So in relation to the film we are watching this Tuesday, The Fountainhead, I thought I might talk a bit about Ayn Rand. Back in the day I used to like Ayn Rand. I had a high school government teacher who didn't teach government so much as he taught Ayn Rand and had crazy arguments with students in class about whether or not they should sacrifice themselves for altruism. Many laughs were had.
I eventually decided to read Atlas Shrugged on my own, which is still the longest single book I've ever read (1075 pages of tiny, eye-destroying print). At the time I liked it and took much of what it said at face value. It took a small tree and several filibuster speeches to basically explain that a creator of goods or services should have full rights and control over what he creates and that supply and demand solves everything. The government officials and those who sided with them were portrayed as incompetent and weaselly and the capitalist were portrayed as heroes complete with dramatic rescues and in your face one-liners. Make that several-liners. Actually just go ahead and make it a whole chapter. Every time someone complains about capitalism expect one of Rands author avatars to step up and thoroughly explain to them just how wrong they are and how government should never regulate business and also the cigarettes they smoke just aren't as good as true capitalist made cigarettes. The whole schtick was to beat it into your head that the perfect economy allows those who come up with an idea or product to have full control over it and that those who have money obviously deserve it. Anyone who tried to use money or resources to help the community at large failed miserably and ruined anything. As a kid this concept of egoism over altruism really fit well with my teenage sense of self importance and My Chemical Romance t-shirts.
Later however after I came back to it I realized just how ridiculous Rand was. Her magnum opus was a story about a strawman world where all the people who had successful companies were competent entrepreneurs who had earned it, while the government just wanted to use them. Now in some ways this can apply to reality, but things in Atlas Shrugged were pretty much black and white. In real life people inherit fortunes and companies they haven't earned and don't know how to responsibly handle. In real life if the economy is left alone successful companies aren't the ones who make the best products and earn an honest profit. In real life the successful ones are the companies that manage to get rid of their major competition one way or another and form a monopoly. Then it isn't a matter of everyone buying their product because they are paragons of virtue who produce the best product that money can buy; it's just that they are the only ones selling because no one can compete with their resources. It never really went far in considering business practices which take advantage of it's workers to produce at lower costs. In Rand's straw-world all such companies failed and people just walked out the door out of disgust for such dishonorable behavior unlike our world where people swallow their pride and stay because they need the money to survive.
Rands philosophy has some good ideas, but she also had a habit of treating her opinions as facts. As a result many Randroids today go around taking a philosophy which has some good points and treating it as if it has the answer to everything. Rather than focusing on a system that takes human nature into account, objectivism seems to assume that if everyone could just all adhere to it's principles and live according to the ideal capitalist way then everything would work out. It assumes that instead of a foolproof system we need a system without fools, which sounds really good on a picket sign, but isn't all that practical. That's like when someone comes up with a farfetched plan and you ask them "what if you mess up?" and they respond with "I won't." It's just kinda arrogant to assume that everyone would or should just agree with you in order for things to work.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Bootlegging
Yesterday I got something in the mail that I had ordered off Ebay. It was something I had seen at a convention at a much higher price, but I opted to get it on Ebay for much cheaper. It turns out it was a bootleg version, which I half expected in the first place. All thing said it's not a bad bootleg so I got what I wanted. I've seen some pretty bad bootleg things before and it makes me kinda interested in bootleg things to the extent that they can be pretty darn funny. So let's talk about the iffy business practice of bootlegging.
These guys crack me up. "Robertcop" and "Spaderman" the original characters.There seems to be an art to bootlegging. That art goes something like; if everyone knows your stuff is fake then you might as well make it as hilarious as possible. At least that way someone might buy it for laughs. I've always though Robocop was creepy as shit, but now that he's "Robertcop" I can't stop laughing.
So is it an ethical business practice to sell this stuff? Not really, but it sure is funny.
Now here's something that brings back memories. For those not in the know, Beast wars was a spinoff of Transformers in the 90s. Pictured up top is Optimal Optimus; part gorilla, part tank, part jet, and all badass robot. This was one of the coolest toys I ever owned as a kid if for no other reason than because his arms had spring loaded exploding parts in order to...actually I don't know why. Who cares, it was awesome. So over a decade later they come out with this bootleg version of all the Beast Wars toys I had as a kid. Here we have the "Transfornables" with "Animism Defender." This wasn't even some dark corner of the internet; they had these at BigLots. I guess maybe Hasbro sold the molds to make these? Of maybe these people just don't care really hard. These were long discontinued by Hasbro so it looks like you can get away with counterfeiting anything as long as it's old and nobody's making money off it anyway.
So is it an ethical business practice to sell this stuff? Not really, but it sure is funny.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Keeping up with Technology: 3D Printers
Printed from a 3D printer
I recently started making figurines for fun. Sculpting them out of modeling clay (the clay I used has the creeptastic name "Living Doll" ) you then bake it in the oven and it turns to plastic. They can then be sanded and you can make casts out of them. There are people who make and sell "garage kit," which are limited production figures, often based on popular characters. The are sold in pieces and the buyers build and paint them. It's quite a popular hobby and I was considering making some stuff that I could sell as a kit.
However I keep thinking about 3D printers. I mean hell, they are pretty cool. It sure would suck to take the time to learn a new skill such as figure modeling and then have technology make it obsolete. If anyone could make a 3D model and print it then I would be hard pressed to find it worth the time to sculpt something and cast it when I could just make it on the computer and print it much quicker and easier. They can print in full color too; the 4 color process ink is mixed in with the plastic. Sure it's expensive to own one but it's becoming more and more practical. There are services that you can upload a model to and print from. Heck you can buy one for $1600.
Kickstarter
For those who haven't heard of it Kickstarter is a website where people can post a request for donations. Mainly used for artistic projects, kickstarter allows a creator to reach out to their audience directly and ask for donations, without having to go though a publisher. As much as I dislike applying Darwinism to things that aren't evolution, I think in this case it shows that the projects that people are interested in and want to buy are the ones that get the most funding.
Take this project for example. Double Fine Adventure is a point and click adventure style computer game. The Point and Click genre has been in decline in recent years, despite having a large community of fans. Publishers seem to think that those kind of games won't sell, so Double Fine Productions, which includes some of the founding fathers of the genre, decided to start a fundraiser for their project. Setting out to acquire $400 000 to develop the game, they gathered $3,336,371 as of this writing. They are video documenting the production of the game and gaining lots of publicity. It shows that reaching out to the fans directly is sometimes a better option than going to publishers who will tell you what you're doing will never sell.
Take this project for example. Double Fine Adventure is a point and click adventure style computer game. The Point and Click genre has been in decline in recent years, despite having a large community of fans. Publishers seem to think that those kind of games won't sell, so Double Fine Productions, which includes some of the founding fathers of the genre, decided to start a fundraiser for their project. Setting out to acquire $400 000 to develop the game, they gathered $3,336,371 as of this writing. They are video documenting the production of the game and gaining lots of publicity. It shows that reaching out to the fans directly is sometimes a better option than going to publishers who will tell you what you're doing will never sell.
Friday, April 13, 2012
When Businesses Make People Mad
I guess there's good reason for people to for LLC's and Companies for a variety of reasons. The "limited liability" part of a limited liability company sounds pretty good to a lot of people. Some companies need it too, they just can't stop pissing people off. Now this doesn't mean that the executives aren't hated too when a company angers it's customers, it just means that they aren't the one's being sued. Some of them need it too; their goals to make money seem to either not take customer feelings into considerations, or else they just don't care.
Now I could ramble about Wallmart or some other company that people hiss at, but instead I'm gonna talk about video games. I don't even play 'em much these days but these stories still make me want to not buy anything from them ever.
