# Who is this f**k?



## psu3doreal (Aug 7, 2010)

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8253/richassfurry.png


----------



## EdieFantabulous (Aug 7, 2010)

Sounds like a funny guy.


----------



## Glitch (Aug 7, 2010)

So?
The commissioners paid shittons for it.  He can spend the money however he wants.


----------



## Machine (Aug 7, 2010)

I don't get it.

EDIT: Lol pricing.


----------



## EdieFantabulous (Aug 7, 2010)

I would kick a guy in the face if I even heard any of those numbers come up when I am paying for something.
Unless I am buying something worth it.


----------



## Chibinight13 (Aug 7, 2010)

HA OMFG thats funny! WTF?really???thats really bad. whoa.....
He said you can spot his artwork hmm, time to dig...


----------



## Smelge (Aug 7, 2010)

Genius.

I've never had the balls to do porn shit, I can do artisticy nudity, but not the porn, but I have always wondered how many views and watches and cash I could be pulling in if I just went "I WILL DRAW PORNS"


----------



## Tycho (Aug 7, 2010)

lol.

He's not far off the mark.


----------



## Ben (Aug 7, 2010)

I'm guessing you're new to 4chan, considering you don't know that all 4chan posts 404 within 10 minutes to a day. With that in mind, I'd suggest you run away before it's too late.

And yeah, honestly, I never understood how furries can spend so much on furry art and furry porn. I can understand buying commissions from your friends to support them, but when it comes to pretty much collecting porn from every artist you can, regardless of the cost... well, I guess that's just personal preference. Still weirds me out though.

EDIT: oops I can't link to things from waffleimages, how do I something awful


----------



## Chibinight13 (Aug 7, 2010)

Oh i think they took it down...


----------



## Willow (Aug 7, 2010)

So the guy set up expensive commissions and people paid for them? More power to him I guess.


----------



## Anon1 (Aug 7, 2010)

Well shit, that's honestly how I hoped it'd go for me...


----------



## Zseliq (Aug 7, 2010)

lol Wish I had that kind of money to throw around on a picture.


----------



## SirRob (Aug 7, 2010)

$120 for a sketch? Wooooow. I can't believe people would spend that much money for a sketch. That guy must be _really_ popular.


----------



## Glitch (Aug 7, 2010)

SirRob said:


> $120 for a sketch? Wooooow. I can't believe people would spend that much money for a sketch. That guy must be _really_ popular.


 
Remember, these are furries we're talking about.


----------



## Willow (Aug 7, 2010)

SirRob said:


> $120 for a sketch? Wooooow. I can't believe people would spend that much money for a sketch. That guy must be _really_ popular.


 Furries will pay anything just to get a picture of their character. Porn or not. Though porn is a good incentive for it. 

I feel bad for banking on the generosity of artists doing free sketches, if I could I would pay a reasonable amount for a sketch though.


----------



## CannonFodder (Aug 7, 2010)

SirRob said:


> $120 for a sketch? Wooooow. I can't believe people would spend that much money for a sketch. That guy must be _really_ popular.


 Even blotch doesn't charge that much.


----------



## Zenia (Aug 7, 2010)

If only I could make money like that. XDD


----------



## SirRob (Aug 7, 2010)

Willow said:


> Furries will pay anything just to get a picture of their character. Porn or not. Though porn is a good incentive for it.
> 
> I feel bad for banking on the generosity of artists doing free sketches, if I could I would pay a reasonable amount for a sketch though.


It's just so much money... They could've gotten any FA artist to draw a sketch for much less...


CannonFodder said:


> Even blotch doesn't charge that much.


I would if I was Blotch.


----------



## Zerksis (Aug 7, 2010)

For that kind of green, the art better be done on solid gold.


----------



## Willow (Aug 7, 2010)

SirRob said:


> It's just so much money... They could've gotten any FA artist to draw a sketch for much less...


 Or completely free. 



Zerksis said:


> For that kind of green, the art better be done on solid gold.


 And a painted portrait.


----------



## CannonFodder (Aug 7, 2010)

SirRob said:


> I would if I was Blotch.


 But think about it, blotch doesn't even charge that much.


----------



## slydude851 (Aug 7, 2010)

The pricing makes me laugh a little.  $150 for some furry porn.  Why pay when you can get it for free


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 7, 2010)

So something as detailed as Farewell to Earth would cost me $1,540?  Or just an mspaint-rendered scene like it?



Ben said:


> I'm guessing you're new to 4chan, considering you don't know that all 4chan posts 404 within 10 minutes to a day. With that in mind, I'd suggest you run away before it's too late.



You're thinking of 4chan/b/, and you're correct there, but 4chan's other boards have much longer lasting threads even if the intelligence is barely on par with the rest of the 'Net.



Smelge said:


> Genius.
> 
> I've never had the balls to do porn shit, I can do artisticy nudity, but not the porn, but I have always wondered how many views and watches and cash I could be pulling in if I just went "I WILL DRAW PORNS"


 
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/473932/ - Porn or not, art matters for faves and watches.


----------



## TreacleFox (Aug 7, 2010)

It has to be fake. -.-"


----------



## Wyldfyre (Aug 7, 2010)

Meadow said:


> It has to be fake. -.-"


 I thought that, but knowing /b/ I'm not so sure.


----------



## psu3doreal (Aug 7, 2010)

Ben said:


> I'm guessing you're new to 4chan, considering you don't know that all 4chan posts 404 within 10 minutes to a day. With that in mind, I'd suggest you run away before it's too late.
> 
> And yeah, honestly, I never understood how furries can spend so much on furry art and furry porn. I can understand buying commissions from your friends to support them, but when it comes to pretty much collecting porn from every artist you can, regardless of the cost... well, I guess that's just personal preference. Still weirds me out though.
> 
> EDIT: oops I can't link to things from waffleimages, how do I something awful


 

It's /ic/, it'll be there for at least a day.


----------



## Takun (Aug 7, 2010)

SIIIIGH


----------



## Willow (Aug 7, 2010)

Takun said:


> SIIIIGH


 Foolishly foolish indeed.


