# Digital Artist Charging More for "Unnatural" Colors: Legit, or Ridiculous?



## LakotaWolf (May 23, 2013)

Allow me to preface this post by saying I know that it's an artist's prerogative to charge whatever they want, FOR whatever they want, and a commissioner can simply walk away and NOT buy art from them if they don't agree with the artist's terms XD No one is forcing the commissioner to buy a commission. I realize that and accept that. I'm really just asking for opinions here. I don't know whether my own reactions to this situation are normal or not, or whether this artist's practices actually make some practical sense for reasons that I am not seeing. I'm trying to keep an open mind about the situation and accept other thoughts and explanations, which is why I'm asking for them XD Clearly, my own opinion is already tainting my situation, but please tell me what you guys think. I really do want to get other thoughtful perspectives on this.

Anyway, here goes! 

-------

I recently purchased a digital commission from an artist here on FA. Please note: this is a digital artist, not a traditional artist. 

This artist does not like to work with "unnatural" colors or "sparkledogs", and charges more money for the "motivation" she needs in order to draw them.

(Side note: For myself, I cannot quite decide whether or not this is on par with the way some artists won't draw vore or gore, or fetishes, or babyfurs, etc. It's not quite a dislike for a particular fetish/sexual fetish. It's a dislike for coloration. It seems a bit overly sensitive to me, and a bit ridiculous. It's also not something along the lines of "will not draw felines because I am not good at drawing them". So, I'm not sure what to think about this.)

On her FA page, she states that she "might" ask for more money if the character is unnaturally-colored. She doesn't say that she will always charge extra, or how much extra, so I went forward with contacting her, unsure of whether or not I was going to get charged "extra", or how much it was actually going to be. 

I commission digital artists all the time, something I have done for over 13 years. I can say that this is the first time that I have ever run into a situation where an artist has asked me for extra money for "motivation" because my character is unnaturally-colored.

This is the character I asked the artist to draw:

http://www.splintyr.com/lakota/lakotarararar.jpg
http://splintyr.com/lakota/ for more images

My character, Lakota, is a black and yellow wolf. I agree that black and yellow is pretty "unnatural" for a wolf. I am not disputing that. Lakota's markings are also unnatural. I don't really consider her a "sparkledog" as she is only two colors and isn't rainbowy, doesn't have hair, and doesn't wear headphones or legwarmers, but I know there isn't exactly a set-in-stone definition for sparkledogs, so maybe she IS one. I don't know. XD

(As an aside, if I really wanted to get nitpicky, Lakota's colors aren't unnatural - there are three animals that are bright yellow and black - the Yellow-Throated Marten, the bumblebee, and the Black-Hooded Oriole/Yellow Oriole. One of these is even a mammal. So, if I wanted to get nitpicky and be a female dog, I could argue with the artist over whether bright yellow is an "unnatural" color. It isn't. On a wolf? Yeah. But unnatural entirely? No. So, the artist in question needs to refine her definitions to be "unnatural to the animal I am drawing for you", perhaps.)

Anyway, the TL;DR of this is that I feel a little bit butthurt and ripped-off that I am being charged a sudden $10 on top of a $50 digital commission just because my character is a yellow and black wolf. It's not like I'm purchasing a plushie or a fursuit and the artist has to go and find and purchase unusually-colored faux fur. It's not like she's painting an acrylic painting for me, so she has to mix just the right shades of paint. It's a digital image, and I have provided the exact hue of my character's fur in my reference images. It doesn't seem hard to me to use the dropper tool in a paint program and go from there.

On the flip side, I can understand that someone can have a great love for nature at its most natural, and one's sensibilities and sense of the natural world can be offended by having to draw a rainbow-tailed wolf with green polka-dots on a bright fuchsia body. It's one's right to not like drawing unnaturally-colored sparkledogs. You can dislike sparkledogs all you want, and no one can tell you otherwise. It's not my right to tell an artist to LIKE to draw sparkledogs, or vore, or gore, or any other "type" of commission/subject/etc. and so on.

