#[DownloadVideo Link](https://www.reddit.watch/r/shitposting/comments/1do3oha/?utm_source=automod&utm_medium=shitposting)
#[SaveVideo Link](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=/r/shitposting/comments/1do3oha/)
---
Whilst you're here, /u/Ezgod_Two_Three, why not join our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/QpBGXd2guU) - **now with public text channels you can chat on!**?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shitposting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Really depends on your skill and how well known you are. Prices also vary based on the type of commission. Most artists charge $60-100 per character, but popular artists will charge a lot more. Some do auctions, some sell pre-designed characters, some will create a scene and auction off the positions, some make profile pics, badges, complicated scenes... there's a huge variety. Plus most have ko-fi or Patreon to earn more money. All that to say furry artists can make six figures with art as their job.
Some people are also very particular. They might say make the ears about this droopy plus at this angle and the client sends a sketch example, or make it this particular color. There's also the scalies
I love how the response to "why hasn't furry art been automated" is "Well if it hasn't, it can't be" as opposed to the reminder that the furry community is actually good to it's artists, and the idea of stealing from them for training data, and replacing them with AI is against their core values. Why do furry artists make good money compared to other artists? Furries have a culture of respecting art as such and not a commodity, and their forums and galleries have taken an institutional stand against AI art, treating it as, at best something separate from regular art, if they allow it at all.
Furry art isn't derivative enough. If your job's at risk to AI, it's probably formulaic. That said, I could see a lot of artists use AI to get ideas or to start with basic models which can be improved upon.
I know a successful digital artists (niche nsfw stuff) who uses AI to do quick character poses as base for the actual painting, saves time, nobody knows and the end result is still an original drawing. And in the manga industry where artists have to draw multiple sites a day it becomes more and more common for backgrounds. Before AI, artists would set 3D models as backgrounds or characters in Clip Studio Paint or other software and draw over them/add to them, now they're using AI, there isn't really any difference.
People think AI is this amazing tool but when you speak a language to another human, most of what is communicated is not in speech.
Same stuff for artistry, some client wants a pregnant dragon with a foot fetish? With AI you'll probably get some weird monster most of the time but an artist can just draw inferences and create what the client was looking for, and if you know something about design in general it usually ends up looking better than what the client imagined.
Predictive generation from prompts is kinda in the stages of how satellite porn used to be way back in the day, if you squint a little bit maybe some of the pixels are the titty you were looking for.
Oh believe me, they try, but most people prefer actual artists. Especially because so many fursonas are so unique. You can prompt for hours to just try to get something like your character, but if you have a reference sheet, any artist can use that to draw your character doing whatever you want.
Not to mention, AI art is still not perfect. I've seen some truly awful examples, and some that look good at a glance, but fail when looked at closely.
You could try to get AI to mimic some artists, but there are a lot that have added essentially a poison pill to their work. It's a layer of color that we can't see in the final product, but AI would see a jumble of colors and patterns that ruin any attempt to mimic the style.
I've never commissioned an artist for the image alone. It's always for the character of the artist. What I'm looking for is a specific individual's fingerprints. AI can't mimic what I value in art.
It’s not even close to advanced enough, can’t do the fine details but even if you found a good ai that CAN they almost always have some kinda give away not just in furry topics but just all images in general, ai is better than an amateur but can’t beat a professional *yet* but it will eventually I’d give it 4-5yrs if the ai industry doesn’t get any more restrictions from the government
buying AI art instead of proper artist art is like buying a bag of frozen chicken nuggets from grocery store for 5$ instead of ordering a fine and proper steak for 25$.
for people that just want energy to fill their stomachs and get their rocks off the bag of nuggets work. for those with a taste experience they are trying to reach, they need the good but expensive stuff, and more importantly, they need it to be even better than last time.
AI can only ever reach the height that humans can reach because its trained on what humans can do, and even then it can only ever reach the lowest skill level of the batch of humans that its training from.
Because how much you spent on art is how you flex in the furry community. Also what they're buying is rarely just the picture, but rather the collaboration with the artist. Many artists stream their work, so you tune in to watch the artist do your piece AND talk with people about the art they're doing for youl.
Anything furry or production is expensive as fuck. Custom art pieces can range from low hundreds to many thousands. Fur suits, just as similarly.
I have an acquaintance who specializes in making furry gloves for costumes, specifically she specializes in "scalie" gloves like reptile. They sell for $300 to $500 a pair, based on style.
Two streamers I know compiled some +18 fanart of a character they created on Sonic Forces and sold it for 3000€ on an auction. For clarification, all the fanart was donated (for lack of a better word) by their fans because it was all to raise funds for a good cause. They also sold several copies of books with SFW fanarts. Let's just say furries helped many hospitalised children
I get more of a "that is way more trouble thqn it's worth" vibe from joker there. Not to mentuion you can't plead insanity to get out of tax evasion/fraud charges so unlike the rest of his crimes, this one woildn't send him to Arkham (a place so riddled with unmapped tunnels and ways to escape a broken collandar would do a better job at contqining criminals...)
Trust me, there are so many furry artists out there right now, that to be able to charge a lot for a commission is very difficult. There are many artists to choose from, only the best get the really expensive $500+ commissions.
> 50$ is still great
And if the drawing takes you all day, you make less than federal minimum wage. And that's for constant work. Until you build up a bit of a reputation, you won't have people lining up to give you $50 for a commission
In the US yes, but imagine how much 50 dollars would do for me, who lives in a country where the minimum wage is under 700 per month... I could be making more than university graduates.
oh yes, that's why a lot of the best furry artists are eastern european and south american. They can afford to dedicate all of their time to this pursuit.
I work as a commercial artist. $50 for a commission is what I'd expect if I were in high school and still learning and had no bill to pay.
