WILLCRAFT @ when you go to graphic designer , you going for helping ...if you dont know about graphics and you just imagine something that not means you have a good idea , if your graphics designer said not good means not good
You are being paid to perform a service. If you do not want to perform that service, do not make a contract with the person who wants you to do so. This is like your client saying, I am a client, not a piggy bank, I am not a simple tool to enable you to acquire currency. When you design for someone, they ultimately have authority.
Wow. I thought this was pretty funny, but would never have guessed all this... tension... would come of it.
I suppose this piece may contain some commentary about the quality of the ideas that come from the people the artist works for - everyone has opinions about their jobs, as anyone doing the same thing for hours a day would - but some of the rest of the interpretations are nothing what I was thinking at all when I read it.
All I got out of it was that the artist doesn't like to be treated like a thing, and would rather be treated as a person. People who provide services are often seen as a means to an end, not human beings. I should know, I fix computers for people who don't know how they work, don't know anything about how they got so broke, love free pornography, don't believe in antivirus software, and want them fixed five minutes ago, but don't feel like they should pay for my knowledge and expertise because - you know - computers, right?
So it goes.
Anyway, thanks for sharing your work with us xyphid. I enjoyed your piece. I hope your today was a little better.
Well, see, you are a tool to execute your clients' ideas. You're paid to do what other people tell you. If they want you to execute their ugly ideas, you had better execute their ideas if you want to eat that night. I'm getting a little bit tired of workers feeling more and more entitled to more and more stuff. I'm with the Occupy and Other 98% movements when it comes to higher wage, fair treatment and equal pay, but I am NOT with them on the notion (especially with creative workers) that they ought to be able to just create and design beautiful, inspired art all the time. No, that's not what you do. You're paid to bring others' visions to fruition. Do that job, or leave a space for someone else who IS willing to actually do WORK.
He's not obligated to take certain jobs. If he can get by with what he's paid, that's good for him. The person who wants their thing designed probably isn't gonna give up on it just because one artist doesn't want to, and thus the job goes to someone else. Art isn't just a labor, it's a passion. And art might not be his only job. I agree with you that the 99% doesn't deserve what they have and needs to share, but that doesn't mean this guy is part of the problem, or even relevant to the problem. Stop trying to push your political agenda in places where it doesn't belong. This is a guy's right, and his subjective opinion, and hardly related to corporations owning most of the wealth. This is an artist working alone, not some CEO exploiting the system.
Please, just stop. You're making Liberals like me look bad.
I wasn't trying to push a political agenda? I was simply disagreeing with the message in the image. I appreciate the effort to make debate, but I think you misinterpreted what I said. If he can pick and choose his jobs, that's fine. He is belly-aching about a problem that he ought not have, then, and if he can barely live on what he makes, he should start taking more jobs or not being picky. The picture either seems like:
A.) The artist is complaining about having to do a job as he's asked and not being able to do what he wants, or... B.) He is complaining about too many people who try to commission his work aren't the kind of clients he prefers to do business with.
His options for either of these are:
A.) Stop complaining, buckle down and do the work that he needs to do so he can get his money and eventually get better commissions, or... B.) Quit taking business from clients he prefers not to work with.
So he is either complaining about a problem that EVERYBODY has, or he's sort of "First World Artist" complaining, meaning that he's well-known enough that he can live off his art, yet he can't see that such a condition is a dream come true for most artists and finds something to gripe about even in happiness and luxury. Work is work. If he can't realize that he won't be able to just do whatever he wants all the time, then he ought to just go live on an island somewhere. Because everywhere you work you're going to have to do what others say. Commissioned artwork is no different. The only difference is that with commissions, your bosses change more frequently.
So, you're telling him he can't vent and let other artists that feel the same relate to him? He probably doesn't take those jobs, and the people trying to hire him probably pitch a fit over it, hence this picture. I've been there.
I still have NO IDEA what this has to do with the Occupy movement. Still seems pretty irrelevant.
It has to do with workers who feel slighted and kept down by means of work. It's highly relevant in all things. Everything is connected in a deep way. Yes he is allowed to rant, but gods be damned if this isn't whiny milk-drinker stuff. Part of being a professional is NOT letting it all hang out on a professional stage. I envy him if he can belly-ache about his customers in front of his customers.
