Should artists and writers work for free?

[kiffren]

I'm a writer. Commercially, I don't think I would do it for free. However, the main reason I write is for my own enjoyment, and that of my readers is second. If I was offered a 'job' where something I wrote would get published for free without me paying anything, or them paying me anything, I would probably take it. I want my name out there.

 

I can't say anything about other forms of art.

[HeatherMarie]

(Just realized I have something else to add)

 

Besides being an amature author, I go to a special art class twice a week. I've made 30+ paintings in the past year. 10 of those I gave away to people, a few of them strangers, because they expressed interest in my work.

 

I did this *because I wanted to*. I did it because it makes me feel good to know that they like my work. I did it because they were nice and didn't beg or anything like that.

 

But if someone came up to me and asked me to paint a specific detailed work, that was to be a part of a large something-or-other that would make them tons of money, and could I do it for free because it would get my name out there? Heck no. My time, canvas, paints, and commitment is *worth* something.

[KageSora]

I would say that given that each (competent and talented) artist has a unique style and vision that they bring to their work, they invest a heck of a lot in each piece they produce. Part of what the client pays for is that uniqueness, that vision, that style that no one else on the planet can give them, and that is certainly far from worthless in and of itself even if the artist is working digitally (and given how much high-powered graphics machines and programs like Photoshop cost, there's still a significant overhead even in "non-analogue" works).

Oh, I don't mean to say that the uniqueness isn't important--that's the main reason they're paying that specific artist, after all. I just mean if you want to strip all of that out, you have at the very least the basic cost of the physical materials used to create the work.

 

And yeah, those digital programs can get way pricy, but once you've paid it off, you can hopefully use the same program for a decent number of pieces as opposed to needing to by new physical materials for every so many pieces you do. But those are way expensive for the really good ones these days...

 

 

@Marie19R: Yes! If I want to give out my work or offer a free one to somebody who expressed interest, that's my choice, and I can do that--but to expect me to work for free, because I'll possibly have the potential to benefit someday in the future while you benefit from my work much sooner and without a guarantee of me benefiting from "getting my name out" with Random Project X? No way!

Edited September 7, 2011 by KageSora

[Nerendier]

they can do some volunteer artwork for non-profit organizations or something. They don't have to give up their time and energy for nothing.

Isn't doing volunteer work simply working for free? Isn't giving away your work working for free?

 

 

 

 

@Artemis, I imagine working as an actor in the beginning amounts to something like $1 an hour or something of that nature.

 

 

 

 

Let's look at it this way folks, hypothetically.

You're an artist.

You're pretty good.

You don't have a fancy degree.

Your family is not rich.

You can't find a job to do with art.

You paint/draw/write anyway.

You have a pile of good paintings, but because you're not rich, you don't have connections, and you don't have a fancy degree, they're sitting in the corner and you can't get a gallery to look at you.

 

Now, what's your next step, having failed in all of this?

You can try and peddle a few on the corner or whatever.

Or, you can try and do something so that people will know your name, like a movie or a book.

But yea, why would they pay you? You're not special, even though your work might be.

What options do you have left?

[Princess Artemis]

@Artemis, I imagine working as an actor in the beginning amounts to something like $1 an hour or something of that nature.

The Screen Actor's Guild enforces a minimum wage for all actors. Not all actors are in SAG, of course. Nevertheless, $1 an hour is still getting paid.

 

Let's look at it this way folks, hypothetically.

You're an artist.

You're pretty good.

You don't have a fancy degree.

Your family is not rich.

You can't find a job to do with art.

You paint/draw/write anyway.

You have a pile of good paintings, but because you're not rich, you don't have connections, and you don't have a fancy degree, they're sitting in the corner and you can't get a gallery to look at you.

 

Now, what's your next step, having failed in all of this?

You can try and peddle a few on the corner or whatever.

Or, you can try and do something so that people will know your name, like a movie or a book.

But yea, why would they pay you? You're not special, even though your work might be.

What options do you have left?

 

And if someone is a carpenter? Pretty good? No fancy degree, no rich family, can't seem to find a job in carpentry, yet tool around with wood anyway. Has a pile of hand-crafted jewelry boxes and other such carpentry in the corner.