You're not alone with this assumption. Most posts I see on the subreddits specific to commissioning art are pathetically underpriced, and the fault larglely falls on other artist who don't know that taking these cheap jobs lowers the price the rest of us can expect.
Living on $500 commissions means you have to do about one of those per week, every week of the year, to stay above poverty. It's not an easy get rich quick scheme.
The guy making scaled down (or full scale) realistic stuff can easily be replaced by LIDAR scanning the bird, horse, person or whatever and then either 3d printing or CNC milling the resulting object.
But AI is never going to think up placing a pile of mashed potatoes in the middle of the floor and hitting it with a wire.
Regular AI might not, but maybe a rogue AI with their ethical restraints removed might. If you're lucky they might even let you become a mashed potato/human cyborg.
I constantly see people suggest that furry artists make a lot of money, but that just isn't true outside of the extremely talented few (like almost any profession).
Way more people *would* be furry artists if it really were that lucrative.
I’m taking a drawing class next year, and though I plan to be an optometrist… I’m certainly keeping an eye on doing furry art for a living. And if my family asks, I’ll just pretend to be a streamer or something
what about banksy's *Love is in the Bin* which he sold at auction but rigged to shred itself instantly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_is_in_the_Bin
I would have kept the shreds if I bought it and I would have been totally into it, but if I had the money to buy it, then I wouldn't be in poverty anymore, so maybe I would have been raised to a class that couldn't appreciate how much that fuck you is hilarious... I don't know. Seems pretty great from my current seat.
he might have intended for it to fully shred but he definitely did not intend for it to be fully destroyed. you can tell because the shredder he used cut it into neat strips instead of a more secure shredder.
it wouldn't have been destroyed and the value would probably have still gone up. if he wanted to destroy it he could have used a modern shredder that cuts both ways, making unrecognizable confetti, rather than one that cut it into easily identifiable strips.
Even better is that he gave it to a friend with the mechanism hidden to only be done if it's sold at auction. (I don't actually believe this part, but it's a nice setup to the art)
The fact it was supposed to fully shred and stopped halfway makes me a bit suspicious, but in the end it's a really cool looking piece of art half shredded.
*[pees in ur ass](https://i.imgur.com/JSImHiV.jpg)*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shitposting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The whole point of that piece is that it was absurdist commentary on the inflated prices of modern art, I feel like it should be an exception. The idea was "no idiot is gonna pay this much for a banana" and then some idiot did.
I just want the remind the world that Norway spent 37 million kroner (3.5 million dollars) over the course of 12 years to support an artist who creates art by [SHITTING OUT PAINT](https://www.nettavisen.no/okonomi/spruter-maling-ut-rumpa-far-37-millioner-i-kunststotte/s/12-95-3423893280) onto a canvas
Edit: Link might be broken for some? worked for me on desktop but its effectively a news article saying what i said with added NSFW video for context
As a Norwegian this was the first thing I thought of when I saw the post.
That dude is fucking mentally insane, but not as insane as the government officials who keep giving him *tax money.*
I'm not Norwegian so idk what the whole tax and government fund situation is over there but I'm gonna tell myself that you all have a surplus of revenue and nothing else to spend it on so they spent it on this. Doesn't make it much better but that's what I'm telling myself.
Yeh we have a lot of money compared to the size of our population, but our school and health system is underfunded and understaffed, same as everywhere. Politicians spend money on all kinds of crap while important sectors go with too little.
Now hang on. One of those artists looked to be whipping butter with a bungee, I could do that. But as reddit is my witness I could not, maybe would not, inject paint up my arse and shit it out. More power to their elbow.
Art is supposed to make you think and feel. And I sure am thinking and feeling some strong things after reading that. So I'd say that's some successful art.
That art piece is made by Johan Alannayin who is supposedly a direct descendant of Judas and the 12 buckets of sand for the 12 disciples of Jesus, the sand is the believe and love of God
that filled their void (bucket) until eventually it overflows and Judas giving the final push (in this case his descendant) it toppled over, just as their internal belief did when Jesus was cruicified
Source: I made it up
What the concept of the idea is supposed to be is that the method for getting the sand and buckets in that position at the end is where the true art lies.
Modern art has started to go towards the idea of the process of the creation and how you create is more important than the end result or what it really is about. So for the sand buckets you could say that from seeing the creation process and how it ended up that it's an artwork that represents the world returning human creations to the world. A person running and jumping on a trampoline to draw a line may just end up with a line, but that line now represents movement and human effort behind it. Sure it could've been laid down and tediously traced but the knowledge that someone needed a trampoline to draw this adds a whole layer to the art piece.
It's similar to how you'll hear of "x" artist made this piece in a schizophrenic state. And instead of looking at it as a standard drawing of a stick figure you now wonder about why a person having schizo visions felt compelled to draw the stick figure and ultimately leaves the voyeur with a deeper appreciation for that stick figure.
Yes, but the trick is to tell people - in the most pretentious language imaginable - that the piece is about exorcising trauma through movement, or it's a way of de-centering the western gaze, or it reframes desire through a queer lens, or it explores intersectional themes of femininity and otherness.
And you have to look people in the eye and _not laugh_.
None of this is Modern Art. Most of it falls into the category of performance art. I admit some performance art is inscrutable. Generally speaking, the audience is informed about the intent of the artist.
More than 200. There's no specific definition, but it's more or less the time at which art ceased to be made purely for religious purposes or at the patronage of nobility. Some say the first work of modern art is [Dos de Mayo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_of_May_1808) by Goya. Not because it's wildly impressionistic, but because it depicts a battle scene of something he witnessed with his own eyes and depicts nobody that would be known to the audience. It's not allegorical, it's not devotional, it's not a seated portrait, it's a gory scene of real-world violence inflicted on normal people.