But is it fair to charge more to draw sparkledogs (or unnatural-colored characters), or should you simply refuse to take commissions for sparkledogs if you have to have extra "motivation" to draw them?

And, is it acceptable for me to write back to the artist, agreeing to pay the extra $10, but giving her some advice? - (which I would keep very friendly and polite.) Namely, I would like to tell her that perhaps she could word her page a little better, to not call her higher fee a "motivational" fee (which frankly makes the whole thing sound a little odd/snooty, at least in my opinion) and to perhaps simply state that she does not like drawing sparkledogs and that there WILL, definitely, be a higher charge for them, and not "maybe"/be wishy-washy about it.  

Please give me your thoughts and opinions on this XD Thank you!


----------



## Teal (May 23, 2013)

$10 extra for "unnatural" colors? What bullshit. 
I can see extra for complex characters but just because you don't like the colors, what the fuck?

This should be listed up front and very clearly, even if it is a terrible practice. And to not specify how much is rather  shady.

Did you know how much the "fee" would be before you payed? (sorry, but your post is a bit all over the place).


I actually think I know who this artist is.


Sexual and violent things are much different than a color scheme you don't like.


----------



## Zenia (May 23, 2013)

Charging extra for unnatural colors is stupid, IMO. Like Teal said, charging more for more a complex character and/or difficult markings is understandable but not for colors. I am also curious about the additional money. Did the artist tell you up front that it would be another $10 and give you a chance to change your mind? Because if they just sprang this amount on you without your approval, I don't think you should have to pay it.


----------



## Kalmor (May 23, 2013)

That's a terrible, terrible practice... Charging for "motivation"??? Oh man... That's just dumb, but they're well within their rights to do so. 

As you said yourself, I'd understand more if it was traditional artwork because then the artist would have to pay for the resources to make all of these weird colour combinations. But digital art? What? Their vagueness about the fee adds to my level of "WTF are you doing?"


----------



## Teal (May 23, 2013)

Zenia said:


> Charging extra for unnatural colors is stupid, IMO. Like Teal said, charging more for more a complex character and/or difficult markings is understandable but not for colors. I am also curious about the additional money. *Did the artist tell you up front that it would be another $10 and give you a chance to change your mind? Because if they just sprang this amount on you without your approval, I don't think you should have to pay it*.


 It seems like a scam. Especially without a static number.
For example an extra $5-7 for a complex character. Not "there's a "fee" for complex characters"

This could happen.
 "I don't think these colors are natural enough, give me an extra $10!"
"The fee for unnatural colors is $20!"
"The fee for unnatural colors is $15."

She could just slap on whatever she felt like. -_-


----------



## LakotaWolf (May 23, 2013)

I'm sorry, my post DID wander all over the place. XD


To clarify, no, I did NOT know how much the fee would be before I payed. The artist did not specify.
She only mentioned she "MIGHT" charge more.


Here's how things went down:


-I found the artist's page on FA.
-On the artist's page, it stated basically this: "I don't like unnatural-colored animals or sparkledogs. I may charge more for characters with colors that aren't natural. This doesn't mean I won't draw characters that are unnaturally-colored, I'd just rather not draw sparkledogs without some extra ~motivation~!" (Yes, the tildes were on there.)
-I contacted the artist and asked about commissions. I showed her my reference images.
-She Noted me back and said it would be $10 extra (on top of the $50) because of Lakota's unnatural colors. In this same reply, she also showed me a sketch that she had ALREADY made, even though I hadn't paid or even agreed to the extra $10 at this point! >_< 


So really, I actually still haven't paid for the commission - I could still back out, or call bullshit on the extra fee and refuse to pay it.


Aaaerrrrgh. I really don't mind paying an extra $10 - it's not like I don't have the money, and the artist's work is amazingly good, so it's totally worth it. But it just feels so janky and strange.


----------



## Teal (May 23, 2013)

Sounds like she's trying to force you to pay. Even though you haven't really agreed to anything. I say look for another artist.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 23, 2013)

Man...this thread makes my head hurt.

