Obviously work times vary, but I don't think this is anywhere near the norm for a comic page? Like, maybe if you're only doing line art and you're pretty quick?? There's a reason most comic artists can't afford to post more than a page a week.
Anyway, not digging into the rest at the moment, just find this bit suggested as a "norm" to be suspect. (And I get that you're just basing that off your experience and who you know, I'm not saying you're being false or anything!!)
Yeah I draw pretty fast usually and 1-3 hours for a page of finished artwork is absurdly fast. I usually spend that long on just the coloring.
The process is a part of their value if the process is mandatory. Just like when you buy a meal at a resturant you're not just paying for the ingredients, you're paying for the cooking.
Artists don't need to do extensive research into each project they work on as itself, especially not colorists and letterers (concept artists and designers, at most). Writers do. Simple as that.
First of all, we do judge writers on their work. That's why a lot of people only work with finished scripts, and people always ask for examples of the writer's work to gague their abilities. Actually, that's exactly the same as artists showing their portfolios. Writers aren't "side-stepping" anything, they're doing the exact same process artists are to be hired/accepted into a collaboration, if not more (working on the script before it's picked up). I don't really know what you're refering to here, but you need to reread what you're responding to because at this point you're just being hostile for fun and it's really pretty offputting.
What? I never argued you're incapable of anything, I'm expressing my opinions based on my own experience. And honestly, in regards to this, seeing how you treat writers and... anyone who doesn't outright agree with you... I feel a bit bad for the writers in 'collective'.
@sleepingpoppy , @kytri
sorry if i misrepresented artists somehow, like i said before this is based on me and my friends, obviously worktimes vary, and I can’t account for those i don’t know :0c
also
i am so salty rn
Like I said, I realize you were basing it off what you know, but since the actual average times would be relevant to the conversation, it's important for other to realize that the numbers you gave likely way under the norm. I make a full color comic, and I guarantee you 1-3 hours are not my numbers. XD
Was directed at your conversation, not you specifically, as a reminder that the board will get shut down if we don't behave. Also, the fact that we can't seem to have this conversation without writers and artists insulting/feeling insulted is dumb and bums me out.
^just so you know I wasn't, like, singling you out specifically. It's not an artists vs writer thing. Everyone needs to keep a cool head.
Taking a step back from the points that everyone is making here (some I agree with, others not as much) I just wanted to add some of my experiences as an example.
I'd like to believe that I'm somewhat of an established author but when going into a collaboration, what's taken at face value is honestly what you bring to the table.
Just like how artists have portfolios for professionals to look at, I clearly state my "portfolio". An example of a writer's "portfolio" won't usually be just a list of manuscripts/novels/poems/etc that they've finished but also a comprehensive statistic of how many readers or followers that they have. This way, just like how artists are trying to entice their viewers with their artistic skills, writers can entice by guaranteeing at least "x" amount of initial viewers that will be interested.
I did a short slice-of-life comic called TurtleDays3 and since I can't draw for the life of me, I garnered the attention of various artists to draw the scripts that I wrote for me.
This worked for several reasons:
1. The commitment was just one short strip most of the time, with the option of coming back if satisfied.
2. I still paid them (albeit usually a discounted amount).
3. I promised a shout out to the artists' original works so that viewers from the comic strip of my title were easily able to go to the artist profile of the one who actually drew it.
Result:
I was able to get a large number of interested artists, many of whom were willing to do it for free. Why? Because it was low-commitment and a way for them to garner new readers for their original works.
When I posted on this forum about wanting to hire artists for this, I stated how many people are subscribed to my works and how many views my novel/comic has, not because I'm bragging, but because it's what I bring to the table in order to attract artists of a certain level.
TL;DR
As an artist, your work speaks for itself. No matter how "unfair" it may seem to writers, it's a lot easier to gauge the skill level of an artist by what they've drawn.
For a writer, I don't think that just a script and the firm "we can do it" belief is enough to attract an artist. If you really want to attract a dedicated/motivated/talented artist to work with you long-term, the promise of future profit means absolutely nothing unless you can back up that base with proper statistics to prove what you're saying.