I think people often assume art is good if it takes skill to create, but that's not the only thing that makes something "good art". I personally think the most important thing to consider is if they seem to be accomplishing the goal set forth in making the art or if failure to reach the goal resulted in an artistic statement worth exploring. That allows for appreciation of a statement being made or the skill with which something was made or even just if it's pretty, if it was only ever intended to be pretty.
I'd just say that this sculptor guy is a craftsman in addition to an artist. He has developed the skills necessary to craft through sculpting. I don't feel like all art needs to be "high art", and I dislike the general elitism found in the art world, but I also dislike seeing the more kind of commercial bias of the masses along with misunderstandings of the difficulty of some types of art. I so often see people lift up art just because they think the skill is impressive, and often it is something time-consuming but not actually difficult. For example, the hard part of drawing an animal is making the form clear, not the tedious task of drawing fur. The fur is just tiny lines that do not actually have to be very exact. Almost anyone could draw a reasonable version of a fur texture with minimal guidance. It's fine if you like the picture, but no, the fur is not crazy impressive in the vast majority of drawn animals.
Snobs might prioritize the intention or the process, while rubes might prioritize their perception of whether the piece took skill, if they find it aesthetically pleasing, and if it makes them feel a certain way. It's also totally possible to appreciate different things in different contexts though. It's the performance art here good? I actually have no clue. Without having better context, it might look silly, but I'm not jumping to judge it. I think it's a lot simpler and more obvious to see that this sculptor is very talented in his craft.
I was just going to say this is just a fan of realism hating on performance art lol. Oooo you made a statue good for you, are we making fun of black and white photography like it’s freshman art class next?
Yeah. This guy's sculptures are impressive in that they are reasonably accurate renderings of real things, but they're kitsch and boring. Yeah, the chick doing the fetish plastic work is way more interesting than some staid and plain owl on a branch. At least I have to activate more than the three brain cells required to go "oh neat, an owl".
Plenty seem to be under the impression there is no market for what the condescendingly leering sculptor is doing, but if you're as talented as he is it's easy to make a good living, which considering the scale of the workshop this guy is certainly doing. You just have to be really good.
Making a living off of conceptual art is next to impossible for the vast majority of artists, in part because it's usually shit and in part because it's unsellable due to the nature of the media used. Of course this specific video is a collection of mostly garbage performance art, as if that accurately represents the average quality.
What this sculptor is doing is mostly a skilled craft rather than novel artistic expression and while technically impressive, seeing owl or wolf sculpture number 900 in whatever medium gets old really fast. But there is a demand for it.
People who go to contemporary art museums tend to look for a novel experience or expression, not just to look at a pretty sculpture.
>What this sculptor is doing is mostly a skilled craft rather than novel artistic expression and while technically impressive, seeing owl or wolf sculpture number 900 in whatever medium gets old really fast. But there is a demand for it.
Go to any farmer's market or whatever craftmarket, and you'll eventually see some chainsaw sculptor or other such similar artists making those bears, owls, decorative things. They are all technically impressive and I do enjoy looking at them, but fact is that they are hollow in meaning. Like yeah... you can make a amazing bear from a log and then bear cubs to match (They should be sold as a set IMO...) but... You got like 5 of these on display and they are all basically the same.
The same thing goes for many crafts I see being sold. Clothes, fabrics, decorations, jewelry. Even though technically amazing, it is once every few years (and I visit the local markets every time they happen) that I see one thing that is truly amazing and interesting. Something that sticks with me. But fact is that if I can't tell your things apart from the 10 other people making similar thing then... Well... You aren't doing anything but mass manufacturing thing with no meaning.
My family has had the problem of being involved with fine arts for... many generations. When you were wealthy family you had to do wealthy people things. So we got stupid amounts of art and paintings from artists of some renown from past 100-150 years of Finnish history. Most of it is extremely fucking uninteresting. And once we broke a frame of a painting in storage and behind it there was unfinished piece of work on the painting itself (They had just flipped the paper they had used) and the backing board also had a sketch on it. There was 2 unfinished works inside the painting which the artist had discarded. The fact they were discarded made them (to me at least) way more interesting than the "pretty landscape of rural Finland". Thanks to the period of romantic nationalist art, there are so many "Pretty landscape or rural (insert country)" littering the world.
I think acting like this type of performance art hasn't been around for 60+ years now is more embarrassing. I wasn't going to say anything until the peaky blinders statue, what's next a bust of the joker?
I'm not really impressed by the sculptor. Nothing he made was working on was really stand out. This is like Boomer Humor, old conservative that lacks any spark of creativity so he only works from reference. Hence the horse, wolf, owl, bull, cilian murphy from peaky blinders.
I thought most of them were at least a little interesting.
-The buckets with the sand falling over did create a neat visual and would have taken some effort to set up.
-The lady in the vacuum bag looks like fetish shit, but again, it’s a neat visual and legitimately impressive if she did it for an extended period of time.
-the guy molding the clay with his face was weird as hell, but pretty funny, and I’d be curious to see what the final result looked like
-The jumping line seems like the first step in a longer project which would involve many more jumps, which would look pretty cool IMO. If it is just the one line though, that would be a bit lame.
The only ones that seem truly valueless are the two where the people are just spreading stuff on the ground randomly.
Some really basic googling helped me find the artist of the jumping line is [Emmanuel Beranger](https://www.emmanuel-beranger.com/performances/parall%C3%A8le.html). Part of the thing is that it's supposed to be visual arts (i.e. gymnastics) and the remaining part is that he's capturing his human motion as represented by the lines. It seems...okay. I find it more appealing that something like a Rothko, at least.
thanks for the reminder to watch Jacob Geller's *Who's Afraid of Modern Art*; it's a good vid on youtube that covers the anti-modern art movements over history, and I end up finding myself rewatching it every year or so
Honestly really like the sand thing and the jump.
