I appreciate that you acknowledge that some of the art is actually good (I like that rainbowy painting near the start). The prices may not be worth the actual quality, but the artists have potential.
Half of the things on here are amazing to be completely honest. I'm pretty sure for a lot of this stuff at least some thought was put behind it. I would be surprised if it didn't. It doesn't even matter if those thoughts were Mr. Krabs style "money money money" just to make money off of someone and if someone's intention was to scam someone else and they didn't understand that what they created might have genuine value to someone. Art value is totally subjective to any one person and if only they were reasonable enough to at least lower prices on some of those items, I would actually get them or recommend getting them to someone else.
I love that he's being encoraging and saying "just a few more years" bc it's totally true, a lot of these look exactly like what I used to draw before taking art lessons and improving with practice
Actual advice for struggling artists: it's okay not to "make it" just from art alone. If you need to supplement your income with employed work, do it. If you can find time, ANY time in the day to devote to your craft and talk to likeminded creators and art enjoyers you will eventually pick up some speed.
11:23 The funny thing is, owning an original Bob Ross would actually be a massive flex. I think one estimate was that there are less than 100 originals out in the wild out of the 10000+ he painted in his lifetime. Verified originals coming up in actions are veritable unicorns and can go for 5 figures. The rest are all kept under lock and key by the Bob Ross Inc, who have stated they will not sell a single painting for as long as the incorporation exists.
that is just Robin. he destroys idiots in wild rants, whenever they deserve it. but on the other hand, he compliments people for their work and effort and probably gives them more moral support than their entire families might do. he sees gems where us simple meme-consumers see nothing more than dust. lets hope, at least some of the artists in this video watch it and get the boost they need to continue their work and to improve their art.
Annoying how half the posts in this subreddit are sometimes non-artists that'll never understand that what they're showing of an artist's work.... is understandable for its price. Or a non-artist just being a petty bitch. I'm so glad you're showing *actual* delusional artists from this subreddit.
I am alsoglad that Robin also, instead of Gordan Ramseying them, encourages them to practice more, as a beginner artist, I feel like that is something everyone needs to hear.
7:05, I have been saying this since I found out about AI generated images, I saw some AI image producers who complained when I typed it all out instead of referring it to art, and I am glad to see this being a more spread around idea.
Like I get what Robin is trying to say during his rant around 15:40 but the thing is, a LOT of artists make work for people. Most work from the Renaissance was commissioned. Artists have/had patrons who they paint for. A lot of portraits from any period of history were commissioned. Artist today will have people/organizations reach out to them to make work for them. The internet is full of artists who get commissioned by people who like their work and want it. Expression is absolutely a part of making art, but sometimes you have to make expressive art in a way that is popular. Robin mentions how it would be like if someone told him to make content that everyone wants to watch, but that is something that a lot of UA-camrs take into account? Let’s players will play games that are popular, or stop playing games that aren’t getting views, Reddit readers are more likely to revisit subreddits that got them clicks. While expression is a fairly vital part of art, saying that people should ignore market trends or what’s popular or what their audience prefers isn’t really helpful. Idk I feel like I’m not wording this right. Like sure, at the core, expression is important, but if no one is interested in your work, then that is a type of feedback that tells you that you could improve? Again, I get what he is saying, but it feels… naive? Simple? Unrealistic? One of my art professors said that there’s a “market for everything,” but even then, if you don’t make it in a way that makes people want to buy it then it doesn’t matter.
For anyone who is curious, Haute couture is just a fancy way of saying something is made to order based on someone’s measurements rather than premade sizes like you’d find at a regular store. Doesn’t justify spending 6,000 on headwear but good to know they’ll tailor it to my cranium I guess
Had to add my two cents about the monologue in the middle. Honestly, there are ways you can reconcile making art for yourself and making art other people want. You can take some commissions and do some of your own stuff. You can pick the niche and artistic identity you want to have and take commissions that reflect that. You can also use commissions as a means to express yourself and make sure you’re portraying other people’s characters in a way that’s uniquely your own. I personally don’t want to make art my job, and I’m still finding my artistic identity even now, but in terms of the art trades I do with people, making the artwork reflect my own sense of aesthetics is what makes it really enjoyable. I assume most people who commission artists to make art are appreciative of whatever style you're using, because that's what they came to you for.
