Poll: Is the internet good or bad for Artists?

[MintberryCrunch]

I'm really very glad that thus far nobody has said no, because it definitely isn't bad for artists.
The Internet has only made it easier for new and upcoming artists; hell, most starting artists upload their works for free to download, whether they be songs, albums, photographs, whatever anyway. For musicians, most of their money is made through live performance than through the sale of media (this is obviously once artists actually start getting paid for gigs obviously), putting yourself out there through any media is only going to increase the chance that your chosen artform succeeds.
The only people complaining are the mass-producers; the big record labels, the bigger artists who already have money but are too overwhelmed by greed to appreciate the fact that people are enjoying their music around the world.

 

[SerithVC]

I'd have to say that generally the internet is a terrible place for aspiring artists of every media. I say this because most people on the internet are trolls and if your art isn't smut it is often disliked. Either that or they will rip apart your work and point out every flaw without suggesting how to better your art. I remember way back in grade 9 when i was hoping to get into drawing and sketching and posted one of my first works online and everyone just ripped on it for every little detail i messed up on and it actually made me not want to draw anymore. I've been wanting to post some of my writen works online but i don't want the same thing to happen with that.

 

[Entitled]

webcomics...true for the most part but xckd or cyanide and happiness are far from small fry,they are pretty much the well known newspaper comic strips of yesteryear (mabye even bigger)

Yeah, they are even releasing their own physical books. That's kind of the point. Even though comic strips never had a real "AAA industry", this demonstrates how the new media can grow up to the old one.

Single man projects were the first to grow up, and now there are smaller team projects. As soon as we will figure out how to organize large scale financial support, (whether it will be crowdfunding, or merch, or ads, or whatever), the largest projects will also start to grow up in a naturally free new media.

as for "threatening" each other it depends....often they are not going after the same piece of pie (like comparing skyrim to angry birds)

Well, I said that specifically about that latter half, about the art on the edge of the copyright system.

I think you have said in the past that payment per units depending on the consumers' whims, is a shame and a travesty.

Well, what I think is a shame and a travesty, is the staggering amount of creative, high quality work out there, often made from thousands of man-hours, that is only allowed to exist on another artist's (or a publisher company's) whims and from it's grace, with the chance of allowing them to sell any of their copies not even on the table.

That movies get Oscars for retelling a 19th century classics, or for doing homages to earlier films, and publishers get to get even richer from long-dead early 20th century authors' IP by hiring others to make sequels, while they are actively shutting down other people's similar projects.

That large part of the creativity on the Internet, is in works that are formally considered acts of copyright infringement, even if they can be just as creative, clever, meaningful, and in many ways original, as their main inspiration, because the character names that they use, or the settings where they take place, can be more easily guarded by the Big Content than original thought can be.

 

[Entitled]

But the guy whose main method of making a living is to upload strips of stick figures saying something smart to their website on every monday, wednesday, and friday, and selling related merchandise, certainly would.

Is there anyone who actually does this other than the creator of XKCD?

He really is an artist, by the way. Well, an artist by the conventional sort of term you're talking. He can draw pretty damn fine-looking stuff. So I think that limits the number of stick-figure-drawing professionals who aren't artists to a pool of about 0.

Dozens, at least: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_webcomic_artists

Well, that also includes not just stick figure strips, but also web graphic novels like Drowtales and Megatokyo.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

This is going to be about music as it's relevant to me. When I lived in Florida and played guitar in a band (Six Bullet Solution was the name, if you're curious), The Internet was a godsend. There's a certain charm that's missing if the punk/hardcore music scene has a place in your heart, the ideal of driving around in your van putting up flyers and talking to gig owners, basically finding the scene around you person by person. Regardless, the Internet allowed us to just put songs up, free of charge, and say "if this is your thing and you'd like to hear more, then consider buying a CD or helping us get gigs". It gave us a lifeline to EVERY scene, and while it was still obscure we still were able to reach practically all of the like-minded people without having to claw and search them out.

I voted yes because without the Internet, I would never have opened for Otep and Crossbreed. If you've heard of those two bands then I'd feel a lot better about my life : )

 

[Mr.Mattress]

Yes, because do you honestly think that people like Egoraptor [http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/484273], Oney [http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/553125] or Harry Partridge [http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/524391] would be picked up by a Network or Film Company? I don't think so (Though apparently Oney was close to getting "Leo and Satan" onto Adult Swim, though that could be because of it's popularity on the internet). The Internet allows for people to not only be creative, but it also allows them to find their niche and make money off of it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Dozens, at least: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_webcomic_artists

Which ones here meet he criteria you listed of a main profession drawing stick figure webcomics?

 

[Entitled]

Dozens, at least: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_webcomic_artists

Which ones here meet he criteria you listed of a main profession drawing stick figure webcomics?