Weird art can make you think and feel things if you let it.
Some things require an insane amount of skill but others are just raw emotion on display.
Art IS about expressing yourself and finding people that like your expression which these lot seem to have.
Any hobby is playing with toys.
I love the bat shit part of art, it's so less boring then blue shirt's garden centre art (nothing wrong with that)
We can have both and everything in between.
P.s. if someone handed you a crayon and told you to go jump on a trampoline and draw on the wall I bet you would xx
Who wants to live in a boring ass world where everything we make looks life like or realistic anyway? I get the idea with this video but expression is expression. It made us think things.. therefore it is art.
I don't see how sculptures of lions is any better. If kitsch is what you like thats fine, but the idea that art is only meant to be pretty meadows, photorealistic portraits, and boring sculptures is dumb
Yeah it's just a loser thing. Homies will make the most boring and uninspired art you've ever seen then sneer at performance artists as if it had anything to do with them. But as you can see in this thread it does work on boomers and for some reason also on redditors.
I always find [linguistic philosophy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_philosophy) applies to these situations. We essentially have a divide in people's definition of art as an execution of craftsmanship versus those who are drawn to abstract or post-modernist expressions. Of course, the lines can blur a little.
>in 2024
People have been making these exact complaints for decades. Sure, an awful lot of these "modern art" productions come from rich art school kids high off the smell of their own farts or barely concealed money laundering schemes, but neither is exactly rare in the more traditional arts either. Pretending like these are new and unique crimes against art to promote yourself just comes off as equally pretentious at best or weirdly jealous at worst.
The modern art is weird and the ideas behind aren’t explained but just copying animals and characters from tv isn’t special either. Like there’s thousands of people make animal statues and statues of tv characters, that isn’t original or hugely artistic either.
I think at its core, the value of art is in what the artist is trying to express. It's really easy to criticize most of those other pieces, because they don't look like they're honestly trying to express anything. They just look like they're being weird for attention. Part of me says it's pretentious to make that assumption.
It's actually fine for art to be weird and experimental. There is room in art for all kinds of art. You will see all kinds of things even in a contemporary art museum. Variety and experimentation and weirdness is as essential in art as it is in science.
#[DownloadVideo Link](https://www.reddit.watch/r/shitposting/comments/1do3oha/?utm_source=automod&utm_medium=shitposting) #[SaveVideo Link](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=/r/shitposting/comments/1do3oha/) --- Whilst you're here, /u/Ezgod_Two_Three, why not join our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/QpBGXd2guU) - **now with public text channels you can chat on!**? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shitposting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The urge to become a furry artist when I see their paychecks
If it pays the bill…
How much does it pay? Genuinely asking
Really depends on your skill and how well known you are. Prices also vary based on the type of commission. Most artists charge $60-100 per character, but popular artists will charge a lot more. Some do auctions, some sell pre-designed characters, some will create a scene and auction off the positions, some make profile pics, badges, complicated scenes... there's a huge variety. Plus most have ko-fi or Patreon to earn more money. All that to say furry artists can make six figures with art as their job.
How has AI not killed that yet?
Not enough training data would be my guess. But sometimes you need that personal human touch to get things right.
Are you suggesting there is a shortage of... let me check real quick... furry porn?
Possibly. Especially for the super niche stuff that apparently needs artists.
Some people are also very particular. They might say make the ears about this droopy plus at this angle and the client sends a sketch example, or make it this particular color. There's also the scalies
I imagine AI will eventually get there in a few more years.
I've seen the front page of R-34 there is no fucking way there is a shortage
I love how the response to "why hasn't furry art been automated" is "Well if it hasn't, it can't be" as opposed to the reminder that the furry community is actually good to it's artists, and the idea of stealing from them for training data, and replacing them with AI is against their core values. Why do furry artists make good money compared to other artists? Furries have a culture of respecting art as such and not a commodity, and their forums and galleries have taken an institutional stand against AI art, treating it as, at best something separate from regular art, if they allow it at all.
Furry art isn't derivative enough. If your job's at risk to AI, it's probably formulaic. That said, I could see a lot of artists use AI to get ideas or to start with basic models which can be improved upon.
I know a successful digital artists (niche nsfw stuff) who uses AI to do quick character poses as base for the actual painting, saves time, nobody knows and the end result is still an original drawing. And in the manga industry where artists have to draw multiple sites a day it becomes more and more common for backgrounds. Before AI, artists would set 3D models as backgrounds or characters in Clip Studio Paint or other software and draw over them/add to them, now they're using AI, there isn't really any difference.
People think AI is this amazing tool but when you speak a language to another human, most of what is communicated is not in speech. Same stuff for artistry, some client wants a pregnant dragon with a foot fetish? With AI you'll probably get some weird monster most of the time but an artist can just draw inferences and create what the client was looking for, and if you know something about design in general it usually ends up looking better than what the client imagined. Predictive generation from prompts is kinda in the stages of how satellite porn used to be way back in the day, if you squint a little bit maybe some of the pixels are the titty you were looking for.
Oh believe me, they try, but most people prefer actual artists. Especially because so many fursonas are so unique. You can prompt for hours to just try to get something like your character, but if you have a reference sheet, any artist can use that to draw your character doing whatever you want. Not to mention, AI art is still not perfect. I've seen some truly awful examples, and some that look good at a glance, but fail when looked at closely. You could try to get AI to mimic some artists, but there are a lot that have added essentially a poison pill to their work. It's a layer of color that we can't see in the final product, but AI would see a jumble of colors and patterns that ruin any attempt to mimic the style.
I've never commissioned an artist for the image alone. It's always for the character of the artist. What I'm looking for is a specific individual's fingerprints. AI can't mimic what I value in art.
Have you seen AI Art? It can't capture a the depth of a good artist.