----------



## Oovie (Aug 7, 2010)

Sounds about right, what about those dildos furries buy from Bad Dragon? Those guys will buy collections of them, it's like he's selling them pixelated dildos.


----------



## Smelge (Aug 7, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/473932/ - Porn or not, art matters for faves and watches.


 
I'm going to sound like a 9/11 truther, and say the comparison is irrelevant.

Let's look at the stats:

Artist: Kacey
Submission: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1579896/
*Favorites:*                                                                                          361                                                                                        
*Comments:* 141
*Views:* 1810

Artist: XianJaguar
Submission: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1020825/ (NSFW)
*Favorites:*                                                                                          162                                                                                        
*Comments:* 39
*Views:* 1274

Ok, so Kacey got more pageviews, favourites and comments on her picture of a waterfall, over XianJaguars Fox with tits and ass combo. Fairly clean cut right? The clean art beat the porn art. No. No it didn't. Let's look at this:

Total Watchers

XianJaguar: 4938
Kacey: 14,606

Kacey has over 2.95 times more watchers than Xian. Or, let's assume that only watchers favourited each one.

For Kaceys submission, 1 in every 40 watchers favourited.
For Xian's submission, 1 in every 30 watchers favourited.

So no. The porn submission got more favourites per watcher than the clean one.


----------



## Bir (Aug 7, 2010)

Willow said:


> Or completely free.
> 
> 
> And a painted portrait.



In fine oils.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 7, 2010)

Smelge said:


> I'm going to sound like a 9/11 truther, and say the comparison is irrelevant.
> 
> Let's look at the stats:
> 
> ...


 
That's an interesting perspective.  I hadn't thought of it like that before.

However, the number of watchers only contributes to the number of views one can expect to get, not the number of favorites or the ratio of favorites to any other statistic.  The ratio that matters in this comparison is the fave to view ratio, not the fave to watcher ratio, and I wish Xian had recognized that when she wrote that entry.  Kacey's waterfall painting got one favorite for every 5.02 views, while Xian's nude woodblock piece got one favorite for every 7.86 views.

While the subject matter does weigh heavily, perhaps far more in a niche fandom such as furry, the quality of art tends to weigh more still.  But when commissions are figured in, heh, stats be damned in far too many facepalm-worthy cases, such as the funny thing on a wet weekend.


----------



## Trance (Aug 7, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> Even blotch doesn't charge that much.


 
She doesn't?

Well, damn.  Maybe I want a sketch from Blotch then.  
She's an absolute beast at furry art.

Oh shit, i'm thinking about spending money on furry art... *facepalm*


----------



## Tycho (Aug 7, 2010)

Wow.  That waterfall piece by Kacey is gorgeous.

Deserves a better place to be showcased than FA :V


----------



## Defcat (Aug 7, 2010)

Wyldfyre said:


> I thought that, but knowing /b/ I'm not so sure.


Knowing /b/ it could be fake, but it could be real quite soon.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 7, 2010)

Defcat said:


> Knowing /b/ it could be fake, but it could be real quite soon.


 
It isn't /b/.  It's still 4chan, but not /b/.  At the risk of the link going 404 by the time anyone sees it: http://boards.4chan.org/ic/res/766573 http://boards.4chan.org/ic/res/766573#767660 [forgot to link to the relevant post.  >.<]

Edit:





Tycho said:


> Wow.  That waterfall piece by Kacey is gorgeous.
> 
> Deserves a better place to be showcased than FA :V



I was going to link you to the same piece on her site, otonashi.net, but the Miyagamis have taken it offline for revamp and put a link parking page in its place, two of those linking right back here to FA.


----------



## Willow (Aug 8, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> It isn't /b/.  It's still 4chan, but not /b/.  At the risk of the link going 404 by the time anyone sees it: http://boards.4chan.org/ic/res/766573


 That was just..wow.


----------



## Ikrit (Aug 8, 2010)

people always look at the porn more instead of the clean
i bet if i draw a dick it will get more views then anything in my submissions


----------



## Smelge (Aug 8, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> That's an interesting perspective.  I hadn't thought of it like that before.
> 
> However, the number of watchers only contributes to the number of views one can expect to get, not the number of favorites or the ratio of favorites to any other statistic.  The ratio that matters in this comparison is the fave to view ratio, not the fave to watcher ratio, and I wish Xian had recognized that when she wrote that entry.  Kacey's waterfall painting got one favorite for every 5.02 views, while Xian's nude woodblock piece got one favorite for every 7.86 views.


 
I was trying to come up with a better statistic, but it was 4am and I couldn't get my head around it.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Aug 8, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Wow.  That waterfall piece by Kacey is gorgeous.
> 
> Deserves a better place to be showcased than FA :V


 
Yes.  My wall.  |3

Sounds like N..0G...


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 8, 2010)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Sounds like N..0G...


 
EXACTLY what i was thinking. ^
i googled around for this exact post somewhere (or those prices) and i haven't found anything...


----------



## Fenrari (Aug 8, 2010)

The top commissioners that I can think of wouldn't be on 4chan. It could be someone working for hardblush though.


----------



## Aden (Aug 8, 2010)

I'm being seriously entertained by people who think $150 is a lot of money to dump on an art commission.

Furries have it _very_ cheap.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 8, 2010)

Aden said:


> I'm being seriously entertained by people who think $150 is a lot of money to dump on an art commission.
> 
> Furries have it _very_ cheap.


 
touche...but we are talking furry standards. MY FURSONA IS A WOLF WITH GLOWSTICKS AND GLITTERGREEN HAIR is a little less in depth than "i'd like a painting of my boyfriend and i's DNA to hang above my sofa."


----------



## psu3doreal (Aug 8, 2010)

Aden said:


> I'm being seriously entertained by people who think $150 is a lot of money to dump on an art commission.
> 
> Furries have it _very_ cheap.


