# Furry art challenges?



## AssSalt Marine (Mar 20, 2019)

Hey yo my furry dudes! I was trying to find any furry art challenges, competitions or battles, but I found none~
If you know something like that, be it forums, Instagram hashtags or stuff, please let me know!


----------



## BunBunArt (Mar 20, 2019)

Oh I have no idea but I also would like to know! xD I love challenges!


----------



## Pipistrele (Mar 20, 2019)

Let's challenge ourselves!


----------



## TR273 (Mar 20, 2019)

Why don't we start one in here? Either in the Games section or in the Art threads. Sort of 'Weekly challenge, winner picks the next challenge.


----------



## BunBunArt (Mar 20, 2019)

Interesting


----------



## Furrium (Mar 20, 2019)

I also love challenges but I can't draw


----------



## Pipistrele (Mar 20, 2019)

TR273 said:


> Why don't we start one in here? Either in the Games section or in the Art threads. Sort of 'Weekly challenge, winner picks the next challenge.





RoxyHana said:


> Interesting


Why winners exactly, though? Just some sort of informal "art exchange" or "draw something in that theme" is cool enough for an ongoing event .u.


----------



## TR273 (Mar 20, 2019)

Pipistrele said:


> Why winners exactly, though? Just some sort of informal "art exchange" or "draw something in that theme" is cool enough for an ongoing event .u.


Fair point


----------



## Keefur (Mar 20, 2019)

You could always put your art to good use.  I'm needing art for the con book for Fangcon.  The theme is Howlywood.  We could get submissions and let everyone vote on the best ones.


----------



## TR273 (Mar 20, 2019)

Keefur said:


> You could always put your art to good use.  I'm needing art for the con book for Fangcon.  The theme is Howlywood.  We could get submissions and let everyone vote on the best ones.


Hmm, how quick do you need them? I've got an idea already.


----------



## Keefur (Mar 20, 2019)

TR273 said:


> Hmm, how quick do you need them? I've got an idea already.


The con is at the start of next year. lol  You have plenty of time.


----------



## Pipistrele (Mar 20, 2019)

Keefur said:


> The con is at the start of next year. lol  You have plenty of time.


That's.. one of those things I would actually like people to get paid for? Art exchanges and challenges are more "for fun/for practice" kind of obligations, while making free stuff for someone else's con sounds like something that deserves an actual reward .o.


----------



## Keefur (Mar 20, 2019)

Pipistrele said:


> That's.. one of those things I would actually like people to get paid for? Art exchanges and challenges are more "for fun/for practice" kind of obligations, while making free stuff for someone else's con sounds like something that deserves an actual reward .o.



It's a form of advertising for the artist, so the artist benefits.  The con isn't making any money off of con books and the books are for the entertainment of everyone.  Smaller cons just don't have the resources to buy lots of art.  Cons like Anthro Con can afford to fly guests of honor in from places like Japan, so they could afford it.  That being said, people still fall all over themselves to donate art to cons because they know it gets their names out.


----------



## Pogo (Mar 20, 2019)

I'd like to partcipate :3
Regardless of whats going on.


----------



## Pipistrele (Mar 20, 2019)

Keefur said:


> It's a form of advertising for the artist, so the artist benefits.  The con isn't making any money off of con books and the books are for the entertainment of everyone.  Smaller cons just don't have the resources to buy lots of art.  Cons like Anthro Con can afford to fly guests of honor in from places like Japan, so they could afford it.  That being said, people still fall all over themselves to donate art to cons because they know it gets their names out.


Iiiiii dunno. It doesn't make _that_ much sense in terms of "getting names out" (since smaller cons are already, well, _small_), and con books aren't exactly the glowing source of exposure due to limitations and exclusivity of the format. Also, from knowing and assisting a lot of paying artists personally (sidejobing as a Russian-English translator for them and vice versa), I'm yet to see any of them "falling over themselves" to give free artwork for niche books in niche cons they most likely won't even attend; some properly do somewhere, but that's just my perspective.

I do see your points on budget and stuff, but my suggestion is to finance featured artists either from conbook's cost or (in case it's being given away for free) from ticket costs. Even if said sum will be minuscule in the end result, it's still much more respectful and reasonable to the artists than "Sorry, we don't have money, but at least your name is out there!" kind of thing.

That, and calling free work for monetized venue "a good use" is frankly kinda shady - you're basically agitating artists to donate free artwork to a con so organizers can make money of it. Something like that should be mentioned upfront, not sugarcoated.