I kind of barfed this all out so my apologies for mistakes and the like.
That's interesting. I do full-color too and so do most of my friends, I guess there's a bigger time difference than I thought between artists?
That's honestly true, it's not even the topic, I just feel like the way writers were brought up so negatively as part of some kind of unrelevant cursade really... kind of annoyed me. I'm not gonna stand by as half of the community is shit on, in relation to my comment, you know?
Anyway, I'm gonna let turtleme and their fantastic response lead us back to the straight & narrow now
It's not about shitting on anyone. It's about the reality that if 1 artist and 1 writer pair up to do an unpaid collab, the artist is (most of the time) going to be spending more billable hours on the final comic than the writer will. Drawing takes longer than writing (most of the time). And because of that, promising an artist 50% of "potential" profits isn't a fair assumption given the division of labor.
And when writers hear this, they sometimes feel defensive and will say, "But I also have to edit and revise." So does the artist. "But I also have to research." So does the artist. No one is saying the writer's work is less valuable, there's just a fundamental difference in hours spent glued to a screen, and that should play a part when any potential collab discusses how profits are going to be split.
Okay but that's literally what I said from the first second.
and in my comment even before that i explictly mentioned 50/50 splits being unfair towards the artist
I never said the same amount of time goes into to work, I just said (and you're more than welcome to look over my comments for this because it repeats each time)
comparing 6 minutes of work from the writer to 6 hours of work from the artist is not a fair comparison
that isn't to say it's flipped, or equal, just that the differences aren't as large as that.
You sure got a funny way of "defending" people in the community. Are artist that do extensive research research just wasting time then... or does it count like if they were writers? Colorists... letterers ...no need to research and hone your craft either, I guess it doesn't count unless you're a writer.
Really? Let's look at your previous post...
For future reference, THAT's where this conversation went off the rails. Don't assume you can just post snide stuff about people who disagree with you and it won't garner a more spirited retort. You can try and point fingers and claim I'm being "hostile" and "offputting" and you can "feel a bit bad for the writers in 'collective' " but YOU were the one who posted a passive aggressive response to this post...
Does that seem like the sort of post that requires a normal person to judge some one as UNFIT ?
Child please.
Me personally, unless you're really passionate and the partner(s) you're working with are equally as passionate about the project, then it can be an enjoyable experience, but I've only really had one of those. If I'm not going to be paid for it, I'm not going to dedicate my all into it, or if I absolutely hate it I'll just rush things out, I'm not being paid for it, so what do I care anymore, yeah exposure is important, but so is the sense of passion for the work, and money is a great motivator.
Once again, this becomes an "artist" vs "writer" type of discussion.
And as both, I will have to say this: the type of quality is different because these are different fields. The type of research done by an artist is different than the type of research done by a writer. The type of edits and revisions done by a writer are different than those done by an artist.
Not to mention how we bring in practice, hard-work, effort, AND experience -- quite frankly, we really cannot and should not try to generalize or sum it all up.
Too much focus is on the "which one is better", when really, we should be focusing on the "who".
The problem is the type of people who do the unpaid collabs and the LACK of experience they have. I feel the problem here is that some of these arguments allude to people having experience (both writer and artist). Everyone here has a point in some way if we are talking about experienced people
However -- the fact in this forum is that a lot of people asking for unpaid collabs aren't experienced or they're still trying to gather some and don't really understand the implications of what they're doing (or they do and don't care).
They're young, they're new to writing and drawing, they're new to everything (they might even be selfish ad just want things for free), but they want to become the next best seller.
It's really just a type of naive (maybe selfish) person. And from my angle, it's the type of person we often hear say "ugh, drawing's too hard" without an ounce of practice, so they opt to be a "writer" because it's "easier". It's an insult to both writers and artists as a whole.
Honestly, from my perspective, as a writer and artist, that's the real problem.
We're all talking from the point of experienced people and we're kinda thinking that the people we're dealing with have had some type of experience.
