I quits my job but who was art?

>>3042878

He is already at a proficient level. It's all a sham to build up something to sell his audience false claims. Literally pulling a Noah Bradley here.

File: comment_VcV2aal3BaFxz4Cwpi4YS2BobrH8ExV9.jpg (203KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 640x640px

Give a TLDR, nobody got 15 mins to watch some random dude talking

Also, the guys got a really punchable face. Not sure what is it about it but Im getting the urge

>>3042878

>making a living at art
>skill level

It ain't about skill, boyo, it's about demand and appeal

Nobody cares how technically accurate your old man hand studies are, and the average pleb knows fuck all about anatomy or rendering. People want to look at things that make them feel good, horny or laugh.

Decent money, complete creative control, and a career path in art that exists. You can only have two.

>>3042918

You don't deserve the solid advice he's giving and should learn the hard way instead

>>3042878
All I see in his artstation is studies. Everyone can do those.

>>3042878
That piece hides his level because everything is dark. Go to his art station and you'll see that he's not actually at a pro level yet.

>>3042927
What kind of utter idiot believes demand isn't influenced by skill? You can cite as many outliers as you want, but the bottom line is, all things being equal, skilled artists are in higher demand than less skilled ones, that's simply common sense.

>>3043009

But there's a hard cap on the demand for your work that your technical skill will command alone. The industry is saturated with artists who all have the same technical level of skill as the ones whose names get thrown around here all the time. There's literally thousands of artists just as technically skilled as the big names, but they'll never see the light of day because their aesthetic isn't emotionally appealing and they're too proud to pander

Is the demand higher for their talent? Sure it is. But the contribution that their raw talent makes to the demand is negligible compared to how their art makes people FEEL when they look at it.

You don't have to believe me, anon. The industry will teach you itself.

>>3043047
>You don't have to believe me, anon. The industry will teach you itself.

Please refrain from pretending you know the industry first hand in such an arrogant manner, it's always incredibly obvious when it comes from some noobie who has never worked a day in his life as artist.

There are thousands of technically highly sjkilled artists who aren't famous, yes, but each and every one of them is a working professional and has no trouble landing jobs at all. In fact, one of the reasons why so many skilled artists are relatively unknown in terms of internet fame is because they don't have to be famous. They have their list of clients in case they work freelance or they have a nice and secure in-house position at a studio that they got the old fashioned way by sending out their portfolio.

It's not his skill level, it's just hard getting a job period. Especially, if it's your first job in that industry. Even if it's not art related, most people have to send out multiple applications.

It's also easier to get a job, when you have one, so I wouldn't quit. And other factors might be happening here. He might be bad at business, so he can't freelance. He might not be marketing himself right (something is off in his portfolio, bad social media, bad website), he might not be good at interviews, or communication. He might not be in a good area for jobs, or applying to jobs where he is not a good fit.

And maybe, there are jobs he can do, but he's choosing not to do them for some reason. Sometimes you got to take the job to just show others that you can do the job AND get the job done. He wants to be a concept artist, but maybe he'll need to take a job doing texture work for 3D models, or something. If he isn't making any progress, he might have to start somewhere. And that starts by broadening your horizons when it comes to art jobs.

>>3043055

>landing jobs
>freelance
>clients

And what do these things have in common? Terms. Requirements. Specifications. People have to fucking like what they make, and they've got to make it how those people like it.

I can guarantee you that each and every one of them gets their freelance jobs because they agree to produce work that people actually want to look at and continue to ask for not just whatever pops into their heads. Their skill counts for something, but what counts more is that people see what they made and vibe with it on a personal level.

If there's an overlap between what you like to produce and what people want, then you're in a good spot. If you're super skilled and that all you ever create is what you want, with no regard for what anyone besides what you want to see, good luck making a sustainable living in this age. Nobody wants to work with someone who cares more about how good they think their work is than actually delivering what's demanded.

The point here isn't that your talent, while not irrelevant, is secondhand to your ability and willingness to make a picture that people find appealing enough to pay for. The OP suggested that skill level was the sole metric for making a living, which couldn't be further from the truth.

>>3043055
>they have a nice and secure in-house position
>secure
As someone who has lost an in-house position a few times I kind of envy those whose entire income is not dependant of a single individual hand hovering over the layoff button

File: wikihow dorg.png (177KB, 664x520px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 664x520px

>tfw art was who all along