How does an artist get some exposure?

Porn.

As someone who makes a lot of money but is uncreative as fuck, I wish there was an easier way to find artists to commission. Pro tip: I pay in full up front

>>86734599
Unfortunately this, porn commissions are how most would-be Van Gogh's make their living these days

>>86734579
by doing it for free

>>86734649
http://imgur.com/gallery/kuytL

>>86734695
what if your work is already free?

>>86734697
Start doing furry porn. Er, scalie porn.

>>86734692
some people don't wanna do porn, it's not healthy. You can't just get out.

>>86734599
Porn.

So many art industries are gated by the school you went to and the contacts you got. Well. Just like anything else in life.

>>86735114
Yeah, but such is life. Semi-nude/nude commissions are way to go. Unless you know guy who knows guy and you get art designer gig at Bioware or wherever.

>>86735138
shouldn't be like that

some people are trying to funnel all the money and attention for themselves. And then all entertainment feels similar and bland

File: 0.jpg (461KB, 700x781px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 700x781px

>>86734579
Fan art.

Drew a Mario or Sonic Fan art and, if it's decent enough, everyone and their cousin suddenly start noticing you.

You can also go with what is currently hyping, like Steven Universe. A fan art of Steven Universe guarantee you an income of at least 100 new viewers.

Or you can make sexy fanart (you don't need to go dirty) of video game girl characters.

It's now up to you to hook them with the rest of your stuff.

>>86735140
There's "demand" for non-porn (regular entertainment)... but if it's not through a gilded vendor (old comics company; network tv) you never hear of it. That's gotta be pretty discouraging for a lot of creative people out there. Only we can break that.

>>86734579
Being good helps. Of course "good" can mean many things but to most business it means being able to create a brand that customers can recognize.

>>86735252
dude fanart is so overdone and oversaturated, don't you think? It's no longer "fan art", it's just "pandering art" now/

You think if I did some naruto fanart it's gonna be as big or a hit as it would've been years ago? Of course not; the same will happen to this overwatch and gravity falls "fanart" it's all gonna die out/look the same.

>>86735301
a brand that's good, that part is the artist's job.

>>86735329
>dude fanart is so overdone and oversaturated, don't you think? It's no longer "fan art", it's just "pandering art" now/
Doesn't matter, it still bring you new viewer.
>it's just "pandering art" now/
Nothing wrong with pandering in itself if you enjoy the thing too. dishing out pandering would be like dishing out fanservice and cheesecak and characters with big boobs.

make fan art and porn art of already successfully established characters

File: K AND K.png (1MB, 1351x780px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1351x780px

>>86734697
did anyone read this?

>>86735383
I want original content like anyone else. That's the most enjoyable.

>>86735501
One doesn't forbid the other.

In the end good Original content end up having fan-art too. It's kind of inevitable.

>>86735587
true.. if you *want* to draw it, then that's okay. I bet if given the chance, a lot of creative people would rather focus on their own ideas. It is kind of painful to observe someone who *has* to do fanart to get attention, if they'd rather be doing something else.

How do you guys feel about people who make money off of fan arts?

Personally, I'm against it. It kind of makes me mad to see people try to make money with other people's characters.

>>86734579
Draw shit you like in a presentable manner. Actually show and have interest in what you make.

>>86735800
Yeah it depends on how the artist feels, but I agree with your sentiment. After a while, some characters should become public domain.. but that's a whole other discussion from crappy fanrat lol.

>>86735835
done done and done. I swear, it's just got no exposure yet, but at least everyone who's read it gave a positive response.

File: 1424993436527.jpg (18KB, 176x255px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 176x255px

>>86734599
>friend ditched our friend group years ago to draw furry and mlp porn
>he now has hundreds of fans although his art is average

You're not wrong

>>86735839
It depends on what characters you mean should be "public domain" because I sorta disagree with that

I don't think it's fair for a creator to have to allow the rights to their own characters open to the public just so people can mooch off of its success and get paid for it

>>86735329
>>86735501
>>86735671
Keep in mind, OP asked how to get exposure.
He got his anwser: fanart, sexy fanart, even (it doesn't even need to be dirty).

It's perfectly respectable to only want to make your own original content. But if someone is asking to get exposure well, then the "I just want to make my own stuff" isn't real anymore. Being exposed or not does not prevent you from doing your own stuff.

Desiring to be exposed, seeking for attention (not that there is nothing wrong with that), mean you have entered the the process of marketing your work, make it attractive to the audience. and from this point of view, Fan art is a perectly legit way to do it.

Saying "I want to attract viewership, but only with my own OC" is, might be a bit arrogant (though justified, if it's actually really good). and if it doesn't work, it's not because you fail at your art, it's because you fail at "selling it. those are two different concept. And if you aren't a prodigy at marketing (which is a different talent than being good at your own art), there is nothing wrong to rely on cheap trick such as fanart so that the viewership might be hook and seek your other stuffs while they are here.

Your talent is in your own art, selling it is a different talent all together and you shouldn't feel bad to not be good that second point. It doesn't say anything of your own talent in the first place.

File: Batman_the_Animated_Series_logo.jpg (32KB, 272x402px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 272x402px

>>86735923
okay, an example: I sincerely believe batman should be public domain by now.

