I’ve been observing more than a few conversations crop up on online artist forums concerning “successfully marketing your art.” These are “hot topic” threads for artists on the Internet.
The bottom line — making money from art…which translates to “making a living from art” — is the overwhelming desire of most who read and participate in these topics. They are “hope-to’s” flocking with wide-eyed interest to any article and any information centered on successful art marketing and self-promotion (topics which, by the way, are often instigated and catalyzed by the owners or employees of the very online venues which stand to profit from each successful-artist-wannabe’s efforts at self-promotion). The artists frequenting these venues and voraciously reading these topics call themselves “fine artists,” and call what they create ”fine art.” But are they, in fact, fine artists, and do they, in fact, create fine art?
Let’s explore a bit, and a good place to start might be to to look at some categories and definitions of “artist.” Generally, here are a few:
- print artist: someone who designs and creates art specifically for print and poster reproduction;
- graphic artist: an artist who designs and creates images for an application or product, many times with text and images designed to communicate a message or for a complete production such as a movie, book, or CD release;
- illustrator: creates art to illustrate a book, an article, or an idea, their own or another’s
- commercial artist: an artist who creates art for profit, is paid to create art, or works-for-hire;
- design artist: an artist who conceives designs and who also may develop them;
- fine artist: an artist who is expressing from emotion or inspiration and creates with the intent of producing something of beauty or meaning, something of aesthetic value rather than something calculated to produce income or for utility for practical application (FYI, by the way, the fine arts are historically classified as visual art, photographic art, dance, sculpture, and music).
Were I to classify these in a hierarchy, I would make three broad categories, none more prestigious than another:
A. Fine artist
B. Illustrator, print artist, design artist, and graphic artist (amateur only) I can list print artists, graphic artists, design artists, and illustrators under commercial art, but I cannot list them under fine art at all. And I cannot list them under commercial art if they are “for-the-love” hobbyists, not pursuing steady payment from or a career in graphics and/or illustration.
C. Commercial artist
- professional print artist
- professional graphic artist
- professional illustrator
- professional design artist
(Professional means pursuing a profession in, a profession meaning that which affords them the means to make a living from their efforts.)
In this category, that is, the “commercial artist,” we have the professional painter, professional photographer, professional [insert visual media]…which is, in fact, a professional graphic artist.
Note that we do not have a proliferation of the phrase ”professional fine artist.” Nobody claims to be a “professional fine artist.” Why? Because linking the terms “professional” and “fine art” is considered to produce an oxymoron by definition.
So, now, back to the question: Are people who are pursuing the “how-to-make-money-with-my-art” really fine artists producing fine art?
Some of them, yes.
Most of them, no.
And here’s the difference.
A fine artist creates art with the primary intent to create something which has intrinsic meaning to them, an expression of themselves catalyzed by inspiration, reaction, or emotion. First and foremost, it is “their art,” not art produced specifically with the intent to produce them income and/or notoriety.
Contrast the commercial artist who creates art with the primary intent to make money and/or fame and popularity, for themselves and/or for another.
So who are most of the artists proliferating the online art venues?
Answer that question for yourself. Here’s the measure:
Do you create your art regardless of whether it will or will not turn a profit, be that profit fame or fortune? Then you are a fine artist.
Do you create art to illustrate something? If so, you are a graphic artist or illustrator. If you do this for others “on demand” and receive fame or fortune from it, you are a commercial graphic artist or illustrator. If you do it “for the love” or to help someone…or to illustrate your own poetry, music, article or book, then you are not a commercial artist.
Do you create art for gain, specifically creating it with the intent to profit, be that profit fame or fortune? Then you are a commercial artist, not a fine artist.
So, who are the majority of artists frequenting the threads and topics about how to market their art and self-promote?
A great many of them could be classified as fine artists, yes. They create art first, then decide to market it after the fact. But, at least half of them are, technically speaking, self-employed commercial artists, not fine artists. Why? Because they are not producing art as an expression of self and/or inner vision — art first and foremost for art’s sake. They are creating art with the specific intent to sell it, to make money from it, to produce a product that someone will pay them for with some sort of compensation, be that fame or money, preferably both.