----------



## Keefur (Mar 20, 2019)

Pipistrele said:


> Iiiiii dunno. It doesn't make _that_ much sense in terms of "getting names out" (since smaller cons are already, well, _small_), and con books aren't exactly the glowing source of exposure due to limitations and exclusivity of the format. Also, from knowing and assisting a lot of paying artists personally (sidejobing as a Russian-English translator for them and vice versa), I'm yet to see any of them "falling over themselves" to give free artwork for niche books in niche cons they most likely won't even attend; some properly do somewhere, but that's just my perspective.
> 
> I do see your points on budget and stuff, but my suggestion is to finance featured artists either from conbook's cost or (in case it's being given away for free) from ticket costs. Even if said sum will be minuscule in the end result, it's still much more respectful and reasonable to the artists than "Sorry, we don't have money, but at least your name is out there!" kind of thing.
> 
> That, and calling free work for monetized venue "a good use" is frankly kinda shady - you're basically agitating artists to donate free artwork to a con so organizers can make money of it. Something like that should be mentioned upfront, not sugarcoated.



I would love to throw hundreds or thousands of dollars at art for the con every year, but you do realize that no one makes money off the con.  No one gets paid for their services and all proceeds are either donated to charity or go back into the con for the next year.  If you think that a small con isn't worth the effort to donate art to, that is a personal decision, but the art goes into the con books or promotional materials and isn't sold for profit.  Artists are properly credited for their work.  We do get advertisers who pay to get their ads in the con book.   If artists don't want to self-promote, then so be it.  If there is no art, then there is no art and it is just less interesting.    Since I am tapped in to the inner workings of many other cons, I can tell you that there aren't many cons that pay for promotional art, and the ones that do are very big and usually only take art from the top names, so that cuts out many lesser known artists.  Other cons have completely done away with con books, so no one benefits.  I often put my own art in ours and other con books for free.  When I was a GoH at a couple of other cons, I readily donated free art.  I have donated art unsolicited to many cons to be promotional.  It is part of my philosophy of making the Fandom a better place and isn't about the money.  I wrote an anthology piece for an Ursa Major award winning book and let the publisher keep the money because the book promoted the Fandom.  The way I look at it, it is like walking by a collection kettle for the Salvation Army during the Christmas holidays.  No one is forced to donate, yet no one is condemned if they don't.


----------



## Pipistrele (Mar 21, 2019)

Keefur said:


> I would love to throw hundreds or thousands of dollars at art for the con every year, but you do realize that no one makes money off the con.  No one gets paid for their services and all proceeds are either donated to charity or go back into the con for the next year.  If you think that a small con isn't worth the effort to donate art to, that is a personal decision, but the art goes into the con books or promotional materials and isn't sold for profit.  Artists are properly credited for their work.  We do get advertisers who pay to get their ads in the con book.   If artists don't want to self-promote, then so be it.  If there is no art, then there is no art and it is just less interesting.    Since I am tapped in to the inner workings of many other cons, I can tell you that there aren't many cons that pay for promotional art, and the ones that do are very big and usually only take art from the top names, so that cuts out many lesser known artists.  Other cons have completely done away with con books, so no one benefits.  I often put my own art in ours and other con books for free.  When I was a GoH at a couple of other cons, I readily donated free art.  I have donated art unsolicited to many cons to be promotional.  It is part of my philosophy of making the Fandom a better place and isn't about the money.  I wrote an anthology piece for an Ursa Major award winning book and let the publisher keep the money because the book promoted the Fandom.  The way I look at it, it is like walking by a collection kettle for the Salvation Army during the Christmas holidays.  No one is forced to donate, yet no one is condemned if they don't.


Even in that case, some clarification and honesty is still important when doing such proposals. Like, if you're going to hire volunteers, mention outright that "It's a non-paying work that's going to be used in a exclusive promotional material (con-book in this case) of a $30-$50-per-ticket convention - all benefits will go towards financing future con/charity/whatever else". No matter how noble the end goal is, it's still profiting off artist's free work, and putting it as "We need some artwork for a good cause, place submissions!" without actually telling about how and why their artwork is going to be monetized (or even mentioning that it's going to be monetized) is still kinda careless at best and shady at worst.

Basically, if you don't have the opportunity to pay the artists, at least state outright what they're in for before asking for submissions. My philosophy is that artists' free time and effort should be properly respected, which is why situations like this one are something of a pet peeve of mine.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Mar 21, 2019)

While not exclusively furry, there's the yearly Art Fight - Home that a good number of furry artists participate in. It's pretty fun, though last time I did it I was trying to draw with reactive arthritis in my wrists and kind of murdered them doing an intricate piece as a result. >.> Oops!