"Digital this" "Digital that" who the fuck cares if it's digital or not? Sorry but the way you're going on about it is irritating.

You already knew the answer and want to argue it out here. What does that really do? I mean if you're going to be this much of a headache over a person who you can easily just not buy a commission from, you're just putting yourself out there more than you should and could irritate other potential artists with this word salad.

She gave you a quote. You know what? For whatever reason this is PERFECTLY FINE. If someone wants to charge more to do your character, and only gives base prices as an estimate and SAYS they may charge more. So what? She didn't take your money and then hold your art hostage. It's an artist's discretion. It's your money, no real harm or foul.

TLDR: You're making it a big deal and probably making it worse for yourself by dragging it out like this for other potential artists who may want to know what kind of client they may deal with.


----------



## Zydala (May 24, 2013)

How is this different than charging more for subjects that you don't usually like to draw? I don't know why you think it's different; it's a freakin' drag to draw and paint something you don't like - whether it's a babyfur or a green pig. So you make it worth your while for putting up with it. Keeps people who don't think that's fair away and it nets you money for hours that aren't as fun.

YOU might think it's too sensitive but that doesn't really matter.

I think the fact they did a sketch for you though without you even agreeing to the rest is a little weird though. Might have jumped the gun there. You should just find a different artist.


----------



## Morghie (May 24, 2013)

I think this is a bit ridiculous. I took a look at your references and they are NOT difficult colors to work with. I mean, an artist can charge whatever he/she pleases when it comes to commissions, but charging an extra $10 because the colors are too "unnatural"? I can't say I agree with that. As Teal said, I can understand charging a little more if the character is complex, but that's not the case here.

Also, the fact she gave you a sketch and pinned a price on you without even waiting for your reply...she's got you in a bit of a tough spot there D: 

Personally I don't think what she's doing is fair, but that is just my opinion.


----------



## Teal (May 24, 2013)

Morghie said:


> I think this is a bit ridiculous. I took a look at your references and they are NOT difficult colors to work with. I mean, an artist can charge whatever he/she pleases when it comes to commissions, *but charging an extra $10 because the colors are too "unnatural"? I can't say I agree with that*. As Teal said, I can understand charging a little more if the character is complex, but that's not the case here.


 The OP said they didn't know how much it would be even, so she could have pulled that number out of nowhere. 


I still say if she wants to charge more it should clearly state that and have a visible range. A lot of artists charge a little bit more for nudity, or adult work. But they don't have it listed as some vague "extra" they state is either as a range e.g. $4-$9 or simply a number e.g. $5.

She can charge it if she wants, but it's tacky.


----------



## Zenia (May 24, 2013)

Teal said:


> The OP said they didn't know how much it would be even, so she could have pulled that number out of nowhere.


Oh, you want wings on your wolf? That will be an extra $72 please. :>


----------



## LakotaWolf (May 24, 2013)

Zydala - Why not just NOT take commissions for things you don't like to draw, if it's so much of a drag?
Though I'm sure your answer would be "well, they need the money!"
My reply to that would be: if they need the money this badly, they ought to be willing to color bright yellow wolves without shunting a $10 price increase onto their customers _after the fact_. At least put the price increase upfront - that was really my major gripe here. They did not tell me that the price was going to go up by $10 until after I agreed to the $50 commission price.

At any rate, as I stated in the beginning, I was asking for opinions - I'm NOT here to argue. I've already gotten and paid for the commission. I just literally have never encountered this before and I wasn't sure how to feel about it. I absolutely was initially butthurt about it, then I was like, SHOULD I be? Was I overreacting? So instead of jumping down the artist's throat immediately and being a jerk to her (since on the internet, it is so easy to be a jerk anonymously), I figured I'd try and ask some other artists/a community first.