Motive and intent are the measure, and only the artist really knows the answer. However, a skilled eye can tell the motive and intent behind the art by studying the works as well as looking at the methods an artist uses to ”market” their art.
Does the artist change their original artistic expression until they find one which “catches on” and consumers or collectors buy? Or is the change in their artistic expression due to “periods” or exploring different expressions and styles? The former means the artist is commercial; the latter, a fine artist.
Does the artist produce works specifically to sell, or are they selling prints and ancillary products containing their art as incidental or secondary to the creation of original work? If the former, the artist is a commercial artist; if the latter, a fine artist.
Do buyers or collectors seek out the artist to ask if they have produced any new art rather than the artist “hawking” their originals to potential buyers and collectors? If so, the artist is a fine artist. If the artist specifically and repetatively campaigns their art, producing it with intent to sell, they are a commercial artist.
Fine artists will enter contests, will show their works in galleries, will specifically produce works for a collector (occasionally), but what they won’t do is just paint/photograph expressly to sell. In fact, often a fine artist won’t sell a work, simply because they want to keep it. They might agree to sell prints or reproductions, and they might be induced to sell a work they love simply because the collector or buyer is persistent or offers them something they need/want enough to part with the work. What they don’t do is to specifically create artwork for sale.
Ultimately the measure of whether what you do is fine art or commercial art comes down to calculation. If the artist creates the work with the calculated intent of producing something to trade for fame and/or fortune (money), they are a commercial artist. If the artist creates because of inspiration, reaction, or as the result of emotion, expressing that inspiration into their chosen media, be it photographic, painting and drawing, sculpture, or any other media, then they are, in fact, a fine artist.
Which are you? And did you start out as a fine artist, then, when your work didn’t sell, change your work in the hopes of producing something that would sell? Then you may have started as a fine artist, but you became a commercial one, whether you are in fact successful or not.
It’s all in the motive; it’s all in the intent.
To quote from one post on one online forum:
“Good or appropriate marketing is often indicated as making what you can sell[,] not selling what you can make[.] -
“…Some organizations make their products[,] and then try to pursuade the potential customers to purchase what they have made.
“Other organizations[,] and often the most successful ones, make what they can sell[.] [I]n other words[,] they create products and services in response to what the customers need ”
Walter Paul Bebirian
http://forum.imagekind.com/comments.php?DiscussionID=257&page=1#Item_0
I would add, “what the customers need or will desire,” but this basically demonstrates the point. The commercial artist is an artist whose intent is primarily to create art to profit by, rather than the art which “lives inside them, demanding expression.”
Now the question that really drives the point of calling oneself a “fine artist:”
Isn’t it better to be a fine artist rather than a commercial artist?
Not in my opinion, no. Again, intent and motive defines the difference, and, many commercial artists are also fine artists, that is, they create commercial art, but, in their leisure, they create fine art, as well. What they honestly do, however, is to differentiate their commercial art from their fine art. While both might be for sale, they actively “market” their commercial work. Their fine art, however, might or might not be presented for sale, but it isn’t “marketed” in the same way as that which they create for the express purpose of turning a profit.
“But…,” say you.
I know. It sounds better to call yourself a “fine artist” as opposed to a “commercial artist.” “Commercial” sounds so…so…mercenary. There’s this stigma against “making money.”
Well, that’s a false stigma, because, in truth, the majority of people want to make a living at what they love doing, not what they have to do to live well and happily. Just because you want to call yourself a “fine artist” doesn’t change the fact that, if your art is created, not as art for art’s sake, but, instead specifically with the intent to profit, you are a “commercial artist.” You can lie about it all you want, but those are the facts.
Now I suppose we could come up with a new category, the “commercial fine artist” (though, again, we create an oxymoron), but then what do we call what traditionally is defined as a “fine artist?”
Your suggestions may be posted as comments below. I look forward to seeing them, because I certainly can’t think of any which roll well off the tongue. “Purist fine artist?” Ugh. Nope.
) I’ll list these statistics from compete.com from highest to lowest traffic.