----------



## SmutterlyYours (Mar 21, 2019)

Omg yes pls! I've also been trying to find challenges -- esp  NSFW stuff. Can we please brainstorm some ideas and post em as threads? I'm new here and idk how fetish friendly the forums are, but I really want to try my hand at hyper and cumflation.


----------



## Keefur (Mar 21, 2019)

Pipistrele said:


> Even in that case, some clarification and honesty is still important when doing such proposals. Like, if you're going to hire volunteers, mention outright that "It's a non-paying work that's going to be used in a exclusive promotional material (con-book in this case) of a $30-$50-per-ticket convention - all benefits will go towards financing future con/charity/whatever else". No matter how noble the end goal is, it's still profiting off artist's free work, and putting it as "We need some artwork for a good cause, place submissions!" without actually telling about how and why their artwork is going to be monetized (or even mentioning that it's going to be monetized) is still kinda careless at best and shady at worst.
> 
> Basically, if you don't have the opportunity to pay the artists, at least state outright what they're in for before asking for submissions. My philosophy is that artists' free time and effort should be properly respected, which is why situations like this one are something of a pet peeve of mine.



You are implying that I am somehow trying to "cheat"  or "take advantage" of artists.  My post above wasn't a formal call for art submissions. If it had been, it would have been a lot more specific with some legal statements.  It would have stated that any art submitted is donated material that becomes property of the con.  *This is to prevent the art from being re-used for something inappropriate or at cross purposes with the con*.  It would also state that submission of art is no guarantee of its use. It would state that any art used would be credited back to the artist.  If you ask for donations, this is pretty specific.  I don't know of anyone who does work expecting to get paid without determining a fee.  Artists consider it an honor to get into the con book or used for advertising, and donated works is how the vast majority of conventions function.  Is also a form of free advertising for the artist.  You may not want to participate, but since this is strictly a voluntary process, you are really condemning artists who DO participate.


----------



## Asher Grey (Mar 21, 2019)

Well, anyway, I've seen Inktober done with furry art specifically. I've also seen "draw your fursona wearing [this]", like the pink sweater one, though none have come up recently. There's also artist challenges that aren't specific to furries, but there's no reason you couldn't use your fursona for them!

I'm a big fan of art challenges myself, so a couple in the forums games could be fun. Art-fight type stuff has always interested me, but I've never had a chance to partake in it.


----------



## Asher Grey (Mar 21, 2019)

SmutterlyYours said:


> Omg yes pls! I've also been trying to find challenges -- esp  NSFW stuff. Can we please brainstorm some ideas and post em as threads? I'm new here and idk how fetish friendly the forums are, but I really want to try my hand at hyper and cumflation.


My understanding is that, although it gets ignored, there's rules about not posting NSFW material. I think a simple enough prompt can be open to interpretation, be it SFW or otherwise, but making it focus on porn isn't a very good idea on the forums.


----------



## Nante-Hiroda (Mar 21, 2019)

CapReMount said:


> I also love challenges but I can't draw
> 
> View attachment 57512


Feel ya on that one bro lol


----------



## quoting_mungo (Mar 22, 2019)

Keefur said:


> It would have stated that any art submitted is donated material that becomes property of the con. *This is to prevent the art from being re-used for something inappropriate or at cross purposes with the con*. It would also state that submission of art is no guarantee of its use.


_That_ I will say is really sketchy. I'm fine with con books soliciting artwork for no compensation except exposure as there is a defined distribution method and a general idea of how many people will end up with the art in their hands. Combined with the nature of furry fandom (people see art they like, people follow the artist for more of it and possibly buy art from the artist) I can see it as more of a "you give us gear, we display your logo" sponsorship situation.

_However_. As someone with some training/formal education in the illustration field, I will say that full transfer of ownership is, to use a technical term, fucking expensive. It would be like a company outfitting an entire football theme from head to toe and getting a stamp-sized logo on their breast pocket in return. The value of exposure in the con book is simply not in proportion to losing the rights to your artwork - you don't demand full rights for any art included in your ads, do you? The very most I can see motivation for is asking for exclusivity for a set time period; maybe until a few months after the con.

This just gets more sketchy if you state that submission is the point of transfer, as opposed to publication. That means that art that isn't used still becomes the property of the con, with no compensation. The artist essentially creates a work with the knowledge that it's up to the con whether it ever sees _any_ distribution. Not okay. If this is your policy I strongly suggest you bring it up as a point of revision. Prohibiting artists from posting or making prints of their own work forevermore because they were kind enough to allow its use in your con book is frankly predatory.

I say this as someone who's generally in favor of con book art submissions.