I have encountered plenty of artists who state things like "will not draw vore/gore/insert fetish here" or "will not draw x animal here" or "will not draw humans" or "will not draw clothing", and I have even seen artists who say "will charge an extra $x for complex designs or complex backgrounds", but I have never encountered an artist who said "I might charge some unknown amount if I don't like your character's colors".

But you're right, I didn't _have_ to commission this artist. And obviously I know it's an artist's right to feel/want/do anything they want to feel/want/do with commissions. My opinion is that I found this practice questionable, and I came here to ask if anyone else found it questionable as well. It wasn't my intention to enrage, irritate, or pain anyone with this thread and I apologize if I've inflicted that upon anyone. I went ahead with the commission and I paid the artist for her work without direct complaint to her, so it's not like I'm screwing her out of the work she has done for me so far.  

Thank you for the honest opinions that you have shared with me so far on this matter.


----------



## Teal (May 24, 2013)

LakotaWolf said:


> Zydala - Why not just NOT take commissions for things you don't like to draw, if it's so much of a drag?
> Though I'm sure your answer would be "well, they need the money!"
> My reply to that would be: if they need the money this badly, they ought to be willing to color bright yellow wolves without shunting a $10 price increase onto their customers _after the fact_. At least put the price increase upfront - that was really my major gripe here. They did not tell me that the price was going to go up by $10 until after I agreed to the $50 commission price.


 Money yes, and this artist knows that people will pay that "fee" for her art. (Also dude, what's with the attitude?)



> At any rate, as I stated in the beginning, I was asking for opinions - I'm NOT here to argue. I've already gotten and paid for the commission. I just literally have never encountered this before and I wasn't sure how to feel about it. I absolutely was initially butthurt about it, then I was like, SHOULD I be? Was I overreacting? So instead of jumping down the artist's throat immediately and being a jerk to her (since on the internet, it is so easy to be a jerk anonymously), I figured I'd try and ask some other artists/a community first.


 Honestly I couldn't tell what stage the commission was at or if you had even paid. Your posts are vague. You probably should have immediately asked why you had not been informed of this earlier. 



> I have encountered plenty of artists who state things like "will not draw vore/gore/insert fetish here" or "will not draw x animal here" or "will not draw humans" or "will not draw clothing", and I have even seen artists who say "will charge an extra $x for complex designs or complex backgrounds", but I have never encountered an artist who said "I might charge some unknown amount if I don't like your character's colors".


 I'm one who'll charge you extra for complex things (and give discounts for certain things). She can do it, but the amount should not be a mystery. 


> But you're right, I didn't _have_ to commission this artist. And obviously I know it's an artist's right to feel/want/do anything they want to feel/want/do with commissions. My opinion is that I found this practice questionable, and I came here to ask if anyone else found it questionable as well. It wasn't my intention to enrage, irritate, or pain anyone with this thread and I apologize if I've inflicted that upon anyone. I went ahead with the commission and I paid the artist for her work without direct complaint to her, so it's not like I'm screwing her out of the work she has done for me so far.


 If you hadn't even agreed to the commission you didn't really owe her anything.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 24, 2013)

I don't know why have a stupid mindset about digital art.

Just because it is digital and you have access to 256 billion colors does not make a piece work. Yellow is psychologically a disturbing color. You also have black. Ever wonder why the combination is there in nature? You see bees and insects with this color combination you know to stay away. Birds are gaudy so they can fuck. You know get a girl raise a family and all that. You also want to make those colors work. You could end up doing a fuckawful gaudy picture. So I don't care if you have been commissioning for X number of years, it still doesn't make you an artist doing the work.

An artist has a right to charge for more or not take your commission for whatever reason. The only purpose I see in this thread is you to embarrass the artist for whatever egotistical reason you have instead of just ending the commission. This is why this thread is not favorable in the least in your position since you don't have to pay to continue the commission. 

Also, whether the amount should be listed or not, is irrelevant. That's what price quotes are about so the artist can estimate how much more it would be on the kind of project they would do. That way you don't *undercharge* for certain amounts of work. You may not know until you *talk with the commissioner* and get more info. This is why you don't necessarily set a price in stone. 

