HOME | DD
RobynRose — DA's Commission System and Minimum Wage
Published: 2013-04-11 23:38:27 +0000 UTC; Views: 33894; Favourites: 188; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
body div#devskin0 hr { }
DA has recently announced a new portal for users to search through those offering commissions to find artists they want to support .
The commissions system will be handled using DA's internal currency system of points, of which DA takes a royalty from.
Commissions are allowed to start at 10 points each for any type of art produced, from rough sketches and small icons to full digital works. Commissions is a great way for artists to offer their services, but are we creating a low-wage market where over-abundance of supply and lack of unification undercuts everyone?
That is to say, how can we guarantee that artists get paid fairly for their work?
- 10 points is roughly 13 cents. 1000 points may seem like a large commission, but it's really only $10.
- Right now DA takes a 20% cut of point commissions.
- DA's commission system also has a $50 cap set on it. Many professional artists charge much more for full, detailed art and simply won't use the system for professional work.
For more information on industry standard pricing and salaries, see the jornal below. Beside it is a USD to points calculator.
:thumb214227933:
For an hour's worth of work, 10 pts / 13 cents is a pitiful wage, yet many young, inexperienced artists are willing to offer their work for such low costs. Worse, they're afraid of seeming greedy if they charge too much, and will undercut an artist that values their work at or above minimum wage.
We also have the problem of hobby and amateur* artists competing with professional artists** who want to create for a living. Amateurs don't care about wage and do it for fun, or don't feel like their art is worth much, and so offer a much lower price for their work.
Should DA work to ensure that artists who are providing real-money commissions work for at least minimum wage?
Should there be a set minimum price for certain complicated works like full-body drawings and animated art?
Also, what about commercial use and licensing? What are these commissions for and how will they be used?
I've had a lot of shady and questionable offers for my work, some of which I have been scammed into doing. I regret those decisions, but they have helped to make me less naive about the world of buying and selling intellectual property. Other artists will inevitbly experience the same thing at some point in their careers, but I feel as though older and more experienced artists have a responsibility to encourage new artists to value their work at a livable price, whether they feel like it is worth that or not.
In such a low-wage environment, how can we ensure that new, young, inexperienced artists are not being ripped off and abused by those who want free or cheap art and may even try to profit off of an artist's work?
My suggestions so far:
*In this case I define an amateur artist as someone
- Who draws as a hobby or simply for enjoyment
- May not have schooling or training in art
- Does not earn living income off of their art (they may take in money with a "jobby" but it's not the sole income)
- May not be able to guarantee quality or deadlines
- May be young, still in school or in a career that has nothing to do with art as their main job
- Does not consider themselves and their work professional
**A professional artist would be
- Someone who is trying to make most or all of their living income from their art
- Someone who charges industry standard price for their art
- Someone who usually has some form of training / schooling or a skill level that is the equivalent
- Someone who can guarantee quality and deadlines
- Someone who considers themselves and their work professional
Related content
Comments: 356
As you said, the system does appeal to the young / students / hobbyists. There is also the question of an entire generation of artists being raised to think that such low prices and high fees are appropriate for their work, which is not the case. Some people do wise up and start valuing their art, but many are bullied down and become disheartened.
I've seen the same non-argument multiple times in the contest.
"You can't force artists to charge that much, they should be free to charge as little as they want."
"Thank god I never became an artist, you can never make any money with it! I would starve!"
Hello, that problem would be solved if you just charged more for your art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Edit: that should say "comments" not "contest"
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Ha, true.. I suppose art is harder to sell to other artists, especially when you're an amateur, so since they're not paying bills they don't care. Which is totally their right of course, they're not really who I'm competing with. But with the huge audience of DA comes a lot of price competition at all levels. Some of the recent contests definitely have the plague problem of companies thinking, "here's an art site with thousands of users, we can offer next to nothing and someone will jump on it." And they're right.
The 20% fee thing still blows my goddamn mind. I'm sure DA is looking for extra revenue streams outside of their shop (and they seem to be pushing premium pretty hard lately) but trying to justify a 20% cut on all transactions by saying they're trying to make money back from 'allll the development' going into a new widget? They're shooting themselves in the collective foot, because with a fee that high few people are going to want to use it, thus making back none of the truckloads of money that allegedly went into developing it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Art is only worth what people will pay for it.