As wikipedia says, these are all making their primary income from there, I don't know exactly how many of them would count as "stick figures" or as realistic graphic novel art, most of them are somewhere in-between, with a partially simplified art style.

The point is, it's not just Munroe, there is a whole new legitimate profession out there in that little niche alone, and the same is true for many other new media.

 

[TheSteeleStrap]

Yes, it has never been easier to get your art to your potential audience. Without the power of the Internet, we'd never hear of amazing artists. If you literally can't compete with cats asking for cheeseburgers, then I think it's time to go back to the drawing board.

 

[aba1]

Like most things in life, it's a mixed blessing.

I think you bring up a interesting point and it is something that concerns me not many people think about it but if you always torrent everything smaller artists make no money which they need to live and when you are looking for commissions and work your always against the best of the best at all times no matter what in all of the world.

Few people "always torrent everything," and people seeking commissions are largely doing fine, though. You also have to consider the fact that small artists are less likely to be pirated and and benefit most from the exposure of the internet.

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.

 

[Entitled]

I 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.

No, you have seen games that sold below the expected level. (that also happened to have a given piracy rate, just like everything else, including successful games).

Even if you would have proof that sales without piracy would have been higher, (by factoring in all the positive and negative sales effects that piracy brings and reaching a negative number), you could only say that piracy is one of the many, many, factors that lower a game's reveues.

To point at any individual game and say that "this one failed because of piracy", would be just as arbitary as saying that "it failed because of taxes" (as in, if the devs would have had to pay less taxes it would have been breaking even), or "It failed because of server costs", or "It failed because of that bad review that it got", or "it failed because it was sold too expensively", or "it failed because it's DRM made it unpopular".

 

[aba1]

I 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.

No, you have seen games that sold below the expected level. (that also happened to have a given piracy rate, just like everything else, including successful games).

Even if you would have proof that sales without piracy would have been higher, (by factoring in all the positive and negative sales effects that piracy brings and reaching a negative number), you could only say that piracy is one of the many, many, factors that lower a game's reveues.

To point at any individual game and say that "this one failed because of piracy", would be just as arbitary as saying that "it failed because of taxes" (as in, if the devs would have had to pay less taxes it would have been breaking even), or "It failed because of server costs", or "It failed because of that bad review that it got", or "it failed because it was sold too expensively", or "it failed because it's DRM made it unpopular".

Seriously dude you came off extremely doushy right there. Also when I said that the game was a flop because of downloads it came right from the author themselves (I just wish I could remember the title so I could just throw out the stupid link). I remember the author was talking about how it was a online hit and it was very popular but the problem was that nobody actually purchased the game hardly, so they made almost no money off of it (at least initially) and you can say what ever you want but that is a direct cause and effect so say what you want to make yourself feel better but it happens. I am fairly sure it was one of the titles in one of the first humble indie bundles.

 

[Entitled]

Seriously dude you came off extremely doushy right there. Also when I said that the game was a flop because of downloads it came right from the author themselves

That doesn't cange anything about the inherently flawed logic of the claim.

It's "a direct cause and effect" only in the sense that if more people would have bought the game, it would have been successful, but there are a million reasons why more people didn't buy the game. The very same creator could have as well said that the game flopped because of the bad economy, and it would be just as true/untrue this claim, in "a direct cause and effect" sense.

Piracy rate is a constant. Multiple developers have already reported on it, and it was always around 90%. Some developers shrugged and accepted this as a part of the Internet culture. Yet this one created an alternate universe in his mind, where all the positive sales benefits of the free internet culture and piracy exist, yet sale losses caused by piracy alone can be eliminated.

(I just wish I could remember the title so I could just throw out the stupid link). I remember the author was talking about how it was a online hit and it was very popular but the problem was that nobody actually purchased the game hardly, so they made almost no money off of it (at least initially) and you can say what ever you want but that is a direct cause and effect so say what you want to make yourself feel better but it happens. I am fairly sure it was one of the titles in one of the first humble indie bundles.

Is it possible that it is a misremembered version of the World of Goo incident?

 

[aba1]

Seriously dude you came off extremely doushy right there. Also when I said that the game was a flop because of downloads it came right from the author themselves

That doesn't cange anything about the inherently flawed logic of the claim.

It's "a direct cause and effect" only in the sense that if more people would have bought the game, it would have been successful, but there are a million reasons why more people didn't buy the game. The very same creator could have as well said that the game flopped because of the bad economy, and it would be just as true/untrue this claim, in "a direct cause and effect" sense.