Re: "AI Art", I'm partial to making a distinction we've never really had to make before between "content" and "art". Current gen AI is fundamentally incapable of making "art" because it lacks intentionality, but that doesn't diminish the aesthetic quality of it as "content". Might've taken that idea from that old PBS Ideas Channel meme "content, arrr!" As an interesting side note, this brings into focus 1. why corporations seem to despise art and 2. why they're over the moon about generative AI. Corporations always wanted predictable, mushy, artless content but the people they paid kept making art because practically any content humans make has some artistic value by definition. Now they can both get rid of labor and produce genuinely, truly artless content like they've always secretly wanted.
15:57 no, no they did not. Most of the greats worked on a commision basis, or struggled all their lives and never saw their art appreciated. Sometimes both!
Lol I just posted something along this line. Like basically every renaissance painting was commissioned. Portraits? Commissioned. Picasso’s Guernica? Commissioned. Eiffel Tower? Commissioned. And sooo many artists did commissions to make a name for themselves.
@@inactivechannel3004 no….? Art was always widespread. I mean if you take an art history class you will learn about the artist who became famous, but there were tons of artists who you never hear about.
I'd love to bring up that how in history most artists get ridiculed throughout their life and then become famous after they've died . Someday someone's going to go through this subreddit and we're going to all look like assholes
You know, i feel like a lot of "delusional artists" are people who see that xyz paintings go for thousands of dollars, but they don't understand WHY a painting would go for that much money.
The sad thing, is that there are many talented artists, who gave up their art, because is totally financially unreliable to invest any time and energy.
I once wrote a short paragraph of fiction inspired by a picture I saw in a group on FB. 1-2 months later, I see the same picture reappear in the group, with the text I wrote copied & pasted over it. People asked OP where the text came from and the OP took all the credit, instead of just admitting they copied it from the comment of another member (me). It didn't bother me personally that much, as I lost no money or social standing on the theft, but it just struck me as quite sad that some people are actually driven to steal & lie just for a few likes on the internet.
7:30 well what they is true, art is a skill that everyone can learn but the rate of which you learn does depend on the person. Bc while everyone has the potential to learn and master art skills doesn’t necessarily mean they have the mindset to come up with their own stuff. Like the creative ability to think outside tye box and come up new and fantastical things just comes from how our minds are programmed. So yes, it can definitely be learned over time it is also fair to say that some people are just born with it and find doing it much easier.
The thing is you can have a Bob Ross right now. One PBS gave away for a charity event is up for auction for 10 million. The bulk of Bob Ross' painting (sans ones given to friends and family or PBS give aways) are crated and will never be sold. Not even displayed just sitting in a storage room forever.
8:45 the problem with that is shipping isn't a flat rate, especially for larger stuff. Shipping from one state to the next one over is easily half the price of shipping from the east coast to the west coast. Not to mention eBay has international transactions. So do we screw over the guy who lives one state over by setting the price according to cross- country rates, or do we screw ourselves over by setting the price according to nearby shipping rates and hoping nobody who lives far away buys it? And then there's the matter of the value of the art. If it costs $50 to ship a $1000 artwork that's one thing. But if it costs that much to ship a $100 piece of art, including the shipping in the price increases the value of the piece on the marketplace by 50%, but it's doing so in a manner that could be considered fraudulent-- the"value" of the piece now includes things that aren't the artwork itself, but rather are seperate services provided by a third party that aren't relevant to the actual monetary value of the piece. Point being, there are legal ramifications of including shipping in the cost of items that could be considered investments.
Wow. Did you just define art in a pretty objective way. Ive never heard a convincing division that I agree with until the AI image argument. Well done to you and the community that thought of it!
15:56 the greatest artists in history totally painted what other people wanted, all the time. painting what you think is cool is more of a modern twist
You shouldn’t underpay either in worry of being called delusional. It depends on what your art is, but if you feel your art is worth more than you charge, just charge the amount you want to charge without worry
You can blame Photoshop for 14:23. They call the image workspace a canvas, so I guess makes people think your drawing surface is a canvas. If I'm not mistaken, a canvas is more a cloth or fabric than paper, kind of like US "paper" money.
That "Heisenburg" looks more like he's about to order 2 Number 9's, a number 9 large, number 6 with extra dip, number 7, 2 number 45's, one with cheese, and a large soda.
