HOME | DD

parallellogic In reply to Fairy-Slayer [2013-10-15 06:55:48 +0000 UTC]

~actually had a management component to them

There's an entire "Earnings" section

www.deviantart.com/account/ear…

~I'm glad to see it's getting some positive attention

Yeah, me too.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

parallellogic In reply to bunnydesuuu [2013-10-15 06:55:54 +0000 UTC]

Thanks

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

namenotrequired In reply to ??? [2013-10-14 16:26:26 +0000 UTC]

I think this would be really good. Would definitely solve some problems.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Dreki-K In reply to ??? [2013-10-14 10:28:53 +0000 UTC]

Love your suggestions, I hope the staff considers them, really!

I especially agree with your second point, many people seem to ignore that you can actually convert points to cash... DA definitely didn't advertise this feature enough, and most users won't try to find that kind of information by themselves, so...yeah, it'd be awesome if they made that option more visible.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

VixenDra In reply to Dreki-K [2013-10-15 16:43:21 +0000 UTC]

Anctually, the main problem is the sickly high 20% fee for DA. Imagine selling a 300$ commission and a customer paying this+20%.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

parallellogic In reply to rosebuster [2013-10-14 06:15:41 +0000 UTC]

Thank you

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

HappyAggro In reply to ??? [2013-10-14 02:39:16 +0000 UTC]

Ah, so wait, just to be clear, commissioner pays in points but artist gets money through PayPal and that's how the current system works? Because if that's the case, then there is a lot of confusion on both dA and other sites about that, they seem to think that the current system means that if someone commissions you for points, you're only getting points. They definitely should be clearer on that, I had no clue about it until you posted about it. (I also didn't know you had to wait TWO WEEKS, seriously?)

This proposal sounds fairly solid, probably one of the most straightforward ones. So much confusion over all this, I hope that deviantART gets the hint, considering how important it is (or at the least how much people are blowing it out of proportion, your call), and I'm not usually the type to get involved in these sorta things unless they seem off the mark.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

parallellogic In reply to HappyAggro [2013-10-14 02:58:55 +0000 UTC]

~commissioner pays in points but artist gets money through PayPal

Yes

~someone commissions you for points, you're only getting points

This is one major headache I've run into multiple times.  I've gotten to the point where I have to tell artists "just trust me, you have literally nothing to lose" in order for them to set up the commission.  Only though my own insistence am I able to use dA's system, it's a huge uphill battle I have to fight over and over.  I'd rather just do commissions directly

~ then there is a lot of confusion 

Where does this confusion originate from?  What indicator implied the system worked differently?  I honestly want to know where this impression comes from.   It's hard for me to look at the current system with fresh eyes, so I can't really understand how most people see the existing system.

~I also didn't know you had to wait TWO WEEKS, seriously?

Yes.  Also, if you look closely, you'll also notice that deviantART takes a 20% cut of your money.  It costs $35 to buy 2800 points, but the artist receives only $28 of that.  The rest is eaten up by dA.  Compare that with the $33.70 the artist would receive if you gave them the same $35 directly through PayPal (as most artists already do for commissions).

~This proposal sounds fairly solid, probably one of the most straightforward ones.

Thank you, I appreciate that

~I hope that deviantART gets the hint

The staff have already acknowledged the idea, I'm actually quite hopefully something might come of this eventually.  They're working on the commission portal (to search for commissions), I would assume the commission system is still in development as a whole (the staff implement more suggestions while features are in development than after they're released, from my observations).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

HappyAggro In reply to parallellogic [2013-10-14 03:31:46 +0000 UTC]

~Yes
Oh WOW.

~I've gotten to the point where I have to tell artists "just trust me, you have literally nothing to lose" in order for them to set up the commission.  Only though my own insistence am I able to use dA's system, it's a huge uphill battle I have to fight over and over.  I'd rather just do commissions directly
Yeah, I can get it being a tremendous headache.

~ I honestly want to know where this impression comes from.   It's hard for me to look at the current system with fresh eyes, so I can't really understand how most people see the existing system.
My understanding of what users think (the announcement journal might give a greater indicator) is limited, as I haven't looked into that much. I don't think that deviantART has fully clarified how the system works this early on. While the commission guide does mention that sellers can get cash from the points that buyers give them, the stuff that's live now, as in, what most people will pay attention to is purely in points. As in, you'll see the commissions widget, and it'll list the points value, but you won't see a little indicator at the bottom that says the dollar amount. (I'll admit that I made my suggestion post on $wreckling 's journal without looking closer at the Commissions guide so my post definititely could have been more informed). The system isn't open to all users just yet but that really hasn't stopped people on other sites who probably gave the Commissions guide the same lack of attention that I did from commenting on it...

