Self Publishing: What's An Artist Worth?

If you're like many other folks who have recently delved into the foray of self-publishing 5E products, you've probably quickly realised that art is expensive (actually, I dislike using that term - it's not expensive for what it is). Some people are lucky enough to have artistic talent which lets them illustrate their own products; others need to rely on the hard work of other contributors to help bring their words to life. This short article covers a few basic ways you can get your product illustrated. Welcome to a well-established community of small and self-publishers in the RPG industry!

If you're like many other folks who have recently delved into the foray of self-publishing 5E products, you've probably quickly realised that art is expensive (actually, I dislike using that term - it's not expensive for what it is). Some people are lucky enough to have artistic talent which lets them illustrate their own products; others need to rely on the hard work of other contributors to help bring their words to life. This short article covers a few basic ways you can get your product illustrated. Welcome to a well-established community of small and self-publishers in the RPG industry!

Are You A Writer Or A Publisher?
First things first, it's important that you start from the right perspective. If you're producing and selling products, and using artists to illustrate them (we'll leave out editors and layout/design people for now), you're not just a writer any more. You're a publisher. A small publisher, perhaps, but a publisher nonetheless. Being a publisher isn't the same thing as being a writer - it requires different skills; and as a publisher, albeit a small one, you have a new set of responsibilities. Publishing ain't always easy, but it can be rewarding.

If you just want to be a writer, that's a different thing. As a writer, you don't need to worry about art, someone else can edit your work, someone else does the layout, someone handles the marketing, someone handles the accounting. If writing is the thing you really want to do, consider instead approaching a publisher and writing for them. They'll do all the (non-written) hard work, and you'll get paid for your writing.

But if you're doing the whole shebang - using artists, selling the work, and so on - you're a publisher. You may prefer to think of yourself as a struggling writer, but you've taken a step beyond that; and as a small publisher you need to consider the hard work of others involved in bringing your words to life. You may be surprised to find that that can take as long or longer than your actual writing, and involve just as much hard work!

Don't Work For Exposure
Now, art isn't cheap. Or at least, it shouldn't be - it is possible to persuade artists to work for peanuts (or worse, for exposure) but doing so is exploiting them. A quick Google search will reveal hundreds of articles about how artists should not work for free or for exposure, and the reasons why, so I won't belabour the point here except to say that it is important. I even wrote a similar article (focused on writers, not artists) a while back.

That might mean you can't afford art, at least at first. That's totally OK. It's OK to not be able to afford something, and to work towards being able to afford it, and books with little or no art are just fine! However, there are other options which mean that you can actually afford art and pay your artists a fair amount. Every small publisher has gone through this - if you look at DTRPG, you'll see thousands of small publishers who have gone through that very thing. Don't panic; it's not a new problem. If you keep producing quality stuff, you'll be able to start slowly improving the production values of that material. "But I can't afford it" is not a great reason to exploit somebody; it's a great reason to hone your craft and reputation and work towards being able to afford it. In the meantime, starting with little or no art is just fine; if your writing is solid, you have a great starting point.

That said, in this day and age, there are some amazing resources which enable you to early circumvent these barriers. It's a pretty wonderful time for self-publishing!

Some Solutions
The most obvious one is Kickstarter. Let's say you need a thousand dollars to illustrate your short book (like I said, art is not cheap - I spent £20,000 of Kickstarter funds on art for my WOIN books). A Kickstarter campaign to raise that thousand dollars has a number of benefits. First, you find out in advance if folks want your book. Second, it has its own marketing value all of itself. Third, it means you can pay your artists a fair wage. Fourth, if you raise more than your thousand dollars, you start making profit before even putting the book on sale. Fifth, you can then sell the book.

That's a win-win situation. Your book ends up looking good, everybody gets paid fairly, you make money. It's hard to find a good reason not to do that, especially when your back-up plan is to ask artists to work for free. Work out what art you need, work out how much it costs, and there's your Kickstarter goal. When your book gets funded, your artists' fair pay is built-in to the model.

I would normally include Patreon as an option, but the logistics are a bit awkward there. Certainly it's very suited to lots of small items, but if you want to use DMs Guild (which I assume most folks reading this do) the exclusivity clause at DMs Guild makes it slightly tricky getting your product to your patrons. I'm hopeful that some loosening of the rules (or a much needed extra feature - comp copies for DMs Guild publishers) is in the future, as that would make for the ideal solution.