There is no such thing as pseudo-philosophy - everything is philosophy. There is such a thing as pseudo-intellectualism, though. Telltale signs of this in a person are: Foul language in conjunction with entry-level "collegiate" linguistics, shrewd and acute, yet often fundamentally false observations dismissing disputing subject matter in a tonally sarcastic manner, usually intended to impress another by dressing it up as "old hat" for the Pretending Intellectual, personal attacks, and referring to oneself in the third person. What you should do when you encounter a pseudo-intellectual is exit the conversation as soon as possible. Make final remarks if you must, but if they respond, do not reply. This will feed into their ego, they will feel as though they are actually debating with you, and it will ultimately contribute to the growth of their very deep psychological illness.
Wow, that's a mighty pretentious paragraph you got there. I really shouldn't talk to arrogant asshats that think they're above everyone else just because I don't feel like dedicating a wall of text just to blatantly insult you and say you have a mental illness. (Really, you think I have a legitimate mental illness just for disagreeing with you and being sarcastic? What planet are you from? Armchair psychology much?) This is how I naturally talk, and how I've always talked, it's not me trying to act pretentious like you are right now. I can't even afford college, honestly. Probably not going to be able to for a few years. Live in the ghetto of Long Beach. Pretty sure you're gonna stomp me for that, and be all "Ha! I was right!" and call me an idiot.
But I digress. There's no ego-stroking going on here on my end. I just don't like it when people act like they're deeply offended by something totally irrelevant, or hardly relevant for that matter. It feels like you were just looking for some way to relate it to the struggle of the 1%, and whine about this artist expressing that they don't take certain jobs.
I understand if they don't want to hear your input on the design. They did hire you based on your style so your input should be valid. If however they do listen to you and make changes or allow you the freedom to make changes that you see fit to work with their design, then there is no room to complain. If you do communicate the things you may see that don't work in an articulate way and they don't listen then go on rant I am with you on that.
Anyone providing a service also has the option of accepting which projects to do, but I can see how irritating it would be if everyone that contacted you for work - hadn't really thought out their idea!
But If You Are Getting Payed For It...It's Kind Of Your Job To Execute Them. That Like That One Animator Chick On Youtube Who Made A Big Show Of Telling Her Boss She Quit Over The Fact She Did Not Get To Draw What She Wanted. It's A Job. You Do What You're Payed For And If You're Not Happy Doing It You Find Something Else To Do. It's Kind Of Entitled To Think You Can Get Payed To Do Whatever You Want When What You Do Comes From People Paying You To Do What THEY Want-Freelance Art And Payed Art Sometimes ARE The Same Thing (If You Create And Sell Them Yourself) But Not Always (Like When Your Job Is Drawing What Your Paycheck Tells You To). Agree Or Disagree All You Want-But It's A Cold Truth. Good Day To You Sir/Madam.
I have to agree. No one's forcing you to get payed for designing. Good luck finding people who will decide what theme they are looking for based on your self-satisfaction designs of what "you want to design without anyone telling you what to do".
Glad You Agree. I Mean Don't Get Me Wrong I Know Art Is Not Always Easy But If You Want To Draw Art On Your Own Terms You Sell Peaces On Your Own. If Your Get Payed To Draw On Someone ELSE'S Terms Then That's What You Do And That's What You CHOSE To Do. I May Not Know Everything About This Stuff Since I Can't Draw To Save My Life But Logic Is Logic And You Do What People Pay You To Do If You Intend To Use Any Skill To Make Money.
some people seem confused. Clients don't hire designers to execute their ugly ideas. (or should not) That's not their job. They hire designers to help them figure out what is the idea and how to make it work, what they pay is first of all the visual expertise and then the product itself
Actually it really should be the former. I expect all my clients to have clear, concise ideas of what they want, and most industry professionals I've spoken/worked with (at least in the concept art field) have always preferred that they be told almost explicitly what the client wants, so there's no room for error and they (the designer) don't waste a lot of time guessing at what the client wants. Granted, it's expected of the artist to make suggestions to improve the piece, but ultimately it is the paying customer's final decision.