Ah yes, Tumblr, the glorious realm of misunderstanding and failure to Google! Main concentration is how it seems like dA is encouraging artists who don't know any better to undercharge and that freakin' 20% cut, but you notice that they seem to be falling under the whole "buyer pays in points, seller gets points not cash" trap? (Keep in mind, Tumblr has a bit of a hateboner for deviantART, so that does impact how people react to the site considerably. I hope some of them voiced their opinion on wreckling's journal otherwise it's not really gonna do them any good. DeviantART usually is best able to take feedback from their users (when they want to) if it's actually on, well, their site.)

~Also, if you look closely, you'll also notice that deviantART takes a 20% cut of your money.
I was aware of that yes, way too much to take out in my opinion.

~They're working on the commission portal (to search for commissions), I would assume the commission system is still in development as a whole (the staff implement more suggestions while features are in development than after they're released, from my observations).
That sums the approach up, I doubt something that was still in development would be available so limitedly. Also, the recent deviation page change was made with user feedback in mind after a partial rollout was attempted, so I'd expect something similar.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

parallellogic In reply to HappyAggro [2013-10-14 06:24:07 +0000 UTC]

~I don't think that deviantART has fully clarified how the system works this early on.

Do you think having commissions for sale on deviantART's front page will help alleviate this issue?

~The system isn't open to all users just yet

From my understanding, everyone has access to the Commission Widget right now (it's the last widget in the "Misc" section).  The only feature in "pre-beta" is the portal, which allows you to search for users who have the widget on their profile page.

~dA is encouraging artists who don't know any better to undercharge

I don't know how they can really 'encourage' or 'discourage' users when they let each user choose their own price.  This is an art site that panders specifically to artists and not really much else.  There is a glut of artists and a deficiency of commissioners.  Basic microeconomic theory will tell you that the result will be artists offering low prices to entice any and all commissioners to initiate a purchase.  If you want to see prices go up you need to increase the number of people who want art, which means getting those users on-site and making it easier to use the tools available.

I have to wonder if $spyed really understands the economic principles at play here.  His solution was for all artists to band together, form an oligopoly, and raise prices in unison.

spyed.deviantart.com/journal/N…

Also, the pricing scheme is likely based on existing user behavior rather than dA dictating what should and shouldn't be allowed.  If you plot the price break-points (with the lowest possible being 10, you get: 10, 30, 100, 250, 1000), then you see a pretty even logarithmic growth in prices.  That's pretty typical for user behavior (see my Data Mining Journals).  If anything, dA should probably think about putting in another break around 4,000 points - I could see "single/multiple characters" being below 4,000 points and "complex with background" being priced above 4,000 points.  The stuff in the 10-30 bracket is probably users testing the system and tossing out adopts.

~I doubt something that was still in development would be available so limitedly

I think they might do it that way to limit the feedback to a reasonable level.  With all beta testers using something, I could see where it could get a bit chaotic (17 thousand users all using a new feature, and finding problems/bugs, in unison).

~ the recent deviation page

I really wish they'd move the "Share" buttons below the "Remove" button.  I must say, the "Remove" button jumping around from one deviation to the next is quite annoying (since the share buttons are optional and not everyone lists them).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

HappyAggro In reply to parallellogic [2013-10-14 21:35:56 +0000 UTC]

~Do you think having commissions for sale on deviantART's front page will help alleviate this issue?
Not really, I think that having journals that serve as tutorials from staff/Community volunteers (like what's being done with Project Educate) might do more to help. Simply having commissions on the front page is more advertisement than anything. While the Commissions guide is a good start, it doesn't have the reach that an actual deviation would.

~The only feature in "pre-beta" is the portal, which allows you to search for users who have the widget on their profile page.
Yeah, that's what I meant.

