4 ms·

> Yet art is insanely expensive. That's not true. There are a billion people putting their art on the Internet every day: DeviantArt, Pinterest, Flickr, Shutte

> Yet art is insanely expensive. That's not true. There are a billion people putting their art on the Internet every day: DeviantArt, Pinterest, Flickr, Shutterfly, and other sites with fan fiction, manuscripts of books, cartoons, millions of homemade videos, music sites. The average price of all of this art is zero. Only a very tiny fraction of people make money with art.

estomagordo 10y ago
> The average price of all of this art is zero. And the average quality is less than zero.
- jacobush 10y ago
  I don't think so... I think we are being spoiled by the vast amounts of. I am one of the generations who had formative experiences before internet, and I would have been completely transfixed by the stuff on say, deviantart. I could look at weird stuff in the library for hours sometimes, and half of that was not very good at all.
lawless123 10y ago
>DeviantArt Did anyone else shudder?
- amiga-workbench 10y ago
  What? Is Sonic the Hedgehog inflation fetish porn not your thing?
  - jerf 10y ago
    There's a lot of terrible stuff on DeviantArt. But there's also a lot of great stuff on there too I've seen. And then there's the stuff that combines both; beautifully rendered, highly detailed work that tells an interesting story in one image, that's also ultimately "just" fan-art for Rick and Morty. Humans are weird sometimes.
jimmies 10y ago
First, saying art is cheap because billions pieces of art on Deviant Art are free is like saying code is cheap because billions of lines of code published every day on GitHub are free. Average you pay for code is zero, by that logic? Second, the Internet can only host a very specific kind of art (digitalized) that is a very tiny fraction of art that you can experience in a museum or an exhibition. Where is my paint oil on canvas with the beautiful texture and smell I could experience on DeviantArt? You have to count what you have to pay for an artist/coder to make what you want, not what they want. Then we are talking about the same thing.

estomagordo 10y ago

> The average price of all of this art is zero. And the average quality is less than zero.

jacobush 10y ago
I don't think so... I think we are being spoiled by the vast amounts of. I am one of the generations who had formative experiences before internet, and I would have been completely transfixed by the stuff on say, deviantart. I could look at weird stuff in the library for hours sometimes, and half of that was not very good at all.

lawless123 10y ago

>DeviantArt Did anyone else shudder?

amiga-workbench 10y ago
What? Is Sonic the Hedgehog inflation fetish porn not your thing?
- jerf 10y ago
  There's a lot of terrible stuff on DeviantArt. But there's also a lot of great stuff on there too I've seen. And then there's the stuff that combines both; beautifully rendered, highly detailed work that tells an interesting story in one image, that's also ultimately "just" fan-art for Rick and Morty. Humans are weird sometimes.

jimmies 10y ago

First, saying art is cheap because billions pieces of art on Deviant Art are free is like saying code is cheap because billions of lines of code published every day on GitHub are free. Average you pay for code is zero, by that logic? Second, the Internet can only host a very specific kind of art (digitalized) that is a very tiny fraction of art that you can experience in a museum or an exhibition. Where is my paint oil on canvas with the beautiful texture and smell I could experience on DeviantArt? You have to count what you have to pay for an artist/coder to make what you want, not what they want. Then we are talking about the same thing.