10:05 Destoroyah is a Godzilla character from the 1995 movie Godzilla vs Destoroyah he is pretty well known in the Godzilla community, but the fact that it's up for $800.99 is INSANE as you can get an official S.H.Monsterarts godzilla figure for max of $200. The fact that they tried to sell that for 4X the price in crazy to me. sometimes there will be resales up to $400 so that's still 2X the price of resale value, idk why they thought $800.99 was the perfect price.
One of the biggest delusional artist moves it's when you complain and even act rude towards other people because they don't show interested in your art.
I went to a play and they had "art" on display. It was plastic bread tags in the shape of a heart, framed for $100. It literally took 5 minutes, and a $10 frame. They had other ones worth more.
Idc if it looks like a 5 year old drew it, I'd rather have hand drawn art than AI stuff. Sometimes AI art looks cool but I feel like it mostly gets stolen
I own a painting I got from a millionaire's yard sale for $15. I see prints of it for sale all over the internet, but I don't own the rights to the prints. 🤬
Doesn't matter. It could be the original and you could still not own the rights to it. Maybe if it was an older painting with specific paramenters (that you likely wouldn't know), but modern stuff is better protected. I don't see the problem though. You paid 15 dollars for something you wanted. What's the problem of other people liking and having access to it?
I wish I had the half of self confidence of this artists, dayum man I know sometimes it's hard work to create something, but some of this people have abandon COMMON SENSE
I'd take it a step further and argue it's more accurate to call it "procedurally-generated imagery". There's no human intelligence in there, it just analyzes patterns of pixels and what patterns more commonly occur in images associated with certain keywords, and spits back out images with similar patterns based on the keywords it's fed.
"The greatest artist in history didn't paint what people wanted them to, they painted what they wanted." I hate to be the one to break it to you, but a lot of artists DID paint what people wanted, and what would be popular, painting what they wanted on the side. They had patrons, painted to get into some of the most prestigious halls, they DID have jobs. Think of them like artists who do art for books like DnD.
ok so the artist the last guy rants about actually is very similar to how I make my art... the thing is tracing is considered a real tactic to recreating something, in fact I challenge them to go to any high school art class and see what projects they are doing, because 90% chances are it is some sort of tracing or reference art. Tracing (or free hand replication) is, fundamentally, how artists learn how to make art. To tear at someone for that is like saying a musician can't practice famous songs. Specifically if the reference material is a photograph, because you aren't doing connect the dots, you have to actually know how to recreate the effects. For myself, I do this simply because I have a very difficult time coming up with completely original things to draw. I think they would have a freak out if they looked up a video of a speedpaint video because those are very much using clips and fragments as a base to give structure to the image before they go in and add all the detail.
7:05 "steal it" how? As far as i know it's not stealing if you upload it to a public free domain without having any copyright on it. It's like purposefully leaving your wallet on the street and crying if someone takes it.
I feel comfortably correct in stating that probably like 80% of these pieces that look like they come from a website or drop shipped from China for like two to three dollars and the people are trying to sell them for thousands of dollars so they could jump start their crappy e-commerce website saying hey I made $10,000 in one day on this one product and I can teach you to do so for $5,000
You see, my art is shitty, and I’ll gladly admit it’s shitty. And since I know my art is terrible I do free commissions rather than selling it for $500.
about topic for shipping, what i really dont get and hate is a few post on ebay where the item is like 30 bucks, but the shipping is over 2 thousand and its like "do you really expect me not to notice that before i buy or even after i do and not make a case or charge back?"
Some of the greatest artists in history were literally paid to make art that people liked, even if they didn’t like the person or people, because they needed to eat.
Regarding that bark - never underestimate the amount of money people pay for literal 'junk wood.' My dad is 83 and retired. He's bored so he drives up to his childhood home a few miles from the Atlantic Ocean in Virginia where my Uncle lives to visit him a few times a year. He will search the beach and take home a truck load and also trailer full of driftwood. He stains them in his garage. He lives near Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head. So he will go to all the places where other retired people are - but those retired people are rich af. They will pay hundreds of dollars for stained driftwood. The most he's ever been paid is $1,200 for a 22 inch piece. It's actual insanity. And as I'm tying this out I think I'm in the wrong profession.