Electronic Arts is a video game company that was voted the most hated company in America by online voters, beating out Wallmart, Bank of America, and all those other guys people love to hate. While some of the other companies on the list are cause more actual harm, EA has taken the number one spot by being the most underhanded toward it's customers. EA was not just content with buying other successful video game producing studios and using them to produce half finished games at full price under a popular name, or even working their employees over 100 hours a week with no overtime. No they are much more creative than that.
They started secretly including software in their games that installs a rootkit (a type of program designed to alter a computer stealthily, almost always malicious) on the users computer. This rootkit limits the number of installs of the game to 3. This means that if you reformat your computer, or install updates, or the game itself messes up and you need to install it, you can only do it three times. Supposedly this deters piracy, however it affects customers more than pirates. Most of the games being pirated are games that have yet to be officially released and pirated copies do not contain the rootkit anyway, making the pirated copies more appealing. The software not only violates the rights of computer users to know what is being installed on their machine and makes their full priced game purchase about as effective as a rental, but the program can actually block important programs from running. Dick move guys.
Besides EA, Capcom, the company responsible for Street Fighter and Megaman, among many others is using sneaky tactics to squeeze money out of it's customers. In the recent Street Fighter vs Tekken, the game a huge chunk of characters that are included on the disk are only accessible by paying for "downloadable content." DLC is common because it allows developers to make additions to the game later, and keep the fan community interested long after the games initial release. DLC is supposed to be new content however, and Capcom hid the fact that the content was already on the disk, but hackers figured out what was actually there. So gamers are having to pay to use something they already own. Imagine buying a car with power windows. locks, and a moon roof, but you couldn't use any of it until you went back to the dealer and paid an additional fee just to have them flip a switch. Then if you sold it the next guy would have to pay too.
Now I could ramble about Wallmart or some other company that people hiss at, but instead I'm gonna talk about video games. I don't even play 'em much these days but these stories still make me want to not buy anything from them ever.
Electronic Arts is a video game company that was voted the most hated company in America by online voters, beating out Wallmart, Bank of America, and all those other guys people love to hate. While some of the other companies on the list are cause more actual harm, EA has taken the number one spot by being the most underhanded toward it's customers. EA was not just content with buying other successful video game producing studios and using them to produce half finished games at full price under a popular name, or even working their employees over 100 hours a week with no overtime. No they are much more creative than that.
They started secretly including software in their games that installs a rootkit (a type of program designed to alter a computer stealthily, almost always malicious) on the users computer. This rootkit limits the number of installs of the game to 3. This means that if you reformat your computer, or install updates, or the game itself messes up and you need to install it, you can only do it three times. Supposedly this deters piracy, however it affects customers more than pirates. Most of the games being pirated are games that have yet to be officially released and pirated copies do not contain the rootkit anyway, making the pirated copies more appealing. The software not only violates the rights of computer users to know what is being installed on their machine and makes their full priced game purchase about as effective as a rental, but the program can actually block important programs from running. Dick move guys.
Besides EA, Capcom, the company responsible for Street Fighter and Megaman, among many others is using sneaky tactics to squeeze money out of it's customers. In the recent Street Fighter vs Tekken, the game a huge chunk of characters that are included on the disk are only accessible by paying for "downloadable content." DLC is common because it allows developers to make additions to the game later, and keep the fan community interested long after the games initial release. DLC is supposed to be new content however, and Capcom hid the fact that the content was already on the disk, but hackers figured out what was actually there. So gamers are having to pay to use something they already own. Imagine buying a car with power windows. locks, and a moon roof, but you couldn't use any of it until you went back to the dealer and paid an additional fee just to have them flip a switch. Then if you sold it the next guy would have to pay too.
Selling Stuff at Conventions
Last weekend I went to the Middle Tennessee Anime Convention. There were a bunch of people there with artists tables set up selling stuff, as well as merchants in the dealer room.
Jordan and Fowler got a table in artists alley to sell their pictures. Curiously in the application for the table the rules said that no more than 20% of your work could be fanart, yet at the con itself more 80% of everyone's stuff was fanart. I guess it's so when you fill out the paperwork they have proof that you agreed to that, so if someone did try to claim copyright infringement they wouldn't be held accountable. None of the staff particularly cares about it though, they were more concerned with keeping people from hitting each other with wooden swords and congregating in front of escalators.
Think of the dealer room like a flea market that only sells anime stuff, Japanese food, costumes, and swords.
I had talked to one guy who was selling a bunch of swords, who was angry at the other merchants for selling swords and such that were from anime, thus copyright infringement. He seemed to be taking the moral high ground and refusing to sell anime stuff, despite the fact that everyone else was doing so and nobody cared. I don't know if it was really copyright infringement, or if he was just mad that nobody was buying his swords. Some of them were actual licensed merchandise, and others were just vague knock offs. The franchises that the stuff was based off of was well known, so my normal issue with copyright infringement doesn't really apply. No one is gonna think these guys are selling original material, then just want replicas of swords and whatnot from their favorite shows.
From a business standpoint it seems to be a fun place to sell your stuff, but how profitable it really is though. With the cost of the table space, prints, and hotel/travel expenses some of the artist in the alley pay I wonder how much it's really worth it for them to sell there. We had the luxury of living nearby so my friends really only had to pay for the table and prints, but others were coming from out of state. The more internet famous artists probably saw a lot of business, as did the ones who had lot's of fanart. Still you have to wonder whether the three days they spent selling stuff there was more than a minimum wage job. At $7.50 an hour for the if you worked for 12 hour for three days you would make $270 before taxes. With the cost of the table and prints/materials you would probably have to make over $350 dollars to make it worthwhile. If I ever sell there I'm gonna make sure to sell a bunch of fanart of whatever is popular at the time, whether I actually like it or not. Of course the goal isn't necessarily always to make money. You can also have a lot of fun, get some fans, and have some good conversations while selling your work there so.
Jordan and Fowler got a table in artists alley to sell their pictures. Curiously in the application for the table the rules said that no more than 20% of your work could be fanart, yet at the con itself more 80% of everyone's stuff was fanart. I guess it's so when you fill out the paperwork they have proof that you agreed to that, so if someone did try to claim copyright infringement they wouldn't be held accountable. None of the staff particularly cares about it though, they were more concerned with keeping people from hitting each other with wooden swords and congregating in front of escalators.
Think of the dealer room like a flea market that only sells anime stuff, Japanese food, costumes, and swords.
I had talked to one guy who was selling a bunch of swords, who was angry at the other merchants for selling swords and such that were from anime, thus copyright infringement. He seemed to be taking the moral high ground and refusing to sell anime stuff, despite the fact that everyone else was doing so and nobody cared. I don't know if it was really copyright infringement, or if he was just mad that nobody was buying his swords. Some of them were actual licensed merchandise, and others were just vague knock offs. The franchises that the stuff was based off of was well known, so my normal issue with copyright infringement doesn't really apply. No one is gonna think these guys are selling original material, then just want replicas of swords and whatnot from their favorite shows.
From a business standpoint it seems to be a fun place to sell your stuff, but how profitable it really is though. With the cost of the table space, prints, and hotel/travel expenses some of the artist in the alley pay I wonder how much it's really worth it for them to sell there. We had the luxury of living nearby so my friends really only had to pay for the table and prints, but others were coming from out of state. The more internet famous artists probably saw a lot of business, as did the ones who had lot's of fanart. Still you have to wonder whether the three days they spent selling stuff there was more than a minimum wage job. At $7.50 an hour for the if you worked for 12 hour for three days you would make $270 before taxes. With the cost of the table and prints/materials you would probably have to make over $350 dollars to make it worthwhile. If I ever sell there I'm gonna make sure to sell a bunch of fanart of whatever is popular at the time, whether I actually like it or not. Of course the goal isn't necessarily always to make money. You can also have a lot of fun, get some fans, and have some good conversations while selling your work there so.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Gig Posters
One thing in the world of poster design that bugs me got brought up in the last class. Often bands will make posters using imagery from other works that they do not own the rights to. These guys are usually small time and nobody really gets to upset about it, but occasionally big name bands will do it too. As I've probably made clear I don't much like this kind of thing. If you are going to make something derivative from something else it had better be pretty different from the original.