Nor should you care about being butthurt if you said already you want to pay the artist for his/her work and it's only 10 bucks more that you said you don't mind too much. Big deal. 

This just means other artists who see these long winded posts over 10 bucks on a furry commission who do high quality work should just avoid you. Good Job.


----------



## Ansitru (May 24, 2013)

Just a reasonable explanation why someone may charge more for unnatural  colours: it takes knowledges to make them work properly in a piece.
Taking  your character, for instance, the colours may need to be altered  slightly to make them work in a full-fledged digital piece as they already clash in flat-colour.



LakotaWolf said:


> My reply to that would be: if they need the money this badly, they ought to be willing to color bright yellow wolves without shunting a $10 price increase onto their customers _after the fact_. At least put the price increase upfront - that was really my major gripe here. They did not tell me that the price was going to go up by $10 until after I agreed to the $50 commission price.



Also: au contraire. Since there are many sparklebeasts in the fandom, it's actually quite a smart move to tack on an extra price if you really don't like drawing them, but need the money. 
The artist mentioned there might be a fee, so suck it up and deal with it. You knew this when you asked them for a commission.



> I have encountered plenty of artists who state things like "will not draw vore/gore/insert fetish here" or "will not draw x animal here" or "will not draw humans" or "will not draw clothing", and I have even seen artists who say "will charge an extra $x for complex designs or complex backgrounds", but I have never encountered an artist who said "I might charge some unknown amount if I don't like your character's colors".



Except there are many people who charge more for subjects they don't like drawing, but that they have to draw often. Examples being fetishes, or in this case unnaturally coloured animals. Again: suck it up and deal with it, or look for another artist. It's as simple as that.


----------



## Zydala (May 24, 2013)

LakotaWolf said:


> Zydala - Why not just NOT take commissions for things you don't like to draw, if it's so much of a drag?
> Though I'm sure your answer would be "well, they need the money!"
> My reply to that would be: if they need the money this badly, they ought to be willing to color bright yellow wolves without shunting a $10 price increase onto their customers _after the fact_. At least put the price increase upfront - that was really my major gripe here. They did not tell me that the price was going to go up by $10 until after I agreed to the $50 commission price.



'Cuz everyone and their grandmother's pet goldfish has some sort of unnatural-colored fursona. You'd be cutting out a lot of business. It's like if someone said they didn't want to draw canines - all right but be prepared to be losing out on a lot of work.

There could be a bunch of reasons they don't want to do unnatural colors - they might be partially colorblind, they might not be as great with different palettes. Takes more time then, which makes doing unnatural colored things not really worth the base price.

I agree though, that adding the extra ten bucks and sending the sketch was a bit strange. Unless there was an exchange that went along the lines of "I may charge extra just so you know" "oh that's okay I will pay whatever", then she should have made sure first that you were okay with the new price before sending the sketch. I personally would also add at least some sort of range if there was ever things I would charge extra for but I don't think that's absolutely necessary.


----------



## Lauralien (May 24, 2013)

For waiters and waitresses (in North America), the prospect of tips gives them the motivation to provide good service to people that they may not like at all.   Seems perfectly fair to me for an artist to want to do the same with subjects they don't like.

As long as no money actually exchanged hands before the $10 fee was added on, I don't see a problem with it.


----------



## Teal (May 24, 2013)

Zydala said:


> .
> I agree though, that adding the extra ten bucks and sending the sketch was a bit strange. Unless there was an exchange that went along the lines of "I may charge extra just so you know" "oh that's okay I will pay whatever", then she should have made sure first that you were okay with the new price before sending the sketch. I personally would also add at least some sort of range if there was ever things I would charge extra for but I don't think that's absolutely necessary.


 See this is what I had a problem with, the sketch thing and vague extra for the colors.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 24, 2013)

Teal said:


> See this is what I had a problem with, the sketch thing and vague extra for the colors.



Pay for the sketch (it's not 50 dollars worth if you really want it) actually it was nice of them to do that , though a bit stupid because they just gave FREE art, unless they watermarked it. 

