# Possible FA artist group - advertising unknown artists (opinions)



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

So, here's the idea:

An account on FA. It is a group for artists who have less than a certain number of watchers. Anyone in that category can join the group, as long as they actually do draw, and aren't just artwhores.

Each member posts a short description and link to the group on their FA page in a fairly prominent position, and adds it to the footer for journals. They also submit what they believe to be their best piece of art. The art must have their FA address on it somewhere.

The group displays that single picture per artist with relevant links back to their FA page.

The idea is that it is advertised by every member, increasing the chances someone will look at the group page, browse the gallery and find some art they like, leading them to the artists page. More members, higher chance of someone clicking through and watching you. If you hit the threshold, you no longer need to be part of the group.

Any ideas, thoughts or anything? I reckon this could be a pretty handy way of getting that little extra publicity for the more unknown artists.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

I think this is great. It is hard for most people to get watchers who only do SFW art. Porn gets you watched- it is a fact but not everyone is comfortable doing it. Link in forum signatures leading to the page would be great too. Also an artist highlight once a week would be great. "ARTIST OF THE WEEK- XXXXX" would get "featured submission". I think it would work though the only negative I can see is someone getting butthurt over not getting the spot light asap.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> I think this is great. It is hard for most people to get watchers who only do SFW art. Porn gets you watched- it is a fact but not everyone is comfortable doing it. Link in forum signatures leading to the page would be great too. Also an artist highlight once a week would be great. "ARTIST OF THE WEEK- XXXXX" would get "featured submission". I think it would work though the only negative I can see is someone getting butthurt over not getting the spot light asap.


 
Well, you could do the featured submission thing by going to the latest member and getting them to choose their favourite submission from the gallery that isn't their own?

Or assign each member a number, depending on when they joined, then use a random number generator to pick one each week?

Could also be used to advertise which artists do Livestreams, ones with commissions open, free art, etc. Update the journal once a week with the relevant info. It shows on the frontpage and works as an archive too.


----------



## FireFeathers (Mar 26, 2011)

What do you define as Unknown? How are you going to make your case for what is 'thier best art" and what isn't? What are you going to tell people who want to join but have too many watchers but still think they're unknown? 

You have a lot of pretty...tense subjects  that you'll be fighting with constantly. It's a good idea, but it's too subjective to work well.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

Smelge said:


> Well, you could do the featured submission thing by going to the latest member and getting them to choose their favourite submission from the gallery that isn't their own?
> 
> *Or assign each member a number, depending on when they joined, then use a random number generator to pick one each week?*
> 
> Could also be used to advertise which artists do Livestreams, ones with commissions open, free art, etc. Update the journal once a week with the relevant info. It shows on the frontpage and works as an archive too.


 
I could see that working as long as the random number generator didn't chose the same number two times.

Everyone should write their own information in their own journal- linking outside websites: (LJ, Blogtv, youtube, live stream, ect), commission information (prices, turn around time, TOS, and paypal information), artist info (a bit about the artist).

Artist info helps me see eye to eye with the artist and their situations. Some do art for actual living expenses like Ratte and others do it for whatever else. I am more often going to the artist needing to have bills paid than one that does it for spending money.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

FireFeathers said:


> What do you define as Unknown? How are you going to make your case for what is 'thier best art" and what isn't? What are you going to tell people who want to join but have too many watchers but still think they're unknown?
> 
> You have a lot of pretty...tense subjects  that you'll be fighting with constantly. It's a good idea, but it's too subjective to work well.


 
Unknown is just a catch-all. Base it on watcher numbers. The artist themself decides what they feel is their best piece and submits it. If they wish to change the one in the group gallery, they can submit a new one which replaces the old. Bypass drama by making all the subjective stuff the users own choice.



dinosaurdammit said:


> I could see that working as long as the  random number generator didn't chose the same number two times.



If it rolls the same person again, reroll.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

What if the page watched artist up until a certain point. Say 2k watchers. Place their icon in the description artist about me thing until it is reached. Now the artist can continue to be a part of the group though has passed the "accepted set limit" and taken from watched [endangered] status to just watched. It is still all archived under watched but they are no longer [endangered] and their icon is removed from the profile section. Seems fair. A set limit is a set limit- period. They will still be under the watched by group page they just wont have their icon in the profile section. The journal will still have their information as well.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> What if the page watched artist up until a certain point. Say 2k watchers. Place their icon in the description artist about me thing until it is reached. Now the artist can continue to be a part of the group though has passed the "accepted set limit" and taken from watched [endangered] status to just watched. It is still all archived under watched but they are no longer [endangered] and their icon is removed from the profile section. Seems fair. A set limit is a set limit- period. They will still be under the watched by group page they just wont have their icon in the profile section. The journal will still have their information as well.