 
I'm seriously entertained by people who think that the vast majority if furry "art" is worth dropping $150 on. You DO realize that the reason art is so expensive is because it's an INVESTMENT, right? If there's almost no chance of you being able to sell it later, an exorbitant price like that is ridiculous. And let's not even get into the quality (or lack thereof) or a light of work in this fandom. The only reason people put down so much for commissions is because people have always been willing to put down shittons on what gets them off.


----------



## Willow (Aug 8, 2010)

$150 is a lot of money for a digital drawing to say the least. Especially if it's just of one character. 

If I'm going to be paying that much it better be a painting I can hang in my house, like Harley said.


----------



## greg-the-fox (Aug 8, 2010)

I totally need to get in on this :V


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 8, 2010)

psu3doreal said:


> I'm seriously entertained by people who think that the vast majority if furry "art" is worth dropping $150 on. You DO realize that the reason art is so expensive is because it's an INVESTMENT, right? If there's almost no chance of you being able to sell it later, an exorbitant price like that is ridiculous. And let's not even get into the quality (or lack thereof) or a light of work in this fandom. The only reason people put down so much for commissions is because people have always been willing to put down shittons on what gets them off.


 
some people don't have stupid shit like video games or car parts to spend money on, so they get what they want. it's no more ridiculous than someone who pours their entire paycheck into a '91 volkswagon jetta that's on it's last leg anyway. IT'S BECAUSE HE LOVES THAT CAR ; A ; HE LOVES IT SO MUCH! or a bro who shelled out 500 for a brand new PS3 that will gain him nothing expect for arthritis at a sooner age.


----------



## Foryk (Aug 8, 2010)

Stuff like this is probably the biggest reason I'm embarrassed by my fandom.


----------



## ShadowEon (Aug 8, 2010)

Lucky Bastard.Must be nice to get all that money despite being a douche.


----------



## Willow (Aug 8, 2010)

Foryk said:


> Stuff like this is probably the biggest reason I'm embarrassed by my fandom.


 You sure it isn't because of the porn and such?


----------



## Machine (Aug 8, 2010)

Willow said:


> You sure it isn't because of the porn and such?


I was about to say that, but I got bored.

I would never buy art from someone who doesn't post an example of their drawing skills.


----------



## Willow (Aug 8, 2010)

Amphion said:


> I would never buy art from someone who doesn't post an example of their drawing skills.


 I don't request free art from anyone unless they have a few examples of their art.


----------



## Foryk (Aug 8, 2010)

Willow said:


> You sure it isn't because of the porn and such?


 That's a close second.


----------



## Willow (Aug 8, 2010)

Foryk said:


> That's a close second.


 Here's your complimentary facepalm


----------



## Foryk (Aug 8, 2010)

Yes, I realize all fandoms have porn. >3>


----------



## Willow (Aug 8, 2010)

Foryk said:


> Yes, I realize all fandoms have porn. >3>


 And every fandom and subculture has people who will pay hundreds of dollars for art and other things associated with their hobby or whatever. 
The porn and hyper-sexed furries are the more embarrassing things here.


----------



## Foryk (Aug 8, 2010)

Well, I think I drove this conversation far enough off track.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 8, 2010)

Foryk said:


> That's a close second.


 
if you're so embarrassed, you should probably leave. there's no reason to be embarrassed.


----------



## Foryk (Aug 9, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> if you're so embarrassed, you should probably leave. there's no reason to be embarrassed.


 
That would be like asking me to leave my family. I'm embarrassed by them sometimes, but I don't run out of the house because of it.


----------



## Machine (Aug 9, 2010)

Foryk said:


> That would be like asking me to leave my* family*. I'm embarrassed by them sometimes, but I don't run out of the house because of it.


Jesus, you're one of _them._


----------



## Foryk (Aug 9, 2010)

Amphion said:


> Jesus, you're one of _them._


What do y-

Wait... You don't think I think of _any_ of you as family, do you?

Yeeg! No. Not unless I'm married or related by blood or marriage would I consider a furry family. I'm just making a point that embarrassment is no reason for abandoning.


----------



## HotRodLincoln (Aug 9, 2010)

Is it wrong that I thought of this when I read the title?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsrfovOPcjk


----------



## Scotty1700 (Aug 9, 2010)

I like how he talks about "being desperate and getting money from it" with his prices already THAT HIGH.

"GUiz help, I need you to commission me for only $200 each!"


----------



## Dushar (Aug 9, 2010)

I can understand making a living, some times we hate the people we do jobs for but, if the money is right you deal with it but, insaulting the costomer is a bad idea, the internet does not make one anonomymous, there are ways of finding out who did what, its on the level of some one coming into my place of work, buying something, and then me saying " Thank you for buying is over price object, you stupid f*cking moron ", their not coming back, their telling their freinds, and I close up shop, the end.


----------



## Slyck (Aug 9, 2010)

That fuck is yo momma.


----------



## Kikyo (Aug 9, 2010)

Hey, people have paid me to do sketches for them.
Of course, nothing nearly as much as that guy is charging...
But, I guess if people will pay it, why not charge high?


----------



## IInquis (Aug 10, 2010)

Reading through the whole 4chan thread there, he's apparently received scholarships coming out of high school art classes, and studies fine arts and animation. Giving him (her?) the benefit of the doubt, I'd say they know their way around a pencil/styus. Enough so to justify the prices in the minds of their commisioners. Man, I really want to see this guy's work, I wonder if I already have.
He also apparently delivers, on time, and all the time, furs have been plenty scammed by actual furs for more money. Sure, for a hundred bucks you'd most likely be looking at a full colour piece from the general fandom, but if you don't actually get anything in the end...

I just wish I could outdo the bastard, but I couldn't afford the classes and gear. ,,,,;-;,,,,
Well no, I'm just too lazy. Still broke though.