Even if there is some standard set to commissioning, I feel like artists themselves need to be held more accountable if they expect to get paid like a real job. I've had my share of great artists that handled commissioning responsibly and then there are those other artists, that say they have a short "queue" and still end up taking months upon months to finish a simply shaded picture.
They should have a commissioner's rating system attached to the artist's profile so we can read other commissioner's experience before commissioning something. At the end of the say, Art is a product, and I like to know that I didn't pay 20 bucks to wait forever on an artist that does not take it seriously.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Art is only worth what people will pay for it. "
I disagree here. I believe that art is only worth what people are willing to charge for it.
If you charge 13 cents for a drawing, your drawing is worth 13 cents. If you charge $35, it's worth $35, no matter if someone is willing to pay that price or not. If they can't afford your art, that's their problem, not yours.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's a valid point, but as I see it, it's ultimately up to the buyer, not the seller. Art isn't monopolized or regulated, a truly capitalist system.
At the end of the day, if I can't afford your art, I'll find somebody's that's cheaper and unless you are exceptional or present yourself as a better alternative, I will always go to the lowest bidder unless I have a relationship with the artist charging more.
I assure you that the existence of this journal is enough to illustrate that people will approach this the same way I do.
But I said that statement mainly in reference to artistic professionalism. I agree that artists cut themselves short often. But at the same time; having great art skills is great and all, but reading commission pages of artists often turn me off because they contain gaps in the process. I'll be willing to pay 10 dollars more for the same art if I know the artist is competent and serious. They honestly need a standardized template for commission pages because I will encounter an artist and think "This looks really nice!" Then I read their commission page and it ends up turning me off from the artist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I haven't made any money on my art yet and I'm trying to make a living from it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"We also have the problem of hobby and amateur artists competing with professional artists who want to create for a living. Amateurs don't care about wage and do it for fun, or don't feel like their art is worth much, and so offer a much lower price for their work."
I'm not a fan of it, but we live in a capitalist society. If "hobby and amateur artists"(as you call them) do a job as good as or better than a "professional artist", it's their choice to take whatever money they want for it. If all the talent a "professional artist" has cannot compete with a "hobby or amateur artist", then sure as hell the "professional" isn't doing a good job.
I just happen to have a big problem with the way you categorise this:
First of all, the way I understand it, the difference between amateur and professional work is that the latter is paid for. Thus, by definition if any of your so-called amateur or hobby artists takes money for her_his job, she_he is by definition a professional artist.
Secondly, although I'm not a fan of the way capitalism is shaping our society, one thing is certain: For many of us the times of "one job a lifetime" is over. People work several jobs in succession as well as at the same time. If "hobby and amateur artists" can compete with "professional artists" in art, then the latter group has to learn to compete with other professions. Say, if that hobby artist was a salesperson drawing in her_his free time, the professional artist could consider working as a salesperson too.
Making art your profession is the dream of many and it's a tough market. Unless you're the one in a million, you'll earn little money and likely have to rely on other side jobs, that's just how it goes. I respect everyone who chooses to work in such a field but you should have known what you're getting yourself into.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"First of all, the way I understand it, the difference between amateur and professional work is that the latter is paid for. Thus, by definition if any of your so-called amateur or hobby artists takes money for her_his job, she_he is by definition a professional artist."
No. Look below.
I define a professional as someone whose main source of income is their art. The thing that puts food on their table is their art.
An amateur MAy get paid for their art, but they do not NEED the money as a regular source of income the way a professional does. Therefore, they can afford to charge well below minimum wage because they are not living off of their art.
They may still be living with their parents, or may simply work at a job that has nothing to do with art. Eitehr way, they do not feed themselves and put a roof over their head from art.
This is the core difference between hobbyists and professionals. The professionals don't have the kind of "gaining experience and putting myself out there" leeway that teens living under their parents and not paying bills do. This is where the problem of undercutting lies, because not everyone has generous parents willign to subsidize your living so you can make art for 13 cents.
Which, when you consider it, is what you're doing. If you're in your bedroom for four hours making a beautiful illustration and only charge 13 cents for it, who is paying for the gas, electric food and water? Mom and dad's job. professionals don't have this luxury and must charge an amount that compensates them for their time, materials and living expenses.
P.S.
"Making art your profession is the dream of many and it's a tough market. Unless you're the one in a million, you'll earn little money and likely have to rely on other side jobs, that's just how it goes."
You just outlined your own problem. You would make more money (and a livable wage) if you charged more for your art.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't charge a buck for my art and that is not a problem, as you put it, but a choice.
