I'm going to sound like i'm talking down to you but i've worked in this field/related fields for 20 years.twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Jan 06, 2023 1:24 pmWhat is it taking away? Do those artists still not have the ability to continue doing what they wanted? Maybe it steals away a portion of their potential clientele but it doesn't prevent them from continuing to work in the medium of their choice.pdub wrote: ↑Fri Jan 06, 2023 11:05 am I, individually, feel bad for artists because a machine is taking away a large creative avenue.
I understand it has happened in the past though I think, because this has to do with creativity and not more mundane tasks, it is a bit different.
I have been arguing with posters who don't believe it will take away jobs which it will.
Many companies look to find the balance ( and this goes for so many companies ) between cost and quality when it comes to artists. Some of them find the select artists they love to work with. But there's a lot of turnover in the field and when new management takes hold, you tend to get a lot of, hold on to your butts, will I ( as an artist ) still get to work with this producer/project manager? Will that producer/project manager still even be there?
But that's just the cycle -- and generally, if ties are cut, you know they'll find another artist who will either be cheaper, is someone management preferred working with, or is, reality punch, better than you. At least you know though, that work is going to an artist who has worked to get where they are.
What these central companies are intending to do are taking away earning income opportunities to the point where, unless you really want to be that starving artist, you can't continue that career.
What you sound like at the moment, because you bought some art work ( and good for you ) from a local KC artist, is like, "hey no big deal to possibly 80% of the commercial market being cut, they still can go out and buy paints and paint and stuff, right?"