|
Skunkrocker posted:A. Well, there is a bunch of so called "meaningful" furry artwork that does have a message. It's just... you can't take it seriously. There is the oft cited artwork of a fox crying in front of a gay pride flag. It's supposed to be a powerful image about the atrocities and bigotry that LGBT people have experienced over the years. Except the fact it's a loving anthropomorphic fox. So it's stupid. I'm imagining like Northern Ireland style wall murals depicting the struggles of the Furry People's Army for national liberation
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
Justin Godscock posted:My belief has always been that if you rely on art as your sole income you've made a dicey choice as tastes come and go. Keep it as a way to earn extra coin on the side plus you get to keep the passion that would otherwise be destroyed by worrying about if Yiffy the Hedgehog will pay the electric bill. is this actually a problem for people making like porn or wedding photos or handmade glassware or whatever for the masses rather than the high artists making very profound $15000 a piece wicker baskets for the relative handful of bored idle rich looking for a novelty that'll make them look smarter and edgier than their peers i kind of feel like people aren't going to stop wanting to jerk off to weird poo poo in our lifetimes A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Aug 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 06:04
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:is this actually a problem for people making like porn or wedding photos or handmade glassware or whatever for the masses rather than the high artists making very profound $15000 a piece wicker baskets for the relative handful of bored idle rich looking for a novelty that'll make them look smarter and edgier than their peers It's also completely ignoring the fact that any professional (edit: high) artist is well aware of the changes in taste and artistic preference. Indeed frequently they're part of the social strata that is helping drive those changes. Half the reason people want the work of those kinds of people is that it's changing and their portfolio as a whole can be seen as an ever changing conversation about whatever the hell they're trying to portray. Just take any example of a hugely famous artist from 100+ years ago and you'll find entire books by art historians about how their art changed over their lives. This is true in non-visual art too. poo poo, just look at early and late Hemingway or early and late Michael Jackson if you don't think artists change what they make over time. Of course there are way, way more people who are more practical artists just cranking out stuff to make a living who are way more overtly mercenary about it and willing to do whatever the gently caress will put food on their plate. As long as there is one person out there who wants a picture of a rainbow sparkle dog going down on a clydesdale drawn in the MLP style there will be some cartoonist who needs an extra few bucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Skunkrocker posted:A. Well, there is a bunch of so called "meaningful" furry artwork that does have a message. It's just... you can't take it seriously. There is the oft cited artwork of a fox crying in front of a gay pride flag. It's supposed to be a powerful image about the atrocities and bigotry that LGBT people have experienced over the years. Except the fact it's a loving anthropomorphic fox. So it's stupid. I disagree, I feel that TaurinFox's seminal work Fursecution is emblematic of the difficulties many niche subcultures (such as furries, japanese animation enthusiasts, and gamers) face in having The Mainstream consider their plight as seriously. The use of the homosexual symbol of the rainbow is a plea to The Mainstream to be sympathetic to their cause as they are with established disadvantaged groups, and the cavalier response is indicative of the uphill battle that furries must face to become accepted in society today. A more recent phenomenon, not involving furries but rather hardcore video gamers, exists today with the erosion of the once noble ideals of gaming, and they have taken to marching against the oppressive social forces existing today to form a group called Gamergate whose arguments for acceptance are similarly reviled. I think there is a lot we can learn from serious hobbyist art, in my humble opinion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Personally I like the one of the crying wolf wearing an iron cross in front of the nazi flag
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Truly a great piece of art, it showcases the diversity of viewpoints in the furry community.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
the dogataur with titanic making GBS threads tits and dick would honestly not look out of place in a Chelsea gallery, except that maybe too much effort was put into it
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
How can you philistines not mention 'Ponies board a train to Auschwitz, in greyscale', the founding work of the entire drat genre?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
DaDa Die Yiff Ist Töt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:I disagree, I feel that TaurinFox's seminal work Fursecution is emblematic of the difficulties many niche subcultures (such as furries, japanese animation enthusiasts, and gamers) face in having The Mainstream consider their plight as seriously. The use of the homosexual symbol of the rainbow is a plea to The Mainstream to be sympathetic to their cause as they are with established disadvantaged groups, and the cavalier response is indicative of the uphill battle that furries must face to become accepted in society today. A more recent phenomenon, not involving furries but rather hardcore video gamers, exists today with the erosion of the once noble ideals of gaming, and they have taken to marching against the oppressive social forces existing today to form a group called Gamergate whose arguments for acceptance are similarly reviled. I think there is a lot we can learn from serious hobbyist art, in my humble opinion. Please source your quotes, tia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 17:25
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:Please source your quotes, tia. You calling him a liar?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