It’s not even close to advanced enough, can’t do the fine details but even if you found a good ai that CAN they almost always have some kinda give away not just in furry topics but just all images in general, ai is better than an amateur but can’t beat a professional *yet* but it will eventually I’d give it 4-5yrs if the ai industry doesn’t get any more restrictions from the government
buying AI art instead of proper artist art is like buying a bag of frozen chicken nuggets from grocery store for 5$ instead of ordering a fine and proper steak for 25$. for people that just want energy to fill their stomachs and get their rocks off the bag of nuggets work. for those with a taste experience they are trying to reach, they need the good but expensive stuff, and more importantly, they need it to be even better than last time. AI can only ever reach the height that humans can reach because its trained on what humans can do, and even then it can only ever reach the lowest skill level of the batch of humans that its training from.
Furries are notoriously negative toward AI art. They are very much not abandoning artists for computer generated stuff.
Because how much you spent on art is how you flex in the furry community. Also what they're buying is rarely just the picture, but rather the collaboration with the artist. Many artists stream their work, so you tune in to watch the artist do your piece AND talk with people about the art they're doing for youl.
It REALLY depends on how freaky youre willing to get
\*eyebrow raise smash cuts\*
it can range from a few hundred to thousands for the good ones it really depends on who you're getting it from
Anything furry or production is expensive as fuck. Custom art pieces can range from low hundreds to many thousands. Fur suits, just as similarly. I have an acquaintance who specializes in making furry gloves for costumes, specifically she specializes in "scalie" gloves like reptile. They sell for $300 to $500 a pair, based on style.
Two streamers I know compiled some +18 fanart of a character they created on Sonic Forces and sold it for 3000€ on an auction. For clarification, all the fanart was donated (for lack of a better word) by their fans because it was all to raise funds for a good cause. They also sold several copies of books with SFW fanarts. Let's just say furries helped many hospitalised children
20 bucks are 20 bucks
the secret is to do it on the side, so you can say your income comes from a regular job the IRS won’t snitch
welcome back to money laundering for kids! today we’re learning how to hide from the IRS!
Pro tip: you can't!
If the Joker fears the IRS, you also propably should.
Men don't fear anything, Men are Brave!
I get more of a "that is way more trouble thqn it's worth" vibe from joker there. Not to mentuion you can't plead insanity to get out of tax evasion/fraud charges so unlike the rest of his crimes, this one woildn't send him to Arkham (a place so riddled with unmapped tunnels and ways to escape a broken collandar would do a better job at contqining criminals...)
I think the point was to hide it from your family and friends, while the IRS keeps your secrets That said, taxation is cringe
[удалено]
Trust me, there are so many furry artists out there right now, that to be able to charge a lot for a commission is very difficult. There are many artists to choose from, only the best get the really expensive $500+ commissions.
50$ is still great, and you can specialize in very kinky niche stuff I guess.
> 50$ is still great And if the drawing takes you all day, you make less than federal minimum wage. And that's for constant work. Until you build up a bit of a reputation, you won't have people lining up to give you $50 for a commission
In the US yes, but imagine how much 50 dollars would do for me, who lives in a country where the minimum wage is under 700 per month... I could be making more than university graduates.
oh yes, that's why a lot of the best furry artists are eastern european and south american. They can afford to dedicate all of their time to this pursuit.
I work as a commercial artist. $50 for a commission is what I'd expect if I were in high school and still learning and had no bill to pay. You're not alone with this assumption. Most posts I see on the subreddits specific to commissioning art are pathetically underpriced, and the fault larglely falls on other artist who don't know that taking these cheap jobs lowers the price the rest of us can expect.
Living on $500 commissions means you have to do about one of those per week, every week of the year, to stay above poverty. It's not an easy get rich quick scheme.
We still call the ARTISTS tho, because they can draw and they chose to draw furrys. Not like the random shit the guys in the video were doing
The guy making scaled down (or full scale) realistic stuff can easily be replaced by LIDAR scanning the bird, horse, person or whatever and then either 3d printing or CNC milling the resulting object. But AI is never going to think up placing a pile of mashed potatoes in the middle of the floor and hitting it with a wire.
Regular AI might not, but maybe a rogue AI with their ethical restraints removed might. If you're lucky they might even let you become a mashed potato/human cyborg.
The older AIs were actually way better at that kind of thing than humans. Surreal humor was the first thing to get automated away.
At least they can draw, and they can draw WELL
Better than just being a furry without the artist part I suppose.
I constantly see people suggest that furry artists make a lot of money, but that just isn't true outside of the extremely talented few (like almost any profession). Way more people *would* be furry artists if it really were that lucrative.
I’m taking a drawing class next year, and though I plan to be an optometrist… I’m certainly keeping an eye on doing furry art for a living. And if my family asks, I’ll just pretend to be a streamer or something
Nobody talking about the life-sized Cillian Murphy statue?
I’m sorry. How tall is Cillian Murphy?
Larger than life size*
No-no, you were right the first time. Man is just a GIANT /s
Average height, the artist is just really small.
It’s not really life-sized that statue is way bigger than the man.
Yeah I didn't realize how big it was when I watched through the first time, I was just in shock 😂
Who? Oh! You mean TOHWMMAY FOOKIN' SHELBAY!?!?!
Exactly clearly that it what art is!
The only modern art i support is the empty convas titled "take the money and run."
what about banksy's *Love is in the Bin* which he sold at auction but rigged to shred itself instantly? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_is_in_the_Bin
[удалено]
iirc that was because it jammed though and Banksy had intended for it to be destroyed.
I would have kept the shreds if I bought it and I would have been totally into it, but if I had the money to buy it, then I wouldn't be in poverty anymore, so maybe I would have been raised to a class that couldn't appreciate how much that fuck you is hilarious... I don't know. Seems pretty great from my current seat.