Piracy rate is a constant. Multiple developers have already reported on it, and it was always around 90%. Some developers shrugged and accepted this as a part of the Internet culture. Yet this one created an alternate universe in his mind, where all the positive sales benefits of the free internet culture and piracy exist, yet sale losses caused by piracy alone can be eliminated.

(I just wish I could remember the title so I could just throw out the stupid link). I remember the author was talking about how it was a online hit and it was very popular but the problem was that nobody actually purchased the game hardly, so they made almost no money off of it (at least initially) and you can say what ever you want but that is a direct cause and effect so say what you want to make yourself feel better but it happens. I am fairly sure it was one of the titles in one of the first humble indie bundles.

Is it possible that it is a misremembered version of the World of Goo incident?

I still disagree about the first bit but you might be right about the world of goo incident if you have a link or something it might jog my memory. I was between world of goo and gish but I couldn't remember which one or find the article since it was from so long ago.

 

[Entitled]

I still disagree about the first bit but you might be right about the world of goo incident if you have a link or something it might jog my memory. I was between world of goo and gish but I couldn't remember which one or find the article since it was from so long ago.

First google result for "gish piracy":
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_189/5768-Rob-from-the-Rich-Steal-from-the-Poor

Initially published by Chronic Logic, an online casual and independent games portal, Gish was a critical success that didn't quite break through to the mainstream the way later IGF winners have. It's also one of the only games that McMillen has bothered selling at all - most of his games, including 2009 IGF nominee Coil, are free-to-play on sites like Newgrounds and Armor Games.

Perhaps this explains McMillen's nonchalance toward the idea of anyone "stealing" his work. "Gish was hugely pirated. I think it was one of the reasons why so many people know the game," he says. Instead of taking offense, McMillen just sees it as a way for more people to play his games. "Ideally, I'd love it if anyone who liked my stuff just had it if they couldn't afford it."

And this is the fourth result for "World of Goo piracy":
http://2dboy.com/2008/11/13/90/

90%. Yes, that is the approximate piracy rate for the pc version of world of goo. This is in line with a previous estimate by Russell Carroll (director of marketing at reflexive) for the game Ricochet Infinity. Russell estimated a 92% piracy rate and I found his analysis quite interesting (check it out here if you are curious [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17350]). One thing that really jumped out at me was his estimate that preventing 1000 piracy attempts results in only a single additional sale. This supports our intuitive assessment that people who pirate our game are not people who would have purchased it had they not been able to get it without paying.

 

[Pink Gregory]

The internet is what you and others make it, and you have to deal with the competition, you ALWAYS have to deal with the competition.

It's just the way it is now, we can't go back, so why be a luddite about it for the sake of some false 'integrity'?

 

[Lilani]

Overall if you are an "artist" (and by artist I mean all mediums and media...muscians,artists,writers,programmers ect..) has the internet been a blessing or a curse?

I think, overall, the Internet is a great blessing. A major part of creating any kind of art is communication--both in the form of critique (both giving and receiving criticism) and in the form of collaboration. Without the Internet, in order to make something like an animated film with voice actors you either needed to do everything yourself or happen to have a very talented group of friends at your disposal. Now you can go to voice acting sites and audition amateur voice actors from all over the globe, get people with professional sound-editing software to mix your sound, and have a nearly infinite source of research material when it comes to researching things like animation styles, camera movement, and film theory.

And critique is important because it gives you outside perspectives and, if used properly, can bring you to earth. Of course the Internet is filled with people willing to look at anything on DeviantArt and say it's the most amazing thing they've ever seen, but if you put in the effort to build online relationships with other artists and get a good network of people who will be honest with you and who you can be honest with, it can help you grow immensely as an artist. So I guess that's what it comes down to--how you use it (or rather, how to not let it use you).

I've seen a lot of people say that fanfiction is killing the art of writing, but I feel the exact opposite. Fanfictions, in theory, are not much different from writing exercises you'll be made to do in college-level writing courses. In college, you'll be given some sort of a situation or "set-up" and you have to write a short story based on that. The idea behind having the "set-up" is to give you a good jumping off point. If you're given a set of characters, then you don't have to worry about fleshing out the characters when you're writing so you can focus specifically on developing the plot and setting. Or, if it's the plot and setting you've been given, you get practice developing characters. It's like exercising your muscles--when you exercise, you don't work all of your muscles at once. You spend some time on your arms, some times on your legs, some time on your core. Of course with writing you eventually have to take off and do them all at once, but practicing all at once can sometimes cause more problems than solve.