 
2k is too many. A limit around the 750 mark seems achievable. And the idea is that if you've hit that many watchers, you're probably spreading enough art around to not need any help getting seen. Encouraging people hitting the limit to continue advertising the group would be good, and maybe having a list of people who have hit the limit via the group as sort of success stories maybe.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

Smelge said:


> 2k is too many. A limit around the 750 mark seems achievable. And the idea is that if you've hit that many watchers, you're probably spreading enough art around to not need any help getting seen. Encouraging people hitting the limit to continue advertising the group would be good, and maybe having a list of people who have hit the limit via the group as sort of success stories maybe.


 
I used 2k as an example as I don't know what really qualifies as "successful". I am so proud when I get a new watcher even though I have few and I know a few that watch me are group accounts so they don't really fall in the "individual watch" category. Depending on how much an advert on the main site or here would cost I would chip in a few bucks to have an ad that ran to advertise the group site. That would be effective and if it was cheep and everyone threw in a few dollars then it wouldn't be so bad. Odds are no one would go for that idea so stupid as it is I will still suggest it.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> I used 2k as an example as I don't know what really qualifies as "successful". I am so proud when I get a new watcher even though I have few and I know a few that watch me are group accounts so they don't really fall in the "individual watch" category. Depending on how much an advert on the main site or here would cost I would chip in a few bucks to have an ad that ran to advertise the group site. That would be effective and if it was cheep and everyone threw in a few dollars then it wouldn't be so bad. Odds are no one would go for that idea so stupid as it is I will still suggest it.


 
You've lost me there.

Passive advertising, as in through the members journals and pages via headers, footers and so on.

For example:

FluffyRapeBeast69 joins the group. She looks through her gallery and chooses a photorealistic image of Pikachu being molested by hyenas. She adds her FA account to the picture and submits it to the group email address, with a brief description.

She then goes and adds the group details to the Artist Info section of her FA page and adds it to her journal headers. In the meantime, her submission is posted to the group with her description and relevant links back to her.

Now, every time the group has a new member, that art gets posted on FA, providing the artist info, but also the info that it is a group account. If the viewer is interested, they will click through to the account and view the gallery, finding other artists they like. At the same time, every submission FluffyRapeBeast69 makes also has the group details in it.

This means that the more people in the group, the more people are likely to be viewing the group gallery. Submitting your best art makes it more likely someone will click through to you and watch you.

And that is it, simple.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

Why is it "furryrapebeast69" makes me instantly think of a sergal. Have I been that corrupted? 

But you are right I suppose.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> Why is it "furryrapebeast69" makes me instantly think of a sergal. Have I been that corrupted?
> 
> But you are right I suppose.


 
Accurate.

I suppose the best idea would be to say "only art above a certain quality" in the group, otherwise you'd end up with a pile of shitty artists hanging around for years. But, selecting decent artists only would cause DRAMA. So it must be open for all. Hopefully though, people will self-moderate and only try to join when they're at an acceptable level.


----------



## Xenke (Mar 26, 2011)

Good idea, though I support it being exclusive to people who are above a certain quality, no matter how much drama it might stir.

Exclusivity isn't necessarily a bad thing, y'know?


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

Smelge said:


> Accurate.
> 
> I suppose the best idea would be to say "only art above a certain quality" in the group, otherwise you'd end up with a pile of shitty artists hanging around for years. But, selecting decent artists only would cause DRAMA. So it must be open for all. Hopefully though, people will self-moderate and only try to join when they're at an acceptable level.


 
Honor system PFFFFFTTT. 

What one person considers good art is subjective to another person. Most porn artist suck honestly- they are asspatted into thinking they are great when they really are subpar. Self moderating is really the only "fair" way because different people have different taste and what one may view as art someone else views as shit.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 26, 2011)

so I have 500 watches and could join today. would i get kicked at 750 then?

for quality control make it invite only.


----------



## FireFeathers (Mar 26, 2011)

Smelge said:


> Accurate.
> 
> I suppose the best idea would be to say "only art above a certain quality" in the group, otherwise you'd end up with a pile of shitty artists hanging around for years. But, selecting decent artists only would cause DRAMA. So it must be open for all. Hopefully though, people will self-moderate and only try to join when they're at an acceptable level.


 

You sir, are a funny guy. 

Anyways, the subjective part is not them choosing, it's your perimeters.  You're gonna be in the middle of many a-fight. 

Straight foreward, it's a nice idea but it wouldn't work.  I foresee a huge bitch-fest in your future with this project.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

FireFeathers said:


> Straight foreward, it's a nice idea but it wouldn't work.  I foresee a huge bitch-fest in your future with this project.


 
Excellent. Gives me something to do!


----------



## Icky (Mar 26, 2011)

Hey, I'm all for it. The sooner we get this group attention, the sooner the member's watchlist goes up. 

SFW art/tasteful nudity only?


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

Icky said:


> Hey, I'm all for it. The sooner we get this group attention, the sooner the member's watchlist goes up.
> 
> SFW art/tasteful nudity only?


 
The idea is to get it to appeal to the most people, to get the most through-traffic, so probably aiming for anything that is not straight-up fetish fringe shit.

If someone is a clean artist, then they'll naturally post something clean. But if someone does primarily porn, their image would be best summarising their work, though you don't want things that disgust majorities, as it'll make them leave the gallery rather than browse.