If you're not willing to critique high art in a professional fashion then what are you even doing in this thread? loving plebeians.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Oh god, I can't stay away. Would you say that there is a class of furman greybeards (greyfurs?) that have a fundamentally different approach to the fandom in comparison to younger furlas, like yourselves? I've seen this in other fandoms, so I'm curious how in manifests in the ultimate fandom. Edit: Smelling mistake.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
I've read that furries who gently caress animals are a small minority and that the largest psychological contributing factor is whether the person grew up watching anthropomorphic animal cartoons or not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:To be honest, furry art, from the cartoons to the suits, is aesthetically awful. I know that's just an opinion, though I'm sure there's some arbitrary High Art reason too, but I just see how ugly it all looks and wonder how someone could want to devote their life to recreating it. People have already posted some well drawn pictures. But even if someone took years perfecting Optimus Prime in watercolour or whatever, it's still going to be vapid garbage because it says nothing, however good the technical skill. We don't need to figure out a moral high horse (though god knows there are plenty) - it's perfectly ok to loudly complain about not liking a style of 'art'. Honestly, since art is poo poo at least furry art wallows in it and it's a way to get paid. A furry and his/her money are soon parted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2015 12:19
|
|
|
Justin Godscock posted:My belief has always been that if you rely on art as your sole income you've made a dicey choice as tastes come and go. Keep it as a way to earn extra coin on the side plus you get to keep the passion that would otherwise be destroyed by worrying about if Yiffy the Hedgehog will pay the electric bill. Almost every single industry requires an artist. Anything from store signs, flyers, product design, product packaging, logo design, animation, commercials, advertising, decorative art, framing, preproduction art for movies, conceptart for videogames and film, vinyl printing, wedding photography, tattoos, car pin striping, airbrushing sports helmets and skateboards, architecture, furniture design, interior design, website design, etc.... It's just that a large portion of them are mediocre like every other industry and we're so flooded with it all the time we take it for granted. Vanity art, like commissions of a ~*~original character~*~ sparkledog sucking off a dragon is a very very small percentage. Fine art might be even smaller than that too. Panzeh posted:Honestly, since art is poo poo at least furry art wallows in it and it's a way to get paid. A furry and his/her money are soon parted. Furries are also some of the worst commissioners to deal with. I've found that the few times I did take money from them (and the people I know who rely on them) the ones willing to pay the most amount of cash are the ones with the most wrong with them. They're spergy and a lot of the time assume they have also bought a weird form of ongoing friendship with you, so not only do you have to try to fulfill the commission you have to do so without offending them. They *love* to hold over your head the fact they're paying you to try to get you to do extra work for free. They don't quite grasp the idea that it's a business transaction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Horrible Smutbeast posted:Furries are also some of the worst commissioners to deal with. I've found that the few times I did take money from them (and the people I know who rely on them) the ones willing to pay the most amount of cash are the ones with the most wrong with them. They're spergy and a lot of the time assume they have also bought a weird form of ongoing friendship with you, so not only do you have to try to fulfill the commission you have to do so without offending them. They *love* to hold over your head the fact they're paying you to try to get you to do extra work for free. They don't quite grasp the idea that it's a business transaction. This much at least, is completely true. I think every artist has a story about a particularly weird commission they've gotten from a furry. I've gotten a few, and nine times out of ten it turns out that said weirdo doesn't plan to pay in the first place. Like motherfucker, I wouldn't draw this for GOOD money, what makes you think you can have it for free
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
TheAbominableSnow posted:As for commissioners...the weirdos have actually been the ones who asked for fairly innocent stuff, in my experience. I was recently asked to draw a homestuck character turning into a werething (with lots of blood and pain specifically requested), but the commissioner was super polite and normal about it. On the other hand, I was doing pretty plain con badges at FWA last year for quick cash and had some uncomfortable stuff happen. Mostly huge, balding babyfurs making transparent comments about how cute certain art examples looked, and this one dude who insisted on giving me a hug after I finished his badge. Which would have been fine, except he was in a fursuit, and it was only as he grabbed me in a bear hug that I realized he stank like hell and was SOAKED, I mean absolutely completely drenched, in hot sweat. My forearms were shining with moisture and actually dripped once or twice as he pulled away. Needless to say, I reeked of horrendous BO for the rest of the day (delightfully, the con would reassign an artist alley space if vacated, so I had to stay all day long with no breaks if I wanted my spot). Also the person next to me was drawing balloon furry inflation badges and babyfur art all day and made twice as much as I did, despite their low skill level. It was honestly impressive--I can't say I wouldn't do the same if I relied on furries as my main income source like she did. How often are the polite people who commission weird stuff also furries? Furries tend to be tolerant of all kinds of fetishes, perhaps because they have been excluded so much by others that they have come to believe that most if not all exclusion is wrong. I can't help but wonder how much that reduces their self-awareness of their non-furry fetishes/interests.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