~I don't know how they can really 'encourage' or 'discourage' users when they let each user choose their own price
Yet again, Tumblr has a deviantART hateboner, hahaha. But just because they let users choose their own price doesn't mean that DeviantART can't influence how prices are set by way of further education and clarification on A) the points to cash ratio and B) the further emphasis that, no, points are not "funny money" (examples: buyers pay points, commissioners get cash, Madefire motion comics, premium stock and artist's process docs, like .PSDs, premium memberships and super groups, prints, etc. I think it might also tie into the "Welp, I'm not paying for anything REAL, so what's the point?" stigma that you also see when it comes to people in MMOs paying money for special in-game currency to pay for special items such as mounts. Not much that can be done about that, some people just don't really "get" that they're not really paying for the items/files as much as they are the time investment and work put into them). This other popular Tumblr post mentions prices set by artists on sites like Tumblr and dA compared to prices from those in the industry and is more targeted towards those people who commission and think that prices are unfair (see: Tumblr is not a dedicated art site like deviantART, so there's more of a chance for non-artist buyers to show up and those types are way more likely to misunderstanding art's actual value.)

What Tumblr mentions isn't really a deviantART thing as much as it is a common internet artist thing: Buyers don't think it's fair to pay, say $20 for a piece of art because it's just "some image on the internet" when they're really paying for the time the artist spent on it and their subjective skill at it. Sellers set their prices low because they think that it's the only way to get business or have such crippling self-esteem issues that they undercharge severely (not to be confused with people who genuinely don't think their art is worth higher prices with no self-esteem issues  attached)  If you're entirely aware of the benefits, drawbacks, and potential impact on other artists that underpricing your work can do but do it anyways, then that was an educated decision and that's alright. But if we're dealing with, more generally deviantART, and you got artists thinking that it's unfair/greedy for other artists to be charging an amount that isn't chump change, then I do think that more could be done when it comes to educating artists that if they're going to be undercharging for the sake of attention, they need to keep the impact they have in mind. If artists can influence other artists when it comes to setting prices, dA can too. Is it the responsiblity of one of the largest art communities online to do so? Probably not. It'd be nice though, they got a lot of pull.

You probably have way more expertise in the economics end that I do, I guess I'm thinking about it more socially. (Your Data Mining series did end up bringing up a good point, younger dA users are way less likely to be able to be able to get a Paypal so they can't really convert their points into cash, which means that their points commissions WOULD be for points which would make their options of what to buy with them limited to what deviantART currently offers. ...which sorta makes the current system unfair to them. You wondered if $spyed understood the economic principles in play with the commissions platform (he strikes me as more of an IDEA guy, and while I support the general idea, it's gonna need some more finetuning before it becomes remotely comparable in quality to the common Paypal system used), I wonder if he and the rest of the crew kept in mind how age impacts how the commissions platform is used? I'd definitely like for younger users to learn better art pricing skills, even if they can probably only get points at this stage, it'd be a good skill to learn before they get into the matter of money commissions. (I have seen people pre-Commission portal charging double digits in points for art that wasn't adopts. I should know because I was one of those people. X__X )

(I do think that you're overexaggerating in terms of saying that $spyed was saying that artists should form an oligopoly and raise all their prices in unison, he was merely saying something that plenty of artists on deviantART, Tumblr and other sites have been saying, prices are often too low in comparison to the actual amount of effort and skill put into them and that's, well, not really a good thing. If people were doing that from an educated perspective, well, it'd probably still not be a good thing but at least it was coming from an informed place, but most people AREN'T. I could claim that you're saying that it's okay for people to undercharge severely without any real understanding about how it'll impact others beyond "If I charge less, people will be more likely to buy it!" because ECONOMICS, but that's an overexaggeration.

~I really wish they'd move the "Share" buttons below the "Remove" button.
I do think that having the Share buttons waaaay on top (regardless of their option) is a good choice, if only because means that if people want to repost on other sites, they have the accessible means right there and if they don't use it, it shows they couldn't be assed to use the buttons (or if the buttons weren't there, that they don't respect the users wishes...though perhaps instead of just removing the Sharing buttons when people have requested that it not be shared outside dA but still accessible through dA, they could just put up a message like "This deviant requests that this artwork not be shared outside of deviantART" or something. People do that in deviation descriptions but having it UPFRONT, perhaps bolded could get into the heads of all but the densest people)

Also, turns out you're the person who wrote the "Remove More Like This" script, so as a user, I thank you for that! I have no clue if the algorithm for that has improved yet.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

parallellogic In reply to HappyAggro [2013-10-15 08:11:43 +0000 UTC]

~so there's more of a chance for non-artist buyers to show up and those types are way more likely to misunderstanding art's actual value

Hmm, interesting

~DeviantART can't influence how prices are set by way of further education

When you submit a new deviation, there are preview images for what each category accepts.  Perhaps dA needs "pricing examples" to see how much to charge for certain qualities of art.  For example, when you add a new commission offer and input the price, dA should list some top selling art from that price bracket, and then you, as the artist, can choose to move your price up/down to match the quality of what everyone else is selling.