----------



## Keefur (Mar 22, 2019)

quoting_mungo said:


> _That_ I will say is really sketchy. I'm fine with con books soliciting artwork for no compensation except exposure as there is a defined distribution method and a general idea of how many people will end up with the art in their hands. Combined with the nature of furry fandom (people see art they like, people follow the artist for more of it and possibly buy art from the artist) I can see it as more of a "you give us gear, we display your logo" sponsorship situation.
> 
> _However_. As someone with some training/formal education in the illustration field, I will say that full transfer of ownership is, to use a technical term, fucking expensive. It would be like a company outfitting an entire football theme from head to toe and getting a stamp-sized logo on their breast pocket in return. The value of exposure in the con book is simply not in proportion to losing the rights to your artwork - you don't demand full rights for any art included in your ads, do you? The very most I can see motivation for is asking for exclusivity for a set time period; maybe until a few months after the con.
> 
> ...



The easy answer to this is for you to just not participate in donating art.  As someone with almost 20 years of real world experience in the printing field and in dealing with artists, I can tell you that ownership transfer of art is not some expensive legal process.  It is just an acknowledged statement of terms between two parties.  I deal with this on almost on a daily basis in some form or another.  The reason that cons, authors, etc ask for exclusive use of the art (which is a normal request and also applies to written works) is so that the art is not used in a way that competes with or links the user of the art to something they don't want.  For example, having your con book cover be sold to a group of Nazi furs.  You say you have all of this formal education and training, so I am sure you know this already.  I don't know other cons policies on unused art.  If we get art we don't use, we release it.  Of course, con logos and such, if included in the art, do belong to the con.  Depending upon the art, we do sometimes allow prints to be made.  I also never mentioned anything about reposting the art so you were putting words in my mouth.  We encourage the reposting of the art, just not the reuse of it in other projects.  As I said, every agreement can be different and we sometimes work out compensatory agreements with artists.  

Let me give you a couple of real world examples of how this practice works.  One Fandom and one not.  The duck stamp people, each year have a world-wide competition for the artist of the American duck stamp.  A Furry won that honor for the 2018 stanp.  There were dozens of submissions.  The artist who won spent almost a year working on it, as I am sure many of the other artists did.  None of them were paid.  The compensation was that the winner gets to say they are in the exclusive club of artists that won.  They do, however, get to sell prints of their art.  Another example is the Mephit Fur Meet con which has a contest each year for their con book cover and tee shirt designs.  Unpaid.  They get many submissions each year for both.  The tee shirts are sold and the artist gets to say they designed them but are not normally allowed to resell the art.  Their compensation is that they get credited and they can say they designed/drew the shirts/cover.  

As an aside in reference to your football analogy.  Companies actually do outfit entire football teams for free just to get their logos on the pocket.  Then these same companies pay licensing fees to those same football teams to make copies of those jersies, shoes, etc so that they can sell them. 

I have no problem with you disagreeing with the practice of asking for art donations if you think the con is not large enough to warrant a donation.  All cons use this practice, so if you think that con size somehow absolves their use of this practice, this denotes a double standard on your part.  I will tell you that I honestly do not appreciate you using the terms "shady" and "sketchy" as they have connotations of illegal activity and that is highly offensive and  disrespectful not only to us and to all of the other organizations that ask for donations, but also to the artists who willingly participate.  Not only is use of these terms offensive, they border on libelous defamation.


----------



## SmutterlyYours (Mar 22, 2019)

Asher Grey said:


> My understanding is that, although it gets ignored, there's rules about not posting NSFW material. I think a simple enough prompt can be open to interpretation, be it SFW or otherwise, but making it focus on porn isn't a very good idea on the forums.


yeaaah like i said im new here and just got that warning ooops, sfw stuff is all good though too. practice is practice i suppooose


----------



## quoting_mungo (Mar 22, 2019)

Keefur said:


> The easy answer to this is for you to just not participate in donating art. As someone with almost 20 years of real world experience in the printing field and in dealing with artists, I can tell you that ownership transfer of art is not some expensive legal process. It is just an acknowledged statement of terms between two parties.


You misunderstand, though in hindsight I realize I could have worded myself better.
Obtaining ownership of work, rather than being granted limited specific usage rights, is typically hella expensive (at least on my side of the globe; I will grant that the situation could be different elsewhere). Not because of lawyer costs or whatever, but because the artist is signing away their work and will have no future claim to it.



Keefur said:


> I have no problem with you disagreeing with the practice of asking for art donations if you think the con is not large enough to warrant a donation. All cons use this practice, so if you think that con size somehow absolves their use of this practice, this denotes a double standard on your part.