On the other hand, he says he'd post an example of his work, but his style is apparently very distinctive, I'd think a proffesional would be able to disguise themself rather easily. Drawing in only one style forever means stagnation. Unless he actually has created a specific style for the fandom work, though I still don't see why they wouldn't be able to dig up something we wouldn't recognise. If he does all this work, there'd have to be at least one pic at hand that nobody would be able to peg.
But still, I believe it, just really really want to see the arts. D:


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 10, 2010)

Kikyo said:


> Hey, people have paid me to do sketches for them.
> Of course, nothing nearly as much as that guy is charging...
> But, I guess if people will pay it, why not charge high?


 
because 1. a lot of artists that charge high AREN'T worth the price. 45 dollars for a badge...what the fuck. when better artists will do it for 20. 
2. it's cheating your fans. if you do thirty dollar work, don't charge 60 just because fans want it. that's using, and that's fucked up. hence why my average commission costs five to ten dollars. it's five to ten dollar work. i wouldnt charge thirty for my commissions because i'm not an asshole.


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 10, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> because 1. a lot of artists that charge high AREN'T worth the price. 45 dollars for a badge...what the fuck. when better artists will do it for 20.
> 2. it's cheating your fans. if you do thirty dollar work, don't charge 60 just because fans want it. that's using, and that's fucked up. hence why my average commission costs five to ten dollars. it's five to ten dollar work. i wouldnt charge thirty for my commissions because i'm not an asshole.



Worth is relative Harley, it may not be worth $60 to you but if other people are willing to pay it then it must be worth that much to them. If you like the badges one artist is doing for $20 more than the ones another artist is doing for $45 then by all means, get the $20 badge, but if other people are willing to pay $45 for the other artist's badges there's no reason for them to charge any less. Supply and demand and all that :V .


----------



## Asswings (Aug 10, 2010)

Uh. $150, if the artist has any fame, is a totally decent price.
Fuck, anywhere but the furry fandom, no one would bat an eye. 
I mean hell, I was at Emerald City ComicCon and Koi Pham (might have misspelled that name, sorry) was doing sketches for over $100 and he had a lot of people getting them.


----------



## Attaman (Aug 10, 2010)

Ticon said:


> Uh. $150, if the artist has any fame, is a totally decent price.
> Fuck, anywhere but the furry fandom, no one would bat an eye.


  Can think of an artist that does posed, colored, shaded, full-body images of multiple people for about $10 each character.  Can think of another who does the same for sketches at $5 for the first and $3 thereafter.  Lastly I can actually pull up a journal of someone who (for about five minutes) would do six colored characters for $25 USD.  A little over $4 / person on average.  

Unless you're getting some stupidly high quality shit, $150 is absurd pricing that (insofar as I can tell) is pretty much restricted to either big-name artists or the Furry Fandom (or, more aptly, both at the same time).  It's amazing how much "I draw penis with bloom" can make a Furry go from thinking "Hm, $75 is a little pricey" to "OMG A STEAL I'LL TAKE THREE SLOTS!"


----------



## Lobar (Aug 10, 2010)

If this wasn't fake (it is), the +$20 per nude would be a dead giveaway on trying to identify who this was guys.


----------



## CannonFodder (Aug 10, 2010)

Lobar said:


> If this wasn't fake (it is), the *+$20 per nude* would be a dead giveaway on trying to identify who this was guys.


*edit*
Nvm, she doesn't charge that much.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Aug 10, 2010)

Aden said:


> I'm being seriously entertained by people who think $150 is a lot of money to dump on an art commission.
> 
> Furries have it _very_ cheap.


 
We're poor bastards.


----------



## Black Viper (Aug 12, 2010)

That's the nice entrepeneurial spirit


----------



## Chibinight13 (Aug 13, 2010)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> We're poor bastards.


sad but true....


----------



## Fenris Ookami (Aug 13, 2010)

that is just awesome lol   no way in hell id pay for him but still very funny


----------



## Ffzzynxnynxxyninx (Aug 13, 2010)

I was gonna commission Fluke once, but I couldn't afford it. I won't knock him for his pricing cause Fluke is one of the great artists on FA. But here's the quote I got from him:

*$105 for a one or two character full color, with no background, or a very simple background such as a color gradient or wash. Obviously with a 1 character I can put more detail and work into rendering said character fully.

For everything listed above but with a more detailed background (landscapes/rooms/anything goes, though I do have a preference for landscapes) it would be an additional $105. Each additional character will be $52.25*

I'm not sure his art isn't worth the price. He does very detailed work.


----------



## Takun (Aug 13, 2010)

Pianowolfy said:


> I was gonna commission Fluke once, but I couldn't afford it. I won't knock him for his pricing cause Fluke is one of the great artists on FA. But here's the quote I got from him:
> 
> *$105 for a one or two character full color, with no background, or a very simple background such as a color gradient or wash. Obviously with a 1 character I can put more detail and work into rendering said character fully.
> 
> ...


 
I have nothing against Fluke and I think he does at times really great work, but you can tell when he doesn't put as much work into something.  He also seemed to go through an awkward transitional phase and seems to be having trouble blending his style in with the backgrounds to where the characters don't stick out like a sore thumb.  The badges he just did?  Phenomenal.  A lot of the work before that seemed lacking in areas.  Seems like in a few years he really could be worth the price.  Right now I feel like you are paying for the popular name.  Nylak is one of them people on here I feel really fits the high price.

Hi Nylak.  :3


----------



## Ffzzynxnynxxyninx (Aug 13, 2010)

Well it definately depends. I haven't really scoped out a lot of his art in a while, but I have one of his pics as my desktop background. *finds it* 

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4048270/ 

There it is. This to me is Fluke's strongest work that he's posted on FA. It is absolutely beautiful. The use of color in the clouds and the textures, the facial expression, the theme, everything in this pic is gorgeous. If I were into art collecting or whatever as a hobby, I would absolutely pay a few hundred for this pic.


