armaina

5 hours ago, Bourbon said:

I dunno, I disagree. A person should be aware of the artist's skill level and style before approaching them for a commission. The way the fingers/arms are drawn appear to be how they draw in general, and it's also a difficult pose to pull off with foreshortening. Even some of the most skilled artists can fuck it up (and I've had to draw similar poses and it isn't easy). Complaining/critiquing an artist's anatomy after you commissioned them does seem like nitpicking when you should have already been aware of how they draw and their level of skill going in.

If I were expected to draw things perfectly that I don't have the skillset for and then being critiqued/nitpicked over it, that would turn me off from that client and I would refund them. Particularly because a lot of commissioners don't know what they're talking about and often ask for things that are impossible or give inappropriate/wrong critique. 

Asking for changes to missing colors, markings, etc is one thing. But telling someone that you don't like x body part is drawn is another thing (and can be VERY vague and unhelpful anyways). 

I feel similarly, at most adjust the fingers to be a bit conical but otherwise I'd not have requested much more. The sticker pack was way under-priced per drawing, I wouldn't have felt it appropriate to raise a fight over something so minor on just one of them.

Personally, I am of the mind that this should not have been refunded in full. An edit with the addition of the horns, yes. Possibly a partial refund at most, but not a full refund.

The quality is not that far off from the other images so there is no problem with the grievance there. The difference in style is deceptive and makes one assume that the quality is different but it's the same. The artist clearly favors more semi-realistic and real stylized looks. The hair in the image has the strongest indication of the artist usual rendering, which would not have worked if applied to the rest of the body. And the slight wispy lining you see in the two examples would also not have worked if applied to the very specific stylization present in the OP's character. There is also rendering on the chest floof which you can see if you don't have a washed out or otherwise too-bright monitor. If anything, it seems the artist may have had some difficulty adapting to the very stylized and over-large eyed look of the OP's character. At worst the artist misjudged their ability to pull off the look when agreeing to take on the commission.

As I stated before, the worst of this boils down to not sending the OP any WIP or making any indication that the commission in question would not have any form of WIP. But even with that in mind, receiving a full refund over such minor errors feels more like robbery at this point.

A note for future reference, not just in this case specifically, but any other, if you're about to commission an artist you see something very specific in an artist's gallery you would like them to emulate in a commission of yours, point out that specific piece to them and express this. You know your refs, you know what to look for, all artists do not have the same 'short hand' for rendering textures and render types and will not always interpret it the way you may have imagined it in your head. Pointing out something explicit 'This character's look is really close to how I'd like mine to look' or 'the way you did this short fur on this would be perfect', at the start of the commission can bridge some of gaps of misinterpretation. (and yes WIP will always fix a lot of this but, pointing out stuff like this can still help)

This is one of those cases where the problems could have been avoided entirely had a sketch phase been shown ahead of time, the price paid is about 35$ USD so I feel it would have been something worth ensuring there was at least one preview step before completion. (I'd probably have misinterpreted the ears as well, but that's what WIPs are for!!)

10 minutes ago, Bearteeth said:

Wanted to update this and say that I was able to file a chargeback. I thought it was going to be too late to do it but I had until November 2nd 2019. So I'm hoping to get a full refund. 

Good luck, let us know if that works out.

This was an especially frustrating read. The OP was reasonable, flexible and gave ample opportunity to be worked with yet was continuously lambasted by the artist. No check in, no sketch approval, and acting like they being harassed because the OP checked in weeks after hearing nothing. I don't think a partial refund would have been out of the question had any of this been communicated to the OP at all.  (also that's absolutely not what gaslighting is) Putting a lot of inappropriate responsibility on the client, there's a difference between providing an appropriate amount of context for the situation, and dumping every complication you have on the client to guilt them.