Band members are not always designers though. So often don't really consider that they are ripping off someone's work when they grab imagery, or else they just don't care. Now this might seem like a trivial thing to a band. After all if they can play cover songs at a concert they why not have a 'cover poster' of sorts? Well it goes back to recognizability. If you cover a popular song or if you say "this next one is a cover of X" then you make it clear that you are borrowing something. Unless you put a disclaimer or something at the bottom of the poster then people looking at it probably won't know where it came from. If bands actually did that; had a footnote that said "imagery from so-and-so" then maybe that would be alright. Heck it would probably be great publicity for the artist.
Usually thought it's stuff that nobody cares about that gets used on band posters. A band might need a poster ASAP and have no cash or time to spare making something legit. What's more it's kind of a popular thing to do for a gig poster, so people pretty much expect it anyway. And stuff's in the public domain right? These are called excuses. If a band really wants a poster to promote their event then just hire an illustrator. It doesn't even have to be a serious thing, they can just ask a friend who draws or uses Photoshop if he would do it for twenty bucks. Small time bands should know how hard it can be for up and coming artists to get a job, so why not just support an up and coming artist? There are plenty out there who are as desperate to eat as the band is to get a poster up the night before a concert.
And in my opinion some of the best gig posters are illustrated ones. Collages of retro stuff or reused images may look cool, but an illustrated poster brings something unique to the band's image. Later if they make it big they can reuse and resell these posters without worrying about some dude crying copyright infringement. Provided that they buy the rights from the artist of course.
Lastly here's a book full of cool illustrated gig posters. Click on the preview to see some awesome illustrations.
Gig Posters Volume 1.
Band members are not always designers though. So often don't really consider that they are ripping off someone's work when they grab imagery, or else they just don't care. Now this might seem like a trivial thing to a band. After all if they can play cover songs at a concert they why not have a 'cover poster' of sorts? Well it goes back to recognizability. If you cover a popular song or if you say "this next one is a cover of X" then you make it clear that you are borrowing something. Unless you put a disclaimer or something at the bottom of the poster then people looking at it probably won't know where it came from. If bands actually did that; had a footnote that said "imagery from so-and-so" then maybe that would be alright. Heck it would probably be great publicity for the artist.
Usually thought it's stuff that nobody cares about that gets used on band posters. A band might need a poster ASAP and have no cash or time to spare making something legit. What's more it's kind of a popular thing to do for a gig poster, so people pretty much expect it anyway. And stuff's in the public domain right? These are called excuses. If a band really wants a poster to promote their event then just hire an illustrator. It doesn't even have to be a serious thing, they can just ask a friend who draws or uses Photoshop if he would do it for twenty bucks. Small time bands should know how hard it can be for up and coming artists to get a job, so why not just support an up and coming artist? There are plenty out there who are as desperate to eat as the band is to get a poster up the night before a concert.
And in my opinion some of the best gig posters are illustrated ones. Collages of retro stuff or reused images may look cool, but an illustrated poster brings something unique to the band's image. Later if they make it big they can reuse and resell these posters without worrying about some dude crying copyright infringement. Provided that they buy the rights from the artist of course.
Lastly here's a book full of cool illustrated gig posters. Click on the preview to see some awesome illustrations.
Gig Posters Volume 1.
Inspiration or Rip-off? Rules to Consider
Looking at the examples comparing and contrasting stolen/similar work made me want to put down some rules that I consider when deciding whether something is a rip-off or not.
1. Was this made for a profit? If the derivative work was made and sold or then it whether it is a rip-off of another work or not should be considered. If some dude just made it for fun or practice then it doesn't really matter whether it is a rip-off or not. People can do what they want in their free time. Getting mad about it would be like trying to stop people from singing karaoke.
2. Does the derivative work contain actual imagery from the original (not even redrawn or anything)? If so then it is a total rip-off. If it's stuff in the public domain then it might be okay from a legal standpoint, but it is just not ethical in my opinion. Only if the original creators permission is obtained does that make it okay. Stock imagery and textures are up for grabs in a collage if the poster of the content gives permission, but randomly scouring the internet with google and taking whatever you find is not cool.
3. If they have the same idea of main look, then is it possible that two people could have come up with it? Some ideas are just archetypical. They get reused and explored so often that it's impossible to say that you came up with it in the first place. Anything with eyes as the main theme has likely been done, so as long as you aren't doing something that breaks rule #1 then it's probably okay.
4. If it is a parody or Homage then is it borrowing from something well known? This is hard to gauge, but if the work is referencing something obscure then the possibility that it could be mistaken for original work rises and the more likely it is to become a rip-off.
5. If it is for a school project then what is it being used for and how it it being used? This one's more general. School projects fall under the theoretical assumption that in the real world the student would have permission to use the imagery. After all you can't expect a student to go out and hire a photographer for an ad project. A real world situation would have a budget, but trying to make students buy rights to everything would just make it impossible to learn and keep them from exploring ideas. Just make sure to consider how it is used. For example taking a photo from the internet and using it in a magazine ad project is okay, but taking the same photo and turning it in to a photo class is not. Common sense really. Just don't try to sell schoolwork that would be plagiarism in the real world.
1. Was this made for a profit? If the derivative work was made and sold or then it whether it is a rip-off of another work or not should be considered. If some dude just made it for fun or practice then it doesn't really matter whether it is a rip-off or not. People can do what they want in their free time. Getting mad about it would be like trying to stop people from singing karaoke.
2. Does the derivative work contain actual imagery from the original (not even redrawn or anything)? If so then it is a total rip-off. If it's stuff in the public domain then it might be okay from a legal standpoint, but it is just not ethical in my opinion. Only if the original creators permission is obtained does that make it okay. Stock imagery and textures are up for grabs in a collage if the poster of the content gives permission, but randomly scouring the internet with google and taking whatever you find is not cool.
3. If they have the same idea of main look, then is it possible that two people could have come up with it? Some ideas are just archetypical. They get reused and explored so often that it's impossible to say that you came up with it in the first place. Anything with eyes as the main theme has likely been done, so as long as you aren't doing something that breaks rule #1 then it's probably okay.
4. If it is a parody or Homage then is it borrowing from something well known? This is hard to gauge, but if the work is referencing something obscure then the possibility that it could be mistaken for original work rises and the more likely it is to become a rip-off.
5. If it is for a school project then what is it being used for and how it it being used? This one's more general. School projects fall under the theoretical assumption that in the real world the student would have permission to use the imagery. After all you can't expect a student to go out and hire a photographer for an ad project. A real world situation would have a budget, but trying to make students buy rights to everything would just make it impossible to learn and keep them from exploring ideas. Just make sure to consider how it is used. For example taking a photo from the internet and using it in a magazine ad project is okay, but taking the same photo and turning it in to a photo class is not. Common sense really. Just don't try to sell schoolwork that would be plagiarism in the real world.
Saturday, March 24, 2012
The Most Important Part of a Business
The list of things to obtain and accomplish before starting a small business can be long and complex, covering everything from filling out acknowledgement of existence forms to health benefits for workers. It's time to start talking about the most important part of running a business. The one thing that is by far the most important thing possible to running a business. That's right; buying a nice printer.