----------



## Odd (Aug 13, 2010)

I'm taking notes.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 13, 2010)

Pianowolfy said:


> I was gonna commission Fluke once, but I couldn't afford it. I won't knock him for his pricing cause Fluke is one of the great artists on FA. But here's the quote I got from him:
> 
> *$105 for a one or two character full color, with no background, or a very simple background such as a color gradient or wash. Obviously with a 1 character I can put more detail and work into rendering said character fully.
> 
> ...


 
i'm sorry, but that's bullshit. that is INSANE pricing for his artwork. he may be one of the top two artists on FA, but that doesn't mean he has the right to HORRIBLY overcharge his prices. that's really messed up :/ that's total using of fans


----------



## Odd (Aug 13, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> i'm sorry, but that's bullshit. that is INSANE pricing for his artwork. he may be one of the top two artists on FA, but that doesn't mean he has the right to HORRIBLY overcharge his prices. that's really messed up :/ that's total using of fans



This is my, I'd have to disagree shpeel. Artists are free to choose their price range, this is a given. Most artists who work by commission and are worth their salt don't just randomly pull prices out of their ass, and have take into account what's going to be demanded of them, especially if they're in demand or talented enough where they would need to factor in costs of materials and time. If nobody wants to pay, they don't have to or can negotiate a discount and eventually the prices will drop. If their work is in demand, well they're obviously doing something right.

It's not extortion, is business at it's most basic.


----------



## Xenke (Aug 13, 2010)

Odd said:


> This is my, I'd have to disagree shpeel. Artists are free to choose their price range, this is a given. Most artists who work by commission and are worth their salt don't just randomly pull prices out of their ass, and have take into account what's going to be demanded of them, especially if they're in demand or talented enough where they would need to factor in costs of materials and time. If nobody wants to pay, they don't have to or can negotiate a discount and eventually the prices will drop. If their work is in demand, well they're obviously doing something right.
> 
> It's not extortion, is business at it's most basic.


 
I like you because I agree.

Even though I dislike Fluke's art.


----------



## Odd (Aug 13, 2010)

Xenke said:


> I like you because I agree.
> 
> Even though I dislike Fluke's art.


 I don't even know this Fluke.

Am I doing it wrong?


----------



## Aden (Aug 13, 2010)

Pianowolfy said:


> Well it definately depends. I haven't really scoped out a lot of his art in a while, but I have one of his pics as my desktop background. *finds it*
> 
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4048270/
> 
> There it is. This to me is Fluke's strongest work that he's posted on FA. It is absolutely beautiful.



Huh, ...I could probably do that.



> The use of color in the clouds and the textures, the facial expression, the theme, everything in this pic is gorgeous. If I were into art collecting or whatever as a hobby, *I would absolutely pay a few hundred for this pic*.


 
Noted. :B


----------



## Syrella (Aug 13, 2010)

Wow, crazy prices. I wish I could ask that much and still hope to sell anything. xD 

My opinion: Artists are free to charge what they want. It sucks for those who are looking to buy/commission art, but y'know what? If an artist can get away with charging that, they damn well should. Artists are often underpaid as a whole. Hence the term starving artist, yeah? Yes, he may be taking advantage of the system as it is, but hey, that's good business. And so long as the demand and supply is there, he will continue to do so.

Would I personally pay $100 for a sketch? Probably not.


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 13, 2010)

Pianowolfy said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4048270/



Wow, that's...not good at all. The more I look at it the more flaws I notice. The hand holding the beer is terrible, so are the clothes. He doesn't seem to understand how light works, and I'm fairly certain the beer bottle was just lifted from a photo, that stone wall looks suspicious as well. No amount of detail can hide glaring anatomical and perspective fuck ups, and this guy's work is lazy and sloppy as fuck. I should certainly hope he's improved a lot since he made this if he's charging that kind of money. "edit: lol nope, still just as bad :V ."

Also lol at all the people who think a couple hundred dollars for good art is unreasonably high, not that the average furfag could tell the difference anyway :V .


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 13, 2010)

Takun said:


> I have nothing against Fluke and I think he does at times really great work, but you can tell when he doesn't put as much work into something.  He also seemed to go through an awkward transitional phase and seems to be having trouble blending his style in with the backgrounds to where the characters don't stick out like a sore thumb.  The badges he just did?  Phenomenal.  A lot of the work before that seemed lacking in areas.  Seems like in a few years he really could be worth the price.  Right now I feel like you are paying for the popular name.  Nylak is one of them people on here I feel really fits the high price.
> 
> Hi Nylak.  :3



I can see tonnes of fuckups in those badges Takun. Fluke isn't a good artist, at all, I don't think he ever will be. Nylak on the other hand is totally worth what she charges.


----------



## Geek (Aug 13, 2010)

I think the price is reasonable for the art industry compared to the domain industry:

according to greatdomains.com OLX.EE sold for $7,500

.ee (Estonia)

For $100 i could buy 10 domain names for $10 each at godaddy and sell them for thousands or better... millions at sedo:

http://sedo.com/search/searchresult.php4?tracked=&partnerid=&language=us


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 13, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> Wow, that's...not good at all. The more I look at it the more flaws I notice. The hand holding the beer is terrible, so are the clothes. He doesn't seem to understand how light works, and I'm fairly certain the beer bottle was just lifted from a photo, that stone wall looks suspicious as well. No amount of detail can hide glaring anatomical and perspective fuck ups, and this guy's work is lazy and sloppy as fuck. I should certainly hope he's improved a lot since he made this if he's charging that kind of money. "edit: lol nope, still just as bad :V ."
> 
> Also lol at all the people who think a couple hundred dollars for good art is unreasonably high, not that the average furfag could tell the difference anyway :V .



YES! that's exactly what i'm saying! i mean, i get what he's going for, but his drastic popularity seems to overshadow his lack of obvious skills (mind you, i don't have those skills either, but i don't charge 260 for a three character picture with background. jussayin'). the leg is what bothers me the most with that picture. i see that he's trying to set it a certain way, but the lack of detail needed in the pants just left it looking awkward and broken. i honed in on that right away.



Whitenoise said:


> I can see tonnes of fuckups in those badges Takun. Fluke isn't a good artist, at all, I don't think he ever will be. Nylak on the other hand is totally worth what she charges.


 
but because he is so popular, people will sell their car to buy art from him. and other high-popularity artists who are only up there because they draw mostly canids. disregarding some of them are whiny babies who leave the fandom for petty reasons.


