click for larger image", or large images auto-shrunk to fit (i.e. right click, "view image", then click when the cursor turns into a magnifying glass), not "full view". Took several reloads to get the whole image (I blame my VERY old browser under Win 98 SE and my dialup connection - always have trouble with https), but the text is legible.

[ADeMartino]

Tigress, I just looked at a few of your artwork pieces - and I was immediately furious.

I cannot believe someone had the nerve to try to sucker-bid you like that. Your work is absolutely amazing. The detail is exquisite - I can clearly see the amount of work that goes into your art. They were freaking INSANE to quibble, and frankly, it would be a bargain at twice the price.

[workerbee222]

People who aren't mechanics have no issues paying a trained mechanic to work on their car.

People who aren't electricians have no issues paying a trained electrician to work on their house wiring.

People who aren't computer literate have no issues paying a trained computer literate to fix their PC.




So, why do people who aren't artists react so aggressively cheap when forced to hire a trained artist and pay them?

A very funny ad made "Best of Craig's List" in which an artist requested the work of a carpenter, electrician, and a couple other professionals, and stated he couldn't pay them, but would be glad to refer his friends, relatives, acquaintances to them for paying jobs. He'd give them good references, so even if they didn't make money working for him, the referrals would more than make up for it.

Right. If fact, a carpenter friend of mine is sometimes asked to repair houses, free, because the house is for sale, the current owner doesn't want to put money into it, and the rationale is that the new owners will give him paying jobs when they see how great his work is.

[Jetfire]

Mea culpa. I'm used to links that say "click for larger image", or large images auto-shrunk to fit (i.e. right click, "view image", then click when the cursor turns into a magnifying glass), not "full view". Took several reloads to get the whole image (I blame my VERY old browser under Win 98 SE and my dialup connection - always have trouble with https), but the text is legible.

For what it's worth, it's probably not just your browser. I use Chrome on an Ubuntu Linux box (and on a Win7 box) and the Full View links on FA can take their sweet time loading up; usually with no indicator that anything is happening. I don't mind taking awhile, but I do wish it had a better indicator.

And Tigress, very nice work there. I've got a dragon character I'm tempted to have drawn sometime, though I'm not sure when/if I'll ever do it. But if I do, I'll try to keep you in mind to have it done with.

[suburbandecay]

Someone wants an image that needs to be printed on a particular piece of equipment (i.e. the vinyl printer for truck graphics). They find out what kinds of file it will accept, and the artist's software will produce the same type of file, but Murphy LOVES to find incompatibilities. Since the commissioned art would be useless if that particular equipment won't print it, the customer wants to do a compatibility test first. For the compatibility test, ANYTHING in the same file type, with the same resolution, would be suitable - an existing drawing, or snap a picture of the neighbour's dog and do a "save as" in the appropriate file type, then watermark the hell out of it.

I work in a prepress shop, and we have a couple of files here specifically for profiling an output device (fingerprint test, generally on printing presses). The one we use is a combination of images with a variety of colors, flesh tones, and gradations. It's something that can be tossed together in any art program and can potentially be useful to the artist so you know how colors are going to look for the finished product.

[AmethystSquirrel]

It's so much fun to explain to them that I've won statewide awards and met famous people in quilting circles and that I would be happy to take that amount as a down payment now.

May I steal that line for my jewelry?

People I sold to when I was a little teeny nothing think everything is the same place. When I tell them I was picked up as an artist my my county and do art shows with my jewelry, they are impressed, but think I should sell it even cheaper

[Kanalah]

Sure, go ahead.