 

What's their next step, having failed all that? Find another job, if there isn't a way to get food on the table. If food is getting on the table, don't let any company ask for the carpentry for free.

 

Why would they pay you? Because you are not an indentured servant. It's got nothing to do with how special the person is; the person is a human performing work. Pay them.

 

Artists and writers are no different than any other craftsperson. Their time is worth money, and if a company wants their time, they need to pay for it exactly the same as they pay any other person doing work for them. If a company is unwilling to pay a person to work for them, it means the company is using them.

[KageSora]

Isn't doing volunteer work simply working for free? Isn't giving away your work working for free?

 

 

 

 

@Artemis, I imagine working as an actor in the beginning amounts to something like $1 an hour or something of that nature.

 

 

 

 

Let's look at it this way folks, hypothetically.

You're an artist.

You're pretty good.

You don't have a fancy degree.

Your family is not rich.

You can't find a job to do with art.

You paint/draw/write anyway.

You have a pile of good paintings, but because you're not rich, you don't have connections, and you don't have a fancy degree, they're sitting in the corner and you can't get a gallery to look at you.

 

Now, what's your next step, having failed in all of this?

You can try and peddle a few on the corner or whatever.

Or, you can try and do something so that people will know your name, like a movie or a book.

But yea, why would they pay you? You're not special, even though your work might be.

What options do you have left?

Well, there are different types of "working for free". There's the volunteer work that you offer to do, and then there are the scams to get free work out of you because people are too cheap to pay you.

 

If you're offering your work for free, great! Good for you!

 

But if somebody wants you to slave away for free (I'm talking work that you put many, many hours into, not just a quick work. I am not going to do 20 hours of work for somebody on the promise that it might help me maybe get a paid job somewhere down the line), on a project they're sure will make them big bucks... That's a ripoff. Why should you, who put in the hard work without which the entire project would be a bust, get nothing but a chance to maybe get paid for your work in the future?

 

Just "getting your name out there" does not guaranteed that people will want to pay you--especially if you now have a reputation established as "will work on projects that generate lots of money for absolutely nothing as long as my name is attached to it".

[Tetra Kataki]

I draw - both by hand and digitally, though lately it's been the latter - a lot. I love what I do. When people tell me my art is good - which it is, considering I'm visually impaired - I feel like I'm appreciated. I'll do works for free, these usually being sketches and sprites - which I still need work on, so I see it as a win-win. They get a piece, I get practice.

 

However, I will not work for free if it has a possible huge payout. Am I being greedy? No. I just want my fair share. If I did some artwork you were to profit off of, I want what I deserve. Of course, if I draw something someone requested me to draw, and I take no payment, that is me being the generous me. But it still stands - if you're going to make more than a few bucks off of my work, I want a piece of that pie. Make that a third, really.

 

You know, I'd have figured after 2 years on DeviantART, I'd get some form of recognition - but I have less than 800 pageviews and less than 150 comments, where 80% come from friends. Whether I'm "getting my name out" or not, I know it takes a lot before you'll get paid. I suppose I can lie in wait for the perfect opportunity. At least the locals appreciate my art - my music theory teacher liked my drawing of the Akatsuki, and he has it on his fridge. o w o

 

 

 

On a side note, I was once paid five dollars by a friend for a sketch. It was definitely not a commission, but a bribe. I was feeling rather lazy that day, and he really wanted that sketch. Needless to say, his bribe worked, and I spent that five dollars on beef jerky, trail mix, and a soda.

 

Also, I'm half asleep right now. If you don't quite get my rambling, chalk it up to my sleepiness - after 11 PM, I don't quite think straight anymore, and my mind is worse than a black hole.

[Nerendier]

And if someone is a carpenter?  Pretty good?  No fancy degree, no rich family, can't seem to find a job in carpentry, yet tool around with wood anyway.  Has a pile of hand-crafted jewelry boxes and other such carpentry in the corner.

 

What's their next step, having failed all that?  Find another job, if there isn't a way to get food on the table.  If food is getting on the table, don't let any company ask for the carpentry for free.