I just simply disagree with the way you see this. Nobody has to make up for some person who decided that art is all(I don't mean to make it sound like art has no value whatsoever) that person is doing to make a living. It was a conscious choice they made. Since you're so keen on examples, here's mine:
Apart from that allegedly irresponsible teenager who undercuts the pay of "professional artists", there may be people who work a proper hard job every single day, but still manage to produce art in their pastime. They're happy to give it away for nearly nothing, because they're good that way. But then there's people who do JUST that. They don't work a hard job to make a living. All they do is what other people do in their pastime. They spend their entire time with what is merely a hobby to others. But hell, they should get more money for the hard work they do. Hell, no. If they did a good job, they'd get good money for it, that's how I see it. If they don't, their art is shit or they only have shitty clients. Good work has its value. This is obviously a way exaggerated example, but so is yours. Photographers, painters, writers, the vast majority of them do a shitty side job so they can spend the rest of their lives doing what they love. It's a choice.
Also, I applaud you for judging me on absolutely no basis:
"This is where the problem of undercutting lies, because not everyone has generous parents willign to subsidize your living so you can make art for 13 cents.
Which, when you consider it, is what you're doing."
I do what exactly? I earn my own money at a proper job. I make art in my pastime if that's what you want to call it. I give it away for free. I don't owe a thing to those so-called "professionals".
Suit yourself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for writing this! It's definitely a concern that we've been watching. I agree that many artists are undercutting themselves. I also encourage people to consider paying an artist extra after they complete the Commission and are happy with the final result.
However, I will point out that I've spoke with a few artists about their price being so low, and a few mentioned that they set it so low because they want to create new works and fill up their gallery, and are just adding a price tag for "a bit of extra cash". Some artists seem to use it as motivation to create, and enjoy being put in a direction to create works. One artist even mentioned that if they charge to much, it's not as fun to them, and starts to feel more stressful.
There are some changes we can make to the feature encourage artists not to undercut themselves, however, I do think we should allow artists to have the flexibility of setting the price they want. We've been monitoring how people are using Commissions and the prices that they are charging.
With the Commissions portal that we are currently testing, it'll be interesting to see if this impacts prices. Until now, the only way you see Commissions is if you come across them on someone's profile, but with this new portal, it could change how people think about pricing their Commissions, since they can clearly compare their prices with others'.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do believe that buyers should pay more if they can. I buy a lot of point commissions and the artists are amazed when I double or triple the payment because they are charging so low. it's a nice sentiment and should be done if you can.
And sorry to get on a soapbox here. I believe the commission portal is a great thing and I am glad that dA is leaning towards keeping it as open as possible. Thank you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Thank you! Someone who understands~
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The issue I see with lowering prices is the time it takes to create an art piece. Regardless of how much money they're paid in one sitting for work to be delivered, that does not account for the work they have to put into it. 20 hours compared to 40 hours is a big difference and that 200/week is certainly not enough to 'pay the bills'. So yes, it's fair for her to charge higher.
If people want to undercharge because they want to and can afford it then it's their own prerogative, but no artist should be asked to lower their legitimate prices because some people make a comment that others are charging too low.
Another point, 'buyers paying more if they can' sounds like artists should rely on tips for their income, instead of having steady prices that reflect how much time/work is put into their service.
Again I'm all for artists charging however low they want to IF they want, but they should not be made to under price themselves.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I never said it was unfair for her to charge higher. But by saying they *can't* charge less doesn't help. I have artists that say, "I can't charge less than this" and will walk away from a job that pays less. I think this is fair. However, to cut-down someone who will take that lower price, because they choose to for whatever reason, shouldn't be vilified.
As for the "buyers paying more if they can" wasn't meant to be across the board. I have seen people open emergency commissions at a reduced price to raise money quick for an expense. Certainly that is the type of time that would warrant someone kicking in a few dollars extra to help.
My point is that no one should be made to raise OR lower their prices. They should be educated on their worth of their time and then make the decision to price accordingly, based on their own circumstances. And I don't think anyone would bully them one way or the other.
That said, I buy commissions, as well as offer commissions myself, and I can see this from both sides.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The way I perceived the original journal's message was that artists are charging pennies for their work, and may or may not know the ratio or value of how much they are receiving for their work.