~mentions prices set by artists

Well, I'm no artist, but I think there's some realistic reasons the prices are lower for "fandom" works than professional illustrators.  I can think of only one user who actually tracks their online commissions for taxing purposes, so they're the only one I know treating it as a meaningful income.  With online commissions, there is a much larger risk of not completing the commission: I've had numerous users simply never return notes if they aren't interest in my commission offer; I've had a couple instances where artists have gotten busy with real life and put my commission on hold.  This is rather unprofessional conduct, but online it's more expected since, for most people, online works are a secondary (and voluntary) income.  To me, the final artwork may be of a similar caliber to professional artwork, but the service quality is considerably lower, and that risk gets factored into the price.  Also consider the fact that professional illustrations ultimately make someone money (a game manufacturer sells CDs, illustrations help an author sell books, etc), so there's a functional utility to the art, whereas online, the usage is much more limited if the artist is completing commissions exclusively for one user at a time.

That said, I'm not "whining about the current 'fandom' prices" as mentioned in the Tumblr article.  From what I've seen, the prices on dA are rather reasonable, and that's a contributing reason to why I've gotten involved with commissioning artists in the first place.

~$20 for a piece of art because it's just "some image on the internet"

I haven't really seen this behavior, so I can't really comment on it deeply.  My guess is that there is some demotivitional factor in missed sales because an artist perceives their prices to be too high.

~You probably have way more expertise in the economics end that I do

I've had several classes on various aspects of finance and have run a few small projects involving the subject.  I'm better versed in the theory than the application

~younger dA users areway less likely

And they also have more free time on their hands.  Online currency is hard to come by for them, but as unskilled workers, they're willing to work longer hours to make up the difference to squeeze out whatever currency they can.  I think I've mentioned in those Data Mining journals somewhere that this ultimately gives rise to a cheap exploitable workforce.

~it's gonna need some more finetuning before it becomes remotely comparable in quality to the common Paypal system used

My guess is that dA is building outward rather than upward.  It's more about offering a plethora of services (that low-and-behold can be bought with points) than about having every service be the best in the industry.  You already see that with the "Motion book" platform, and you'll probably see a lot more services released over the coming years that run on points.  If you give users a lot of places to spend points, they'll ultimately start pouring money into the site.  When you get users in the habit of putting money into the site, you get a new, steady income for the site to run on.  My guess is is that the site is still pretty far below the critical threshold of a sustainable economy running on points.

~I do think that you're overexaggerating ... oligopoly

Yeah

~effort and skill put into them

Eh, and risk and professionalism.  I think there could be more work to improve artist etiquette which might improve sales.

I think once you start talking about "overcharging" or "undercharging" you really need to define these terms.  Some use minimum wage as a baseline, though I'm not convinced that's the proper metaphor to use.

~Share buttons waaaay on top (regardless of their option) is a good choice

Nay I say.  We should be able to skim through the art in our message centers by repeatedly hitting the "Remove" button (without moving the mouse).  But the "Remove" button keeps moving up and down based on whether or not each user has enabled the "Share" options.

Hmm, maybe I should just make a script to remove the "Share" buttons everywhere, I suppose that would fix the issue.

~ if only because means that if people want to repost on other sites

C'mon, they'd still share art if the buttons were one position lower (like 50 pixels lower)

~turns out you're the person who wrote the "Remove More Like This" script

Aye

~I have no clue if the algorithm for that has improved yet.

I think users have gotten accustomed to seeing it, so there are fewer complaints.  I use my own script, so I can't comment on whether or not the algorithm has improved.  Personally, I preferred the discontinued "Discover" feature which was pretty similar to the Recommended Friends script I made a while ago parallellogic.deviantart.com/a…

~ I thank you for that!

Welcome

👍: 0 ⏩: 0