 

Why would they pay you?  Because you are not an indentured servant.  It's got nothing to do with how special the person is; the person is a human performing work.  Pay them.

 

Artists and writers are no different than any other craftsperson.  Their time is worth money, and if a company wants their time, they need to pay for it exactly the same as they pay any other person doing work for them.  If a company is unwilling to pay a person to work for them, it means the company is using them.

If they're going to pay someone, why would they pay a nobody?

 

See that's the problem. These people that are going to work for free absolutely do not want to find another job. They know that they want to be a professional artist, and refuse to be anything else. So yea, they'll try anything, including working for free if there's any chance that they can do what they love for the rest of their lives. After all, what other chance do they have?

 

I'm not saying that artists don't deserve to be paid. What I'm saying is that a struggling artist shouldn't let arrogance get in the way of an opportunity.

 

And as for a reputation of working for free, well, once you have a reputation, you can finally start letting your work speak for you, because they will come to you, then all you have to say is, "Look. You came to me because my work is good. It's professional grade. You want professional grade, you pay for it." Because them coming to you is far better than you going to them.

 

(BTW, 20 hours isn't that much for a chance to get your name out.)

 

PS. Doesn't the minimum wage not account for time spent off-set? If they get paid minimum wage but then go home after 2 hours of shooting and practice for an additional 8 hours, 10 hours of work for ~$15.

Edited September 7, 2011 by Nerendier

[KageSora]

I'm not saying that working for free is always a bad idea--but there are people out there who will take advantage of you if you offer to work for free. There are also people out there who will say "What!? You're gonna charge me?! But you worked on [insert project that got you known here] for free! You should do the same for me, you'll get even more known!" Are you just supposed to agree that yes, you'll get more recognition so you'll do it for free? :|

 

 

If a project requires artwork to get off the ground, and it stands to make a ton of money, you deserve some of that money in return for providing them with what they need to get the project going.

 

 

As for why pay a nobody...

 

It's usually because they're too ing cheap to pay a known professional, so they target newbies in the hopes of getting pro-quality (or near that) work out of 'em for dirt cheap or free. If they weren't trying to use you, they'd go to a pro and just pay the price. :|

 

They don't want to pay--they want good quality work for as little money as possible, because they want to make as much money as possible. I understand that that's the point of any venture designed to generate profits, but nobody is going to work for you if you want to maximize profits by not paying them or working them as hard as you can for as little pay as you can.

 

 

Now, I understand that there are times when they don't go to a pro because they just don't have the budget for that. Fine, work for cheaper, but at the very least get some kind of payment for your effort.

 

 

And 20 hours may or may not be a lot. It would depend on how "out there" your name got. If you do 20+ hours of work for a project, but your name never gets properly attached, or it ends up bombing anyway, or they just don't get as much exposure as anticipated, you're out those 20+ hours you could have spent looking for a job that would pay you something, and you don't get any recognition for it.

 

 

Yes, any venture is risky because you don't know how well it will do--but that's why you need to be careful about the sorts of work you accept.

 

 

And I've heard a number of stories about people claiming that artists/writers should work for free because "doing what you love is all the payment you need" or "how hard is it to whip up a few drawings?" You can't just pay your electric bill by saying "Oh, I'm doing what I love but I don't get paid! My love for my work is payment enough for my bills, right?" Grocery stores are not going to give you free food because you're "doing what you love even if you don't get paid". And "how hard can it be?" is a stupid attitude, because if the job was so easy they could do it themselves.

 

 

Even if you get your name out there, it could be a while before you get a project that will pay enough to pay any bills. You're probably going to need to do other work on the side anyway, so people should just suck it up and accept that.

 

 

Another big problem is that people don't want to pay you because they just don't understand how much effort it takes. Writing a story is much more than "just putting a bunch of words on a page" and making great art is more work than people who don't do such assume.

 

 

 

Besides all that, while you're waiting for your name to "get out there" you still need to find work that pays anyway to put food on the table. :| You still gotta either get another job or charge people for your work in the short run, unless you plan to starve until you get known so people will offer to pay you for work.