Fay V said:


> so I have 500 watches and could join today. would i get kicked at 750 then?
> 
> for quality control make it invite only.


 
Maybe 750 is too low, 1000 possibly. A round number is so much nicer. But making it invite only would turn it into more of a circlejerk. You want it to be open to as many people as possible, and having to approach people first just puts more work on the person running the gig. Artists would have to apply first simply by firing off the image they want to use, artist description and FA page link to an email address, and if their art is plainly terrible or the artist didn't bother to read if they are eligible or not or whatever, they could get rejected. But most people with adequate art would be allowed to join.


----------



## Icky (Mar 26, 2011)

Smelge said:


> The idea is to get it to appeal to the most people, to get the most through-traffic, so probably aiming for anything that is not straight-up fetish fringe shit.
> 
> If someone is a clean artist, then they'll naturally post something clean. But if someone does primarily porn, their image would be best summarising their work, though you don't want things that disgust majorities, as it'll make them leave the gallery rather than browse.


 
If there's porn and clean art from budding artists side-by-side, the porn will be looked at much more. It seems unfair to those with a smaller watchlist because they refuse to draw porn.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

Icky said:


> If there's porn and clean art from budding artists side-by-side, the porn will be looked at much more. It seems unfair to those with a smaller watchlist because they refuse to draw porn.


 

Fuck. This is true. On the other hand, the artists submitting porn to their own accounts will attract more attention to the group and increasing the chance of the clean artists getting looked at.


----------



## Xenke (Mar 26, 2011)

Also, thought, simply because those who join the group first will be least likely to gain more watchers, simply because there will be less members when they join and because their submissions will be last on the list, perhaps a program where an artist can have another submission added once per month or something.

It'd be a bitch to work through, but it'd keep old artists in the group cycling through and not getting forgotten.


----------



## FireFeathers (Mar 26, 2011)

I'd be lying to say i wouldn't keep an eye on this group just for a hoot. 



> If there's porn and clean art from budding artists side-by-side, the porn will be looked at much more. It seems unfair to those with a smaller watchlist because they refuse to draw porn.



IT BEGINS.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Mar 26, 2011)

So their featured work should be a pg13 right?


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

dinosaurdammit said:


> So their featured work should be a pg13 right?


 
This would make more sense than previous stuff.

Firefeathers, I am disappoint. Gonna stop sending you music :C

AND I THOUGHT WE HAD SOMETHING

*sobs*


----------



## Icky (Mar 26, 2011)

FireFeathers said:


> IT BEGINS.


Hey, better I say it now before some butthurt furfag whines that dogdick666's porn is getting more attention.



Smelge said:


> Fuck. This is true. On the other hand, the artists submitting porn to their own accounts will attract more attention to the group and increasing the chance of the clean artists getting looked at.


 
I'm not saying you can't draw porn, I'm just saying the artists submission to the group should be PG-13.


----------



## Folgrimeo (Mar 26, 2011)

I say push through with the idea, trust that it will work reasonably well (honor system and all), and deal with problems as they arise. There's one group which I will refrain from naming, a friend complains it's losing focus of its mission. Be that as it may, it seems to have its heart in the right place and is willing to make changes as needed.

I'm not sure yet whether I'd be willing to participate. I can think of a piece of art I'd use to represent myself, though I never sign my drawings, so I'd be slapping my FA address on it when I have no intention of having such a version in my gallery (I'd throw it in Scraps, but I use Scraps for a lot of art too, rather than a dumping ground for subpar stuff). I might be able to recommend artists in my furry travels though, the art I save comes from wildly different artists, although usually through other person's faves.


----------



## FireFeathers (Mar 26, 2011)

Smelge said:


> This would make more sense than previous stuff.
> 
> Firefeathers, I am disappoint. Gonna stop sending you music :C
> 
> ...


 

We'll always have Muse, man! We'll always have Muse!



Icky said:


> Hey, better I say it now before some butthurt furfag whines that dogdick666's porn is getting more attention.


 
Nah, i agree with you; i personally think the idea is nice, but people aren't that nice.


----------



## Smelge (Mar 26, 2011)

FireFeathers said:


> We'll always have Muse, man! We'll always have Muse!


 
[yt]h8vJFgtv90I[/yt]


----------



## FireFeathers (Mar 26, 2011)

*runs off into the sunset*


----------



## Iudicium_86 (Apr 8, 2011)

Sounds good to me and I'll deff support if this becomes reality. Would also make a great networking opportunity for trades and such.


----------



## HillyRoars (Apr 8, 2011)

I wouldn't mind joining in on something like this seems like fun and helpful! I love to get opinions on my work and more views and would help of course :3


(Heheh I just looked at my watcher number "63", It's double from what I thought D *throws mini party*)


----------



## Smelge (Apr 8, 2011)

Working on it.

That is all I shall say for the moment.


----------



## Productmur (Apr 11, 2011)

I'd love to join something like this~ It'd not only been nice to get some more hits, but also viewing other artists would be fun. ^_^


----------

