?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Kayla-Na and Shin0r0z of FurAffinity

Okay I figure I should let the community know of these two, and I'll be as fair as I can with it. This is mainly my own personal spat and technical ripoff from both, but I can try to tell both sides.

Starting with Kayla-Na, or as some may know her previously Mel-The-Hybrid. I got a piece from her a WHILE back, it involved my character and one from the Sonic franchise. I had to wait about 3 months before it was actually gotten to, as she had built up quite the list beforehand, but I have no problems with waiting. I can wait this long and not mind too much. When it finally got to my piece, the idea was given during a stream ,and she promptly got to working on it. During the doodle, I noticed an error on the Sonic character, and quickly asked if it could be altered. I as instantly assaulted by chat-goers and followers telling me "She knows what she is doing!" and the like. Now, I know as a commissioner I have a RIGHT to ask for an edit unless it is specified in the rules for the art that edits are not allowed. Also I believe I paid beforehand, so what was done was done. Regardless the edit was NOT done, the error was left in. Later on I notice she drew the characters face a bit depressive, I left that be, figured maybe they were working into another expression. This was not the case. I let it be at the time and thanked her for her work, though when I got to see file up close, I wasn't fully pleased. The Sonic character in question was depressed, lazily drawn, and the error was left in as I said. This cost me around the sum of 35 dollars, and only for a sketch, no inks, colors, etc. Recently I brought the item up to her again and she told me she drew it as she did because my idea was "Depressive and just dull". Regardless, as a PROFESSIONAL artist you should be very used to ideas you do not like, if you are accepting pay; And I argue that she could have DECLINED my idea. Also, I am upset that not only did the artist not do the requested edit, but the fans AGREED with it. There is a thin line between liking an artist and being a loyalist. So in the end, we parted ways and I got stuck getting ripped off. Kayla is VERY HARD to work with, she doesn't seem open to many ideas that don't coincide with her own, and seems refused to do edits, even for minor commissioners like me.

Secondly, we have Shin0r0z, or 0r0, or 0r0ch1, you pick the name you know. I popped into one of his Donations for Doodles streams to nab me some art, and at first it was good. The first piece received was alright, and for only 10 bucks a pop, I was not complaining. Then the second I got a few days later came up a bit sloppy and out of style, but that's again something I dealt with and paid up. The third item was the last straw for me and added to some personal discrepancies I had had with this artist before (a spat about something personal, nothing I want to bring up, but it does add some personal emotion to this, which isn't good). So without even being asked if it was good, and being passed onto the "okay, next?" reply, I quickly sent him a note on FurAffinity. I mentioned how I was fed up with his performance, and desired a re-draw or refund. With all the details I gave him, the image was drawn at the incorrect angle, hid some aspects I mentioned specifically in my details, and was downright robbery since an item NOT mentioned in the doodle was drawn to block half the image. After a few troll-like responses from him, i was given a refund, thankfully, though I still say watch out for this guy. he's sneaky, he'll pretend to be your friend, but truly his talent is not worth the money at some times. He also overprices for more mature doodles. As I said, a DfD was 10 bucks, plus 5 I believe per character. To add a more mature/adult quality to that, for JUST A SKETCH, is an additional 30 dollars. yes, unless he changed his prices recently, it was 30 dollars more plus the original 10 to get anything of an adult nature. A bit outrageous if ya ask me.

So hopefully this will be read fairly. flaming is not necessary and do hope that if you ARE one of the followers of these artist, you really take a moment to think if they treat you fairly or not. I do not wish to start drama or anything, I am just merely pointing out how I was treated unfairly by these artists by either their own personal views against me, a possible misinterpretation of information, or just flat out laziness. Also I cannot post up the pictures for either cannot locate them, or they were not posted, but if you do want to see the results, I can try to get them to you.
Artist's beware has moved!
Do NOT repost your old bewares. They are being archived.
https://artistsbeware.info/

Comments

( 84 comments — Leave a comment )
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
hamburger
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:01 am (UTC)
Approved this, but could you provide screencaps from your communications with either artist so we can get a better feel for the situation? Thanks!
kayla_la
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:11 am (UTC)
He also overprices for more mature doodles.

This isn't really the place to air this particular sentiment. Unless the artist charges you with surprise fees after the fact, you know what you're in for when you commission them, and you can choose to pay it or not. It's a little rude to stick it into your beware post when it isn't really anything to beware of. That's just my opinion, though, I suppose. Not trying to start a fight or anything either, just saying they get to set the price, and you can choose not to pay it, but it's not fair to put it in your beware post when it's not something they did 'wrong'.
sigilgoat
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:55 am (UTC)
I agree. It's hard to beware something in plain sight.
(no subject) - mandyseley - Dec. 25th, 2010 05:02 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - ashleyvsdestiny - Dec. 25th, 2010 05:35 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - zackfig - Dec. 25th, 2010 06:15 am (UTC) - Expand
foxhack
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:13 am (UTC)
Not a mod, but would you mind linking to their FA pages and the pieces in question, if possible? And perhaps link to other sketches for comparison?