Edited September 7, 2011 by KageSora

[Princess Artemis]

See that's the problem. These people that are going to work for free absolutely do not want to find another job. They know that they want to be a professional artist, and refuse to be anything else. So yea, they'll try anything, including working for free if there's any chance that they can do what they love for the rest of their lives. After all, what other chance do they have?

 

I'm not saying that artists don't deserve to be paid. What I'm saying is that a struggling artist shouldn't let arrogance get in the way of an opportunity.

That'd be why companies don't respect artists enough to pay them. They're getting it for free, why in the world would they pay money for it? (Some people who really want a thing aren't cut out for it, though.)

 

It isn't arrogance to think that work done for a job is worth getting paid for. Everyone from the lowly janitor to the high-powered CEO gets paid for work rendered. Janitors are not arrogant about their loo-cleaning prowess because they won't do it for free, and the vast majority of janitors go to the company for the job, not the other way around.

 

And as for a reputation of working for free, well, once you have a reputation, you can finally start letting your work speak for you, because they will come to you, then all you have to say is, "Look. You came to me because my work is good. It's professional grade. You want professional grade, you pay for it." Because them coming to you is far better than you going to them.

 

They will come because of the reputation of letting people walk all over them.

 

If they came to an artist at all, ever, for professional work, it says the work is professional grade. There are companies that trawl DevART with promises of exposure, and their attitude is precisely this: DevART is full of talented suckers who won't ask for nearly what their work is worth if they are properly 'buttered up' and might even cough up for free, so go get 'em, use 'em up, then throw them away when they are too tired to work anymore.

 

"Look. You came to me because my work is good. It's professional grade. You want professional grade, you pay for it." <-- The first thing an artist should say to a business, no matter how unknown they are, if that business tries anything funny.

 

Shopping their work around to businesses announcing, "Use me!" to them is the wrong way to do it!

 

As far as SAG scale, no idea if it covers non-work hours. It still has that really important bit though: The actor is getting paid.

 

Do you think doctors ought do free work in a hospital that has more than enough money to pay them, with no guarantee they'll get anything but a reputation for it? Alongside others who are doing the same work and getting paid just because someone knows their name?

[prairiecrow]

Competent artists who are starting out still deserve to get paid for their work IMO, the same way that carpenters and plumbers and electricians who are apprentices deserve to get paid. They're still bringing a certain skill set to the table and their time is worth something.

 

And of course any artist learning their craft would be well advised to get as much practical experience as they can even if it's on a volunteer basis. For someone looking to break into the commercial art field, this usually means taking on "art for free" projects to gain that experience. It's a tradeoff that most successful commercial artists have made at some point in their career. And in some cases one negotiates a certain number of no-charge preliminary sketches with a paying client to secure a gig, but those sketches are usually negligible in terms of time invested.

 

However, when an entrepreneur whose stated purpose is to make money comes to an artist and proposes to make them work for nothing so that the entrepreneur can make money and give them nothing in return, that's just plain skeevy IMO, and any artist who falls for it deserves to be pelted with HB pencils by his/her fellow craftsmen. It does nobody any favours (except the morally bankrupt snake who's now got the free art), especially other artists who now have the bar set lower when it comes to setting prices for their own work.

[Nerendier]

That'd be why companies don't respect artists enough to pay them.  They're getting it for free, why in the world would they pay money for it?  (Some people who really want a thing aren't cut out for it, though.)

 

It isn't arrogance to think that work done for a job is worth getting paid for.  Everyone from the lowly janitor to the high-powered CEO gets paid for work rendered.  Janitors are not arrogant about their loo-cleaning prowess because they won't do it for free, and the vast majority of janitors go to the company for the job, not the other way around.

 

 

 

They will come because of the reputation of letting people walk all over them.

 

If they came to an artist at all, ever, for professional work, it says the work is professional grade.  There are companies that trawl DevART with promises of exposure, and their attitude is precisely this: DevART is full of talented suckers who won't ask for nearly what their work is worth if they are properly 'buttered up' and might even cough up for free, so go get 'em, use 'em up, then throw them away when they are too tired to work anymore.

 

"Look. You came to me because my work is good. It's professional grade. You want professional grade, you pay for it." <-- The first thing an artist should say to a business, no matter how unknown they are, if that business tries anything funny.