I do have to say historically, that famous artists did in fact have to paint shit people wanted and not just things used to express themselves. They then had the ability to paint what they wanted as well but like a large portion of them created stuff for the church despite not liking the church because they didnt want to starve. Some had patrons but even then they usually had things they wanted painted too. Like yes people should create art for self expression but we live in capitalism and need to be alive so they shouldnt expect others to want to pay them to just express themselves. Also as a production artist I love making art even if its not for me and not for self expression. Its also fun to use what I can do to help others express themselves. If artists didnt create for other and for money we would have way less amazing stuff especially videogames and other art heavy mediums.
the flaw in something being worth what people are willing to pay is that overpriced art is used for money laundering... not sure how it works online though, maybe they are cleaning money they got from scams
Thank you for the W take on stupid AI shit! And then they be like “you’re gatekeeping🤡🤓” No, just like the rest of actual artists we dedicated years to get better but you feel entitled to call yourself an artist when at best you spent 1 minute *waiting for generator* 🤡 Fuck dude today everyone’s an artist 💀
I think we lost the right to say that AI art isn't art the second we insisted that a mobile made out of preserved chicken skin (real thing; saw it in the Chicago Modern Art Museum) deserved to be on the same level as a Rembrandt oil painting because of the "meaning."
The reason the AI image on deviant art was $10,000 is most likely because it had already been sold on another platform or was on hold and that price was to prevent other people from trying to buy it
Bruh 11:55 is definitely a misfit for this sub. Is it super kitschy? Yes, but no matter how ugly I wouldn't call $15 super overpriced for a handmade piece. Maybe $5-10 would've been more reasonable but $15 ain't "delusional".
Now I feel better as an artist knowing I’m not THAT delusional when it comes to my crappy art…
You’re art is great 😊
@@MisatoBestWoman Do you mean that or are you just messing with me???
Just like me.....just like me fr
All of it.
Did u draw ur pfp? It’s pretty cute!
I suddenly feel more confident about my delusional art.
Same man same
understandable
Same
Me too; even when nobody gives a shit about my art
I appreciate that you acknowledge that some of the art is actually good (I like that rainbowy painting near the start). The prices may not be worth the actual quality, but the artists have potential.
Half of the things on here are amazing to be completely honest. I'm pretty sure for a lot of this stuff at least some thought was put behind it. I would be surprised if it didn't. It doesn't even matter if those thoughts were Mr. Krabs style "money money money" just to make money off of someone and if someone's intention was to scam someone else and they didn't understand that what they created might have genuine value to someone. Art value is totally subjective to any one person and if only they were reasonable enough to at least lower prices on some of those items, I would actually get them or recommend getting them to someone else.
I liked the Shrek drawing. I'm glad the artist did it. Sometimes I watch/like/listen/donate/buy things just to encourage the creator to keep at it.
I love that he's being encoraging and saying "just a few more years" bc it's totally true, a lot of these look exactly like what I used to draw before taking art lessons and improving with practice
Lebrontosaurus is the only actual good art piece in this compilation.
Ong. It’s actually well made
LeBrontosaurus going in for a dunk
Actual advice for struggling artists: it's okay not to "make it" just from art alone. If you need to supplement your income with employed work, do it. If you can find time, ANY time in the day to devote to your craft and talk to likeminded creators and art enjoyers you will eventually pick up some speed.
11:23 The funny thing is, owning an original Bob Ross would actually be a massive flex. I think one estimate was that there are less than 100 originals out in the wild out of the 10000+ he painted in his lifetime. Verified originals coming up in actions are veritable unicorns and can go for 5 figures. The rest are all kept under lock and key by the Bob Ross Inc, who have stated they will not sell a single painting for as long as the incorporation exists.
7:17 A PE teacher I know said "too many kids think only the best get to play". Well put and devastating.
that is just Robin. he destroys idiots in wild rants, whenever they deserve it. but on the other hand, he compliments people for their work and effort and probably gives them more moral support than their entire families might do. he sees gems where us simple meme-consumers see nothing more than dust. lets hope, at least some of the artists in this video watch it and get the boost they need to continue their work and to improve their art.
Annoying how half the posts in this subreddit are sometimes non-artists that'll never understand that what they're showing of an artist's work.... is understandable for its price. Or a non-artist just being a petty bitch.
I'm so glad you're showing *actual* delusional artists from this subreddit.