Frankenstein, Dracula and many other iconic characters and stories became public domain, which resulted in honest flops, as well as honest artistic successes.. eventually, these series died out naturally as new ideas developed. Every now and then Dracula comes back and *has* to be good, otherwise it won't succeed.

Now look at the inverse: As long a big companies hold the rights to characters like batman (for too long), they'll keep milking it and making terrible movies and comics, essentially forcing the character to live thorough terrible releases exclusively (desperate efforts to market and make money off the character, and nothing else), instead of letting it take a natural course, and let itself be processed through passionate creators alone (which outs desperate attempts to make money) and eventually allows it to only be remembered fondly.

A pandering dracula movie is looked down upon (as it should be), but a pandering batman movie, is the only one, so it's given this "exclusive" flair, which is often at odds with the quality of the release. But even worse, it makes it difficult to recognize it as a terrible piece of work, because it's the only one. It almost doesn't matter how bad it is.

>>86736230
I'm gonna my post to shamelessly plug my story again: http://imgur.com/gallery/kuytL

>>86736298
*use my post

>>86735800
For corporate characters, I don't mind. If you can get money drawing the simpsons, cool, fair enough.

I'm more uneasy about it when it comes to amateur stuff, unless you can get permission it actually seems like mooching off an individual instead of a faceless corporation that barely knows how to use it's own property anyway.

>>86736411
So by corporate do you mean networks like FOX, CN, Nick, etc.?

what about corps like PAWS, Inc., where they own all the rights to Garfield? They're an independent corporation, right? does it still count?

Though, I don't see too many people making money off of fanarts of him, either.

>>86734579
>make characters that appear borderline fetishist
>Keep it so sfw that it can attract various amounts of people
>Be a nice ass and suck up to the industry's successful artists and get free stuff
>????
>exposure

>>86737093
It hasn't even been a full day yet and there's anons circlejerking again

Fuck off our /co/mrade, anon

>>86737002
In the broadest principle, if it's big enough to be a legally registered thing with more than 1-2 employees it's probably big enough for it to be okay.

I'm primarily concerned with the hypothetical "This pornographer is making more off [webcomic character] than the comic creator" scenario.

>>86734579
Being chosen.

>>86735193
>shouldn't be like that
tough titty

>>86737317
haha, I don't just mean for myself, I mean for people who watch/read entertainment too

>>86737242
Shit, is there any examples of that scenario?

>How do I get exposure as an artist?
Do porn.
>No.
Okay, then do fan art.
>No.

You're having us work with an arm tied behind our backs here. It's all find and good to want to create original content, but you've got to be fine with the fact that original content doesn't sell. At all. And when it does, it's usually only after a few years of plugging away at it thanklessly.

>>86737405
Couldn't cite any, but it's almost certainly happened.
(Though most cases would be relatively benign "The creator has made $0 and some nobody on DA made $10 doing a sketch of it.")

>>86737406
>plugging away at it thanklessly
>>86736298
>thanklessly plugs in his comic

heh

>>86737406
>original content doesn't sell. At all.

hah!! That's simply not true! Everyone in this thread would rather pay for a good story (emphasis on good, a story they would enjoy) rather than some fucking fanart they would enjoy. Everyone would rather do that.

>>86737475
That wasn't me

>>86734579

1. Do requests or your own personal thing

2. Once you get to a certain point

3. Open commissions

4. ????

5. Profit

>>86737525
My bad. It was meant to say OP

>>86737501
Can't tell if sarcastic or not.

Good thread though.

>>86737605
No prob dude

>>86737612
Nah that's not sarcastic, but I can see how it looked like that

>>86737501
What's the last comic you bought outside of Marvel/DC?

What's the last patreon you supported?

People like things that they already like. It's incredibly difficult to get people to try new media.

>>86735800

I hate that shit to an unfathomable degree. Bonus points if they use a meme with said established, franchise characters to make bucks and slap the words "He's a GOOD boy"or "Look at these CHILDREN".

>>86737093
fucking really anon
did you not learn anything from last night

jesus christ

>>86734720
Pay people to see your shit?

>>86737666
It just has to be available. Those companies have a stranglehold on the media outlets, even the internet- they spend a lot of money to flood everywhere (this is most apparent on youtube and google search results). Like, when a new movie floods the cinema screens, you don't ask if it's by warner bros or whatever, you just think to yourself "would I like to watch this?". Now imagine if that opportunity isn't even given to you because the fat companies are taking up all the space.

I found the answer thanks to this guy
>>86737742

>>86737742
It's honestly coming to this. I don't mind doing this at all, because I'm confident my work will spread for far better reason than giving them money, thank you for this; genius.

Genuinely not sure why there isn't an ongoing Plug Your Art thread here. I mean other than How's Your Webcomic I guess.

Also, I occasionally do small bits of fanart for obscure little things I like, and it won't get a lot of attention, but then suddenly a year later it'll start getting a handful of tumblr notes because someone searched for the same obscure thing that they also like. It's not exposure to a wide audience but it feels nice. A nice little reassuring pat on the head telling me I wasn't wasting my time drawing that thing.