It would help a bit. :)
foxhack
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:14 am (UTC)
Ah, I just read you don't have links to the pictures... sorry about that. :\
westly_roanoke
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:32 am (UTC)
I don't like drawing adult stuff, and I charge significantly more to do so. I don't see a problem with this as long as it's all up front saying 'Yes, there will be a larger charge for adult images', there's really no reason to add that as a beware.

Though, it would be nice to see a comparison between other's sketches and your sketches that you received.

Thanks!
sigilgoat
Dec. 25th, 2010 04:57 am (UTC)
It's not that uncommon for an artist to charge more for things they don't like to do. I personally have a few charges for fetishes I don't enjoy drawing, extra for backgrounds, and comic pages because they're much less fun for me.

So yeah, not really beware-able
(no subject) - chronidu - Dec. 25th, 2010 06:21 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - megumi_kitten - Dec. 25th, 2010 07:04 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - hunter_san - Dec. 30th, 2010 12:37 pm (UTC) - Expand
cassu_bean
Dec. 25th, 2010 05:09 am (UTC)
IMO it seems like the only reason you're posting here is because you're not 1000% happy with the work you got, from what I've read you got the art in a reasonable time-frame. I mean sure it sucks when the artist doesn't exactly draw 'your vision' but sometimes it very hard, especially when people are being picky. You also haven't provided solid evidence of gone into further detail other than 'they were drawn at the wrong angle' or 'there were errors.' You say you don't have the pictures but I think you should provide some proof if you're posting here, otherwise it's just your word.
vauvakolibri
Dec. 25th, 2010 05:26 am (UTC)
I can see the not changing what asked thing as a suck and personally see the problems that streaming commissions might have, but I don't think that having the artist's fans disagree with you is really a suck from the artist's part. She shouldn't have ignored you, but she's not responsible for the actions of her fans.

"and was downright robbery"
So it was a 10$ live-stream and exactly how much details did you ask for?
Mind you, it's not your fault if artists underprice their work, but asking for a specific angle, apparently expecting every single one of details (that judging from your wording there were quite a bit) to be visible and calling it "downright robbery" sounds bit overblown, especially if the artist didn't have time to properly assess the details and situation, as opposed to a non-live sketching.
cesarin
Dec. 25th, 2010 06:46 am (UTC)
I agree, 10$ usually is just a "quick sketch", nothing related to a "superduperdetailed"
if you wanted detail.. usual comissioners go from 30$ or more..
I know Shin's price is usually 60-90 USD on his usual rate.
(no subject) - vauvakolibri - Dec. 25th, 2010 06:59 am (UTC) - Expand
mukichan
Dec. 25th, 2010 06:58 am (UTC)
I don't know of Kayla-Na's commission etiquette... But with Oro, him charging like that sounds pretty normal. I guess with the $30 fee, it's to discourage people from asking for mature doodles.

Kinda reminds me of another artist on FA who's charging $200 per comic page (contains roughly 6-8 panels) and there being drama about that price.

Basically, some (if not most) will charge like that to discourage people from buying it cause it is alot of work or it is something that they're not comfortable with.
celestinaketzia
Dec. 25th, 2010 05:47 pm (UTC)
You mean $500 per comic page. Between $150 - $200 is about standard in the furry fandom for comic pages.

I know I won't go below $150, period.
(no subject) - marus_puppy - Dec. 26th, 2010 01:52 am (UTC) - Expand
wildehund
Dec. 25th, 2010 07:17 am (UTC)
Yeah, I'm in the "would like to see some evidence" boat here.
Also, you're complaining a lot about their "outrageous" prices...Which don't actually sound like bad prices, and to which you agreed to beforehand anyway...so...Yeah.
shukivengeance
Dec. 25th, 2010 08:01 am (UTC)
Since this is mostly a beware about quality, and we don't have the pics with examples to compare to the artists' galleries - or even a link to said galleries, I don't watch either of those people - I'm finding it difficult to take your side here.

As for the secondary aspect of bitching about prices isn't this something that's against the comm rules? I know the money rule is mainly regarding people who think that a beware 'isn't legitimate unless the transaction involved >$X' but I think whining about an artist's prices is equally unnecessary here. A transaction with an artist is entered into by their client's own free will and prices are dictated by supply and demand.