----------



## CannonFodder (Aug 13, 2010)

So it's fluke?
*looks through fluke's fa*
JESUS H TAPDANCING CHRIST?!!!
I know he is popular and all, but feck me that's overcharging.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Aug 13, 2010)

Pianowolfy said:


> Well it definately depends. I haven't really scoped out a lot of his art in a while, but I have one of his pics as my desktop background. *finds it*
> 
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4048270/
> 
> There it is. This to me is Fluke's strongest work that he's posted on FA. It is absolutely beautiful. The use of color in the clouds and the textures, the facial expression, the theme, everything in this pic is gorgeous. If I were into art collecting or whatever as a hobby, I would absolutely pay a few hundred for this pic.


 You're just saying that because it's Fluke, everyone's favorite gay dog penis artist. And I really have no idea what makes this piece of "art" so great. Just because he can draw some anthropomorphic canine looking at a sunset doesn't change the fact that the art is fucking hideous.


----------



## Ffzzynxnynxxyninx (Aug 13, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> You're just saying that because it's Fluke, everyone's favorite gay dog penis artist. And I really have no idea what makes this piece of "art" so great. Just because he can draw some anthropomorphic canine looking at a sunset doesn't change the fact that the art is fucking hideous.


 
Whoa, take it easy, Jim Rome. 

I like the background and the character's expression. To me it's worth the price for anyone willing to pay it. You don't have to like it :V


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 13, 2010)

It's purely a matter of preference and subjectivity.  To wit, people are willing to pay thousands of dollars for paintings that look like the results of either a bad kegger party or a good kegger party.


----------



## Ffzzynxnynxxyninx (Aug 13, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> It's purely a matter of preference and subjectivity.  To wit, people are willing to pay thousands of dollars for paintings that look like the results of either a bad kegger party or a good kegger party.


 
Yeaaahhhhh those ones I don't get. It's like someone who takes a ketchup and mustard bottle and goes crazy on a canvas, then turns it for 10 thousand dollars. o.o


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 13, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> YES! that's exactly what i'm saying! i  mean, i get what he's going for, but his drastic popularity seems to  overshadow his lack of obvious skills (mind you, i don't have those  skills either, but i don't charge 260 for a three character picture with  background. jussayin'). the leg is what bothers me the most with that  picture. i see that he's trying to set it a certain way, but the lack of  detail needed in the pants just left it looking awkward and broken. i  honed in on that right away.
> 
> but because he is so popular, people will sell their car to buy art from  him. and other high-popularity artists who are only up there because  they draw mostly canids. disregarding some of them are whiny babies who  leave the fandom for petty reasons.



Thing is if furfags are stupid enough to pay big bucks for this shit they deserve to get ripped off, a fool and his money are soon parted and all that. Honestly I've got to respect this guy, looks like he's got an awesome scam going. With all the obvious corners he appears to be cutting I can't imagine these take more than an hour or two, $105+ for a couple hours work isn't bad at all. Also Im glad all those dogcock mongling manchildren are fawning over this guy instead of genuinely talented artists. I'd rather they weren't here at all, but if they have to be I think it's better that they stick to their own shitty corner of the fandom and leave the real artists alone.



Kellie Gator said:


> You're just saying that because it's Fluke, everyone's favorite gay dog penis artist. And I really have no idea what makes this piece of "art" so great. Just because he can draw some anthropomorphic canine looking at a sunset doesn't change the fact that the art is fucking hideous.



Ya, it's pretty obvious all of his watchers are just there for the red rockets, I highly doubt they're giving his non-dogcock "art" a second glance. They just see that he's uploaded something with no dicks, arbitrarily declare it "breathtaking" and "spectacular" before going back to stare at the dog peens. I have a feeling furfags do this because they like to pretend that the fandom has a thriving art community, and that they aren't just here to spank it to animal dicks. 

Also I'm pretty sure this guy traces gay porn, and a lot of those $105 dollar backgrounds look like they are just photographs he's crudely painted over, when he can be bothered to do even that, the rest of the time he just runs it though a filter to two and calls it a day. Case in point.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4100923

Look at the "tree" next the the faggot dog thing's face, just look at it. Look at the "leaves" surrounding it. Somebody paid for that, that's fucking hilarious :V .


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 13, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> It's purely a matter of preference and  subjectivity.  To wit, people are willing to pay  thousands  of dollars for paintings that look like the results of either a bad  kegger party or a good kegger party.



That actually isn't terrible, although I think a lot of the value may be in the materials used rather than the art it's self.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 13, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> That actually isn't terrible, although I think a lot of the value may be in the materials used rather than the art it's self.


 
The cynic in me doesn't want to believe that, as possible as it could be.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Aug 13, 2010)

Nylak is awesome.

She needs to do more Avatar: The Last Airbender fanart.  >;{


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 13, 2010)

ArielMT said:


> The cynic in me doesn't want to believe that, as possible as it could be.





? said:


> This abstract painting is a dramatic wash of color *created using  handmade oil paints mixed with the finest pigments and crushed metals*  for added depth and a metallic glow.


The painting it's self isn't terrible, even though I don't find it at all appealing personally, but I think the materials are where the cost comes from. Admittedly mixing crushed gold in with paint is an interesting idea, and it doesn't look as gaudy as I would have thought.


----------



## CannonFodder (Aug 13, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> The painting it's self isn't terrible, even though I don't find it at all appealing personally, but I think the materials are where the cost comes from. Admittedly mixing crushed gold in with paint is an interesting idea, and it doesn't look as gaudy as I would have thought.


 Yeah that is where the cost comes from, the more expensive the paint the higher the quality and why I dropped out of painting cause I couldn't afford the good stuff.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 13, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4100923


 
i would just like to point out that this is the image complete stripped of color and shade.
so, pretty much, we have ourselves a basic furry canid headshot, and it has eight hours of brush strokes into it. no real fucking talent, just very VERY detailed work.
for christ's sake, and there's so many better artists that aren't getting the attention they DESERVE because we have our dogcock artists stealing the spotlight. dicks do wonders on shitty artwork (point being: how much more attention a thumbnailed gay porn picture does than clean art)


----------



## Aden (Aug 13, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> i would just like to point out that this is the image complete stripped of color and shade.
> so, pretty much, we have ourselves a basic furry canid headshot, and it has eight hours of brush strokes into it. no real fucking talent, just very VERY detailed work.