I know this is kind of off-topic, but when you're taking a commission is it not standard practice to get like, half upfront? I mean they could obviously still screw you for the other half, but then you can just not deliver the final product? I guess if you're producing digital art that could get a bit tricky but with obnoxious watermarks you could probably still do that. How does this process work for fursuits or other physical works? Surely you don't start work without receiving some kind of payment first, right? I wouldn't work for poo poo unless I knew the person was serious about paying. Also, I read all 16 pages of this over the course of today during downtimes at the office. I think this means I'm a broken human being.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Archimago posted:I know this is kind of off-topic, but when you're taking a commission is it not standard practice to get like, half upfront? I mean they could obviously still screw you for the other half, but then you can just not deliver the final product? I think that for photography and video, it works like this: They get paid some part in advance, they make the product, then they turn in a low-res watermarked version, for the client to see if it's what they wanted. Full payment happens, then they turn the HQ one. Not sure about art commissions though, I imagine that the answer varies a lot. I know that when I paid a friend 35 euros for a piece of Discworld's Death with some Kamen Rider elements, there wasn't such process.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
I think some artists do the same thing by showing the unpolished sketch to their client.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
I've got my first bit of commissioned art coming and the artist will send me the unpolished sketch and offer me the chance to make any changes and where I'll pay and then she'll finish it off to the full quality. Seems to be the best way of doing it, honestly.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I think that for photography and video, it works like this: They get paid some part in advance, they make the product, then they turn in a low-res watermarked version, for the client to see if it's what they wanted. Full payment happens, then they turn the HQ one. Starting out as a photographer I had someone just take the low-res copies and run, I guess under the theory that while there's not a hell of a lot you can do with a thumbnail picture, you can't beat the price, and if the freelancer never makes any money they can't afford to chase after you for using the work commercially either. I can only assume it gets way, way worse with vanity stuff and porn. If you make anything freelance people will go to absolutely insane lengths to try and rip you off. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 07:12 on Sep 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:Starting out as a photographer I had someone just take the low-res copies and run, I guess under the theory that while there's not a hell of a lot you can do with a thumbnail picture, you can't beat the price, and if the freelancer never makes any money they can't afford to chase after you for using the work commercially either. I can only assume it gets way, way worse with vanity stuff and porn. If you make anything freelance people will go to absolutely insane lengths to try and rip you off. No joke. This is seriously not a joke. You could sign a contract, write everything out in clear detail, have them agree to it beforehand...and halfway through they'll ask for something ridiculous because "drawing is a hobby right? You just do it for fun it shouldn't take that long." I once had someone change their mind half way through, freak out because I wouldn't do 5k extra worth of work to fix it and then they ran away. Jokes on them, if I ever see their lovely cartoon anywhere with my designs in it they're getting sued to hell and back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
Plus ca change.. One of my friends who's still on the inside passed on this little nugget of information about the Londonfurs. Bit of background- during my time on the organising committee we went to a lot of effort to negotiate use of a secondary venue for a changing and fursuit storage area, both to reduce congestion in the main bar area and also to keep the loving vile stench of shitloads of sweaty fursuits and fursuiters from turning the place into a gas chamber after the fursuit parade. The bar's management company is one that we'd enjoyed a really good relationship with for the best part of a decade. Well, long story short- retard furries and their wandering hands have ruined it for themselves. I wish I could say I was surprised or shocked at this development, but no. Just business as normal in that mob of drooling priaprismic autists. quote:Announcement: The closure of Jamies Too (fursuit lounge)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
hahah so what did they do?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Well the emphasis on keeping your hands out of other peoples "no touch zones" seems pretty straight forward.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Camrath posted:Define 'animal abuse'. Obviously, I've mentioned at length the sexual abuse of animals by a minority of the fandom and the conspiracy of silence/GSF reasons why it's either condoned or just not generally commented on, but I've not heard anything about someone 'slaughtering animals' at any point. Some furs hunt (I did/do), but perhaps some more context is needed? Nowadays they seem to congregate at a TOR-accesible site called "Animal's Nightmare". I haven't worked up the balls to look too deeply into it and I've seen some absolutely horrendous poo poo in my time. I'm a bit surprised that none of the major animal rights organizations are making a stink about it because it really is on the cutting edge in terms of the worst that's out there. There's been rumors of one or two zoosadists showing up in the furry subculture, which makes sense since so much of the zoophile population passes themselves off as furry (or has tried to).
