 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
A bit ago I completed the initial stage of a character portrait (done in two
or three passes over as many days).
exhibit a: http://empyrean.freesitespace.net/misc/2454941.jpg
The person who commissioned it asked how much I wanted. I said 'however
much you think it's worth', but added that I wanted to go over it once more
and improve the linework to push the form of the figure (the effect is a bit
flat atm on the pants and jacket, apart from the figure's left arm).
That turned out to be $80...?!
So...yeah. I was somewhat playing around with making the image look like a
Franklin Booth illustration, and as far as that goes it turned out well, has
a nice effect, and is much faster than my usual shading method, but...it's
*so* much less effort than I usually put into a drawing, and the amount paid
for it is so large that I really feel I should put in a detailed background,
just to justify that (especially since Booth focused as much, if not more,
on the backgrounds over figures).
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> That turned out to be $80...?!
> So...yeah. I was somewhat playing around with making the image look like a
> Franklin Booth illustration, and as far as that goes it turned out well, has
> a nice effect, and is much faster than my usual shading method, but...it's
> *so* much less effort than I usually put into a drawing, and the amount paid
> for it is so large that I really feel I should put in a detailed background,
> just to justify that (especially since Booth focused as much, if not more,
> on the backgrounds over figures).
For some people $80 would be *way* too little for such an image.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> For some people $80 would be *way* too little for such an image.
Yep, when I first read "$80...?!" my first thought was that Tim thought it
was too little, a perfectly valid thought IMO.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Huh...so it might well be that I'm just being hard on myself and it actually
is good enough to warrant that amount?
*scratches head*
I guess I'm just new to this whole actually getting paid for something like
this. I've only sold 4 other drawings before, one for $15, two for $20, and
one for $50 (which was a coloured pencil piece I'd done in Illustration 2,
and I sold a photocopy of it for $20). Oh wait, the zazzle print someone
bought counts, too...so, ok 7 sales totalling a little over $330 over...10
years? Not exactly a viable income... :P
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> For some people $80 would be *way* too little for such an image.
I tend to agree. Certainly, a professional would ask at least as much,
and probably more.
I honestly don't have a good idea about these things - never bought or
sold art. Think of it this way: How much do you normally get paid per
hour for your real job, and compare that rate with what you're getting
for this.
--
"Now we all know map companies hire guys who specialize in making map
folding a physical impossibility" - Adult Kevin Arnold in "Wonder Years"
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> exhibit a: http://empyrean.freesitespace.net/misc/2454941.jpg
My mind is going blank just thinking about how many millennia it would
take to draw that many tiny lines...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