I am alsoglad that Robin also, instead of Gordan Ramseying them, encourages them to practice more, as a beginner artist, I feel like that is something everyone needs to hear.
7:05, I have been saying this since I found out about AI generated images, I saw some AI image producers who complained when I typed it all out instead of referring it to art, and I am glad to see this being a more spread around idea.
I just call them glorified google image searchers.
Cyriak mention, instant like
where?
@@WallaceBreenFromKentuckyVery start
@@WallaceBreenFromKentucky 0:09
@@palmossi ty i guess i looked over that
@@WallaceBreenFromKentucky :D
5:39 honestly i would buy that if it wasnt for 1000 dollars, its got a nice aesthetic to it
IKR I thought it was really beautiful :(
That smashed bottle is art and being sold for $250? what an absolute joke
@@therunawaykid6523 No, not the bottle art, the timestamp is for the 'ever growing' painting!
Like I get what Robin is trying to say during his rant around 15:40 but the thing is, a LOT of artists make work for people. Most work from the Renaissance was commissioned. Artists have/had patrons who they paint for. A lot of portraits from any period of history were commissioned. Artist today will have people/organizations reach out to them to make work for them. The internet is full of artists who get commissioned by people who like their work and want it. Expression is absolutely a part of making art, but sometimes you have to make expressive art in a way that is popular. Robin mentions how it would be like if someone told him to make content that everyone wants to watch, but that is something that a lot of UA-camrs take into account? Let’s players will play games that are popular, or stop playing games that aren’t getting views, Reddit readers are more likely to revisit subreddits that got them clicks. While expression is a fairly vital part of art, saying that people should ignore market trends or what’s popular or what their audience prefers isn’t really helpful. Idk I feel like I’m not wording this right. Like sure, at the core, expression is important, but if no one is interested in your work, then that is a type of feedback that tells you that you could improve? Again, I get what he is saying, but it feels… naive? Simple? Unrealistic? One of my art professors said that there’s a “market for everything,” but even then, if you don’t make it in a way that makes people want to buy it then it doesn’t matter.
For anyone who is curious, Haute couture is just a fancy way of saying something is made to order based on someone’s measurements rather than premade sizes like you’d find at a regular store. Doesn’t justify spending 6,000 on headwear but good to know they’ll tailor it to my cranium I guess
as a delusional artist, this video is clearly made for me.
Had to add my two cents about the monologue in the middle.
Honestly, there are ways you can reconcile making art for yourself and making art other people want. You can take some commissions and do some of your own stuff. You can pick the niche and artistic identity you want to have and take commissions that reflect that. You can also use commissions as a means to express yourself and make sure you’re portraying other people’s characters in a way that’s uniquely your own.
I personally don’t want to make art my job, and I’m still finding my artistic identity even now, but in terms of the art trades I do with people, making the artwork reflect my own sense of aesthetics is what makes it really enjoyable. I assume most people who commission artists to make art are appreciative of whatever style you're using, because that's what they came to you for.
Re: "AI Art", I'm partial to making a distinction we've never really had to make before between "content" and "art". Current gen AI is fundamentally incapable of making "art" because it lacks intentionality, but that doesn't diminish the aesthetic quality of it as "content". Might've taken that idea from that old PBS Ideas Channel meme "content, arrr!" As an interesting side note, this brings into focus 1. why corporations seem to despise art and 2. why they're over the moon about generative AI. Corporations always wanted predictable, mushy, artless content but the people they paid kept making art because practically any content humans make has some artistic value by definition. Now they can both get rid of labor and produce genuinely, truly artless content like they've always secretly wanted.
15:57 no, no they did not. Most of the greats worked on a commision basis, or struggled all their lives and never saw their art appreciated. Sometimes both!
Lol I just posted something along this line. Like basically every renaissance painting was commissioned. Portraits? Commissioned. Picasso’s Guernica? Commissioned. Eiffel Tower? Commissioned. And sooo many artists did commissions to make a name for themselves.
Wasn't the Mona Lisa a commission?
@@stephaniesheep1147 yes it was!
this was before art was widespread and anyone can do it nowadays unlike before
@@inactivechannel3004 no….? Art was always widespread. I mean if you take an art history class you will learn about the artist who became famous, but there were tons of artists who you never hear about.
I'd love to bring up that how in history most artists get ridiculed throughout their life and then become famous after they've died .
