It’s like a chicken or the egg problem because I can’t make a decision without looking at a high quality portfolio, and I expect works in a high quality portfolio to cost 4-5 figures just for materials. So somebody has to be the one paying for those projects with no prior example to compare to, and it’s not fair to expect each artist to do that at their own expense.
Discussion
Is there a way to achieve that with a very low budget? Possibly, but if a higher budget would be an improvement, then that’s not optimal. And I think it would be a mistake to try to cut corners in the budget of an artist’s portfolio, of all places.
Interesting short article for more thoughts historically about patronage of the arts.
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780195399301/obo-9780195399301-0358.xml
For the most important projects that I’ve participated in, I relied on hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of prior commissions or projects that other people had paid for, in just three different portfolios. It would have been impossible for me to make sense of anything without those costs already being covered, and those commissions completed.
Would be interested to hear your thoughts after looking at that article. In particular I started to think about the "influence" that a state or patron might have over artists and what that might mean for the artist's ability to express freely what they want. In a way it might be seen as a potential "centralised" influence. Perhaps our participation in bitcoin and what we are seeing in and around nostr might be the seed of a more "decentralised" model of funding artists.
I think this works well for the funding of music, but visual arts is much more of a one-on-one patron-artist relationship. If physical works of art could be distributed as easily as CD-quality music on the Internet, would a more decentralized model be possible? Maybe! There is something unique to the visual arts where individual patrons can form lifelong friendships with artists and be the primary sponsor for decades. I think of the relationship between Calouste Gulbenkian and Rene Lalique. I find it hard to believe that that level of patronage could be replicated today using a decentralized model, because the costs would have been enormous and possibly there wouldn’t be enough people who would be interested in helping.
One medium that gets closer to the MP3 model of distribution would be the casting of bronzes or precious metals and making a limited run by hand or even 3D scanning / 3D printing those at scale. That’s one niche that could work, but it doesn’t really apply to other mediums that I can think of.
Interesting. I'm, frankly, not knowledgable about funding for artists in present day. Is there more corporate funding of art now rather than say funding from individuals?
I don’t have the best vantage point, but it seems to me that corporations are doing 1000x or 100x more than individual patrons. Artists that I really like are being supported this way in Canada, but I can’t speak to other countries. But that’s very diluted, like out of $100,000,000, maybe $5,000 finds it’s way to an artist that I like as a one-time grant! So it’s relatively easy for an individual patron who really cares to “outspend” the corporations when it comes to supporting a particular artist, who are doing more of a shotgun approach. You could say both are helpful in their own way, but I think individual patrons are really an endangered species that needs to come back in the form of Bitcoin maximalists.
Well, I think that is something that can develop now, as bitcoiners become more connected through protocols such as Nostr. It's probably fair to say that bitcoin's potential can, and should, spread into as many areas of culture, arts, science and society as possible.
For sure, and maybe a lot of these causes can receive a surprising amount of support through Zaps by being active on Nostr. The social aspect of promoting your cause on Nostr is very important. It’s challenging because it’s not like most people are desperate to leave their network effects on Instagram or YouTube. Those are still very much seen as essential platforms for distribution and discovery.
Yea, hopefully as nostr continues to grow it will attract the more "discerning" artists rather than the lowest common denominator type creators seen in those algorithm based social media platforms. I'm not suggesting all artists who use those older platforms are "LCD" but that genuinely talented artists might find it simpler and more beneficial to interact with their followers on something like nostr. The ethos of proof of work seems to be quite effective at sorting the wheat from the chaff.😊
Freelance and commission work are beneficial for artists and generally the most accessible funding option. Government involvement will always come with political motives so that's a trap I would stay away from.
Personally I perform better when a client wants a particular result and is willing to pay a reasonable amount for the work. I see it as a matter of honor to give back the value in art that I receive in commission. The money isn't earned until the quality of the work matches the value of the commission, in an approximate estimation of course.
When I create art for myself I either have a project that the art must fit into, or if it's not project related then I explore new ideas. Repetition drags me down so I prefer to
... so I prefer to keep some variation in my work.
Interesting. Is there any obvious difference that you could foresee if bitcoin/lightning and it's sphere were to be more involved in that process compared to traditional fiat?
There are many centralized platforms that many types of artists are dependent upon, that I would like to see decentralized. For example the whole 3D product ecosystem.
Artists are dependent on exposure for reaching clients, as well as for hosting their art and/or products and services.
Bitcoin Lightning is a game changer in terms of sovereignty for artists. Still there is a need to decentralize the central hubs that artists are dependent upon.
This is not easy to do immediately. Artists need reach and centralized hubs naturally have better reach. User traffic and visibility impacts how well artists can earn income from products they have made. This can be anything from art prints, tutorials, 3D models, texture products, promo/advertising work to technical tools they have coded.
Those that control visibility also have power over those that need visibility for their services. If we have high quality decentralized hubs where art ecosystems can flourish and attract traffic, then this will greatly counteract the centralized hubs of today.
It would be valuable to have decentralized marketplaces where artists can meet customers who are looking for the services/products offered.
The obvious obstacle: why should customers look for decentralized marketplaces when they already have centralized hubs?
There are no simple answers here. If the decentralized marketplaces provide unique, quality products with better product browsing and filtering - more signal and less noise - then this would be a possible edge that could attract traffic.
Bitcoin brings sovereignty to creators, yet we need to convince the larger public to make purchases with bitcoin rather than fiat.
Thanks for your thoughts on that. Almost all of the most creative artists and musicians I have known as friends were frankly hopelessly unable to interact with the marketing and the general economics of their art and maybe bitcoin's wider self sovereign ethos might prove to be something that can make it less problematic to deal with that? I agree with your point that, as yet, anyone wanting to reach the greatest audience as possible, whether it's art or anything else, is reliant on those platforms.
I think your observation is very accurate. A lot of artists are not natural marketers or salespeople. Many artists, musicians and writers are introverts at heart, which is probably also why they have spent so much time with their creative obsession in the first place.
We are in a marathon and bitcoin LN brings more and more opportinity to artists and creatives every year. It's amazing what tools we already have.
Networking and audience reach will improve with Nostr over time. We live in exciting times.
Yes, it is very cool to see different creative groups explore the possibilities around Bitcoin and Nostr. Long may it continue!