What other options are there? The other obvious solution is stock art. There are stock art locations where you can buy art rights inexpensively, or even free public domain art. Those artists make their money by selling the same art to lots of people, rather than doing custom work just for you. There's the big places like Shutterstock, and there is tons of stock art available on DriveThruRPG. WotC has released some art to be used as stock art on DMs Guild (for free!) In fact, there are hundreds of places you can get stock art. Here's a quick list:
Now, there are places you can get art done for next to nothing. I personally feel that doing so is unfair. Some artists may well be willing to work for peanuts because (a) they don't know better and think that's the only way to get started as an artist or (b) they don't need the money as they have a full time job and are just doing it for fun. The former, unfortunately, have their viewpoint reinforced by all those publishers who keep telling them that that is true, when it isn't; the latter undermine the former because they make it look like art is, indeed, a cheap commodity. For that reason, even if you don't need the money, if you're an artist I hope that you still charge a fair price for your art, because not doing so harms those that do need the money.

Can you get art for dirt cheap, or free? Sure. Should you? The desire to get your awesome words out there and looking pretty is understandable and the temptation to do what you need to do to get that done right now is hard to resist, especially if you have no money to spend. I've been there! I asked Claudio Pozas, an artist I've known for 16 years, who started small and worked his way up:
Why not just offer US$5 and use whatever artist takes the bait? There are several reasons for that:

1) You'll get the art you paid for: probably rushed, from a starting, naive artist who is hurting his career more than helping.​
2) There's the ethical quandary of offering a payment that is unlikely to support the worker you're hiring. It's a matter of responsibility, when you have the power in the professional relationship (in this case, the job offer).​
3) for the publisher really scraping for money, there are several good artists out there that offer stock illustration. Sure, the art won't be uniquely yours, but it's better than to cheat an artist out of a living wage.​


OK, so now you're asking what a fair rate for art is? That depends on a number of things - colour, black-and-white, size, complexity, and so on. The range does, of course, vary - I'm not saying that beginning artists can charge as much as those who have spent years forging their reputation. A well-known artist may charge ten times or more than a new one; that's OK, as long as the new one is still charging a fair amount.

The average rates I tend to see from artists are in the region of $30 for a quarter page piece, $100 for a full page piece, maybe double that if it's full-colour. For a well-known artist, you may have to pay much more than that, but for the average freelancer, that's about the average. I asked Claudio Pozas again:
"Fair" depends on a lot of things: the artist's experience, the publisher's size, and the product's reach. At the very least, an artist -- like any other person -- should make a living wage out of his work. In the US, the minimum wage is US$7 (roughly) an hour, and there's talk of increasing that to US$15 (a minimum "living" wage).

If an artist is expected to spend two days on an illustration (between sketching, composition, rendering, and handling alterations), that's about 16 hours of work. That artist, at the very least, should be paid US$240 for his time.​
Granted, the artist won't probably work for 8 hours per day, that can be spread out over more days, as the freelancer has to deal with his own workflow, his paperwork, and have time to hone his skills.​
The bottom line is that each publisher should be prepared to contribute to an artist's living wage, so we can end the all-too-real image of the "starving artist". I can see a small, quarter-page illustration that could theoretically be finished (sketch + composition + rendering + alteration) over the course of 8 hours (again, putting together the hours actually spent on the image over several days), and the publisher offering US$120 for it.​
BTW, those numbers I gave you can be adjusted for, as you said, non-work-for-hire, etc. A b/w quarter-page illustration that an artist can do in 3 hours can start at US$30, easily.​

Now, Claudio is an established artist with a solid, reliable, professional reputation. $120 for a quarter page item isn't necessarily what a brand new artist can command, but they can definitely command more than just "exposure".

What about cartography? Dyson Logos offered this information when I asked: "As a cartographer, I charge $250 for a full page map, $175 for a half-page. This is for "work for hire", my rates are lower if we are dealing with licensed material instead (where I keep copyright and provide non-exclusive use licensing)."

You'll notice that Claudio says that an artist should be paid a living wage for work. Now, there is a problem there; I know it well! You, the publisher are not making a living wage, so why should the artist? It's a good question. It's also not the right question. If your business model doesn't allow you to pay a fair wage for art, the answer isn't "exploit an artist", it's "revise your business model; it doesn't work". Don't pass the pain onto those who depend on you - it is, sadly, yours to bear. There are solutions; they take work or patience, but I've outlined several above (start smaller; use Kickstarter; etc.) It may be that you just can't have the art yet. Don't worry - you can, with time, get yourself to a place where you can have it all! Think of it like hiring a builder or other craftsman to work for you (though those types of people long, long ago realised the value of their labour - you won't get them doing it for a fiver!)

