I'm all for paying artists for their work. Unfortunately, same as tattoo artists, some just heavily overcharge for mediocre results (been tattooing myself AND I know a few things about art). Like, sorry, but if you want to earn money doing art, please be good at it...
In the tattoo business people have no other places to go. Charging 1k€+ for half a sleeve is extremely overcharged. If people are paying they often simply don't have enough alternatives.
Given the time commitment and network of basic biological, anatomical, and health knowledge required, that doesn't strike me as an insane price, assuming an artist who is able to create the requested art.
A friend who is heavily inked has gone on at length to me about understanding skin elasticity--particularly how it changes over a lifetime--as well as the way joints and muscles change and distort visual lines, etc. It sure seems like a skilled trade to me.
And, I don't know, depth of penetration of a needle in flesh and sanitation don't strike me as minor things to get right.
People love to make things seem harder than they are. I tattoo people, I am aware about skin types, usually thats not a big issue unless its heavily scarred. The quality of your tattoo machine matters most, as my 70€ eBay makeshift one wasnt nearly as good as a proper one. Amount of ink matters, needle depth, skin type, sweat. But thats stuff you have figured put after your 20th tattoo. Its like knowing datatypes in programming. You just know stuff after some practice.
> People love to make things seem harder than they are.
In my experience people tend to underestimate or downplay how difficult something will be or how complex it is. This happens in people who know only a little about something, but also in people who are highly experienced because it becomes normal and easy for them and they can quickly evaluate a situation and know which considerations don't apply.
> But thats stuff you have figured put after your 20th tattoo.
So... after spending hundreds, if not thousands, of hours learning a skill?
I got a tattoo back in the day and specifically went to one the guys in my platoon said was good due to him being featured in magazines or whatever. It's kind of an important thing to get right on the first, not 20th, attempt IMHO.
I think that would be great. Traditional art market is not nearly as big as the digital space. I'd love if people valued traditional art again as thats the only stuff I do.
Depends on the niche. Original physical art for trading card games or comics is a significant chunk of the income of your typical artist. Digital art in those niches does not have this source of income. But then again digital art has other niches where the actual commission rates are high enough to not make this a problem.
The problem with that is that people aren't asking for AI generated images in the style of Raven from Topeka with an Etsy shop. They're asking for Ghibli. So the people whose livelihoods are most directly impacted are (assuming they're not centuries dead) the famous, talented, and trend-making artists, not the lower tier making bad Precious Moments knockoffs. Society's problem is understanding that not wanting to pay for bad Precious Moments knockoffs is rational, while not wanting to pay, say, a Studio Ghibli for quality, professional creativity is insane.
Except they didn’t do any work for the exposure. If a marketing agency had come up and executed the Ghiblify everything model as a PR stunt we would call it the most genius creative campaign of the decade
They did though. The studio engaged in tremendous amounts of work and created good will, in addition to their specific creative works. Their visual style is tied up in that good will. Use of the visual style for profit without consent is, at least ethically, misappropriation of another's value. And "You should be pleased I used your creative work because now more people will know about you and you will make a lot of money from this!" is one of the oldest defenses to misappropriation of creativity.
I'm not even mad. We do a terrible job in our society of valuing artists and creative people generally and in explaining the value of intangible things, especially something like good will. People have been misappropriating fonts and clipart and screenshots in presentations and posters and whatnot, duplicating clever branding ideas and the creative efforts of others, and so on for _decades_ if not longer, all without ill intent. It's something we need to fix and never will. But when that becomes a channel for another to directly profit, it begins to venture out of harmlessness.
You're entirely missing the point. The average western person has never heard of or seen any Ghibli movies. GPT use is heavily skewed by nerdy types. The average football watching big-bang-theory-is-a-smart-show type person doesn't know what any of this is.
If Ghibli feels like they are getting screwed, they could've taken this opportunity to promote themselves, is the parent's point. If I were in their marketing dept I would have been screaming "guys, non-weeaboo people are seeing our name in the news, let's fucking capitalize!" When has Ghibli ever trended? Set up some screenings or stream Spirited Away on their site for a couple weeks or somethin. If they want to win hearts and minds, that's what you have to do. As of now, it's already out of the MSM news cycle and forgotten.
As if the Ghibli trend wasnt just a short trend people will have forgotten about in 4 weeks... Also I couldnt care less about big studios, they print money anyway.