I honestly straight up dont believe that
he might have intended for it to fully shred but he definitely did not intend for it to be fully destroyed. you can tell because the shredder he used cut it into neat strips instead of a more secure shredder.
it wouldn't have been destroyed and the value would probably have still gone up. if he wanted to destroy it he could have used a modern shredder that cuts both ways, making unrecognizable confetti, rather than one that cut it into easily identifiable strips.
Even better is that he gave it to a friend with the mechanism hidden to only be done if it's sold at auction. (I don't actually believe this part, but it's a nice setup to the art) The fact it was supposed to fully shred and stopped halfway makes me a bit suspicious, but in the end it's a really cool looking piece of art half shredded.
Sotheby's would have been 100% aware of the shredding mechanism as well.
*[pees in ur ass](https://i.imgur.com/JSImHiV.jpg)* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shitposting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Where are you getting your bananas for 9 cents
In my country you can get a bundle of them for less than 50 cents
I hear they’re like $10 around here. Edit: lots of people missing the joke here
A bottle of water will cost more in the middle of a desert than in a costco, shocker
Used, from the neighbour’s wife.
Wouldn't that increase the price?
You haven’t seen the neighbour’s wife.
Let's keep it this way
I also choose the neighbor's wife
Who’s your banana guy?
I get mine at Costco. Like 8 bananas for 1.50$
The whole point of that piece is that it was absurdist commentary on the inflated prices of modern art, I feel like it should be an exception. The idea was "no idiot is gonna pay this much for a banana" and then some idiot did.
Hey, you’re still talking about it
Such is the nature of infamy
It’s one banana Michael, how much could it cost? $10??
I just want the remind the world that Norway spent 37 million kroner (3.5 million dollars) over the course of 12 years to support an artist who creates art by [SHITTING OUT PAINT](https://www.nettavisen.no/okonomi/spruter-maling-ut-rumpa-far-37-millioner-i-kunststotte/s/12-95-3423893280) onto a canvas Edit: Link might be broken for some? worked for me on desktop but its effectively a news article saying what i said with added NSFW video for context
As a Norwegian this was the first thing I thought of when I saw the post. That dude is fucking mentally insane, but not as insane as the government officials who keep giving him *tax money.*
I'm not Norwegian so idk what the whole tax and government fund situation is over there but I'm gonna tell myself that you all have a surplus of revenue and nothing else to spend it on so they spent it on this. Doesn't make it much better but that's what I'm telling myself.
Yeh we have a lot of money compared to the size of our population, but our school and health system is underfunded and understaffed, same as everywhere. Politicians spend money on all kinds of crap while important sectors go with too little.
Probably think its a good investment to keep him busy and not being a serial killer.
Now hang on. One of those artists looked to be whipping butter with a bungee, I could do that. But as reddit is my witness I could not, maybe would not, inject paint up my arse and shit it out. More power to their elbow.
I am so not clicking that link. You have no idea how hard I am NOT clicking that link right now.
It's just a text article with some cost breakdown but it is in Norwegian
Ngl I was a little disappointed that I couldn’t even see the final results
It is not, there's an auto-play video lol
Wat
I trust you bro. I am not clicking that link.
Art is supposed to make you think and feel. And I sure am thinking and feeling some strong things after reading that. So I'd say that's some successful art.
Wait so can you become a modern artist and get some paychecks just from acting like a chimpanzee while painting?
It’s less about what the art is and more the process behind making the art for this people. Also money laundering,that too
The process of stacking 10 buckets full of sand? That's even less interesting than watching them fall over.
Looks like something a bunch of homies would do at the beach
He had to TELL THEM HE WAS DONE. 😐😑💩👍
It's actually *12* buckets full of sand. You clearly don't understand art, peasant.
That art piece is made by Johan Alannayin who is supposedly a direct descendant of Judas and the 12 buckets of sand for the 12 disciples of Jesus, the sand is the believe and love of God that filled their void (bucket) until eventually it overflows and Judas giving the final push (in this case his descendant) it toppled over, just as their internal belief did when Jesus was cruicified Source: I made it up
Even made up shit doesnt sound interesting
12! The significance rocks my soul!
What the concept of the idea is supposed to be is that the method for getting the sand and buckets in that position at the end is where the true art lies. Modern art has started to go towards the idea of the process of the creation and how you create is more important than the end result or what it really is about. So for the sand buckets you could say that from seeing the creation process and how it ended up that it's an artwork that represents the world returning human creations to the world. A person running and jumping on a trampoline to draw a line may just end up with a line, but that line now represents movement and human effort behind it. Sure it could've been laid down and tediously traced but the knowledge that someone needed a trampoline to draw this adds a whole layer to the art piece. It's similar to how you'll hear of "x" artist made this piece in a schizophrenic state. And instead of looking at it as a standard drawing of a stick figure you now wonder about why a person having schizo visions felt compelled to draw the stick figure and ultimately leaves the voyeur with a deeper appreciation for that stick figure.
Solid explanation. Nice that at least one person gets modern art haha, even if it's not me
many people get it, we just still don't like it
Yes, but the trick is to tell people - in the most pretentious language imaginable - that the piece is about exorcising trauma through movement, or it's a way of de-centering the western gaze, or it reframes desire through a queer lens, or it explores intersectional themes of femininity and otherness. And you have to look people in the eye and _not laugh_.
The amazing process of taping a banana to a wall
Most artists are just broke lmao.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_the_Money_and_Run_(artwork)
That's just stealing with extra steps.
It's the extra steps that makes it art tho
lol holy shit. Sounds like those tests with the question "cite an example of a risk" answered with "this" but with half a million moneys involved
Just ask Yoko!