You can do other things to make things fairer for artists, and maybe save some money. Consider letting them keep the rights to the art. When I publish, I no longer use work-for-hire art except for very occasional specific pieces which really need to be (and I pay more for them). Work-for-hire means you, the publisher, owns the copyright to the art. Instead, consider letting the artist keep the copyright (don't do that instead of paying them - do it as well as paying them, but you may be able to negotiate a lower rate). The artist can go on to make money by selling prints and the like; even WotC lets its cartographers do that these days. Hey, head over to my friend Claudio Pozas' art store and buy a print of this gorgeous cover he did for To Slay A Dragon. The odds are you don't really need it to be work-for-hire. If for some reason it does need to be work-for-hire, you can still give the artist permission to sell prints themself.


tsad.jpg

[FONT=&quot]SaveSave[/FONT]
 

I'm pretty sure that the artists who you've deprived completely of work are not fans of that idea.

Wow, not loading the argument at all there. Now Morrus is responsible for depriving artists of work??? :)

Two things: 1) In the long term, this will benefit all artists and creative types. When a site as popular as the Huffington Post can get by with paying nothing to writers (yes, they pay $0, not even paying too little, but paying *nothing*), then there is a problem. If money is being made, those who create the value need to be paid, and unfortunately that requires some major culture shifts in the business world, but without those shifts, artists will continually leave the field because they can't afford to keep working in it.

2) Several times it is mentioned that there are ways to find the money to pay artists. Kickstarter and Patreon have been specifically named... several times. Or not buying full rights and letting the artists sell prints, or a variety of other options. It's a false dilemma to think the only options are paying crap to 90% of artists or never hiring 90% of artists. Repeatedly the point has been made, that there are ways to pay artists a fair rate for their work. It might not be easy, but if you want easy, don't become a publisher.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

AriochQ

Adventurer
I am working on a DM's Guild product. I got one of my son's high school friends to work on the artwork for a 50% cut of whatever profits we realize. It is by no means 'professional' quality, but:

1. It is a good experience for him. We have been talking about deadlines, revisions, etc. All the things that he will run into later in life as an artist.
2. He gets more experience as an artist. He intends to major in graphic design, so it can't hurt.
3. It is fun for me (and hopefully him).
4. I view DM's guild as an extension of my hobby with an added bonus that it may pay for a few more gaming goodies (I have another job to pay the bills). 50% of the profits barely matters to me, but for a high school kid could seriously increase his income.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I was really interested on:

3) for the publisher really scraping for money, there are several good artists out there that offer stock illustration. Sure, the art won't be uniquely yours, but it's better than to cheat an artist out of a living wage.

Is there more information about this? A compiled place with links to artists that offer stock art?

There's a list right there in the OP.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
It's all about supply and demand, and your article proposes to drive up the supply of cheap art (public domain and stock art) and drive down the demand for new art. Public domain art does not pay artists. Cheap stock art may pay the artist a living wage for the time spent on that piece of art, but it reduces the number of pieces of art being sold. If a good stock artist sells a work 10 times at $15 a piece (or 30 times at $5 a piece, and only a third of them get used), that means one good artist gets $150 for ten uses and nine artists get nothing. Is that better than ten artists each getting $15 for a commissioned piece of work? You certainly haven't improved the status of the artists who got nothing.

At the end of the day, your ideas would produce a market that spends less on art (given PD art) and employs far fewer artists at a much higher rate. I'm pretty sure that the artists who you've deprived completely of work are not fans of that idea.

Stock art wasn't my idea. :)
 


Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
That's a list of stock art websites (or public domain art), not of artists offering stock art. Most of them don't group art by artist either (which is kind of useful).

The stock art websites list the artists. There are tens of thousands of artists. I find it useful to search the art by keyword, and once I find one I like, look at what else that artist has done.
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
Now Morrus is responsible for depriving artists of work??? :)

To the extent that he successfully encourages (a) people to not become publishers, (b) use public domain work or (c) spend their art budget on stock art by established artists instead of new art by new artists, yes. It's a law, the law of unintended consequences; this is a complex system, and intervening in it will have consequences you didn't intend.