The idea of 'tipping' as such for emergency commissions and types of similar sales makes sense to me when put in that light, but I still don't believe artists should charge less and work extra hard to get a tip or extra pay.
I do not attempt to state that either way is bad per se - again if someone wants to charge less for varying reasons then they should charge what they wish. But this still effects supply & demand regarding art, and if the general public (for lack of better term) believes that art should be so undervalued in a broad sense, and that's what's concerning.
No artist should have to charge less than what their art is really worth, especially if it's their job. Since it takes work and time and plenty of effort (I'm not assuming you don't know this, just to clarify), like many jobs/careers do, it should warrant an income equal or greater to minimum wage. If an artist receives less commissions because they charge appropriately, that heavily implies they need to charge less, which cuts into money for bills and the like. Again, that's where the concern is.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes. Believe me, I understand supply & demand. But, as others have argued, you can't simply say, "if you raise your prices to $35 people will pay or else." That's just not true. I have bought $5 commissions and I have bought $200 commissions. If I have $5 expendable income one month, that's it. Saying, "tough" is fine. I can live without the art. But if someone says, "hey, I'll take that $5 because it's better than nothing" that is a business decision they make. Just like stores marking-down to clear out a product.
I truly believe artists should make a fair wage. But a lot of people make this a black and white issue. If artists charge more, people will pay more, rainbows and flowers will bloom. That simply won't happen--not unless we suddenly fix the economy and the consumer is in a position to pay on that level consistently.
Yeah, perhaps I'm playing devil's advocate, but my father ran a retail business for 40 years. His competitors used to hate him when he first started out because he charged less, and there were many of these same arguments waged against him. His competitors had to lower to compete. Ironically, when his business closed, he was muscled out by big-boys like Walmart that undercut him. It's simply capitalism. No, it's not right, and it sucks when people need to eat. As a working mom whose husband is out of work, I can appreciate that.
Anyhow, on a personal level, the small commissions I take in help give me extra spending money. I don't want someone saying I can't charge those prices because I'm taking the food out of someone else's mouth. I highly doubt anyone who passed my $3 icons by will suddenly find the $15 to get one from someone else. They simply won't buy, and that benefits no one.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know competitive position as well, I sell animal costumes and I don't yet have a vast portfolio of that specific type of work so I've been taking very discounted commissions to practice & build my portfolio. Whatever I have at the end of the day after work is done and all materials are paid for is my only income. It's not minimum wage, and I don't mean to complain about that because I understand I have to work to build my name and experience to charge the prices I someday hope to charge.
Much of what you mentioned does fall under the idea of supply & demand. Whether or not prices are changed doesn't automatically guarantee consistent income, especially since the product we're speaking of is very much a luxury item.
I'm receiving the impression we really agree for the most part on the points we've commented on. Again, I do not mean to imply that I believe someone has to charge X amount compared to someone else who's charging XX. Again, whatever someone wants to charge is up to them.
Whatever complaints I do make are the effects of people taking less expensive commissions for granted, and expecting other people to lower their prices because it's not the same/affordable as someone else. The reason I bring this up is because it seems from the outside like deviantART is somewhat/partially encouraging this, or at the very least throwing the 20% 'fee' and the $50 limit complications in. Because of both of these, that makes the widget completely useless to me. Many of the pricing complaints, I'm guessing, are from the necessity to make up for the extra 20% loss in order to retain the same level of income. Artists might as well take commissions the 'old fashioned way' via Paypal invoices when it's just as easy or easier to simply note the artist explaining what they wish for their piece rather than clicking a bunch of buttons, and then explaining what they want.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think we agree too. And what you are saying about building your skill level is very valid. I have seen many artists who are starting out charge less to build their clientele. As they get better, they raise their prices. Because their skill level and quality is higher, they can get that higher asking price.
Well, you have to understand that dA also has a commercial commission site that is apart from this site. It's connected, but is a separate entity. As it is their business, they encourage higher-priced and "professional" commissioners to use that service. That site offers more features to the commission process. I've never used it, so I can't comment. But I would gather they expect the $50 and up crowd to migrate there.
Supply and demand. Yes. I have to admit, I live a lot on low-priced commissions. But what I find is that many of the artists I use are grateful for the work. I'm always surprise how many I end up being their first customer, ever. Because they are new and not established, and even at their cut-rate prices, they don't have the clientele. I often promote these artists, and have been told that my promotion has turned around their business for some. So, I guess I have a bit of a "fight for the little guy" in me on this issue. I'm actually happy when the artists I use raise their prices (even if it means I have to pay more) because I see they are moving in the right direction.