Things to consider when buying printers include: what is it's intended purpose, how much are you willing to spend, and where you are going to put it. If you need to be printing a bunch of business documents all them time, from multiple computers, then you may want to consider a office printer with a touch screen like the ones at Fedex Kinkos for a few thousand dollars. The behemoths of office printing offer fancy printing options such as double sided printing, ability to print on heavy paper stock, bulk copying, gloss coatings, and sometimes even binding options. Cheaper alternatives include the fancier desktop printers that generally go for $300 dollars and up. These offer you almost the same quality as the large ones but with less paper handling options and paper trays. On the other hand you might be a traveling business, in which case you can't very well lug one of those around. Except that I am totally planning to put a hugeass printer in an RV and hauling it around. But don't be like me; I'm not right in the head. Instead go for a nice portable printer. There are a bunch of portable printers out there that are made for businessmen on the go that are about the size of a briefcase. Also useful for providing clients on the spot prints if you are a freelance illustrator. Not the best if you are gonna do a lot of stuff though.
Another option is renting a printer from a business like RJ Young. They will repair and unjank your printer for you. The downside is that it can end up being a costly service in the long run, but a larger business may be fine with paying the fees to keep guaranteed support.
Things to consider when buying printers include: what is it's intended purpose, how much are you willing to spend, and where you are going to put it. If you need to be printing a bunch of business documents all them time, from multiple computers, then you may want to consider a office printer with a touch screen like the ones at Fedex Kinkos for a few thousand dollars. The behemoths of office printing offer fancy printing options such as double sided printing, ability to print on heavy paper stock, bulk copying, gloss coatings, and sometimes even binding options. Cheaper alternatives include the fancier desktop printers that generally go for $300 dollars and up. These offer you almost the same quality as the large ones but with less paper handling options and paper trays. On the other hand you might be a traveling business, in which case you can't very well lug one of those around. Except that I am totally planning to put a hugeass printer in an RV and hauling it around. But don't be like me; I'm not right in the head. Instead go for a nice portable printer. There are a bunch of portable printers out there that are made for businessmen on the go that are about the size of a briefcase. Also useful for providing clients on the spot prints if you are a freelance illustrator. Not the best if you are gonna do a lot of stuff though.
Another option is renting a printer from a business like RJ Young. They will repair and unjank your printer for you. The downside is that it can end up being a costly service in the long run, but a larger business may be fine with paying the fees to keep guaranteed support.
Goofy Businesses
In preparation for making a mock business for class I started looking at ideas for businesses. Ideally I would like to use the business I would like to one day start with Jordon; Chickenworks, an Illustration Studio. In the event that we can't do the same business I will probably come up with something completely wacky. I took a look at some lists of weird businesses and found the following gems.
Turtle Transit is a business that will take a vehicle and turn it an advertising vehicle. They will make your car look completely like a pig. With wheels.
CLOO is a phone app that gives you access to a network of residential bathroom hosts. Designed for people walking around the city who are in need of a nearby toilet, this company offers a service where you can use your gps to locate CLOO hosts nearby and send a request to use their john. If they accept then a fee of about two bucks is transferred to the hosts account through the service.
Shitsenders.com is a business that will mail your choice of cow, elephant, or gorilla poop to an address of your choice. Shitsenders keeps you anonymous so that you can exact your petty revenge on whoever your diabolic wrath falls on. They also claim no liability for sending your ex-boss a box of poop.
Turtle Transit is a business that will take a vehicle and turn it an advertising vehicle. They will make your car look completely like a pig. With wheels.
CLOO is a phone app that gives you access to a network of residential bathroom hosts. Designed for people walking around the city who are in need of a nearby toilet, this company offers a service where you can use your gps to locate CLOO hosts nearby and send a request to use their john. If they accept then a fee of about two bucks is transferred to the hosts account through the service.
I'll spare you the image I was going to put for this one.
Shitsenders.com is a business that will mail your choice of cow, elephant, or gorilla poop to an address of your choice. Shitsenders keeps you anonymous so that you can exact your petty revenge on whoever your diabolic wrath falls on. They also claim no liability for sending your ex-boss a box of poop.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Tax Returns.
One of the most loathed parts of employment and business is when it comes time for tax returns. Maybe some people hate having to fill out forms to ask for a portion of their money back from the govenment. Personally I just hate filling out forms. Something about being quizzed by a sheet of paper that determines something important just bothers me. I think it's because you can't just ask the paper questions, so it's up to you to fill it out right, or seek out someone who maybe knows how to go about it, but you don't really know if they know or if they just think they know. I don't know. Know.
But as the deadline for tax returns draws closer and I start to begrudgingly think about filling out those awful papers that I should be happy to fill out because they give me money I remember that this is related to business practices.
When going to school or owning a business there are things you can write off as related expenses that they will actually reimburse you for. It's like they are paying you to just to get off your butt. I know people that run their own businesses that can write of things that are vaguely related and get money back for it. As a student I have written off school expenses and gotten reimbursed for it. I bought a computer and reported it as an educational expense because I am a graphic design student and a digital illustrator. I got back enough to buy another computer. So I bought another computer and did the same thing. Then I had enough to buy a third computer. Instead of just creating a chain of quasi-free computers I just put it in the bank, but you get the idea. Save all your receipts for art supplies and everything. I think they are counting on people not bothering to look into it, which works out great for people who do.
But as the deadline for tax returns draws closer and I start to begrudgingly think about filling out those awful papers that I should be happy to fill out because they give me money I remember that this is related to business practices.
When going to school or owning a business there are things you can write off as related expenses that they will actually reimburse you for. It's like they are paying you to just to get off your butt. I know people that run their own businesses that can write of things that are vaguely related and get money back for it. As a student I have written off school expenses and gotten reimbursed for it. I bought a computer and reported it as an educational expense because I am a graphic design student and a digital illustrator. I got back enough to buy another computer. So I bought another computer and did the same thing. Then I had enough to buy a third computer. Instead of just creating a chain of quasi-free computers I just put it in the bank, but you get the idea. Save all your receipts for art supplies and everything. I think they are counting on people not bothering to look into it, which works out great for people who do.
Walking the Walk
In high school there was term that got thrown around a lot. A poser is someone who pretends to be someone they are not in order to stand out, fit in, or generally make themselves look cooler. If you thought this behavior was limited to high schools then you were probably very disappointed when you started college. Even in a "professional" office environment these people exist. Right now they are existing about as hard as you can possibly exist, which is to say that you'll never be rid of them.
So if a résumé is a place where you can talk up your best qualities and experience while omitting any unnecessary negativity you can imagine that some people like to talk as if they are a lot more qualified than they really are. These people can end up getting jobs that they shouldn't because people don't bother to look into their claims. We all like to make people think we are better than we really are, but when it comes to getting a job boasting too much can cause serious trouble.When you obtain a design position and it is revealed that you don't know what CMYK is there is going to be some backpedaling. Often the braggarts end up getting jobs that don't really require that much expertise anyway, or the employer simply doesn't care and just picked the best looking chore boy. Other times someone unqualified gets put in charge of something important.
One story that was kinda shocking was the story of how a woman in charge of government information got her job with a bogus degree. Laura L. Callahan got a job as the Department of Homeland Security's deputy chief information officer in 2003. She was very proud of her PHD and insisted on being called Doctor and was generally a haughty ass about it by doing things like firing people for not understanding every word of her colorful vocabulary.
Well one employee had his suspicions when she mentioned that she got her degree at Hamilton University. Not the school in New York that produces Vice Presidents and Secretaries of State; that would be Hamilton College. Hamilton University is a church that believes that all education is equal and sells you a degree if you can pass an open book exam. Also they will happily backdate your fake degree for you. So yeah, there's that. She resigned after the investigation. Did I mention that before that she was the Senior IT manager at the White House and was involved in an incident where valuable information was lost due to "a bug?"