But we're dealing with others who don't have what we have. Even in a lot of the arguments, we've noted a lot of them don't have completed works, scripts, or the likes. And it's because they are not experienced.
So with that, we can't clump up artists and writers together or even defend them because it's not that type of argument.
It's not about whether or not a writer hasn't put in the work. If they're experienced and hard-working, it will more than likely be shown in their product.
It's not about whether or not an artist has spent enough hours drawing a piece. If they're experienced and hard-working, the proof will be more than likely shown in their product.
It's dealing with a type of person doing these collabs (and kinda hiding behind the title of "writer" or "artist").
We have to address the elephant in the room and encourage them to get better.
This is a pattern.
This type of person thinks drawing AND writing is easy, and I know both sides of this will agree that it's not that easy (with experience, maybe, but none of us are DaVinci or Mary Shelley levels of good -- and even they had their challenges). I feel the underlying idea we have to discover behind all of this is the why:
With that, I ask you all to think about it. Why would this type of person believe both fields are so easy to do? Have you met people in your lives that are like that? Were you once like that? If we think back on it, maybe we can figure things out.
And not have these heated debates that kinda slice a wedge between creatives. Because both are valid -- it's not the quantity or the actions you do. It's the quality.
And both command the respect of each other.
I don't get why this is even a fight to be had because to me this is quite simple.
Writers seeking artists: If your search for artists or discussions about future collaborations you would like to have continuously result in people telling you that your expectations are unrealistic or unfair to the artist, there's probably something in that statement. Pondering what this might be and adjusting your expectations and improve your offer to be more stable and appealing will be in your own best bloody interest because if you don't, you are unlikely to attract an artist. And if you don't want to adjust your expectations and/or provide monetary compensation or a larger percentage of potential profits, then there's one last place to go: DRAW IT YOURSELF.
Don't like any of those options? Then there will be no comic. An illustrated version of your story is not something you are entitled to. Just write a novel.
Artists who don't wanna do free collaborations: JUST DON'T DO THEM. Seriously, I understand you. It's a competitive market and some of us just have to pay the bills. I don't do unpaid collaborations for this very reason. Like the writer that doesn't want to make the adjustments or offers necessary for a healthy collaboration, you too can learn to carry the load yourself and become the writer of your own project.
Okay, so going from that example, 6 minutes of writing to 6 hours of art. Not fair because the writer has hours of research behind those minutes. Add in those hours and it is more fair. Let's say 3 hours of research that are relevant to the singe page in this example.
Except that artists ALSO do research and prep work, many times equal or sometimes more so than the writer. So if you want to include "stuff that isn't the physical product" into the breakdown of workload, you have to include the hours spent by the artist as well. So it's more like 3 hours 6 minutes for the writer to the artist's 9 hours.
The gap is really that big (depending on the combo in question). When you try to close that gap, you diminish the efforts of artists that occur outside the physical act of drawing.
Speaking as a writer and artist, I would say more research goes into art. Particularly if you're doing a period piece.
With writing you can get away with "She put on her nightgown and snuggled into bed."
If you're going to draw that you have to research the type of nightgown and bed styles popular at the time and place and pray to the gods that the reference images are in decent angles and high res enough.
As a writer you'd be wasting your time describing the detailing and look of the items, as an artist you have to show those details.
Now if the writer in a collab is kind enough to do that all that research for the artist, then we'd be closing in on that gap.
@LordVincent has made a really good point here that I hope nobody misses - rather than arguing over who deserves / is entitled to what, it's better to just drop the idea of entitlement and be pragmatic.
Whether you are a writer or an artist, if you make an offer that isn't appealing to others, you won't get any bites, regardless of what you deserve or think you deserve.
If somebody makes an offer that doesn't appeal to you, you are under no obligation to take it.
People will only enter a collaboration if they both think there is a mutual benefit. Some of that benefit might be extrinsic / monetary, some might be intrinsic. But at the end of the day, individuals will make their own choices regarding which collaborations to enter and how.
The real question is whether we can respect that instead of arguing for others about what terms they should or shouldn't accept.