Mods please note that I'm not questioning this posts' relevance since one of you chose to approve it, just expressing surprise and making a query in relation to an existing rule. Plus as has been the case before, commenters are free to disagree with an OP on their issue.

OP, it really sucks that Kayla-Na was difficult for you to work with (and that lends some legitimacy to the post) but it's a little overboard to hold her responsible for her fans' actions.
hamburger
Dec. 25th, 2010 11:31 am (UTC)
Yeah, that would be my bad as the one who approved it. Newbie mistake, there. I should have asked him to remove the part with the price quibble and resubmit.
armaina
Dec. 25th, 2010 08:06 am (UTC)
First of all, I would like to know why you can't provide us with the commissioned images. They may not be uploaded on the artist's site, but I would think that you at least have them and are capable of uploading them to something such as Photobucket to give us an example.

Secondly, I would really like to see screen caps of the conversations you had with the first artist. I'm skeptical of any claim about he said she said without any proof to back it up, one way or the other.

And lastly, complaining about what the artist charged just because you don't like it and feel you have the right to dictate how much an artist should or should not charge, is not going to win you any favors here. Especially since it was not a hidden fee.
maddogairpirate
Dec. 25th, 2010 08:07 am (UTC)
I can also vouch for Orochi being... somewhat of an ass when commissioned. If he's not interested he's known to take lazy shortcuts and tends to complain that you're ungrateful when you bring it up. It's not ability. It's effort. Or lack thereof.

Oh wait. Duez, it's you. Ha. The example I was thinking of, when I was thinking of Orochi. I think you should also point out how Orochi has drawn your character several times without permission.

Edited at 2010-12-25 08:13 am (UTC)
cassu_bean
Dec. 25th, 2010 08:35 am (UTC)
'I think you should also point out how Orochi has drawn your character several times without permission.'
He drew Duez free art?! The a-hole, he must be some kind of heartless cur.
(no subject) - maddogairpirate - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:42 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cassu_bean - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:44 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - maddogairpirate - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:45 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cassu_bean - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:45 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - maddogairpirate - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:49 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cassu_bean - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:50 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - maddogairpirate - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:53 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - tibek - Dec. 25th, 2010 06:24 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - succendo - Dec. 26th, 2010 02:57 am (UTC) - Expand
duez_chatterbox
Dec. 25th, 2010 08:41 am (UTC)
Okay, i see that I made many errors here about not posting proof. Sadly I'm going to have to leave as a 'he said, she said' situation until I'm less lazy. I just don't have the patience to research the BS again, dig through my notes, screencap everything, grab links.... It's a lot of effort for something that ONLY affected me. So I may remove this soon, dunno yet. I appreciate everyone here being fair though.
kayla_la
Dec. 25th, 2010 08:43 am (UTC)
Deleting posts isn't allowed here and will earn you a ban if done now that you know the rule (please read the userinfo for our rules), but what you can do is edit the new information in when you have it.
(no subject) - cassu_bean - Dec. 25th, 2010 08:47 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - shukivengeance - Dec. 25th, 2010 06:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - maddogairpirate - Dec. 25th, 2010 09:56 am (UTC) - Expand
MOD NOTE - hamburger - Dec. 25th, 2010 11:26 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: MOD NOTE - hamburger - Dec. 25th, 2010 11:28 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - anjel_kitty - Dec. 26th, 2010 01:08 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - grygon - Dec. 26th, 2010 04:18 am (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - jakejynx - Dec. 27th, 2010 01:41 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - foxhack - Dec. 27th, 2010 04:54 am (UTC) - Expand
thaily
Dec. 25th, 2010 11:25 am (UTC)
You badmouth people and are too lazy to provide proof.

Thanks for warning us to avoid you as a customer.

Goodbye.
sci
Dec. 25th, 2010 03:38 pm (UTC)
Minor fixes
Assuming this is all accurate (no screengrabs, links or other evidence) from your own point of view, your accusatory tone seems flawed for a number of reasons that I will elaborate on in order:

  1. Sounds like you're scraping the bottom of the barrel from the outset. You had to wait 3 months but are fine with that. If you're fine with it, why bother mentioning it unless you're either NOT fine with it or want to shit-stir on any conceivable angle.

  2. You assumed Kayla/Mel was paying attention to a chat-room at the same time as drawing, got flamed by unrelated channel watchers and didn't send her a private message to ensure the issue was raised.

  3. You noticed a potential error and didn't mention it, apparently assuming the artist is psychic.

  4. You approved art without seeing it in full or being happy with it.

  5. Without knowing what the original description was, whether the idea was actually "Depressive and just dull" is unknown, but without your feedback the artist interpreted it in their own way. Which you then approved.