While it's nice to talk up you abilities and whatnot, it's important to shop for shoes that you are going to grow into. If the position you are seeking requires a little more than you have done in the past, but you feel like you can learn on the job without becoming a liability, then sure go for it. Just don't act like you are qualified when you aren't even close. To quote some goofy cartoon surfer: "don't write a check your tush can't cash."
Here's some more outlandish résumé charlatans.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Digital art seems to get plagiarized a lot....
I was recently at an art competition award show in which one of the winning pieces was a stolen image. One of the illustrations, was taken from copyrighted video game concept art owned by a large entertainment company and a couple of Photoshop filters were applied to it. A guy I knew recognized it and blew the whistle after the show. It wasn't a small competition either. All I could think was "how stupid do you have to be to think you could get away with this?" I also probably said it out loud a dozen times or so.
A digital artist I follow had a similar run in when a high school girl entered one of her pictures in a contest to win a $10,000 scholarship. She was caught and fans of the artist brought it to light. The artist herself though was nice about it and after all was said and done asked people not to blacklist her, since she ended up being removed from the competition and the award was given to someone else. Here's her journal entry about it.
Furthermore as a popular artist her work is all over the internet, and sometimes people will actually accuse her of stealing her own work. The silly things people do.
That kind of thing really bothers me. I don't mind when someone wants to paint fanart of a copyrighted character or a famous person and sell it because the artist isn't taking claim for creating the idea, they are just making something based on it. They are producing a whole new thing. So long as they don't try to claim they came up with the material I see no real harm in selling fanart in small quantities. I mean all those airbrush-shirt people can do it, and I don't see how Warner Brothers is going to lose out just because some dude sells a cheap t-shirt with some lobotomized versions of Loony Tunes painted on. But I digress.
As a digital painter I spend countless hours drawing and painting, and can't stand to see someone take someone else's work and run some bs filters on it, or collage it into some crap that barely qualifies as a collage and fit's more in line with "I put hats and mustaches on it and think it's cute." What's worse is when you give no credit to the artists you take it from. Worse still is when you claim you made it and enter it in a competition. Being a digital artist I hear about computer based work get stolen a lot. Because of the nature of digital work it's hard to tell when it's stolen because google ganking a picture and printing something out takes little effort and is impossible to spot a counterfeit unless you already know the source. Because y'know it's not an oil painting or something which would have to be painstakingly copied to pass inspection.
I suppose the advantage the internet affords of getting alot of exposure for your work also means higher risk of art theft, be people really should knock it off. Or rather stop making knock offs. Something like that.
A digital artist I follow had a similar run in when a high school girl entered one of her pictures in a contest to win a $10,000 scholarship. She was caught and fans of the artist brought it to light. The artist herself though was nice about it and after all was said and done asked people not to blacklist her, since she ended up being removed from the competition and the award was given to someone else. Here's her journal entry about it.
Furthermore as a popular artist her work is all over the internet, and sometimes people will actually accuse her of stealing her own work. The silly things people do.
That kind of thing really bothers me. I don't mind when someone wants to paint fanart of a copyrighted character or a famous person and sell it because the artist isn't taking claim for creating the idea, they are just making something based on it. They are producing a whole new thing. So long as they don't try to claim they came up with the material I see no real harm in selling fanart in small quantities. I mean all those airbrush-shirt people can do it, and I don't see how Warner Brothers is going to lose out just because some dude sells a cheap t-shirt with some lobotomized versions of Loony Tunes painted on. But I digress.
As a digital painter I spend countless hours drawing and painting, and can't stand to see someone take someone else's work and run some bs filters on it, or collage it into some crap that barely qualifies as a collage and fit's more in line with "I put hats and mustaches on it and think it's cute." What's worse is when you give no credit to the artists you take it from. Worse still is when you claim you made it and enter it in a competition. Being a digital artist I hear about computer based work get stolen a lot. Because of the nature of digital work it's hard to tell when it's stolen because google ganking a picture and printing something out takes little effort and is impossible to spot a counterfeit unless you already know the source. Because y'know it's not an oil painting or something which would have to be painstakingly copied to pass inspection.
I suppose the advantage the internet affords of getting alot of exposure for your work also means higher risk of art theft, be people really should knock it off. Or rather stop making knock offs. Something like that.
Getting the Job at All Costs
The whole point of writing a résumé and building a portfolio is to get your name out there and get hired. Some people don't like to take such a passive approach to advertising themselves. Here's a couple people who will stop at nothing to land the job they are gunning for:
Peter Grosz and T.J. Jagodowski, The two guys from the Sonic drive through commercials had a job doing said advertisements for eight years. The improv comedy skits were popular enough to have then run for nearly a decade, but Sonic's new management decided to end the commercials.
The two decided the show running and continued making drive though car style videos and putting them on youtube getting a bunch of attention from fans in the hoped pf getting their jobs back. They even made this video where they supposedly call the CEO in a comedy routine to get rehired.
Effectiveness? They have a lot of fans and now a lot of publicity. If sonic won't hire them someone else probably will. The story.
David Schwartz wanted to become a mental health counselor. He attended Webster Universities counseling program where he was well on his way to becoming one. Problem is that the school didn't think he was up for the job. They said he lacked the ability to empathize with others necessary to be a counselor, and kicked him out of the program. Dead set on pursuing counseling (and not the kind he should have been pursuing) Schwartz decided to get an attorney and hold a publicity stunt which he called an "empathy workshop."
The event was to be held at the Saint Louis Zoo at the polar bear exhibit, which unfortunately bears no bears after the last one died in 2009. Soooo he was going to hold a workshop where he voiced how sad he was over the loss of the bear. The zoo called shenanigans on him and asked him not to go through with it because they don't want some dude gathering a bunch of people and causing a scene on their property. His lawyer then released a note that said Schwartz had cancelled the workshop because he empathized with the concern for interfering with the "zoo visitor experience" and that perhaps his client was empathetic after all. Yeah. Effectiveness? Remains to be seen but the whole thing seems a little stiff. The story.
Peter Grosz and T.J. Jagodowski, The two guys from the Sonic drive through commercials had a job doing said advertisements for eight years. The improv comedy skits were popular enough to have then run for nearly a decade, but Sonic's new management decided to end the commercials.
The two decided the show running and continued making drive though car style videos and putting them on youtube getting a bunch of attention from fans in the hoped pf getting their jobs back. They even made this video where they supposedly call the CEO in a comedy routine to get rehired.
Effectiveness? They have a lot of fans and now a lot of publicity. If sonic won't hire them someone else probably will. The story.
David Schwartz wanted to become a mental health counselor. He attended Webster Universities counseling program where he was well on his way to becoming one. Problem is that the school didn't think he was up for the job. They said he lacked the ability to empathize with others necessary to be a counselor, and kicked him out of the program. Dead set on pursuing counseling (and not the kind he should have been pursuing) Schwartz decided to get an attorney and hold a publicity stunt which he called an "empathy workshop."
The event was to be held at the Saint Louis Zoo at the polar bear exhibit, which unfortunately bears no bears after the last one died in 2009. Soooo he was going to hold a workshop where he voiced how sad he was over the loss of the bear. The zoo called shenanigans on him and asked him not to go through with it because they don't want some dude gathering a bunch of people and causing a scene on their property. His lawyer then released a note that said Schwartz had cancelled the workshop because he empathized with the concern for interfering with the "zoo visitor experience" and that perhaps his client was empathetic after all. Yeah. Effectiveness? Remains to be seen but the whole thing seems a little stiff. The story.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Résumé Awards
With the Student ADDY awards coming up, and several students in the class who won including myself, I think it would be appropriate to consider awards and honors for a résumé. It makes a great impression to the reviewer when you show them that you have accomplished things. It show that you are more than your education, which is what reviewers are looking for. They want to so separate real candidates from those who are all talk.