Again, my complaint is not that this initiative is going on, but that many make it cut and dry. It's complex.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's what I was meaning to imply, it's complex. The widget on the surface seems to make it even more so. For those who charge for a low amount of points, like students and such (this was mentioned or discussed in earlier comments on this journal, and I'm not doing that point justice), I can see how it's useful, but in my situation not so much. I understand deviantART is a corporation that requires an income etc etc, but it feels like everything is starting to have a price tag, which is annoying at the very least.
I've actually never heard of the commercial commission site, or if I have, it wasn't called that per se. If it allows artists with higher prices to charge what they feel they should then that's great. Though I am still curious about it.
I'm happy to hear your support for the 'little guy', even more so since I fall under that category for a specific clientele. It's good to know there are folks out there helping out, making things less black & white.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's called DreamUp and it actually will allow any pricing, but it tailored for high-end. Here's an article on it ---> [link]
Well, having been a little guy myself, I know how important it is for the support of someone more well known on the site. I have to admit, there have been a few times artists I've helped have priced out of my range. That's bittersweet. But, in the end, it's a good thing for them, so I don't complain. Though, thankfully some of them still cut me a break every now and then.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ohh that sounds really interesting, but it's not for the kind of art I do unfortunately, not that I consider myself high-end.
That's good to hear. x3
Thank you for discussing this issue with me!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Can you convert Deviant Points into money on a debut card or credit card?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Points can be redeemed through a mailed cheque or into paypal.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think what needs to be done is encourage younger aspiring artists to ask older artists what they should charge how money in the art world works, if deviantART really cared they could set up a series of interviews with artists who are currently working go in depth in how money works in the real world. Show how its different for a comic artist compared to a photographer.
What deviantART has done is introduce young ones into commissions but i have not yet seen anyone who has given a fair price for there talents i mean how much is 10 points really worth?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
10 points is worth 13 cents.
I agree with the need to discuss real-world hiring / pricing situations, but also the promotion and placement of such information. If it's just a journal it's going to have a brief burst of popularity, then simply be buried under piles of new stuff. This is the kind of thing that needs to be a constant in DA's system.
We'd need a video or interactive tutorial easily accesible from the commission portant that everyone could read through before starting commissions (buying or selling)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Itchy and scratchy money... you can only use it
deviantART muro drawing
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you can only use it in the park XD
deviantART muro drawing
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Isn't this more than a little hypocritical of DA given their current work with Blackberry that is basically "let's encourage people to be taken advantage of by a big corporation who will totally under value the artist by not even giving them the credit that they deserve, never mind any kind of payment for their contributions".
Do I really need to say anything more?? Other than perhaps one word... "consistency"?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I haven't heard of these issues with blackberry. What should I search for?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Yes, the blackberry contest is a scam, even if you lose, all entries belong to the company now and you get NOTHING for winning anyway, no money, no credit, no nothing. You just see your monster in a film they will make money off and use whenever they like!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
On my DA page there is a link showing at the top with the blackberry logo saying "design a monster...." if you follow that and look at the terms and conditions on blackberry's site it really is a "list of things to shaft the artist". The promotion thing that was also heavily publicised recently with that author (I think he was) was heavily criticised by a lot of DA members who commented on it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh come on, you can't expect amateurs to charge a lot of money for their art JUST because some people are trying to make a living out of it via dA...
Seriously, things like this make my blood boil. Too high prices and people complain your art isn't worth it, too low prices and other professionals are complaining you aren't charging enough money.
Holy mother of jesusballs.
Let artists charge what they want. If you want to earn your bread and milk sitting on your ass behind photoshop doodling your kawaii-desu anime figures, that's fine, but don't complain when it's difficult because of competition on dA.
Sorry. I kinda sound rude, harsh and very immature, but I just can't staaaaand it when people complain about "too low prices". I know everyone needs their bread and milk and would loooooove to earn that by doing what they love, but it's just not plausible for everyone. Buying art is a luxury for most people, they don't need it to live (unless you're living in the Sims, then you need art to boost your morale lol).
I personally didn't want to get into the art world, didn't want to sell my artworks, just do requests. Because art pays horribly low. Currently I am somewhat planning to go to the art world (game art, somewhat art-ish), but I still, for a full 100% REFUSE to go to an art college. Because it won't pay my bread.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
I agree. It's like saying I shouldn't be able to buy something because I didn't really work hard for it while there are others who are working hard. Since when does another person's life effect another person's free will?