Anyway, fanfictions essentially do the same thing as those writing exercises. You have the characters and the world, so as a writer you get to focus completely on the plot. Or maybe you're going to have different characters in that world, or maybe have those characters in a different world. Either way, you have a constant and however you approach it you can focus specifically on everything else. So while you are going to get stuff like Cloud Mows the Lawn or My Immortal out of fanfiction, that doesn't necessarily mean all of those writers stop there. Maybe fanfiction is just what gets them through middle school and junior high before they move onto the real writing courses. I know that's what happened to me--I wrote two fanfictions between middle school and high school, and now I'm working on what I hope eventually becomes a book. And I know in writing those two stories I learned a lot about writing that I never would have learned if I hadn't just sat down and wrote something.

And the fact that the something that kept me going was a video game or a TV show doesn't really matter at this point, because no matter what you write in middle or high school chances are it's going to be shit anyway

 

[Entitled]

Anyway, fanfictions essentially do the same thing as those writing exercises. You have the characters and the world, so as a writer you get to focus completely on the plot. Or maybe you're going to have different characters in that world, or maybe have those characters in a different world. Either way, you have a constant and however you approach it you can focus specifically on everything else. So while you are going to get stuff like Cloud Mows the Lawn or My Immortal out of fanfiction, that doesn't necessarily mean all of those writers stop there. Maybe fanfiction is just what gets them through middle school and junior high before they move onto the real writing courses.

I wouldn't entirely agree with that. While fanfics are stereotypically known for being written by teenagers, and generally inexperienced people, there are also plenty of examples among them of writing quality, that would comparable to "real writing" on their own right.

While you are right, that not having to invent a world makes focus on the plot easier, there is no reason to think that every True Art has to have an entirely new setting or characters to begin with. We already have stories like The Walking Dead where the "world" is a completely generic zombie apocalypse, and character interactions are at focus. We have many great stories, that take place in a a generic real life U.S. suburbia.
It's usually accepted, that if an artist doesn't want to focus on worldbuilding, they can just say that it's not the point here.

Besides, the usual motive behind writing fanfiction is not intellectual laziness, but fannish interest in an aspect of the source material. A lazy writer would name his character "Steve Brooker", and instead of inventing him a personality, make him act surprisingly similar to Harry Potter. A fanfiction writer is someone who first names the character "Harry Potter", not even caring that this will make the story unsellable, and then struggle to give him an in-character personality. (Or just flip the table, and make him blatantly OOC). Because he is that obsessed with adding something to the story, whether it is extra worldbuilding, plot points, characters, criticism/deconstruction, or something else.

 

[Lilani]

Anyway, fanfictions essentially do the same thing as those writing exercises. You have the characters and the world, so as a writer you get to focus completely on the plot. Or maybe you're going to have different characters in that world, or maybe have those characters in a different world. Either way, you have a constant and however you approach it you can focus specifically on everything else. So while you are going to get stuff like Cloud Mows the Lawn or My Immortal out of fanfiction, that doesn't necessarily mean all of those writers stop there. Maybe fanfiction is just what gets them through middle school and junior high before they move onto the real writing courses.

I wouldn't entirely agree with that. While fanfics are stereotypically known for being written by teenagers, and generally inexperienced people, there are also plenty of examples among them of writing quality, that would comparable to "real writing" on their own right.

Oh yes! Shoot, I forgot to make that qualification, lol. Yes I have read some fanfictions that are better than some published stuff I've seen. One in particular was a TF2 fanfiction called It Could be Worse. It is a relationship fic between the Sniper and Spy of TF2, and is one of the most beautiful romance stories I've ever read--gay or straight, fanfiction or "real" writing. I highly, highly recommend it. There is a lot of swearing, but it's not X-rated by any means. It is very well written and the characterization and pacing are amazing.

While you are right, that not having to invent a world makes focus on the plot easier, there is no reason to think that every True Art has to have an entirely new setting or characters to begin with. We already have stories like The Walking Dead where the "world" is a completely generic zombie apocalypse, and character interactions are at focus. We have many great stories, that take place in a a generic real life U.S. suburbia.
It's usually accepted, that if an artist doesn't want to focus on worldbuilding, they can just say that it's not the point here.

Besides, the usual motive behind writing fanfiction is not intellectual laziness, but fannish interest in an aspect of the source material. A lazy writer would name his character "Steve Brooker", and instead of inventing him a personality, make him act surprisingly similar to Harry Potter. A fanfiction writer is someone who first names the character "Harry Potter", not even caring that this will make the story unsellable, and then struggle to give him an in-character personality. (Or just flip the table, and make him blatantly OOC). Because he is that obsessed with adding something to the story, whether it is extra worldbuilding, plot points, characters, criticism/deconstruction, or something else.

And I agree with all of this as well. I guess I've gotten so used to facing resistance to the idea of fanfiction not being damaging to writing that I didn't dare to broach the subject of fanfiction being a legitimate creative outlet just yet ;-) But yes, without spending six paragraphs long-windedly rephrasing what you just very well summarized, I agree. With all of the things.