Listing awards from contests and achievements in the field of the job is an obvious choice to include. If you don't have anything that relates to the job directly you could include achievements that show your character and commitment, such as becoming an Eagle Scout, or joining Business Professionals of America. Be sure to make them relevant to job seeking at least. Underwater yodeling contests and other such stuff don't really help all that much, however impressive they may be. I remember one résumé accomplishment one guy listed was something like "called in a guy to make balloon animals at previous job." Also listing too many minor awards can make you look like you're overcompensating for inexperience.
On a lighter note here's a site dedicated to giving people an award for dying in incredibly stupid ways. I would not recommend listing it if you ever receive one as you will be dead and no longer in need of a résumé. I would also give them an award for their terrible looking and hard to navigate site.
Listing awards from contests and achievements in the field of the job is an obvious choice to include. If you don't have anything that relates to the job directly you could include achievements that show your character and commitment, such as becoming an Eagle Scout, or joining Business Professionals of America. Be sure to make them relevant to job seeking at least. Underwater yodeling contests and other such stuff don't really help all that much, however impressive they may be. I remember one résumé accomplishment one guy listed was something like "called in a guy to make balloon animals at previous job." Also listing too many minor awards can make you look like you're overcompensating for inexperience.
On a lighter note here's a site dedicated to giving people an award for dying in incredibly stupid ways. I would not recommend listing it if you ever receive one as you will be dead and no longer in need of a résumé. I would also give them an award for their terrible looking and hard to navigate site.
Résumé Paper
When fine tuning your résumé making sure to use good paper is a must. It could put all you efforts of refining your identity to waste if you show your reviewer that you don't pay attention to quality because you just used whatever lame xerox paper happened to be in the printer. Especially if you are a graphic designer it helps to have a decent paper choice that makes a statement about the quality of your work.
Some things to consider about paper:
Weight
Typical office paper is 20 lbs. It is meant to be thin to get quantity over quality, and when you hold it against the the light you can see blotchy consistency. Even though your résumé might be just black text, which works just fine on office paper, you still want to give off a better impression than "just fine." Anything above 35 lbs starts becoming cardstock, which will make your résumé feel like a brochure or something. Something close to 24 lbs will give you a weight that feels firm, crisp, and strong, without becoming to thick.
Color
White is the most common and looks professional, but there are other options if you feel they fit the situation. Ivory and other variations of off white. Anything with to much color should be avoided. As close to white as possible is probably safer.
Texture
Linen, bamboo, and parchement papers are popular in stores that have "résumé" paper. Avoid using anything too glossy, but also don't get crazy with the texture. Some art papers can be like printing on a denim jacket and could also murder the printer.
Printer Type
Check to see if the paper you are using is laser paper or inkjet paper. Laser paper is made to withstand higher temperatures used in a laser printer. If you go and try to use inkjet paper in a laser printer it could screw up the printer and then you will be out more than just a job interview. Since you will likely just have text then a common inkjet printer is usually fine for a résumé. If you have colored boxes or some other graphic element that you feel you need a laser printer for then just check to make sure the printer can accept it. Especially the imagepress in room 502. Don't put construction paper in it. Seriously don't.
Watermark
If you do use a paper that has a watermark on it make sure it is on the front and printed right side up otherwise you might look silly if they happen to notice.
Some things to consider about paper:
Weight
Typical office paper is 20 lbs. It is meant to be thin to get quantity over quality, and when you hold it against the the light you can see blotchy consistency. Even though your résumé might be just black text, which works just fine on office paper, you still want to give off a better impression than "just fine." Anything above 35 lbs starts becoming cardstock, which will make your résumé feel like a brochure or something. Something close to 24 lbs will give you a weight that feels firm, crisp, and strong, without becoming to thick.
Color
White is the most common and looks professional, but there are other options if you feel they fit the situation. Ivory and other variations of off white. Anything with to much color should be avoided. As close to white as possible is probably safer.
Texture
Linen, bamboo, and parchement papers are popular in stores that have "résumé" paper. Avoid using anything too glossy, but also don't get crazy with the texture. Some art papers can be like printing on a denim jacket and could also murder the printer.
Printer Type
Check to see if the paper you are using is laser paper or inkjet paper. Laser paper is made to withstand higher temperatures used in a laser printer. If you go and try to use inkjet paper in a laser printer it could screw up the printer and then you will be out more than just a job interview. Since you will likely just have text then a common inkjet printer is usually fine for a résumé. If you have colored boxes or some other graphic element that you feel you need a laser printer for then just check to make sure the printer can accept it. Especially the imagepress in room 502. Don't put construction paper in it. Seriously don't.
Watermark
If you do use a paper that has a watermark on it make sure it is on the front and printed right side up otherwise you might look silly if they happen to notice.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Job Scams
When we were talking about keeping your contact and personal information to a minimum on your résumé to avoid potential scams it got me thinking about Job scams. Here's a couple ways you can get screwed over.
One scam involves a fake interview in which you are required to travel. Often they will get your résumé from the internet and pose as a well known company. They offer to pay your travel costs if you buy your airline ticket through the company's travel dept. They ask for your credit card number and tell you they will contact you with your flight info...except they never do. :(
A number of shipping scams can befall hapless job seekers. One of the scarier ones involves a work from home position where you act as a redirecting warehouse receiving packages that need to be shipped to different places. It can be deceiving as it required no out of pocket costs, and even the shipping labels are prepaid. However the items are bought with stolen funds, likely from another scam, and the scammer is using you as a middle man to make it harder for the police to track them. When they investigate the packages bought with stolen credit card numbers they will be led to you instead. D:
So be careful when a company or client you didn't apply to yourself approaches you based on your résumé. They could be hamburglars.
One scam involves a fake interview in which you are required to travel. Often they will get your résumé from the internet and pose as a well known company. They offer to pay your travel costs if you buy your airline ticket through the company's travel dept. They ask for your credit card number and tell you they will contact you with your flight info...except they never do. :(
A number of shipping scams can befall hapless job seekers. One of the scarier ones involves a work from home position where you act as a redirecting warehouse receiving packages that need to be shipped to different places. It can be deceiving as it required no out of pocket costs, and even the shipping labels are prepaid. However the items are bought with stolen funds, likely from another scam, and the scammer is using you as a middle man to make it harder for the police to track them. When they investigate the packages bought with stolen credit card numbers they will be led to you instead. D:
So be careful when a company or client you didn't apply to yourself approaches you based on your résumé. They could be hamburglars.
Transferable Skills
Last weeks Lynda lecture had some really interesting stuff on résumé building. Particularly the transferable skills that you can put down which show the reviewer your capabilities. Some people will turn in a relatively blank résumé the first time around because they can only think to put down past job experience and education. It's important not to overlook the activities that we do that help us build skills useful to the job market. Spend a lot of time chatting online or posting in forums? Typing is a transferable skill. Act as a mediator between friends fighting? Diplomacy is a useful office skill. Able to quote every line from movies you watch? Information retention is important when working directly under someone. Don't overlook the small things or you can sell yourself short.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Send in the Clones
Often characters are referenced in other works of fiction. Other times characters are blatantly ripped off. This cam lead to some hilarious results. This is a list of goofy knock-off characters.
First on the list is the king of ersatz Micky Mouse. When Walt Disney found out that he didn't own the copyright to his first major success, Oswald the lucky rabbit, he just gave him different ears and continued making money.
Next up is Alan Moore's Masterpiece Watchmen. When Moore originally proposed the story he wrote it about a bunch of characters that DC Comics had recently acquired from Charlton Comics. Of course with the amount of death and whatnot in watchmen they wouldn't have been able to be used in future projects, so Moore's editor convinced him to make original characters based on the existing ones.
Lastly is Yurripe from Angel Beats who is a clone of Haruhi from the immensely popular Melancholy of Suzumiya Haruhi series. Both are characters who run a school club dealing with supernatural shenanigans. Both have the same eff the police attitude. Both look the friggin same. In this case it's more like an homage than anything but man are they the same person.