I said no such thing. I said that knowing the approximate distribution of the con book is a factor _that works in the con's favor_ in weighing the value of "exposure" as payment for artwork, whether it's for usage rights (which I find more ethical) or transfer of ownership of the work wholesale. "Exposure" is in many other areas code for "I want you to work for me but can't be bothered to compensate you" when offered to artists as payment, and having a defined method of distribution and a good approximation of the expected reach of the work is what makes it actually worth consideration. Whether the expected audience is large enough to constitute effective marketing is going to differ from artist to artist, and is not something I was speaking on. And yes, some individuals may well decide to submit art for the sake of supporting the con alone, without an eye towards marketing value for themselves, and that's their decision to make.

I maintain that the stated goal of preventing repurposing of the art that might harm the con's image could be achieved with measures that do not remove nearly as much in the way of rights from the artists - all the con strictly _needs_ for the publication of the art itself is reproduction rights for the run of con books, and repurposing of the art can be covered by contract. If you grant the artist digital distribution rights, that's better than not doing so, sure. If you return the rights of unused submissions to their creators, that's better than not doing so. What you presented, however, was a situation of "send in submission, all rights now indefinitely belong to the con," which is a raw deal for an artist, and arguably has a lot in common with spec work (which _is_ a sketchy practice). 

I do not object to cons soliciting art and/or fiction submissions for inclusion in their con books. I _do_ object to asking artists to sign their work over to the con in the process, regardless of which con it happens to be.


----------



## Water Draco (Mar 22, 2019)

I have seen some furry art challenges take place on discord every now and then.


Also Fennah (YouTube channel) also runs a discord server and quite regularly has art challenges based on his own anthropomorphic characters he has created, and are all part of the Satellitelore.

I'm not posting a direct link to his site this because some of the subject matter Fennah covers can be a bit bone chilling. If you find the YouTube channel then you will find all the links.


----------



## Keefur (Mar 23, 2019)

quoting_mungo said:


> What you presented, however, was a situation of "send in submission, all rights now indefinitely belong to the con," which is a raw deal for an artist, and arguably has a lot in common with spec work (which _is_ a sketchy practice).
> 
> I do not object to cons soliciting art and/or fiction submissions for inclusion in their con books. I _do_ object to asking artists to sign their work over to the con in the process, regardless of which con it happens to be.



Exclusivity over the rights of donated works or "contest" submissions, or whatever form the gathering of art takes is standard operating procedures all over the world and it is for the protection of whatever organization is involved.  For example, say a ficticious company like Flaky Flakes cereal has a contest for a mascot, picks a winner, and then prints a million boxes of cereal  only to find that the same art piece was also submitted and used by a rival company who has also printed a million boxes.  If there was no exclusivity, then this is something that could ruin both companies.  The same goes for written submissions in that the people who are using the work require exclusivity.  Artists and authors know this when they donate their work.   You are very concerned for the rights of the artist, even tho they have freely chosen to donate art, but seem to have overlooked the protection of the organizations that use the art.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Mar 23, 2019)

Keefur said:


> Exclusivity over the rights of donated works or "contest" submissions, or whatever form the gathering of art takes is standard operating procedures all over the world and it is for the protection of whatever organization is involved. For example, say a ficticious company like Flaky Flakes cereal has a contest for a mascot, picks a winner, and then prints a million boxes of cereal only to find that the same art piece was also submitted and used by a rival company who has also printed a million boxes. If there was no exclusivity, then this is something that could ruin both companies.


Exclusivity and ownership of intellectual rights are not the same thing, though. That is why I specifically said that repurposing of art could be handled by contract without having the artist give up all rights to the work. 



Keefur said:


> The same goes for written submissions in that the people who are using the work require exclusivity.


A lot of written work, particularly shorter work, specifically puts a time limit on this. I don't think I've ever seen an anthology/magazine-style publication that demanded indefinite exclusivity. If after the stipulated time period the author wishes to submit the work to another publication (one which doesn't require work to be previously unpublished, obviously, but that's not terribly uncommon), they retain the rights to their work and can do so. If they want to publish it on their website, they can do so.



Keefur said:


> You are very concerned for the rights of the artist, even tho they have freely chosen to donate art, but seem to have overlooked the protection of the organizations that use the art.


I've granted the need for some degree of exclusivity; I just don't agree with obtaining it by having artists sign over all image rights.


----------



## Koriekraiz13 (May 18, 2019)

Know what I'll just give out a challenge,
Draw your fursona or an oc doing something sports related


----------



## TR273 (May 18, 2019)

Koriekraiz13 said:


> Know what I'll just give out a challenge,
> Draw your fursona or an oc doing something sports related





 
That was well timed, I just finished this.


----------