 
Eh, it's not that detailed honestly. I'd say more like an hour and 15 minutes of texturing or less.


----------



## ArielMT (Aug 13, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> The painting it's self isn't terrible, even though I don't find it at all appealing personally, but I think the materials are where the cost comes from. Admittedly mixing crushed gold in with paint is an interesting idea, and it doesn't look as gaudy as I would have thought.


 
I was struggling to find a clear example within the time I could spare, and I did admit that it was the cynic in me that thought otherwise.  Still, people will buy anything if the price is right, no matter how high it seems to anyone else.  Edit: And regarding art, it's because they either don't know or don't care what anyone else sees wrong with it, either.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 13, 2010)

Aden said:


> Eh, it's not that detailed honestly. I'd say more like an hour and 15 minutes of texturing or less.


 
but yet someone would pay 100+ for that...


----------



## Aden (Aug 13, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> but yet someone would pay 100+ for that...


 
Of course. I'm just hoping they'll retain that mentality once I get confident enough to offer commissions.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 13, 2010)

Aden said:


> Of course. I'm just hoping they'll retain that mentality once I get confident enough to offer commissions.


 
start with small but ridiculous prices like 50 dollars for a basic badge. get a few hardcore fans, then say you're raising prices so your cronies agree. "YEA ADEN YOUR WORK IS TOTALLY WORTH 75 FOR A SKETCH!" and then you're set : D


----------



## Asswings (Aug 13, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> i would just like to point out that this is the image complete stripped of color and shade.
> so, pretty much, we have ourselves a basic furry canid headshot, and it has eight hours of brush strokes into it. no real fucking talent, just very VERY detailed work.
> for christ's sake, and there's so many better artists that aren't getting the attention they DESERVE because we have our dogcock artists stealing the spotlight. dicks do wonders on shitty artwork (point being: how much more attention a thumbnailed gay porn picture does than clean art)



Is the background a photo? It looks like it but I'm on my phone. 
And yeah, it's not 8 hours worth of shading. 

But honestly, if people are willing to pay that much, that's how much they should set it. Or otherwise get totally flooded with commissions. Think of it as paying for priviledge.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 13, 2010)

Ticon said:


> Is the background a photo? It looks like it but I'm on my phone.
> And yeah, it's not 8 hours worth of shading.


 
i do believe it is


----------



## Aden (Aug 13, 2010)

Ticon said:


> Is the background a photo? It looks like it but I'm on my phone.


 
No. The leaves are likely referenced from a photo, using a scattering brush and then defocused. Concrete slabs are a simple texture brush above a flat color, shading on the gaps. Tree is a small bit of brushwork.

If I'm wrong about one thing, it's probably a possibility that the leaves are a photo with a photoshop filter applied and saturation turned up, then defocused.

Though he must have at least _some_ skill if you guys are asking.


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 13, 2010)

Aden said:


> No. The leaves are likely referenced from a photo, using a scattering brush and then defocused. Concrete slabs are a simple texture brush above a flat color, shading on the gaps. Tree is a small bit of brushwork.
> 
> If I'm wrong about one thing, it's probably a possibility that the leaves are a photo with a photoshop filter applied and saturation turned up, then defocused.
> 
> Though he must have at least _some_ skill if you guys are asking.



I think it's mostly because Ticon is looking at it on a phone. It's really really obvious that the more detailed elements of most of his backgrounds are altered photographs. Take a look at these, they're better examples.

[NSFW]

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2401335/

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/3969013/

Look at the tiles on each, compare the quality to the rest of the background. Looks to me like he takes a photograph, applyies a few filters and then a really sloppy paint job.


----------



## Aden (Aug 13, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> I think it's mostly because Ticon is looking at it on a phone. It's really really obvious that the more detailed elements of most of his backgrounds are altered photographs. Take a look at these, they're better examples.
> 
> [NSFW]
> 
> ...


 
The tiles on those examples are definitely not his painting job, yeah. I'm guessing free texture site. Then just add photoshop perspective transform and blam. 

The other stuff is probably his doing though. If it were direct from photo it would have a more solid perspective.

I do wonder just how he got so popular...


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 14, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> [NSFW]
> 
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2401335/


 
i think my biggest problem with fluke is that his cumshots look like pearls shot out of milk. they're just little bead bullet things...:C


----------



## Zaraphayx (Aug 14, 2010)

I only skimmed this thread so can someone confirm this is mostly people raging about how clean artists aren't appreciated and drawing cocks with the skill and grace of a 10 year old making a crayon drawing for the fridge is the path to endless commissions, cash, and swimming pools filled with vodka and supermodels?


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 14, 2010)

Zaraphayx said:


> I only skimmed this thread so can someone confirm this is mostly people raging about how clean artists aren't appreciated and drawing cocks with the skill and grace of a 10 year old making a crayon drawing for the fridge is the path to endless commissions, cash, and swimming pools filled with vodka and supermodels?


 
p. much that and a mixture of rage that there are better porn artists than shitty milkbead shooting gay dogcock scribblers


----------



## Zaraphayx (Aug 14, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> p. much that and a mixture of rage that there are better porn artists than shitty milkbead shooting gay dogcock scribblers


 
All I needed to know! brb drawing cocks, playboy mansion here I come.


----------



## Felicia Mertallis (Aug 14, 2010)

The truth hurts. :<


----------



## coward67 (Aug 17, 2010)

I'm guessing a troll... 4chan has all of them, ignore it.


----------



## Gavrill (Aug 17, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I'm guessing a troll... 4chan has all of them, ignore it.


 
haha, what, you don't believe furries are capable of that?


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 17, 2010)

Molly said:


> haha, what, you don't believe furries are capable of that?