 

Shopping their work around to businesses announcing, "Use me!" to them is the wrong way to do it!

 

As far as SAG scale, no idea if it covers non-work hours.  It still has that really important bit though: The actor is getting paid.

 

Do you think doctors ought do free work in a hospital that has more than enough money to pay them, with no guarantee they'll get anything but a reputation for it?  Alongside others who are doing the same work and getting paid just because someone knows their name?

So are you saying that artists should simply hide their stuff away and let nobody have any of it unless they're going to be paid?

 

How are people supposed to become known? Especially if they don't have the money or the connections?

 

Being an artist is far different from other professions, a crappy artist can't really get anywhere, but a crappy janitor might still be able to keep his job and make that money.

 

And I'm not saying give your work for free to anyone and everyone, try to get a price, and when you're getting to the point where you're getting desperate, then what? Do you want to attempt to get your name out by working where a place might get you known, or do you want to give up and find another job, one that you don't even want to do?

 

Personally, I think the former is a better choice.

 

Maybe doing the work for a new director/producer/etc in an indie movie won't get you paid. But if he/she gets big, well, guess what, you now have a favor you can pull to get your artwork in a big gallery.

 

Why do you think that so many of the biggest painter names died long before they ever became famous for their work? It's because without connections it will probably take more than a lifetime for people to see your talent. It's all about exposure, and without doing things here and there to get that exposure, you probably won't see anything come out of your work.

 

EDIT: Better yet, if they don't want to pay you, have them pull some strings for you, have them try to get you into a gallery or something. Working for free doesn't mean you won't get anything out of it.

Edited September 7, 2011 by Nerendier

[water_angel]

I kind of agree with Nerendier. There's some worth in working for free if you're just starting out. Getting your name out there and letting people see your work would definitely help you out in the future when you're looking for a job that you're going to stay with.

 

This kind of applies in all fields, I'm a science major and my friends and I would kill to find anyplace that would let us get some experience, help us find what field we want to go into.

 

But I don't think that an established person should be giving away their talents, unless it's a kind act or something like that.

[diannethegeek]

How are people supposed to become known? Especially if they don't have the money or the connections?

 

Being an artist is far different from other professions, a crappy artist can't really get anywhere, but a crappy janitor might still be able to keep his job and make that money.

 

And I'm not saying give your work for free to anyone and everyone, try to get a price, and when you're getting to the point where you're getting desperate, then what? Do you want to attempt to get your name out by working where a place might get you known, or do you want to give up and find another job, one that you don't even want to do?

 

Personally, I think the former is a better choice.

 

Maybe doing the work for a new director/producer/etc in an indie movie won't get you paid. But if he/she gets big, well, guess what, you now have a favor you can pull to get your artwork in a big gallery.

 

Why do you think that so many of the biggest painter names died long before they ever became famous for their work? It's because without connections it will probably take more than a lifetime for people to see your talent. It's all about exposure, and without doing things here and there to get that exposure, you probably won't see anything come out of your work.

There are a lot of ways for artists, writers, etc to become known without being ripped off. Charity work, contests (the non-scam ones, anyway), local art shows/art fairs, blogs, etsy, workshops, local coffee shops, the list goes on and on. None of these allow someone else to reap the profits for the artist's hard work.

 

The problem for me is when someone wants to make money off a project (like, say, an indie film) without giving a share of that profit to the artist. The idea that they're doing a big enough favor to the artist by giving them exposure so they don't need to pay them is all too pervasive.

 

I'm an unpublished writer and there's no way that I'm going to do free work for someone to make money off of without seeing a share of it. And the truth is, most of those people who are trying to rip artists off in such a way aren't even going to get you enough exposure to make it worth the effort.

 

 

[prairiecrow]

EDIT: Better yet, if they don't want to pay you, have them pull some strings for you, have them try to get you into a gallery or something. Working for free doesn't mean you won't get anything out of it.

The problem with this suggestion is that it assumes that the person asking you for free art has a single ethical bone in their body. They usually don't. Usually they're just freeloaders out to take you for everything they can squeeze out of you, who don't have any connections at all -- that's why they're approaching a random artist begging for freebies on their "guaranteed-to-make-money" project.

