Poll: Is the internet good or bad for Artists?

[Lyri]

My brother is in RavenFace [http://www.facebook.com/ravenfacedmetal] and he loves the exposure that the internet can provide for up and coming bands.
Not only can he promote his own but he can also promote other smaller bands and his own mixing side business.

I took the time to talk to him about how he feels when he finds his albums ripped and put onto the pirate bay and other sharing sites, whilst he was obviously a little bummed out that people were downloading his music it wasn't because it was for free.
His problem believe it or not lay in the fact the quality was crap but he does feel thankful for the exposure it has given him, with that in mind I would say the the positivity the internet can generate for a band far outweighs any cons that come with it.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Yes and no.

It's great because everyone can freely express themselves in every way imaginable. It's bad because everyone can freely express themselves in every way imaginable.

 

[Entitled]

reading this article
http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-reasons-internet-has-made-everyone-entitled-dick/

and in light of a more "passionate" thread I made, it all got me thinking.

as for "threatening" each other it depends....often they are not going after the same piece of pie

Now that I have finally had time to read the Cracked actual article in detail, I have the feeling that sans the gratuitous swearing and the arbitary implication that things used to be "normal" until now and therefore they are "abnormal" now, it would actually work pretty well as one big pro-piracy argument, by contradicting your own hopes that Free Culture and Big Content are not threatening each other.

After all, that's the elephant in the living room that people always miss:

Apologists of the copyright establishment often like to pose themselves as looking at the bigger picture, a sort of "macroeconomy" of the content industry, by caring about how piracy leads to financial loss on the long term, while pirates only care about short term gratification. But what if there is an even bigger picture? That piracy isn't just a unique concept that is hanging in the air on it's own, but it's logically attached to a larger concept, it's just one side of the coin that is collectively known as the Internet, and it's Free Culture?

After all, if we acceptthe Cracked article's claims, that it is the Internet itself that naturally and logically leads to a free culture that encourages piracy, then there are only two ways to stop that free culture: we would either technologically modify the Internet so it doesn't allow for free data-sharing at all, or we would need to modify human nature to the point that it doesn't find a Free Culture appealing.

In either case, we would essentially have to decide either that the Internet As We Know It itself is either harmful as a whole, and need to end it, or that it's good as a whole, and we have to accept it with all of it's perceived "dark sides".

For example, a comment like this, wouldn't make much sense in either way:

I'd say, overall, yes. It's been good for artists of all kinds.

However, some parts of the internet... not so much.

Piracy is an obvious problem, for obvious reasons.

...that would be like saying "eating this cake would be a good thing, though some parts of that are obvious problems, such as getting so filled that I couldn't play football right afterwards". You either believe that getting filled is an unacceptable cost, and eating cake isn't a good idea right now, or an acceptable cost, so let's eat it. But you can't both both have your cake and eat it too. If one thing is the logical consequence of the other, then accepting one and complaining about the other doesn't mean much sense.

We either accept that the Internet overall has been a bad thing by creating a free culture, along with it's indie game distribution, it's Jimquisition, it's Egoraptor, it's Escapist magazine, it's Jim Sterling, it's Six Bullet Solution, it's youtube gag dubs, it's Fanfiction, it's Minecraft mods, it's YouPorn, it's PornTube, it's PornPorn.... OR we accept that the thing that made these possile is inherently tangled with the Free Culture, as the same force made both of them possible.

OR, we entirely reject the Cracked article, and claim that the concept of piracy is a special error in the fabric of the Internet, that could be fixed without harming the rest of the free culture and any benefits of the Internet.

 

[TheDoctor455]

reading this article
http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-reasons-internet-has-made-everyone-entitled-dick/

and in light of a more "passionate" thread I made, it all got me thinking.

as for "threatening" each other it depends....often they are not going after the same piece of pie

Now that I have finally had time to read the Cracked actual article in detail, I have the feeling that sans the gratuitous swearing and the arbitary implication that things used to be "normal" until now and therefore they are "abnormal" now, it would actually work pretty well as one big pro-piracy argument, by contradicting your own hopes that Free Culture and Big Content are not threatening each other.

