Who Amongst Us Isn't an Asshole

[marvelboi77]

Originally Posted by predaking007

MBoi, I'm having trouble understanding the point you're trying to make. Are you suggesting that artists should look at commissions before published work? The publishers are the hand that feeds them, not the "patrons". Comics are the reason they get invited to cons, have fans, and can command big commission rates. The publishers are the source of steady work, not the "patrons". In return, artists work 19 hours a day to draw a page. For top artists, they can spend a couple hours to produce a cover that Marvel commissioned, sell the art for $5000, get royalties from books sales, and sell prints at cons. That actually sounds more appealing than the $2400 in 4 con sketches.

From what I see about the entire industry, it's hurting. Stores are closing and can't keep subscribers. If the stores can't survive selling the books, I have doubts that many creators are living the high life. If comic artists wanted to earn more money, they could just leave comics advertising or video games.

4 fullsize pencil commissions a night times 25 Equals 100 commissions that they can do at home that can be knocked out in a month equals $60,000 tax free dollars. You are not getting what I'm saying.. I'm saying is I wish artists would stop acting like commissions are not good money. A cover also takes longer then a commission to produce. Isn't all money good????/ Yes they should do their published work, but stop taking commissions as an after thought and spending and enjoying my money and acting like it was nothing. Maybe $500 is nothing, but if you compound the number of people with the hours of work then it's equal money in pay and time if not better then published work.

Plus you already been indoctrinated into the word Patron... Good Grief.

[marvelboi77]

Originally Posted by risingstar

I agree with you too. However, what you appear to be describing here is an arguably tremedous sense of entitlement. This certainly isn't exclusive to name artists only. We could conceivably see that in anyone who has become successful. Should anyone consider going into a transaction with someone who feels entitled to that sort of imbalance, they should come prepared. However, the Lee and Tim example doesn't seem to apply here. I imagine the situation between them eventually became about power and competition. Once it turned into a "you can't do that to me..." type scenario, everything fell off the rails.

I agree with you.. I only brought up these points to counter what Mark was saying.

[GerryT]

the word patron being introduced to this is the most condescending and frankly laughable thing ive read in this discussion.It says a lot about the thinking of certain artists and explains how commissions can and do go horribly wrong.

[marvelboi77]

Originally Posted by Underdog07

Who was starring in local plays?

I don't want to say, but he is my favorite artist...

[marvelboi77]

Originally Posted by GerryT

the word patron being introduced to this is the most condescending and frankly laughable thing ive read in this discussion.It says a lot about the thinking of certain artists and explains how commissions can and do go horribly wrong.

I completely agree.

[Underdog07]

They both drew lines in the sand and refused to budge IMO.

Some comments here read almost like a person should accept whatever they get from an artist for the artists time. That to me does not make sense. I charge for my time Whereas most artists charge for the commission with factors that would add to the time added into the price.

This makes me recall when an artist noticed I was unhappy, well not enthused, by his commission. He offered three times to redo it before I accepted his offer. He then got pissed that I wanted it redone.

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by bat_collector

Edit. I dont care

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by GerryT

the word patron being introduced to this is the most condescending and frankly laughable thing ive read in this discussion.It says a lot about the thinking of certain artists and explains how commissions can and do go horribly wrong.

Originally Posted by marvelboi77

I completely agree.

I don't understand how this is a patron situation

Originally Posted by The Batfan

There was NO agreement from him stating any kind of Refund etc policies soo people stop reading into it what you THINK might be said and not said.. I have posted up the email for what was agreed upon.

If there was no agreement based around his refund policies it's premature to flip out because he didn't refund you like...a day after you had your disagreement. Especially when there was a decent chance (as it turns out was the case) that he was selling the art to get money prior to the refund.

The fact of the matter is you've had a lot of problems with artists, some legitimate, others not so much. If you've got a problem with how commissions work, why don't you make a contract and simply don't bother to commission anyone that doesn't agree to it? There's never going to be some universal commissioner contract that people agree to.

[Tim Fischer]

Hello, everyone. My name is Tim Fischer. I am the artist in question.

I had decided to stay out of this debate, because I no longer wanted to communicate with my former customer/client. However, lingering questions about this situation seem to be perpetuating the discussion.

First, I would like to thank each and every one of you who has given me the benefit of the doubt on this subject, without even knowing me. I am sincerely grateful to each of you that put your own reputations on the line with your assumptions that I, a complete stranger to you all, would make the right decisions to resolve this incident.

Second, I'm happy that the tone of this discussion has remained civil, for the most part. You all seem to value your community, here, and that is very commendable.

Finally, allow me make at least ONE thing perfectly clear: I am auctioning the three rejected illustrations on eBay for the sole purpose of raising money to refund my former customer. I made the offer of "calling it even" in an attempt to at least partially satisfy the former client, who seemed to really like the three completed illustrations. My former client's rejection of that offer (which he so far has not posted for viewing on this forum) was accompanied by a rather caustic THREAT of a public shaming and a you'll-never-work-in-this-town-again type of damage to my career.

After being threatened in that manner, I no longer felt the need to communicate with my former client. So, I have not.

I was under the impression that I was creating five commissioned illustrations, not ONE themed set or series. There was never a mention of "all or nothing."

I agree with what many people have written on this thread, that this situation could have been avoided with a more structured set of guidelines for my customers, laying out exactly what their money was buying, as far as their involvement and oversight of the creative process was concerned.

Here is a link to my website's online store. You'll see the line that states: "The artist reserves the right to terminate the commission agreement for a full refund to the customer." Whether or not my former client actually read these guidelines, I do not know. However, I do know that he was at least exposed to these rules, as this webpage is where he found my commission rates. Had our negotiations not taken an immediate turn for the worse, I would have followed my offer of "calling it even" with a statement of my intention to refund his money.

If anyone has questions that they would like ask me, feel free to send me a Private Message, and I will answer them.

Thank you for your patience and your understanding. I apologize for this intrusion into your community.