Someday someone's going to go through this subreddit and we're going to all look like assholes
You know, i feel like a lot of "delusional artists" are people who see that xyz paintings go for thousands of dollars, but they don't understand WHY a painting would go for that much money.
A lot of the great artists of all time were only recognized after their lifetimes and they really struggled.
The sad thing, is that there are many talented artists, who gave up their art, because is totally financially unreliable to invest any time and energy.
Blame the capitalists at the top. They want to silence criticism by destroying the artist’s way of life.
AI art is plaguing the actual art industry and it's sickening.
Heavy disagree, but to each their own.
@@silvergalaxy4093 same.
5:48 honestly, that one is so good, sure its pricey, but the art itself is great
I once wrote a short paragraph of fiction inspired by a picture I saw in a group on FB. 1-2 months later, I see the same picture reappear in the group, with the text I wrote copied & pasted over it. People asked OP where the text came from and the OP took all the credit, instead of just admitting they copied it from the comment of another member (me). It didn't bother me personally that much, as I lost no money or social standing on the theft, but it just struck me as quite sad that some people are actually driven to steal & lie just for a few likes on the internet.
7:30 well what they is true, art is a skill that everyone can learn but the rate of which you learn does depend on the person. Bc while everyone has the potential to learn and master art skills doesn’t necessarily mean they have the mindset to come up with their own stuff. Like the creative ability to think outside tye box and come up new and fantastical things just comes from how our minds are programmed. So yes, it can definitely be learned over time it is also fair to say that some people are just born with it and find doing it much easier.
15:50 Oh they definitely did, most of them did commissions for rich folk to earn a living, the ones who didn't just died in motels/streets.
The thing is you can have a Bob Ross right now. One PBS gave away for a charity event is up for auction for 10 million. The bulk of Bob Ross' painting (sans ones given to friends and family or PBS give aways) are crated and will never be sold. Not even displayed just sitting in a storage room forever.
8:45 the problem with that is shipping isn't a flat rate, especially for larger stuff. Shipping from one state to the next one over is easily half the price of shipping from the east coast to the west coast. Not to mention eBay has international transactions. So do we screw over the guy who lives one state over by setting the price according to cross- country rates, or do we screw ourselves over by setting the price according to nearby shipping rates and hoping nobody who lives far away buys it?
And then there's the matter of the value of the art. If it costs $50 to ship a $1000 artwork that's one thing. But if it costs that much to ship a $100 piece of art, including the shipping in the price increases the value of the piece on the marketplace by 50%, but it's doing so in a manner that could be considered fraudulent-- the"value" of the piece now includes things that aren't the artwork itself, but rather are seperate services provided by a third party that aren't relevant to the actual monetary value of the piece. Point being, there are legal ramifications of including shipping in the cost of items that could be considered investments.
Wow. Did you just define art in a pretty objective way. Ive never heard a convincing division that I agree with until the AI image argument. Well done to you and the community that thought of it!
Damn I almost mistook this sub for r/Blender
How did you mistake this as r/blender?
@@jenkathefridge3933 Blender users are a teeny tiny bit delusional
I love what a patron of the arts Robin is. They're very encouraging to several budding artists here.
2:50 unironically looks like a witch doctor's solution to faraday cage the demons out of your head.
I can’t tell what was crazier, the prices, or the art.
Most ridiculous to me is a smashed bottle being sold as art for $250 ridiculous.
9:09 Looks more like Count Chocula with a goatee.
15:56 the greatest artists in history totally painted what other people wanted, all the time. painting what you think is cool is more of a modern twist
I legit don't charge more than $35 for my art lmao. This subreddit is a great reminder that I'm not THAT bad
You shouldn’t underpay either in worry of being called delusional. It depends on what your art is, but if you feel your art is worth more than you charge, just charge the amount you want to charge without worry
We don't even really have AI is the funniest part. The stuff being advertised as AI are just fucking algorithms!
1:56 i was thinking the exact same thing dude, loved the ufo endings
I am terrified but i want it
The first thing you hear after seeing the lebrontosautus is "OwO my God"
A lot of great artists in history who didn't have patrons were poor and only got famous after death.