First on the list is the king of ersatz Micky Mouse. When Walt Disney found out that he didn't own the copyright to his first major success, Oswald the lucky rabbit, he just gave him different ears and continued making money.
Lastly is Yurripe from Angel Beats who is a clone of Haruhi from the immensely popular Melancholy of Suzumiya Haruhi series. Both are characters who run a school club dealing with supernatural shenanigans. Both have the same eff the police attitude. Both look the friggin same. In this case it's more like an homage than anything but man are they the same person.
Be$t reSume evarr!!!!1
Her experience is a bunch of nonsense that includes the Ds she made in math and and various community service projects and a link to her deviantART. In her skill set she reveals that she has photoshop and that she believes she is pretty good with it. Also that she is an artist who doesn't like to pigeon hole herself. Then talks about how she likes to draw anime. Her hobbies list tells her potential employer what he should have already figured out at this point; that she likes to goof off and play video games all day. Also she mentions her cosplay wardrobe.
Her long term goals are truly inspiring. She one day hopes to get the high school in House of the Dead at her local arcade, and to spend the rest of her life with her motorcycle. Lastly she closes with a bit about how she can be the breath of fresh air her employer is looking for and that now the reviewer can move on to the next step; meeting in person. Also be sure to get her some coffee. But no decaff or there will be hell to pay.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Copyright and Piracy.
Talking about works of art that have no copyright last week reminded me of a situation that I sometimes run across on the internet; that is orphaned work. The company KID used to be a maker of some of the best and most original stories visual novels had to offer. A visual novel is essentially a PC game where you read text and click to advance, sometimes making choices choose-your-own-adventure style. It's basically an interactive book with illustration and music. Well anyway the company went bankrupt and another company that didn't really do much of anything with the property it acquired. The sad part is that one of the best visual novels of all time, Ever 17: The Out of Infinity is now stuck in distribution limbo probably for a long time.
Since the makers are no longer selling, and buying a used copy on Ebay for $150 isn't going to support the makers in any way, the only reasonable option to enjoy this classic is to pirate it. This is the sad fate of many works that have a huge fan following, yet nobody seems to be selling copies anytime soon. So are is piracy bad no matter what, or does rescuing lost classics from copyright hell take priority?
Since the makers are no longer selling, and buying a used copy on Ebay for $150 isn't going to support the makers in any way, the only reasonable option to enjoy this classic is to pirate it. This is the sad fate of many works that have a huge fan following, yet nobody seems to be selling copies anytime soon. So are is piracy bad no matter what, or does rescuing lost classics from copyright hell take priority?
Fair Use and Appropriation Ethics
When asking oneself what qualifies as stealing when dealing with mediums which borrow from other works such as collage and parody, I have always thought of lit like this: If the work you are borrowing from can be recognized as the work of another artist then you can get away with collage. For example everyone brings up Duchamp's mustache on on the Mona Lisa. The art was the statement it made and no the actual image. Furthermore everyone who had even the most basic knowledge of art would know that he didn't create it. The point I'm getting at is that if you can use pop culture in your collage, homage, and parody because people are much less likely to mistake you for the originator. If I were to make fan-art of some not-well-known artist's work someone could easily mistake it for original artwork. What bugs me is when an artist tries to pass work off as their own when they ere either utilizing or borrowing heavily from other works. All this is to say what is ethical to use, not necessarily what is legal.
However when someone takes work and removes he pop culture elements and takes other design and storytelling elements it can lead to just as much of a scandal as if they had taken the original work itself. One case I find relevant to this is the case of Nick Simmons, son of Jean Simmons, who makes comics.Without getting too much into it, because I imagine he feels pretty silly about it now, he basically used heavy reference form another comic, to the point where fans of the original cried it was traced. The original work in question had a pretty large fan base and huge internet backlash resulted in many images of his comic overlayed on top of images from the other comic to make the point that he had essentially traced them.
The publishing company halted distribution of the comic following the bad publicity and accusations of plagiarism. The interesting part is that the author of the original comic never did anything. It was all fan action over the internet that brought everything to light without the need for any kind of copyright claim. It's doubtful whether of not the original author, who is already highly successful even cared. When asked what he thought of the whole situation he had this to say:
"To be honest, the fact that Gene Simmon's son is a manga-ka disturbs me more than whether he's really copying or not."
So it really depends on who's work is being borrowed from as to whether or not legal action will happen. If an artist is successful enough they may not be bothered by, or even be flattered by people using their work. That doesn't mean that it's okay to steal their work, that's talking more about ethics than anything. Lesser known artists are more likely to be offended in my opinion, and rightly so, because their livelihood and reputation are more dependent on their work. So don't steal their shit.
However when someone takes work and removes he pop culture elements and takes other design and storytelling elements it can lead to just as much of a scandal as if they had taken the original work itself. One case I find relevant to this is the case of Nick Simmons, son of Jean Simmons, who makes comics.Without getting too much into it, because I imagine he feels pretty silly about it now, he basically used heavy reference form another comic, to the point where fans of the original cried it was traced. The original work in question had a pretty large fan base and huge internet backlash resulted in many images of his comic overlayed on top of images from the other comic to make the point that he had essentially traced them.
"To be honest, the fact that Gene Simmon's son is a manga-ka disturbs me more than whether he's really copying or not."
So it really depends on who's work is being borrowed from as to whether or not legal action will happen. If an artist is successful enough they may not be bothered by, or even be flattered by people using their work. That doesn't mean that it's okay to steal their work, that's talking more about ethics than anything. Lesser known artists are more likely to be offended in my opinion, and rightly so, because their livelihood and reputation are more dependent on their work. So don't steal their shit.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Artist Representatives
If asked whether I would ever use an artist rep or not I would have to give a solid...maybe. Really it depends on whether I feel like my work can sort of "sell itself" well enough that I can let my portfolio speak for me when I'm not present. Of course a rep would be doing the speaking as well, but I would feel more comfortable letting him represent me if my work had a louder voice in the matter. Basically I would want my work to be something worth representing. That is what I would consider before trying to get a rep.
There are plenty of small time jobs that you can get simply for money. There is no shame in taking jobs outside of your interest, so long as they are profitable and they allow you to work on your portfolio work on your own. Jumping into the illustration wold unprepared could land you a bad reputation if you aren't careful. Personally I would take low profile jobs and build my portfolio on my own time before trying to tackle the big jobs that I really want but aren't yet comfortable with. An artist rep would not be the first priority for me coming out of school. I would actually rather fumble my way though the business aspect for a while to get an appreciation it. That way I don't become dependent on a rep, and less likely to cling to an unhealthy relationship if that is how things turned out. After deciding that it was appropriate to get a rep I would want to research which reps deal with the kind of work that I made and how to get their attention.
I found a post online about becoming attractive to representatives. After all if you don't even impress the rep how are they going to present you to clients? Among the things it talks about is marketability. It's not just about how versatile you are, but how relevant you are to your target market. Say that your style deals in realism, yet your work deals primarily with children's books. You might find that your work stands out...but not necessarily in a way that will help sell children's books. Seems straightforward but I have seen people dead set on landing a job in a niche, when their work isn't really suited for it.
After deciding whether a rep is right for you consider what they have to offer. A good rep can help you develop your career in ways not always available to you on your own. Some clients may deal solely with representatives who have an array of illustrators in the area they represent. Taking time to look at the work of an up and coming artists portfolio might not be the first course of action when a rep is giving a company professional recommendations based on hand picked illustrators. A rep can land you a relationship with a client who might not have taken a look at your work otherwise. Good reps also know the right clients to seek out to give you a good resume and good experience, as opposed to just finding jobs based on pay or availability.