After all, that's the elephant in the living room that people always miss:

Apologists of the copyright establishment often like to pose themselves as looking at the bigger picture, a sort of "macroeconomy" of the content industry, by caring about how piracy leads to financial loss on the long term, while pirates only care about short term gratification. But what if there is an even bigger picture? That piracy isn't just a unique concept that is hanging in the air on it's own, but it's logically attached to a larger concept, it's just one side of the coin that is collectively known as the Internet, and it's Free Culture?

After all, if we acceptthe Cracked article's claims, that it is the Internet itself that naturally and logically leads to a free culture that encourages piracy, then there are only two ways to stop that free culture: we would either technologically modify the Internet so it doesn't allow for free data-sharing at all, or we would need to modify human nature to the point that it doesn't find a Free Culture appealing.

In either case, we would essentially have to decide either that the Internet As We Know It itself is either harmful as a whole, and need to end it, or that it's good as a whole, and we have to accept it with all of it's perceived "dark sides".

For example, a comment like this, wouldn't make much sense in either way:

I'd say, overall, yes. It's been good for artists of all kinds.

However, some parts of the internet... not so much.

Piracy is an obvious problem, for obvious reasons.

...that would be like saying "eating this cake would be a good thing, though some parts of that are obvious problems, such as getting so filled that I couldn't play football right afterwards". You either believe that getting filled is an unacceptable cost, and eating cake isn't a good idea right now, or an acceptable cost, so let's eat it. But you can't both both have your cake and eat it too. If one thing is the logical consequence of the other, then accepting one and complaining about the other doesn't mean much sense.

We either accept that the Internet overall has been a bad thing by creating a free culture, along with it's indie game distribution, it's Jimquisition, it's Egoraptor, it's Escapist magazine, it's Jim Sterling, it's Six Bullet Solution, it's youtube gag dubs, it's Fanfiction, it's Minecraft mods, it's YouPorn, it's PornTube, it's PornPorn.... OR we accept that the thing that made these possile is inherently tangled with the Free Culture, as the same force made both of them possible.

OR, we entirely reject the Cracked article, and claim that the concept of piracy is a special error in the fabric of the Internet, that could be fixed without harming the rest of the free culture and any benefits of the Internet.

Piracy is a problem, and I don't have to like it to like the rest of the internet. Would you like someone breaking into your house and stealing your shit? No.

Also... *slow mocking clap*
way to go for an entire essay about a small point I made... ignoring what I was focusing on: censorship. Something that is a REAL problem on sites/services like YouTube, Google, Apple, and some blogging sites.

I can't really call it a 'free culture' when things like criticizing politics, religion, or doing anything that might possibly be offensive to someone somewhere is banned or deleted.

 

[Entitled]

way to go for an entire essay about a small point I made... ignoring what I was focusing on: censorship.

I'm not talking to you, I was discussing a Cracked article and Vault101's interpretation of it, while I've also taken pirated stolen, kidnapped enslaved quoted a small point you made, to invoke a more concise vocalization it's fallacious conclusions.

Though of course, you prsonally didn't agree to it's premise by accepting the Cracked article's implications to begin with, so it obviously doesn't apply to you to begin with.

Maybe next time read the whole post, not just the part directly below your quote.

 

[Something Amyss]

I know a good few people who torrent most of their media and have even seen games fail because too many people just downloaded it rather than paying for it even in the indie market where people need the money more than ever. It happens more than you give credit for, people just need to be aware that their purchases or lack of make a difference.

Name some of these games that definitively failed because of piracy.

 

[DrunkenMonkey]

Yes in a nutshell, artists need exposure, and what better way than the world wide web. The counter argument that everybody on the internet has something to say and not all of it is pretty. The upside of that is if the artists manage to separate the idiots from the reasonable people then they will get new ideas, etc. In addition to getting a much thicker skin, if they don't crack that is.

I would assume any fledgling artist would always take the exposure in exchange for the criticism. Simply because hell, their name can get out into the open air, whether they have they stomach for it is another story. Hell if they don't that probably means they weren't cut out for it in the first place. If artists can't defend or
respect their own creations, then they shouldn't be artists in my opinion.