Also when was it up to outsiders and strangers to tell yo how much your work is worth?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i think the point was that if your a amateur (insert what ever you do here) and you have quality pieces of which are up there with the professionals then you need to charge accordingly because you work is worth more the 13c.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Which is exactly why I wrote the comment; let artists charge what they want.
If they want to charge 13c for their pieces, why the fuck not?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This ticks me off... artists and animators are already underrated and underpaid as it is..
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You know that nobody whose work is worthy of any attention at all wouldn't use such a system.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I opened my own commission that were very cheap, but nobody pays me. I don't understand why people won't pay me, I desperately want a
cintiq 22HD.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thank you for posting this article.
I agree that it's important to educate young artists about what they should charge otherwise it could undermine our industry (and to some extent it already has).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think that this is somehow a test-run in a way.
I don't think the purpose of this feature (that is completely voluntary) is to help professional artists selling their work.
I rather think that this is aimed at amateurs who really just draw for fun and for whom all the "comission"- bussines is just a game. I'vee seen 13 years olds selling comissions on MSpaint created "full body drawings" for around 10 points and actually having comissions. Of course they're only working for 13 cents, but they don't really do it for the money, anyways. And everyone looking into a real digital full body portrait wouldn't comission them, so no harm done here.
For those people this system is actually not bad, because it makes them feel good. What puts me a bit of to be honest ist the 20% fee. It is actually really high, especially since it is rather easy to do comissions without it.
About that whole professional - amateur stuff:
I'm an amateur. I don't do comissions because I can't promise quality and I can't hold deadlines because of my other work. If someone asks me to draw a portrait for them, I'd negotiate some kind of expense allowance, like points or something from the shop, because there are a few things I want but can't buy without a credit card. But these people have to be ok with me not always being fast and they won't get the same quality as if they comission a professional. So I don't think I'm actually ruining the prices, because I can't reach the professional standart and I'll tell that to eveybody who would want me to do something for them.
So for me this is like doing the shopping for an elderly neighbour, not like a profession.
If I'd been a professional, I wouldn't use DA for my comissions. I maybe would have a page and show my work, but I'd link to my actual homepage with every important information about comissioning me. That way, there wouldn't even be a fee
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think a big part of it is just better education. Many young artists (and many non-english speakers who aren't very good with English) just don't understand how points work. They also don't understand how much their work is actually worth.
However, the commissions platform on dA IS meant more for amateurs, not so much for people trying to make a living. The DreamUP platform (www.dreamup.com) is run by deviantART and is a professional commissioning platform for real money. I don't know to much about it though, since I've never used it. Even with that though, we do need to work to better educate younger artists I think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It would make more sense to me for young and ESL artists if the points system was more straightforward. Right now it seems almost deliberately confusing, as many people don't work with US dollars, and don't know the uneven transfer of buying points.
One would think that points = pennies, but $1.00 doesn't buy 100 points. It buys 80. That adds up really quickly into a confusing system that doesn't have flat, even, understandable numbers that one can mentally convert back into real currency to understand the system.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
It can be a tad confusing, that I'll agree with.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Why would the points have to be equal to any real-life currency? You're Canadian but I'm assuming you talk about USD. The US plays world police well enough, they think they're the centre of the world and the rest of the world does their best to support this idea. Bullshit if you ask me. Maybe the points convert perfectly well to the currency of... who knows what... Neverland. Even if the majority of users of DA were from the US(or are, I don't know), an arbitrary point system is fair to every country. It's the internet, not US property, so might as well have its own currency.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think you're forgetting that DA itself is based in the US.
It is a US-owned and US-run company hosted in the USA. There is no reason for them not to work in US dollars.
"It's the internet, not US property, so might as well have its own currency."
No, it's US property. DA is subject to US laws in both copyright and finance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I personally don't care where my bits and bytes are saved. The internet is a place where people can be regardless of whatever they may look like or where they are from. That's not US property to me, whatever it may be to you. Unlike the US the internet is accessible to everyone(apart a few countries unfortunately). I don't need a passport to go on DA and nobody checks whether I have bombs in my boots. In a sense, the internet is bigger than its ones and zeros and the laws written down for it and the wires and servers standing around in whichever country they may be. But if that's what you want to stick to, so be it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>