There are plenty of small time jobs that you can get simply for money. There is no shame in taking jobs outside of your interest, so long as they are profitable and they allow you to work on your portfolio work on your own. Jumping into the illustration wold unprepared could land you a bad reputation if you aren't careful. Personally I would take low profile jobs and build my portfolio on my own time before trying to tackle the big jobs that I really want but aren't yet comfortable with. An artist rep would not be the first priority for me coming out of school. I would actually rather fumble my way though the business aspect for a while to get an appreciation it. That way I don't become dependent on a rep, and less likely to cling to an unhealthy relationship if that is how things turned out. After deciding that it was appropriate to get a rep I would want to research which reps deal with the kind of work that I made and how to get their attention.
I found a post online about becoming attractive to representatives. After all if you don't even impress the rep how are they going to present you to clients? Among the things it talks about is marketability. It's not just about how versatile you are, but how relevant you are to your target market. Say that your style deals in realism, yet your work deals primarily with children's books. You might find that your work stands out...but not necessarily in a way that will help sell children's books. Seems straightforward but I have seen people dead set on landing a job in a niche, when their work isn't really suited for it.
After deciding whether a rep is right for you consider what they have to offer. A good rep can help you develop your career in ways not always available to you on your own. Some clients may deal solely with representatives who have an array of illustrators in the area they represent. Taking time to look at the work of an up and coming artists portfolio might not be the first course of action when a rep is giving a company professional recommendations based on hand picked illustrators. A rep can land you a relationship with a client who might not have taken a look at your work otherwise. Good reps also know the right clients to seek out to give you a good resume and good experience, as opposed to just finding jobs based on pay or availability.
RFP: My Two Cents.
A request for proposal is an interesting subject to me. I find it to be a useful tool because it allows one to in a sense, go shopping for clients. Of course at the same time the clients are shopping for illustrators/designers when the put one out. This differs from the normal way I am used to freelance work. In my past experience jobs come when someone you know knows a guy who is looking for an illustrator to do X. Otherwise someone recommends you to the person and they email you about it out of the blue.
Now don't get me wrong, these kinds of jobs are great, and they give you exclusive access to jobs that other designers my not even be aware of. It also is a bit of an ego boost when someone recommends you. The downside though is you don't always know what you're getting yourself into. The terms of the job aren't always spelled out, and sometimes you get far into negotiation before realizing you don't want to work with the client or the terms aren't satisfactory. It's also harder (for me anyway) to turn down someone who came looking for you, or who you contacted yourself.
What I like about RFPs is that they put everything on the table. You can look at a database or hear about such-n-such job and then go look at the RFP. You can decide whether you want to take on the job before you contact anyone, so you don't have to feel like you are turning down a client. Besides that businesses that put out an RFP give a more professional feel, and seem more likely to adhere to terms. Though an RFP does not guarantee that a client is more professional than someone who contacts you out of the blue, it gives you a chance to research them before making contact, so you can hopefully choose clients that are more business oriented.
A more business oriented request that deals in specifics leaves you more room to make clear what services you provide. Telling a client the difference between a designer and an illustrator and why the terms and rights for each are different can be a hassle. Clients who aren't used to working with designers/illustrators may feel that they are trying to pull a fast one on them when they get into the legal technicalities.
Now don't get me wrong, these kinds of jobs are great, and they give you exclusive access to jobs that other designers my not even be aware of. It also is a bit of an ego boost when someone recommends you. The downside though is you don't always know what you're getting yourself into. The terms of the job aren't always spelled out, and sometimes you get far into negotiation before realizing you don't want to work with the client or the terms aren't satisfactory. It's also harder (for me anyway) to turn down someone who came looking for you, or who you contacted yourself.
What I like about RFPs is that they put everything on the table. You can look at a database or hear about such-n-such job and then go look at the RFP. You can decide whether you want to take on the job before you contact anyone, so you don't have to feel like you are turning down a client. Besides that businesses that put out an RFP give a more professional feel, and seem more likely to adhere to terms. Though an RFP does not guarantee that a client is more professional than someone who contacts you out of the blue, it gives you a chance to research them before making contact, so you can hopefully choose clients that are more business oriented.
A more business oriented request that deals in specifics leaves you more room to make clear what services you provide. Telling a client the difference between a designer and an illustrator and why the terms and rights for each are different can be a hassle. Clients who aren't used to working with designers/illustrators may feel that they are trying to pull a fast one on them when they get into the legal technicalities.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
My Favorite Company: Gainax.
Gainax Company Limited, 株式会社ガイナックス, Kabushiki-gaisha Gainakkusu, or simply Gainax, is my favorite company. What do they make you ask? Animation of course. They are a Japanese company that produces original stories and cutting edge animation. They have been known to set the animation market in Japan with their aesthetic and deconstruction of various genres. So much in fact that many Japanese animated shows produced in the 90s were merely rip-offs of Evangelion, one of their most famous works.
The thing I like most about Gainax is that it doesn't follow trends in the genre; it sets them. Evangelion was a famous deconstruction of the mecha genre, which showed the psychological impact and horrible consequences of a post apocalyptic giant robot scenario. Years later, after forever changing anime into something darker and grittier than it was Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann reconstructed the deconstruction, showing that if you put the characters back on their meds so to speak, then everything doesn't have to go to hell. They have been known to have endings that defy audience expectations, for better or worse, hence the term "Gainax ending." Hell, their recent work Panty and Stocking with Garterbelt is as messed up as it sounds and shows just how little they care for following conventions and standards. Above all I like that they aren't afraid to break the genre, step on toes, and do whatever it takes to make a good story and do it with style.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
What is a man? A towering pile of drawings? But enough talk! Have at you!
When asked why I chose to pursue Graphic Design I always try to answer truthfully. At first I came to Watkins College of Art, Design, and Film under the banner of fine arts. I grew up drawing a lot and getting recognition for it, so illustration seemed to be a logical transition after high school. Knowing that Graphic Design was more profitable, I initially decided to pursue fine arts because I thought it would allow me to make the kind of things I would enjoy. Sadly this was not the case.
Fine arts seemed to focus on making art for art's sake, or otherwise art for the sake of the artist expressing themselves. This is all well and good. I however am more business oriented. I prefer to be working for a client. Only after I have fulfilled the needs of a client and made an impression do I feel accomplished. After all what good is there in making work only to please oneself? Anyone can accomplish that easily simply by having low standards. Call me what you will but I like to work for others. I just feel more motivated that way.
As for my aspirations after school I would like to work for a design firm, freelance, work as a concept artist for an entertainment company (film or video game), start a small design group, and teach computer studio while still freelancing. Preferably in that order. I have no interest in retiring, but would like to spend my old age just making whatever I want while freelancing and traveling so that I don't get too sad when I get closer to death. I have no illusions about becoming famous, but would accept it if it were to happen. I instead strive to be an elite mediocrity so that I can live in peace and enjoy life and whatnot.
Fine arts seemed to focus on making art for art's sake, or otherwise art for the sake of the artist expressing themselves. This is all well and good. I however am more business oriented. I prefer to be working for a client. Only after I have fulfilled the needs of a client and made an impression do I feel accomplished. After all what good is there in making work only to please oneself? Anyone can accomplish that easily simply by having low standards. Call me what you will but I like to work for others. I just feel more motivated that way.
As for my aspirations after school I would like to work for a design firm, freelance, work as a concept artist for an entertainment company (film or video game), start a small design group, and teach computer studio while still freelancing. Preferably in that order. I have no interest in retiring, but would like to spend my old age just making whatever I want while freelancing and traveling so that I don't get too sad when I get closer to death. I have no illusions about becoming famous, but would accept it if it were to happen. I instead strive to be an elite mediocrity so that I can live in peace and enjoy life and whatnot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)