 
I'd do it if I needed the money :V .


----------



## TheAnt (Aug 17, 2010)

Meadow said:


> It has to be fake. -.-"


 I agree. I doubt the Anon poster is anything more than a furry-bashing troll. I take everything he said with a grain of salt.


----------



## slorrel (Aug 17, 2010)

Wow, what a f**ktard!


----------



## CombatRaccoon (Aug 18, 2010)

Ben said:


> I'm guessing you're new to 4chan, considering you don't know that all 4chan posts 404 within 10 minutes to a day. With that in mind, I'd suggest you run away before it's too late.
> 
> And yeah, honestly, I never understood how furries can spend so much on furry art and furry porn. I can understand buying commissions from your friends to support them, but when it comes to pretty much collecting porn from every artist you can, regardless of the cost... well, I guess that's just personal preference. Still weirds me out though.
> 
> EDIT: oops I can't link to things from waffleimages, how do I something awful



OH HI BEN!

I SEE YOUR ON THE FORUMS WHATS UP? YOU BETTER BE COMIN' OVER THURSDAY!


----------



## CrazyLee (Aug 18, 2010)

It's too bad the guy didn't screencap the rest of the thread, I'd be interested in seeing the responses.


----------



## Alaskan Wolf (Aug 21, 2010)

I never understood why it's breathtaking that art can cost so much. I mean seriously, professional art can go for thousands of dollars, and no one thinks that's expensive. It's art, therefore, it deserves that price tag. If anything, it's surprising that people who are as good as they are are so _cheap_ to commission. Depending on how good this guy is, he might be making well deserved money. I would gladly pay upwards of 100-200 dollars for a well drawn piece of artwork. That kind of price tag is nothing comparatively. Now, if he's making bank from complete and utter shit, then I'll just be on my way out.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 21, 2010)

Alaskan Wolf said:


> I never understood why it's breathtaking that art can cost so much. I mean seriously, professional art can go for thousands of dollars, and no one thinks that's expensive. It's art, therefore, it deserves that price tag. If anything, it's surprising that people who are as good as they are are so _cheap_ to commission. Depending on how good this guy is, he might be making well deserved money. I would gladly pay upwards of 100-200 dollars for a well drawn piece of artwork. That kind of price tag is nothing comparatively. Now, if he's making bank from complete and utter shit, then I'll just be on my way out.


 
i think it's more how much of a dick this guy is about it.


----------



## Phantasm (Aug 22, 2010)

The guy in the post is a dick and likely a troll, but a LOT of people don't really understand what goes into art and why it costs so much...

When you pay for a commission, you pay for more than just a piece of art. You are paying for:

1. Years and years of practice, that takes time...
2. Did the artist take art classes? Well, those weren't free...
3. Paints? Canvas? Paper? Markers? A used set of prismacolors 156 markers cost me $200 and I still didn't get all the colors I wanted and a single tube of decent paint can be as much as $10 for a few ounces!
4. Oh wait, maybe the artist does digital! They don't have those same costs, right? Wrong! Some artists bought their software legitimately which is VERY pricey. Even for the ones that didnt, they still had to purchase their tablet, their computer, their electricity, possibly a chair that doesn't hurt their back (Which I need myself, ouch!)
and 5. The actual time involved in the piece.

It's the same idea as why doctors and lawyers are paid so much. They've invested VAST amounts of money and time to become good at their craft, shouldn't artists be allowed to expect a decent return on their investments as well?

Basically, even digitial artists have costs to recoup and it is more than fair, and expected by normal business practices, for them to offset those costs onto the price of their commissions...

Second, supply and demand. Would you rather make 100 pieces for $1 or 2 pieces for $50? If we stock up on $1 commissions, we won't have much extra time to ourselves and that burns us out! We have to manage our time wisely, especially if there is high demand for our work. We can't spent 16 hours a day working on commissions, we have households and families and pets to take care and shows we want to watch too!

After all the costs I've mentioned, not even including general living expenses, the average furry artist is making probably $2/hr. That's less than half of the national minimum wage in the USA. So why should an artist bother spending two hours slaving and putting their heart and soul into a piece of art when they can get the same amount of money flipping burgers at the local Wendy's for one hour (which takes absolutely no practice, training and the equipment is supplied to you free of charge)?

The reason people think furry art is so expensive is because most furry artists are teens and young adults who know nothing about business and don't know they're undercharging and don't realize that they're getting less doing work than a welfare recipient is getting sitting on their butt. Especially so with ones that live at home, they just don't have the same expenses others have and don't realize their work is worth more.

TLDR; If you think $100 is expensive for a commission, don't ever visit an actual art gallery.


----------



## DarkAssassinFurry (Aug 22, 2010)

I facepalmed IRL. Dear God.


----------



## Velystord (Aug 22, 2010)

it really just depends what the next guy is willing to pay for it


----------



## FunkyMuiscWhiteDude (Aug 23, 2010)

psu3doreal said:


> http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/8253/richassfurry.png


 Dude's got the right mindset if he's got people actually paying him for porn.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 23, 2010)

FunkyMuiscWhiteDude said:


> Dude's got the right mindset if he's got people actually paying him for porn.


 
lol at your misspelled username.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Aug 23, 2010)

That guy can handle money properly and use the furry's weakness - a brain that is an animal's.
He is probably a jew, due his economy brain and money caulculating.


----------



## Whitenoise (Aug 23, 2010)

CynicalCirno said:


> That guy can handle money properly and use the furry's weakness - a brain that is an animal's.
> He is probably a jew, due his economy brain and money calculating.



Holy fuck lol.

Have I ever told you how much I enjoy your posts CynicalCirno? Because it's a fuck of a lot :V .


----------



## CynicalCirno (Aug 23, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> Holy fuck lol.
> 
> Have I ever told you how much I enjoy your posts CynicalCirno? Because it's a fuck of a lot :V .


 
Glad to see you enjoy them, but I am only saying the truth. Jews are one of the smartest entities in some cases. In few cases they are not far from geh cultists.

If you really enjoy it, quote it.


----------