 

[Something Amyss]

Piracy is a problem, and I don't have to like it to like the rest of the internet. Would you like someone breaking into your house and stealing your shit? No.

Of course, the act of actual theft and intrusion differs greatly from the act of piracy. I'd be far less bothered by someone taking something ephemeral than something permanent.

Would you seriously be as bothered by me copying your song as me breaking in and taking your TV?

 

[The Sanctifier]

The internet is a great and easy way to get art out there. Its especially good for people who are into really weird stuff like non-pornographic art. Which I seem to find a lot of on DeviantArt lately.

I think some people look too much into the really crappy fan-fictions and sketches out there. They don't really lower the bar, but just set up a different one over in the corner to cater to people who are into that stuff. So in the end I believe that the internet provides artists with much more accessibility.

 

[Vault101]

The internet is a great and easy way to get art out there. Its especially good for people who are into really weird stuff like non-pornographic art. Which I seem to find a lot of on DeviantArt lately.

dont you mean the reverse? XD

 

[The Sanctifier]

The internet is a great and easy way to get art out there. Its especially good for people who are into really weird stuff like non-pornographic art. Which I seem to find a lot of on DeviantArt lately.

dont you mean the reverse? XD

It probably is the reverse, but it all depends on where you look. Until I joined the Escapist I never even knew R34 or furry was a thing.

 

[Twilight_guy]

pros:
More exposure and a greater ability to get their name out there, different options to sell there material (its easier to sell your songs over a website then get them onto Best Buy shelf.), an ability to brand themselves in unique ways using the internet

cons:
Piracy, An inability to filter the number of artists (lots of artists, not enough time to see them all)

Of course those are just the first things to come to mind but obviously its not a clear good or bad. I'm not going to quantify it as good or bad though. Its a major event and a thing that happened and changed how the music is made and sold. It's a landmark and some landmarks can't be quantified. They changed things so much that they just are.

 

[Blackdoom]

If you want to draw pictures of your favourite characters doing whatever fetish than the internet is a great place to be an artist as it is guaranteed other people will want your artwork.

 

[CarlsonAndPeeters]

In terms of exposure, definitely the internet is a good thing for artists. In terms of piracy, that's another story. I know piracy figures are always inflated/deflated depending on who you ask, but it definitely costs artists money. That doesn't mean the internet isn't worth it, it just means it is a problem that the online community is still figuring out how to deal with.

Now, in terms of being an artist, one thing I'll say is that any illustrator/animator must love Google for having an endless supply of reference images. Making life easier is important, too.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I'm all for the better since I started posting stuff on deviantart, because whilst the stereotypes that's it's just a place for retards to smash their heads against WACOM tablets is a bit overblown, you can find plenty of quality artwork on there.

If anything you just need to divorce yourself from the popularity contest, this applies to every medium, every site, etc. Don't do shit to get popular, if your're good at what you do it'll just happen all on its own. But then there's also the fact that you mightent be very good at what you're doing, to that end accept critique and educate yourself and thanks to he internet there is plenty of places to go to.

I speak from a lot of experience, particularly speaking as a 2-D artist going onto become and Games Developer. As mainly I can attribute any amount of popularity I have on DA to boobs, I like drawing them and people like lookin at them, but now that I've advanced my skills people come for tits but they stick around because they like my shit.
I post a little something something if I knew how to embed pictures into these.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Piracy is a problem, and I don't have to like it to like the rest of the internet. Would you like someone breaking into your house and stealing your shit? No.

Of course, the act of actual theft and intrusion differs greatly from the act of piracy. I'd be far less bothered by someone taking something ephemeral than something permanent.

Would you seriously be as bothered by me copying your song as me breaking in and taking your TV?

Fair enough.

And sure, one could argue that publishers take most of the money away from the actual artist. But my point is, don't you think the artist deserves some kind of compensation for your enjoyment of their work?


However, there is a form of 'ephemeral' theft which I would be greatly disturbed about: plagiarism.

That is... somewhat comparable to someone kidnapping your child. You put a lot of hard work, time, and most likely, a great deal of yourself and your experiences into your work, and then some shithead goes and steals your ideas and tries to make a buck off of it.