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
So what kind of fursuit does David Cameron own?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 10:21
|
|
|
Forgall posted:So what kind of fursuit does David Cameron own? human
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 11:59
|
|
|
papa_november posted:There's a sub-category of zoophiles known as "zoosadists" who engage in openly violent sexual behavior with animals. They're pretty low-key because even other zoophiles want them dead. They'll turn up on imageboads every now and then, and there's a number of photo/video sets making the rounds. I think this stuff tends to be ignored because most people would rather pretend it doesn't exist than acknowledge the fact that there's people out there doing that poo poo. Seriously, that's some next-level hosed up poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
papa_november posted:
TOR weekend web.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
Archimago posted:I think this stuff tends to be ignored because most people would rather pretend it doesn't exist than acknowledge the fact that there's people out there doing that poo poo. Yeah. Holy poo poo, that's just beyond my comprehension. Also, why the gently caress are you even considering looking into this poo poo? Sadly it's not like there's much any of us can do about it, so why expose yourself to the horror? I mean, gently caress. I've known about the dog/horse/whatever-loving in the furry fandom for ages, as I've expounded on at length here. But I'd never even suspected that anything like that even existed, and now I do I wish I didn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
Camrath posted:Yeah. Holy poo poo, that's just beyond my comprehension. Also, why the gently caress are you even considering looking into this poo poo? Sadly it's not like there's much any of us can do about it, so why expose yourself to the horror? I had a friend who, as part of his PhD program, had to take a course on fetishes and paraphilias and what have you. I've seen some hosed up poo poo, but what I learned from him is that if you can imagine it, there's some hosed up person there who gets off on it. Then take the worst poo poo you can imagine and amplify by 100 and that poo poo exists too. A lot of it is harmless, if only for the fact that it's so outlandish it's not actually possible in the real world, but it exists in someone's mind. Some people should just be put down... For the good of society.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Camrath posted:Yeah. Holy poo poo, that's just beyond my comprehension. Also, why the gently caress are you even considering looking into this poo poo? Sadly it's not like there's much any of us can do about it, so why expose yourself to the horror? In an era where you just know that there's one guy at the FBI who's full-time job is browsing 4chan all day and teenagers are going to jail for restreaming sports events I don't think it's much to ask for them to do something other than nothing. There's been some baby steps in the right direction, but it's not enough to cover what's out there. Part of the reason why this is all such a trainwreck is the lack of a federal-level animal cruelty statute in the US. With a couple of obvious exceptions, state law varies from weak to nonexistent and the zoophiles take full advantage of this. Nobody wants to fix it because it's too icky, which is just bullshit. Sizone posted:TOR weekend web. Slow-Scan Shep fucked around with this message at 06:43 on Sep 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
papa_november posted:
Maybe it's that, compared to the horrors of factory farming and medical testing, addressing pretty much anything else someone decides to do to or with an animal as cruelty is disingenuous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
"we eat hamburgers, therefore who cares if someone sticks a lit firecracker up a cat's rear end"
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 05:22
|
|
|
papa_november posted:"we eat hamburgers, therefore who cares if someone sticks a lit firecracker up a cat's rear end" Pretty much. Destrawmaning it for you, cruelty is needless suffering, a lot of the meat we consume is produced in a way that generates needless suffering, not just for one unlucky cat, but for 10s and 100s of thousands of animals. I eat hamburgers and exercise absolutely gently caress all diligence in assuring that the source for those burgers are free-range, humanely treated cows. Therefor I do not give a gently caress about animal cruelty, I care, specifically, about cat cruelty, or, I do not give a gently caress about animal cruelty in so far as it results in stuffing my corpulent maw with beef.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
Sizone posted:Pretty much. Destrawmaning it for you, cruelty is needless suffering, a lot of the meat we consume is produced in a way that generates needless suffering, not just for one unlucky cat, but for 10s and 100s of thousands of animals. I eat hamburgers and exercise absolutely gently caress all diligence in assuring that the source for those burgers are free-range, humanely treated cows. Therefor I do not give a gently caress about animal cruelty, I care, specifically, about cat cruelty, or, I do not give a gently caress about animal cruelty in so far as it results in stuffing my corpulent maw with beef. Meat tastes good, unlike a cat's arse. Hope that helps.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 12:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
Tell me more about how raping a cat is morally equivalent to eating a hamburger. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 13:46
|
|