[Nerendier]

In that case it should be a judgement call.

 

And if they don't have connections now, what happens if they do in the future? One indie movie can send a director from a nobody to the upper echelon. It never hurts to have favors.

 

Risk Vs Reward. Is it worth 200 hours of your life to get a favor with a person who might make it big? Probably not. Is it worth 20 hours over a few weeks/months? Maybe.

 

If it's a movie have them make sure that they show some credits in the beginning and have them put your name up. Art by: _____ or whatever.

 

I'm sure there are plenty of ways to get your name out there, but what happens if it's been ineffective?

 

There should be an obvious difference between a scumbag, and someone who genuinely believes in the project. If you can't tell, then you have more problems than just not selling your artwork.

[diannethegeek]

I'm sure there are plenty of ways to get your name out there, but what happens if it's been ineffective?

I can only speak for the writing world, but generally speaking if you've tried everything and can't get your work out there (like me) then that's a pretty good indication that your work isn't good enough yet. It can be frustrating and nerve-wracking and just downright upsetting, but giving my work up for free when it isn't ready yet ain't going to help me. IDK, maybe it's different in the art world.

[Princess Artemis]

So are you saying that artists should simply hide their stuff away and let nobody have any of it unless they're going to be paid?

No, I'm saying if they get hired to do work, they should get paid.

 

Artists have ways of showing their work without working for anyone but themselves. Nevertheless, if they work for someone else, especially a company, they should get paid.

[prairiecrow]

No, I'm saying if they get hired to do work, they should get paid.

 

Artists have ways of showing their work without working for anyone but themselves. Nevertheless, if they work for someone else, especially a company, they should get paid.

Agreed. A good rule of thumb in the commercial art world is:

 

1) Is the person asking you to produce art for them going to make money?

 

NO: You can consider doing it as a charity case.

YES: You deserve to get paid for it. Period.

 

Contrary to what appears to be fairly popular belief, commercial artists are NOT doing art "out of the goodness of their hearts" or some other such nonsense. We do art because we love to do it, certainly, but also for the same reason that plumbers fix sinks and carpenters build houses: to make money. And there's no reason on earth why we should be treated differently in that respect than any other craftsman, and there's certainly NO reason why anybody should EXPECT us to do it for nothing.

[dragon_mando]

How are people supposed to become known? Especially if they don't have the money or the connections?

 

Certainly not by getting scammed by a freeloading prick trying to make a profit by suckering me into free work.

 

deviantArt. Yeah, yeah, screw the reputation it has. That's where I got started at 16, four years ago. I got my first $120 commission within six months designing a tattoo. I've had a slow trickle of paid work ever since. Not getting commissions there? Join dA groups, do work for member-held contests, it gets you out there without you getting ripped off completely. Sketch and sprite for DC.

 

Yes, you may or may not get paid in any way, depending on whether you win the contests or not, but no one else is making a profit either so you aren't getting scammed.

[KageSora]

And I'm not saying give your work for free to anyone and everyone, try to get a price, and when you're getting to the point where you're getting desperate, then what? Do you want to attempt to get your name out by working where a place might get you known, or do you want to give up and find another job, one that you don't even want to do?

You're going to have to get another freakin' job anyway, if you're desparate. You can't just tell the people at the grocery store "Well, I don't have any money now, but I did free work for this movie and it's gonna make it big, and then I'll have people want to buy my work. So go ahead and ring up these for me, I'll give you an IOU for when people actually start paying me for my work!"

 

You will get nowhere if you try telling people you owe money that you might get paid sometime in the future. Doing free work now is in no way going to fix your situation fast enough to get you out of it if you're already desperate. So you might as well bite the bullet and get a job that pays while you try to get people to by your art. Getting a job still takes time, usually, so you need to start looking before you get really desperate anyway.

 

 

The problem with this suggestion is that it assumes that the person asking you for free art has a single ethical bone in their body. They usually don't. Usually they're just freeloaders out to take you for everything they can squeeze out of you, who don't have any connections at all -- that's why they're approaching a random artist begging for freebies on their "guaranteed-to-make-money" project.