Look man, I’m all for supporting artists, but this is a subreddit that needed to exist
You can blame Photoshop for 14:23. They call the image workspace a canvas, so I guess makes people think your drawing surface is a canvas. If I'm not mistaken, a canvas is more a cloth or fabric than paper, kind of like US "paper" money.
9:36 this looks like those images of examples what a person sees when having a stroke 😭🤚
It always makes me feel good seeing a zelda thing in a emkay video.
11:22 Sanrio is a big player in the anime scene. They’re known for Hello Kitty, Jewelpet, and Gudetama.
That "Heisenburg" looks more like he's about to order 2 Number 9's, a number 9 large, number 6 with extra dip, number 7, 2 number 45's, one with cheese, and a large soda.
9:19 WAIT HOLD ON IS THAT THAT ONE SCP I THINK?????????
here I am making good art and charging nothing
The sketch vs digital sketch thing might be because the digital sketch is coloured? As a freelance artist, that's all I can think of 🤣
10:05 Destoroyah is a Godzilla character from the 1995 movie Godzilla vs Destoroyah he is pretty well known in the Godzilla community, but the fact that it's up for $800.99 is INSANE as you can get an official S.H.Monsterarts godzilla figure for max of $200. The fact that they tried to sell that for 4X the price in crazy to me.
sometimes there will be resales up to $400 so that's still 2X the price of resale value, idk why they thought $800.99 was the perfect price.
Meanwhile there are unconfident god-level artists who underestimate their own art and price it at something like 10$
Has to be me but i'm def not god level
[5:40] honestly, thats pretty good art, i could see van gogh painting something similar and it being millions.
One of the biggest delusional artist moves it's when you complain and even act rude towards other people because they don't show interested in your art.
I went to a play and they had "art" on display. It was plastic bread tags in the shape of a heart, framed for $100. It literally took 5 minutes, and a $10 frame. They had other ones worth more.
Idc if it looks like a 5 year old drew it, I'd rather have hand drawn art than AI stuff. Sometimes AI art looks cool but I feel like it mostly gets stolen
the painting scares me
I own a painting I got from a millionaire's yard sale for $15. I see prints of it for sale all over the internet, but I don't own the rights to the prints. 🤬
Doesn't matter. It could be the original and you could still not own the rights to it. Maybe if it was an older painting with specific paramenters (that you likely wouldn't know), but modern stuff is better protected. I don't see the problem though. You paid 15 dollars for something you wanted. What's the problem of other people liking and having access to it?
I wish I had the half of self confidence of this artists, dayum man I know sometimes it's hard work to create something, but some of this people have abandon COMMON SENSE
Yeah I agree can’t believe someone is selling a broken bottle as “art” for $250
DeviantArt artists
I'd take it a step further and argue it's more accurate to call it "procedurally-generated imagery". There's no human intelligence in there, it just analyzes patterns of pixels and what patterns more commonly occur in images associated with certain keywords, and spits back out images with similar patterns based on the keywords it's fed.
"The greatest artist in history didn't paint what people wanted them to, they painted what they wanted."
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but a lot of artists DID paint what people wanted, and what would be popular, painting what they wanted on the side. They had patrons, painted to get into some of the most prestigious halls, they DID have jobs. Think of them like artists who do art for books like DnD.
The first one scared the shit out oh me
Heck yeah I love Cyriak
ok so the artist the last guy rants about actually is very similar to how I make my art... the thing is tracing is considered a real tactic to recreating something, in fact I challenge them to go to any high school art class and see what projects they are doing, because 90% chances are it is some sort of tracing or reference art. Tracing (or free hand replication) is, fundamentally, how artists learn how to make art. To tear at someone for that is like saying a musician can't practice famous songs. Specifically if the reference material is a photograph, because you aren't doing connect the dots, you have to actually know how to recreate the effects. For myself, I do this simply because I have a very difficult time coming up with completely original things to draw. I think they would have a freak out if they looked up a video of a speedpaint video because those are very much using clips and fragments as a base to give structure to the image before they go in and add all the detail.
7:54 Time to screenshot this and sell it for $10000+
2:30 Looks like "Gabriel" from The Mandela Catalogue.
7:05 "steal it" how? As far as i know it's not stealing if you upload it to a public free domain without having any copyright on it.
It's like purposefully leaving your wallet on the street and crying if someone takes it.
The drawing of Heisenberg reminded me of RZA for Wu-Tang.