  6. For a PROFESSIONAL artist, Kayla seems to spend a lot of time doing sketchwork for furries and her own enjoyment. I do not know if Kayla considers herself a professional artist but the number of artists within the fandom making a living from it is minimal if that's the benchmark you choose to use. In this case implying strict professionalism to such an ethereal concept is a weak argument, but considering the widely accepted temperament of artists in and out of this fandom is generally seen to be temperamental (specifically leading to the term "an artistic temperament"). Then in that case a professional attitude should strictly be seen as the exception rather than the rule, whether or not it was encountered here.

  7. Your final statement also makes the underhanded assumption that any defence of the artist should be interpreted as blind loyalism as opposed to considered rejection of your argument. This is unhelpful in any form of criticism as it both undermines your own issues and dissuades others from adding additional information that they can safely assume will be dismissed as biased.

  8. Finally again you undermine your argument re-stating issues you've already covered which only serves to present an even weaker image of your own issues or memory; re-stating that the artist would not make cost-free alterations after you had approved the final image.

sci
Dec. 25th, 2010 03:43 pm (UTC)
Re: Minor fixes
And in regard to 0r0ch1;

  1. The dismissive way you describe his name is the first indicator of your attitude of subtle contempt.

  2. Your disproportionate complaint style rears it's head as you present more passive-aggressive range going in turn; Fine, Okay, Last Straw. Little is shown between the stages of contentment and outrage. Once again you display the perception that the artist should simply know innately that you the individual, the customer, should be able to simply tell they might be unhappy with the work without feedback. But as extra-sensory abilities have yet to be proven by scientific investigation, we cannot accept this so must again assume your own inaction is at fault here.

  3. And again, another item to imply a pattern of behaviour as you bring an admittedly personal issue up to attempt to bias the audience, but at the same time withholding any details that we might judge it by if so inclined to let ourselves.

  4. And then we approach the closest thing to a reasonable complaint in your diatribe; of a failure of confirmation over a $10 sketch by one of the artists. But again it is not merely that, it is also the additional anger of some unspecified personal issue and your own anger for not speaking up over the previous issues.

  5. Yet more leading argument ensues as we enter the final stretch as you, an apparent follower of the artists work, describe his replies as "Troll like". As 0r0ch1 is well know for his love of memes and bizarre humour, a trait also shared by some Trolls. Intentional trolling from him seems that it could be hard to differentiate from light-hearted communication without malicious evidence to the contrary, particularly with your established distaste for "unprofessional" attitudes. And even then that the issue is over a $10 sketch, an amount an artist would reasonably expect to occupy under an hour of work. An in-depth discussion and assessment of the work produced would reasonably be taken as above and beyond the call of duty.

  6. But despite that, and I would imagine likely to avoid further waste of their time, they simply refunded you and you lost nothing over the single item you did complain about.

  7. But yet more follows that; even though it was not a price you were charged or even apparently considered paying for, you must still rail against the prices he charges for items you didn't want. "His prices are too high" you cry over the work of an in-demand artist for content that traditionally incurs a surcharge. And god-forbid he be friendly to you, the customer, just so he can take your money for his work. Your passive aggression simmers in barely-constrained disgust at his prices being out of your bargain-basement range.



In summation I am forced to conclude the issue you have is not with the artists themselves, but both at your own lack of action in raising issues you were unhappy with at the correct time, and of your ability to afford the works you desire.
Rather than turn this annoyance inward and force personal change of habits upon yourself, you have constructed a faltering web of self-reassurance to try and turn the reasonable behaviour of two artists into a conspiracy of intentionally negligent behaviour against you. And in addition to that, your passive-aggressive closing tries to raise the idea that flaming, or some other group attack on these artists, might be a fitting revenge for your perceived insult. This is when in fact the only person at fault here is yourself and your own twisted sense of failure trying to find another outlet for an event so minor your are unable to even recall the location of the products of all this stress.
Learn and adapt from your own limitations and perhaps you will emerge into a more forgiving and adaptable person who will see the world in wider terms than their own desire for whatever they want, now, exactly as they wanted for nothing.

Merry christmas,
~ Summer Glau
Re: Minor fixes - maddogairpirate - Dec. 25th, 2010 11:53 pm (UTC) - Expand
Re: Minor fixes - sci - Dec. 26th, 2010 12:23 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: Minor fixes - maddogairpirate - Dec. 26th, 2010 12:46 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: Minor fixes - mr_cullen - Dec. 26th, 2010 12:46 am (UTC) - Expand
likeshine
Dec. 25th, 2010 03:42 pm (UTC)

this post reads more like a beware against you... you got the artwork and a refund, and you're passing judgement on the artists' pricing. no thnx.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( 84 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

A_B icon
artists_beware
Commissioner & Artist, Warning & Kudos Community
Artists Beware

Community Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com