Exactly. If they had connections, why the heck would they be coming to a no-name instead of getting a really great pro to do the work?

 

 

I can only speak for the writing world, but generally speaking if you've tried everything and can't get your work out there (like me) then that's a pretty good indication that your work isn't good enough yet.  It can be frustrating and nerve-wracking and just downright upsetting, but giving my work up for free when it isn't ready yet ain't going to help me.  IDK, maybe it's different in the art world.

I'd say it's probably the same in the art world. You can try all you like to sell stick figures, but if you can't even draw those well, nobody is going to buy your art. If nobody wants your work when you show what you can do, you're probably not ready and should polish up your skills more.

[HeatherMarie]

No, I'm saying if they get hired to do work, they should get paid.

 

Artists have ways of showing their work without working for anyone but themselves. Nevertheless, if they work for someone else, especially a company, they should get paid.

THIS. Exactly. Very much.

 

As for "how do artists become known", I'll give you a wonderful real-life example. Today I sent two of my paintings to an art gallery in Phoenix, Arizona. The *sole purpose* of that art gallery is to showcase "unknown" artists, artists who haven't had a lot of exposure and are looking to get their work out in the community. There are FIVE other galleries with the exact same purpose in other parts of Arizona.

 

So, should an artist *work* for free, or should they research and look into gallery options and exposure options that *won't* be taking advantage of them for someone else's benefit? Hmmmm, tough call! *sarcasm*

 

Seriously, it's one thing if an artist *wants* to give away their work, or volunteer, or do specific pieces for people for free.... It's completely different, and rather rude, to say that artists should *work for free* because they are artists.

[Completely Different]

Of course writers should get paid for the work they do, especially if they were hired or working for a company. You here stories about comic book companies that don't pay their artists, or similar situations, and its simply terrible.

 

Now, if the artists want, of course they can work for free. As gifts, for charity, or just to get recognition, but nobody should say to them that "come on, just do it without pay!"

[Nerendier]

THIS. Exactly. Very much.

 

As for "how do artists become known", I'll give you a wonderful real-life example. Today I sent two of my paintings to an art gallery in Phoenix, Arizona. The *sole purpose* of that art gallery is to showcase "unknown" artists, artists who haven't had a lot of exposure and are looking to get their work out in the community. There are FIVE other galleries with the exact same purpose in other parts of Arizona.

 

So, should an artist *work* for free, or should they research and look into gallery options and exposure options that *won't* be taking advantage of them for someone else's benefit? Hmmmm, tough call! *sarcasm*

 

Seriously, it's one thing if an artist *wants* to give away their work, or volunteer, or do specific pieces for people for free.... It's completely different, and rather rude, to say that artists should *work for free* because they are artists.

Did you get paid for that art gallery in phoenix? Because they probably make money from admissions or whatever. You didn't exactly give us a lot of information.

 

 

Ok, here's another question.

Should I stop volunteering at a hospital?

 

Because it meets your criterias for not working for free if you're an artist. After all, somebody makes money from it, just not you.

 

 

 

As a side note, I hope you're not being hostile at anyone here.

[Princess Artemis]

Ok, here's another question.

Should I stop volunteering at a hospital?

 

Because it meets your criterias for not working for free if you're an artist. After all, somebody makes money from it, just not you.

Do you volunteer out of your own free will because you believe it is the right thing to do or you believe it is a good opportunity to hone your skills, or do you 'volunteer' because the only way you believed you could ever hope, in the future, to get paid for your hard work is if you volunteered now and maybe for a some indistinct time in the future, and established a name that the hospital would respect? Do you have a paying job now (or are a full-time student), or are you buying your groceries with other people's ephemeral promises of future vast wealth if you would only volunteer now? Without knowing which it is, it's hard to advise you on whether or not you should do it.

 

To place it in your arguments: Doctors are nothing special, though their work may very well be. How would anyone know if the doctor's work was any good unless they demonstrated it by working for free? Why should a doctor expect anyone to pay a nobody like them if they are unknown? Once hospitals are coming to the doctor for their work, then and only then can a doctor have the arrogance to state that their work is "professional grade" and worth paying for.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Princess Artemis