Basically just because they gave you a sketch doesn't mean on that commissioner's end that the commission was set and final. If anything it hurts the artist giving free art not the person interested in the commission. 

10 bucks is not that much for the extra coloring.


----------



## Teal (May 24, 2013)

Arshes Nei said:


> Pay for the sketch (it's not 50 dollars worth if you really want it) actually it was nice of them to do that , though a bit stupid because they just gave FREE art, unless they watermarked it.
> 
> Basically just because they gave you a sketch doesn't mean on that commissioner's end that the commission was set and final. If anything it hurts the artist giving free art not the person interested in the commission.
> 
> 10 bucks is not that much for the extra coloring.


 I'm just saying it's weird. No she could charge $50 extra if she wanted, I'm just saying she should state how much extra it is or could be. Pulling out numbers only known to her is tacky.


----------



## Ansitru (May 24, 2013)

Teal said:


> I'm just saying it's weird. No she could charge $50 extra if she wanted, I'm just saying she should state how much extra it is or could be. Pulling out numbers only known to her is tacky.



Personally, I also have stuff like "_Price of complex backgrounds is to be asked_" because ... until I know what someone wants for a background, I can't gauge how long I may have to work on it. 
The same goes for other things. You can state, for instance, that an extra fee for a complex character could go from $10 to $30, but if someone then shows up with a character with spots and stripes all over, 6 sets of horns, 4 wings, etc. that could fall out of the range of the fee. And it'd be unfair to put more work in for less pay.

Augh, I hope this makes sense.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 24, 2013)

Teal said:


> I'm just saying it's weird. No she could charge $50 extra if she wanted, I'm just saying she should state how much extra it is or could be. Pulling out numbers only known to her is tacky.



Ok, this is something you guys keep repeating and don't get. It's called an ESTIMATE. Your client business wise will not know where you get your numbers. It's art and doing art pricewise is not set in stone UNLESS YOU MAKE IT.

So who the fuck cares if she pulls out a number and you don't get some scientific calculation. It's her BUSINESS (if the artist is a she). Artists are allowed to give price quotes for a job. This is what we're taught to do professionally. If she decides the coloring job is going to take her an extra hour to do if she's doing price quotes off a per hour $10 dollar an hour basis it's her prerogative.

Everyone has their pricing method in the pro market, and it's to pay the bills. I don't see why you guys will put up with an YCH auction where someone probably ripped a gesture and people bid on what they want, vs someone giving you a quote on the project/commission and you have the ability to walk away from it.


----------



## Teal (May 24, 2013)

Ansitru said:


> Personally, I also have stuff like "_Price of complex backgrounds is to be asked_" because ... until I know what someone wants for a background, I can't gauge how long I may have to work on it.
> The same goes for other things. You can state, for instance, that an extra fee for a complex character could go from $10 to $30, but if someone then shows up with a character with spots and stripes all over, 6 sets of horns, 4 wings, etc. that could fall out of the range of the fee. And it'd be unfair to put more work in for less pay.
> 
> Augh, I hope this makes sense.


 Well that makes sense.


----------



## LakotaWolf (May 24, 2013)

I apologize that I've come off as offensive, specifically to digital artists. It was not my intention to demean their work as less legitimate or "easier" than traditional media - if I've come across that way and insulted anyone who has read this, I'm sorry. 

It's a situation I haven't encountered before, as I have said, although I agree that artists have every right to give estimates and adjust prices before money changes hands. Most artists seem to give "flat rates" for their commission prices, or at least "around $x amount" prices - so I guess I was just surprised by the fact that the artist added on the extra amount afterwards, and that she called it a "motivational" fee because she didn't like my character's colors. If this makes me an asshole for thinking this way, then I am an asshole. That's all. 