In the long term, this will benefit all artists and creative types.

Creativity is an attribute of humans. Probably the majority of people have had dreams of being authors or artists or musicians or actors. Many of them have acted upon it. Most of them end up as mailmen or sysadmins or some other non-creative profession. That's the problem here; jobs that many people can do don't pay well, and that goes double for jobs that people would rather do instead of other jobs that pay better.

but without those shifts, artists will continually leave the field because they can't afford to keep working in it.

Microsoft might be able to spend more on art, but I'm pretty sure that the total art budget of the RPG community is roughly constant. Say it's a million, to grab a number much higher than I believe; that'll support 20 artists at 50K a year, or 50 artists at 20K a year, or 200 artists at 5K a year. Since I'm pretty sure there's 200 artists who want to grab a part of that RPG art budget, if the working artists are going to get a living wage, most of them are going to have to stop competing for a slice of the pie.

2) Several times it is mentioned that there are ways to find the money to pay artists. Kickstarter and Patreon have been specifically named... several times. Or not buying full rights and letting the artists sell prints, or a variety of other options.

With the exception of artists selling prints, you're just moving money around in the community. The amount of money people are going to pay for RPG books is not significantly going to be expanded by Kickstarter and Patreon. You can't get blood from a stone.

It's a false dilemma to think the only options are paying crap to 90% of artists or never hiring 90% of artists.

It's quite simple; you can't increase the money you're spending by a significant amount without increasing the income. And increasing the income of an established industry is slow at best. If your art budget is $200, and you plan on paying your commissioned artists 10 times as much, your choices are less art, more public domain art, or stock art. It's rarely going to be an option to just jump your art budget to $2000, and certainly not industry-wise.

It might not be easy, but if you want easy, don't become a publisher.

If you remove 90% of the publishers from the industry, so go the people they would pay.
 

Wallraven

Explorer
Creativity is an attribute of humans. Probably the majority of people have had dreams of being authors or artists or musicians or actors. Many of them have acted upon it. Most of them end up as mailmen or sysadmins or some other non-creative profession. That's the problem here; jobs that many people can do don't pay well, and that goes double for jobs that people would rather do instead of other jobs that pay better.

...

It's quite simple; you can't increase the money you're spending by a significant amount without increasing the income. And increasing the income of an established industry is slow at best. If your art budget is $200, and you plan on paying your commissioned artists 10 times as much, your choices are less art, more public domain art, or stock art. It's rarely going to be an option to just jump your art budget to $2000, and certainly not industry-wise.

This reminds me of something that one aspiring author said - it was along the lines of "JK Rowling should retire so the rest of us have a chance at success."

Your answer seems to be "make everyone equally unable to have this as a fulltime career".

Not everyone can be successful in a creative career. Or any given career. Those who are better (or luckier, or more popular, or whatever) will rise to the top, the rest will struggle (and maybe quit).
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
This reminds me of something that one aspiring author said - it was along the lines of "JK Rowling should retire so the rest of us have a chance at success."

Your answer seems to be "make everyone equally unable to have this as a fulltime career".

Not everyone can be successful in a creative career. Or any given career. Those who are better (or luckier, or more popular, or whatever) will rise to the top, the rest will struggle (and maybe quit).

Your last paragraph is surprisingly free market, given that you're arguing against the free market. Why not let those who struggle selling $5 commissions struggle and those who are better succeed?

I'm not saying necessarily that we should or shouldn't do anything, but let's not imagine that what the article proposes is good for all RPG artists; the proposal would reduce the amount of art being created for RPGs and prevent artists from competing on price, pricing many artists out of the market. That's arguably a good thing, but let's acknowledge the consequences of the actions.

It's interesting that you respond derisively to an idea to raise the wages of successful writers (on the back of a billionaire writer) in an argument against an idea to raise the wages of successful artists (on the back of many minimally successful artists.)
 

dave2008

Legend
I'm not saying necessarily that we should or shouldn't do anything, but let's not imagine that what the article proposes is good for all RPG artists; the proposal would reduce the amount of art being created for RPGs and prevent artists from competing on price, pricing many artists out of the market. That's arguably a good thing, but let's acknowledge the consequences of the actions.

That is what you think would happen. It is not a fact, but your opinion. It is entirely possible nothing changes or the opposite of occurs.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top