Then I googled a image of RZA, and found out he looks nothing like the drawing… lol
Oh dear God, that first image! Creepy!
I feel comfortably correct in stating that probably like 80% of these pieces that look like they come from a website or drop shipped from China for like two to three dollars and the people are trying to sell them for thousands of dollars so they could jump start their crappy e-commerce website saying hey I made $10,000 in one day on this one product and I can teach you to do so for $5,000
You see, my art is shitty, and I’ll gladly admit it’s shitty. And since I know my art is terrible I do free commissions rather than selling it for $500.
This... Actually makes my clinically insane artworks look good. And my work barely qualify as sane.
"I have no idea how to say that" *proceed to pronounce it correctly*
about topic for shipping, what i really dont get and hate is a few post on ebay where the item is like 30 bucks, but the shipping is over 2 thousand and its like "do you really expect me not to notice that before i buy or even after i do and not make a case or charge back?"
Some of the greatest artists in history were literally paid to make art that people liked, even if they didn’t like the person or people, because they needed to eat.
Dude, I’d want Robin to commission me so badly😭
Regarding that bark - never underestimate the amount of money people pay for literal 'junk wood.' My dad is 83 and retired. He's bored so he drives up to his childhood home a few miles from the Atlantic Ocean in Virginia where my Uncle lives to visit him a few times a year. He will search the beach and take home a truck load and also trailer full of driftwood. He stains them in his garage. He lives near Myrtle Beach and Hilton Head. So he will go to all the places where other retired people are - but those retired people are rich af. They will pay hundreds of dollars for stained driftwood. The most he's ever been paid is $1,200 for a 22 inch piece. It's actual insanity. And as I'm tying this out I think I'm in the wrong profession.
I do have to say historically, that famous artists did in fact have to paint shit people wanted and not just things used to express themselves. They then had the ability to paint what they wanted as well but like a large portion of them created stuff for the church despite not liking the church because they didnt want to starve. Some had patrons but even then they usually had things they wanted painted too.
Like yes people should create art for self expression but we live in capitalism and need to be alive so they shouldnt expect others to want to pay them to just express themselves. Also as a production artist I love making art even if its not for me and not for self expression. Its also fun to use what I can do to help others express themselves. If artists didnt create for other and for money we would have way less amazing stuff especially videogames and other art heavy mediums.
the flaw in something being worth what people are willing to pay is that overpriced art is used for money laundering... not sure how it works online though, maybe they are cleaning money they got from scams
Thank you for the W take on stupid AI shit! And then they be like “you’re gatekeeping🤡🤓”
No, just like the rest of actual artists we dedicated years to get better but you feel entitled to call yourself an artist when at best you spent 1 minute *waiting for generator* 🤡
Fuck dude today everyone’s an artist 💀
I thought I was overpricing my work but now changed my mind.
ai 'art' is just a disrespect to artists, they want respect for something THEY didnt even respect enough to make on THEIR OWN.
Omg that Peter Pan is nightmare fuel
Thank goodness I’m nowhere near this I’m actually so self critical of my art I haven’t devoted any serious time to anything I want to create.
I actually love that cursed sheep art
I sure don’t….
I think we lost the right to say that AI art isn't art the second we insisted that a mobile made out of preserved chicken skin (real thing; saw it in the Chicago Modern Art Museum) deserved to be on the same level as a Rembrandt oil painting because of the "meaning."
People that start doing "art" only with the intention of getting popularity and money shouldn't call themselves "artists" in the first place.
IDEK WHAT TO PUT HERE
Wooooooo! Nightmares!
5:46 this looks so cool tho... It's genuinely cool just not $1,000 cool
The reason the AI image on deviant art was $10,000 is most likely because it had already been sold on another platform or was on hold and that price was to prevent other people from trying to buy it
12:13 Walter Blanco LOL
This reminds me to the great masterpiece of art named "Take the Money and Run".... So simple, straight to the point. ;DDD
14:29 ngl i think despite the price these are the best in the video so far
Bruh 11:55 is definitely a misfit for this sub. Is it super kitschy? Yes, but no matter how ugly I wouldn't call $15 super overpriced for a handmade piece. Maybe $5-10 would've been more reasonable but $15 ain't "delusional".
Huh. Makes me happy that Robin knows who cyriak is. You learn something new every day.
8:11 snapping tool is my best friend.