I wasn't sure what to think about it, so I came here to ask what other people thought. I didn't call out the artist, badmouth her, or mention her by name so others could flame her. Then I got shit on for being a crappy customer, and for hating on digital artists (or something along those lines). I'm actually a pretty good customer who pays immediately, doesn't complain or nitpick, and gives feedback/+favs/etc., but why believe me? Smart artists gonna avoid me now.

At any rate, I appreciate the honest opinions and thoughts I did get from some of you. Thank you.

I also do appreciate the different views and thoughts on pricing/commission pricing. I honestly did not think about some of the different ways of charging that have been mentioned here, and how sometimes pricing can be just an estimate. It really does help to have different perspectives on things from people who HAVE priced their commissions differently. Thank you! :}


----------



## Saga (May 24, 2013)

How in the fuck are those unnatural colors?
It's yellow, black, pink, and a light shade of lime green.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 24, 2013)

Saga said:


> How in the fuck are those unnatural colors?
> It's yellow, black, pink, and a light shade of lime green.



Yellow and Black can be difficult colors to work with because Yellow is light colors on the value scale while Black is eventually perceived as dark on the value scale. Even the OP's avatar isn't using "Black" because you know the saying goes, color is relative. Having that kind of contrast can be sometimes a design challenge, but I mostly find that Black is because now you have to deal with a color that will automatically look warmer against yellow so you have to choose wisely.


----------



## LakotaWolf (May 24, 2013)

I agree with Arshes Nei entirely XD Hell, I find the black a nightmare to work with most of the time. I sort of regret choosing the colors, but I was 11 at the time.  >_> And none too smart. 

You either go with black, and then you really lose the lineart, which is a shame (or you lighten the linework/make it gray/white/etc), or you use shades of dark gray (or very warm black) instead of pure black, which IS hard to do. It's hard to make it look "okay" with the yellow. (It would look better if I'd chosen gold/something more orange, IMO.) As the owner of the character, I prefer the starker look of the black over gray or "warm black", but I don't really mind when artists choose to use gray. I'm usually commissioning artists because I love their style XD

If you poke around my Favorites, you can see the choices that artists make with the colors - http://www.furaffinity.net/user/lakotasilver/ - some people have gotten pretty creative. Most artists go with shades of gray. 

And the colors ARE unnatural - for a wolf. I think I mentioned in my original post that there's a marten that's yellow and black, and a bird, but being honest, as sure as you're born, you ain't never gonna see no bright yellow wolf, to badly paraphrase Shel Silversteen.


----------



## Taralack (May 24, 2013)

Maybe it's time for a redesign.


----------



## LakotaWolf (May 24, 2013)

I've been pondering that one for a long time XD I know it sounds like a cop-out, but I've never re-designed her. I used to see people who changed their characters/fursonas every few months and I'd be like "I couldn't do that!" Each of her markings had DEEP PERSONAL MEANING TO ME ... when I was 11. 20 years ago. roflmao okay maybe it's time XD


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 24, 2013)

LakotaWolf said:


> And the colors ARE unnatural - for a wolf. I think I mentioned in my original post that there's a marten that's yellow and black, and a bird, but being honest, as sure as you're born, you ain't never gonna see no bright yellow wolf, to badly paraphrase Shel Silversteen.



Birds that are brightly colored are done to attract a mate. Birds have pretty good color acuity. So of course they'll see who is the baddest, meanest and prettiest - Sho'nuff. 

Insects on the other hand are colored like that to keep birds or predators that would prey on them away. Bees and hornets, wasps have these colors. 

Wolves don't have these colors mainly since they really can't see colors very well. 
Texture of fur and feathers will also play a role in why you get different types of blacks. I've seen black more brownish, and other times more "bluish" Feathers tend to have that iridescent shine to them.


----------



## Teal (May 24, 2013)

Arshes Nei said:


> Wolves don't have these colors mainly since they really can't see colors very well.
> Texture of fur and feathers will also play a role in why you get different types of blacks. I've seen black more brownish, and other times more "bluish" Feathers tend to have that iridescent shine to them.


 I have two black chickens and they have a blue-green sheen. And one is more blue than the other.


----------

