how does /ic/ feel about artists who rework other people's/franchise's

>>2832169
like matrix ?

It's kind of nebulous.

On the one hand I have no problem with fan art for franchises and think it's mostly mutually beneficial, but on the other hand I understand why it'd be annoying as an artist/designer to have someone take your design and sell it.

It cracks me up when I see artists indignantly bitch that someone slapped their fan-art on a t-shirt and sold it.

>>2832175
overthinking it, though that's an interesting take

an example could be knitting little mario heads and selling them, or painting pokemon in strange or different styles and selling copies of those

>>2832185
for me it mostly comes down to whether its for profit or not

but even then, let's say you make some zelda alt art as free fodder for your online presence in hopes of pandering to possible zelda fans, so that maybe they'll take a look at your original stuff you have for sale.

its less direct but still seems a little cheesy

>>2832169
Just another vulgar form of ""art""

bumpo

It's a doggie dog world. The art game is rough. You don't make it to the top without stepping on a few heads.

>>2832169
The choice is between copyright infringement and starvation

>>2832577

This. failures are a diamond dozen in the art world.