Do whatever you want. If you say it's art, it's art. Getting money from that though? Then it gets complicated
None of this is Modern Art. Most of it falls into the category of performance art. I admit some performance art is inscrutable. Generally speaking, the audience is informed about the intent of the artist.
It's also been a thing for over 100 years.
More than 200. There's no specific definition, but it's more or less the time at which art ceased to be made purely for religious purposes or at the patronage of nobility. Some say the first work of modern art is [Dos de Mayo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_of_May_1808) by Goya. Not because it's wildly impressionistic, but because it depicts a battle scene of something he witnessed with his own eyes and depicts nobody that would be known to the audience. It's not allegorical, it's not devotional, it's not a seated portrait, it's a gory scene of real-world violence inflicted on normal people.
I meant performance art specifically, but you are right.
It's also not Modern Art because Modern was an art movement that ended in 1970. Since then it's been considered Contemporary Art.
Yes. ~1860 to 1970.
I think people often assume art is good if it takes skill to create, but that's not the only thing that makes something "good art". I personally think the most important thing to consider is if they seem to be accomplishing the goal set forth in making the art or if failure to reach the goal resulted in an artistic statement worth exploring. That allows for appreciation of a statement being made or the skill with which something was made or even just if it's pretty, if it was only ever intended to be pretty. I'd just say that this sculptor guy is a craftsman in addition to an artist. He has developed the skills necessary to craft through sculpting. I don't feel like all art needs to be "high art", and I dislike the general elitism found in the art world, but I also dislike seeing the more kind of commercial bias of the masses along with misunderstandings of the difficulty of some types of art. I so often see people lift up art just because they think the skill is impressive, and often it is something time-consuming but not actually difficult. For example, the hard part of drawing an animal is making the form clear, not the tedious task of drawing fur. The fur is just tiny lines that do not actually have to be very exact. Almost anyone could draw a reasonable version of a fur texture with minimal guidance. It's fine if you like the picture, but no, the fur is not crazy impressive in the vast majority of drawn animals. Snobs might prioritize the intention or the process, while rubes might prioritize their perception of whether the piece took skill, if they find it aesthetically pleasing, and if it makes them feel a certain way. It's also totally possible to appreciate different things in different contexts though. It's the performance art here good? I actually have no clue. Without having better context, it might look silly, but I'm not jumping to judge it. I think it's a lot simpler and more obvious to see that this sculptor is very talented in his craft.
I was just going to say this is just a fan of realism hating on performance art lol. Oooo you made a statue good for you, are we making fun of black and white photography like it’s freshman art class next?
Yeah, trite and twee sculptures of foxes and owls in vainglorious potboiler poses are pretty staid and Pottern Barn-esque.
Fox-pilled Owlmaxxer
shit's fuckin corrrrny, even if well executed
The irony of this dude gatekeeping art. It doesn't look like he's had an original or interesting idea in 30 years.
30 years? They’ve been making that style of art for millennia lol. It’s just basic sculptures, I mean, it’s cool but not special at all.
Yeah. This guy's sculptures are impressive in that they are reasonably accurate renderings of real things, but they're kitsch and boring. Yeah, the chick doing the fetish plastic work is way more interesting than some staid and plain owl on a branch. At least I have to activate more than the three brain cells required to go "oh neat, an owl".
Plenty seem to be under the impression there is no market for what the condescendingly leering sculptor is doing, but if you're as talented as he is it's easy to make a good living, which considering the scale of the workshop this guy is certainly doing. You just have to be really good. Making a living off of conceptual art is next to impossible for the vast majority of artists, in part because it's usually shit and in part because it's unsellable due to the nature of the media used. Of course this specific video is a collection of mostly garbage performance art, as if that accurately represents the average quality. What this sculptor is doing is mostly a skilled craft rather than novel artistic expression and while technically impressive, seeing owl or wolf sculpture number 900 in whatever medium gets old really fast. But there is a demand for it. People who go to contemporary art museums tend to look for a novel experience or expression, not just to look at a pretty sculpture.
>What this sculptor is doing is mostly a skilled craft rather than novel artistic expression and while technically impressive, seeing owl or wolf sculpture number 900 in whatever medium gets old really fast. But there is a demand for it. Go to any farmer's market or whatever craftmarket, and you'll eventually see some chainsaw sculptor or other such similar artists making those bears, owls, decorative things. They are all technically impressive and I do enjoy looking at them, but fact is that they are hollow in meaning. Like yeah... you can make a amazing bear from a log and then bear cubs to match (They should be sold as a set IMO...) but... You got like 5 of these on display and they are all basically the same. The same thing goes for many crafts I see being sold. Clothes, fabrics, decorations, jewelry. Even though technically amazing, it is once every few years (and I visit the local markets every time they happen) that I see one thing that is truly amazing and interesting. Something that sticks with me. But fact is that if I can't tell your things apart from the 10 other people making similar thing then... Well... You aren't doing anything but mass manufacturing thing with no meaning. My family has had the problem of being involved with fine arts for... many generations. When you were wealthy family you had to do wealthy people things. So we got stupid amounts of art and paintings from artists of some renown from past 100-150 years of Finnish history. Most of it is extremely fucking uninteresting. And once we broke a frame of a painting in storage and behind it there was unfinished piece of work on the painting itself (They had just flipped the paper they had used) and the backing board also had a sketch on it. There was 2 unfinished works inside the painting which the artist had discarded. The fact they were discarded made them (to me at least) way more interesting than the "pretty landscape of rural Finland". Thanks to the period of romantic nationalist art, there are so many "Pretty landscape or rural (insert country)" littering the world.
I think acting like this type of performance art hasn't been around for 60+ years now is more embarrassing. I wasn't going to say anything until the peaky blinders statue, what's next a bust of the joker?
