?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Advice Needed: Resolution for Commissions

I cant find anybody who would give me an answer on this.. But what resolution of images seem best to give a commissioner?

I have a laptop that I work off of, and I understand that the resolution of my screen tends to make everything way bigger, even most websites dont fit properly on my screen.. Its not bad its just a slight difference.. Anyhow, I tend to draw on my screen at the same size I would if it were paper. Where I can see most every detail when fully zoomed out/original size. I noticed that other artists tend to draw like... two or three times the size that I do but I always felt that was a personal prefrence thing.. Until recently.

I  have heard a few concerns that my art tends to be on the small size, and I dont want to give my customers any less than they deserve. So what resolutions would be best for commissions? Flat colored commissions? Fully colored and detailed commissions? Whats the average expectation?

Community Tags:

Artist's beware has moved!
Do NOT repost your old bewares. They are being archived.
https://artistsbeware.info/

Comments

(Deleted comment)
sirmeo
Nov. 19th, 2016 03:18 pm (UTC)
Well, in the example you provided the artist DOES mention beforehand that getting the full resolution costs extra? I mean the reason you know about it is because the artist's TOS states so, so I don't find that a problem, personally?

I mean I understand disappointment if you wanted to commission art and for whatever reason need a higher resolution piece, and the artist doesn't give that out, but I also understand the artist's reason for being hesitant to give out full print files.

There are, sadly, many commissioners who end up sharing the print file against the artist's wishes.
In a sense I find it "fair" that full resolution might cost extra, because not everyone needs one, and that way only the people who really want one needs to pay the higher price as opposed to the artist raising their commission prices for everyone. But I also understand why someone would be turned off by this, and those people definitely have their right to take their business elsewhere and be disappointed.
I'm neither "for" or "against" this practice, because I understand both sides of this.

I, personally, don't mind sharing the full res file, and I think majority of artist's don't mind either? Only rarely do I see people asking for extra for full res files, and I've honestly never seen an artist NOT mention that you only get 500x500 pixel file if that's the only thing you get (icons and such excluded, in those a small file is pretty much expected) -- I'm not saying it never happens, and if it does happen, it's bad business practice, definitely, but I see artist being upfront about file sizes than hiding them.
(Deleted comment)
thaily
Nov. 22nd, 2016 09:54 am (UTC)
>2. I disagree with the business practice I've seen where some artists will spring 72 DPI images on their clients, and then go, "Oh, you'll have to pay a licensing fee if you want to have the 300 DPI version I also have."

It's because of the potential for misuse of hi-rez print-quality files. People can redistribute the hi-rez file to others who might try to sell prints, or print it on shirts etc. etc.

Once you give away the print-quality file, there's not much you can do to prevent abuse, and you might have to hire a lawyer to stop them, if the perpetrators are even in a country that abides by DMCA/EUCD laws. Most artists won't have that kind of money, so.

It's entirely reasonable to ask for more money for the abuse-sensitive file resolution.
(Deleted comment)

Profile

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

Community Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com