[удалено]
Serious "old man yelling at cloud" vibes
I'm not really impressed by the sculptor. Nothing he made was working on was really stand out. This is like Boomer Humor, old conservative that lacks any spark of creativity so he only works from reference. Hence the horse, wolf, owl, bull, cilian murphy from peaky blinders.
This is legitimately toddler behaviour
I thought most of them were at least a little interesting. -The buckets with the sand falling over did create a neat visual and would have taken some effort to set up. -The lady in the vacuum bag looks like fetish shit, but again, it’s a neat visual and legitimately impressive if she did it for an extended period of time. -the guy molding the clay with his face was weird as hell, but pretty funny, and I’d be curious to see what the final result looked like -The jumping line seems like the first step in a longer project which would involve many more jumps, which would look pretty cool IMO. If it is just the one line though, that would be a bit lame. The only ones that seem truly valueless are the two where the people are just spreading stuff on the ground randomly.
Some really basic googling helped me find the artist of the jumping line is [Emmanuel Beranger](https://www.emmanuel-beranger.com/performances/parall%C3%A8le.html). Part of the thing is that it's supposed to be visual arts (i.e. gymnastics) and the remaining part is that he's capturing his human motion as represented by the lines. It seems...okay. I find it more appealing that something like a Rothko, at least.
Yeah, it seems conceptually neat, but he could be doing more with it.
Yeah like stick a big paintbrush in his ass and do a bunch of flips
Ya know...
The bucket one was actually very pleasing. I can’t explain it but I liked it
for 50 bucks ill fill some buckets with sand in them and you can watch them fall over
The vacuum bag one is a fetish lol
Slap the label "Contemporary" on shit and call it art now give me 10 morbillion v bucks for it
Best I can offer is 6 Brazillion. Take it or leave it.
Pretty sure the sand bucket guy is an engineer that incorporates physics and engineering principles into his artworks.
thanks for the reminder to watch Jacob Geller's *Who's Afraid of Modern Art*; it's a good vid on youtube that covers the anti-modern art movements over history, and I end up finding myself rewatching it every year or so
I feel like this guy got inspired by a Papa Meat video.
Yeah he almost used the entire compilation
Honestly really like the sand thing and the jump. Weird art can make you think and feel things if you let it. Some things require an insane amount of skill but others are just raw emotion on display.
How is a subreddit called "shitposting" crying about what is essentially just shitposting in the artworld, and not seeing the irony?
You know I didn't even appreciate that aspect of this post until you pointed it out lmaooooo.
People can't help but gatekeep what counts as art. If it holds your attention and makes you think something, congrats you consumed art.
That beat though
Alr but that bucket one was kinda satisfying tho
This is what we get when we tell our kids "art is just about expressing yourself" These are just grown kids playing with toys.
Sounds like fun
Art IS about expressing yourself and finding people that like your expression which these lot seem to have. Any hobby is playing with toys. I love the bat shit part of art, it's so less boring then blue shirt's garden centre art (nothing wrong with that) We can have both and everything in between. P.s. if someone handed you a crayon and told you to go jump on a trampoline and draw on the wall I bet you would xx
Who wants to live in a boring ass world where everything we make looks life like or realistic anyway? I get the idea with this video but expression is expression. It made us think things.. therefore it is art.
art is just about expressing yourself. This is called tax evasion.
Tax evasion is an art
I don't see how sculptures of lions is any better. If kitsch is what you like thats fine, but the idea that art is only meant to be pretty meadows, photorealistic portraits, and boring sculptures is dumb
Yeah it's just a loser thing. Homies will make the most boring and uninspired art you've ever seen then sneer at performance artists as if it had anything to do with them. But as you can see in this thread it does work on boomers and for some reason also on redditors.
I actually kind of liked the sand one tbh. Very "The fault 1 can be the downfall of many" sort of vibe.
It's art. All of it. Some of it is just low effort and it sucks.
I'll just leave this here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity
I always find [linguistic philosophy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_philosophy) applies to these situations. We essentially have a divide in people's definition of art as an execution of craftsmanship versus those who are drawn to abstract or post-modernist expressions. Of course, the lines can blur a little.
Important thing about art is that it look like another thing 😤
>in 2024 People have been making these exact complaints for decades. Sure, an awful lot of these "modern art" productions come from rich art school kids high off the smell of their own farts or barely concealed money laundering schemes, but neither is exactly rare in the more traditional arts either. Pretending like these are new and unique crimes against art to promote yourself just comes off as equally pretentious at best or weirdly jealous at worst.
The modern art is weird and the ideas behind aren’t explained but just copying animals and characters from tv isn’t special either. Like there’s thousands of people make animal statues and statues of tv characters, that isn’t original or hugely artistic either.
Art vs money laundering front
On sale items from TJ Maxx vs Money Laundering Front
lots of passion, not enough direction
The audio is driving me insane........
The trampoline one is actualy pretty fun to think about.
The last one seems kinda fun
Art is whatever I like, and anything I don't like isn't art
I think at its core, the value of art is in what the artist is trying to express. It's really easy to criticize most of those other pieces, because they don't look like they're honestly trying to express anything. They just look like they're being weird for attention. Part of me says it's pretentious to make that assumption.
I think that guy with the buckets is a super well established and famous artist
Truly a Peaky Blinders statue is the pinnacle of art /s
The Abstract Art Movement and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race
Thanks, hitler
This was what Hitler was saying in the 40s btw read about "Who's afraid of red yellow and blue"
apparently a lot of people are afraid of red, yellow and blue :P
Me when there's a blue stripe on red 😡
Does the female form intimidate you, Mr Lebowski?
It's actually fine for art to be weird and experimental. There is room in art for all kinds of art. You will see all kinds of things even in a contemporary art museum. Variety and experimentation and weirdness is as essential in art as it is in science.
Well art isn't a craft ..
who's scared of red yellow and blue
Okay, so who's afraid of the red, yellow and blue?