To compound this all, the artist's information on their currant journal boasts a timeframe of:

Quote

ETA: 3 Business-Days to 1 Business-Week from sketch-approval but ETA times vary on To-Do List Queue

I have the distinct feeling the artist just refers to 'but my to-do list' if they don't meet the provided time frame (Which is really short and they shouldn't promise that kind of turn around just in general)

4 hours ago, TundraFright said:

I would like to get this updated as resolved, but I don't think that I can on my own without an admin marking it as such or adding in the additional tag.

We can mark it approved yes, just give us the heads up when the refund is completed and we'll do so.

Very glad to know she made a point to contact you and resolve things, it's always good to hear when anyone is able to own up to the issue and address the problem considerately.

7 minutes ago, Bourbon said:

I dunno if you're confused but I'm not defending Lemonbrat or part of their group, I was just saying that suit reads way more as feline than what Camaro received. I wasn't necessarily saying it's more accurate of a big cat either, just that it's clearly feline while Camaro's head is obviously a rodent head, and the tail is much thinner and more accurately represents a feline tail than the one Camaro got. 

Didn't think that you were defending lemonbrat at all, because it does look a little better than what Camaro got. Rather, I was pointing out consistent issues in shoddy work for Big Cat characters that clearly both used that mouse head as a base, I can tell they both used the same base and I didn't want them to come in and go 'but it's the same'.

The rest of the post was in no way aimed at you, only Lemonbrat

5 hours ago, Bourbon said:

These are the parts that stick out to me, because they clearly CAN create a big cat suit that reads as feline. 

Naw, they really can't. That tiny chin? That's not a big cat trait, big cats have a pronounced chin. At least the flatness of the muzzle is more accurate, as is the nose, than the one Camaro got. The ears on the head also do not sit correctly for a cat on both this suit and Camaro's suit. If anything that suit says to mean the group doesn't know how to make big cat heads. And yes that's even counting cartoonish exaggeration.

Fur of the type used should not have been offered to the client, that's on the Lemonbrat group, not on Camaro. Not to mention, it's clear whomever constructed with it was not familiar with the material.

No work should have been done before a DTD was sent for a suit of this type. Once again, that's on the Lemonbrat group, not Camaro. None of this 'you can give us measurements but it won't be as good', there should have been a hard stop until the DTD was sent.

This deadline should not have been agreed to the amount of time it took to pay off didn't give enough time to complete it.

Camaro had nothing to do with how that head turned out, that all on the people that constructed it. Like I said for the lion above, there are key traits for big cats that are not present for either head. Their noses certainly aren't as pronounced like that and so separated from the muzzle.

I still cannot believe you're doubling down on that tail. You made a hard S curved tail just because there was a few shots in the ref with a tiny curve in it. You know whomever did the construction went wrong on this one and you don't want to own up to it.

The only thing that has not been proven or dis-proven clearly is the explicit issue with the chest. No one has provided the initial request form nor the emails related to it, to prove when or where changes were requested or made, so that's the only thing I cannot comment on.

Your group has been doing this for a long time, these are all rookie mistakes that should not be happening to a group that's been around this long. And if the person doing the correspondence is not the same person that's doing the construction that needs to change.

On 7/29/2019 at 4:51 AM, Arasteia said:

I just noticed I spelled the artist's name wrong in the title! It should be REYKAT. I'm so sorry! 

It's fine! all that stuff can be edited, it's already fixed 😄

2 hours ago, Celestina said:

It isn't anything different than the journal other than other users and the artist calling the OP names. OP was never directly named. The artist called OP an "idiot".  The artist was frustrated that the PayPal dispute could put their account in jeopardy due to the no adult rule for paypal.

This is the thing that needs to be emphasized, OP in comments continues to claim that the chat is what prompted his actions but that chat log didn't happen until after the threat of fling a dispute. (but before the actual dispute itself) In that situation I think any artist would feel need to vent in a private group briefly. There's simply no compassion on the OP's end as he disregards all emotional and physical stress and opts to push harder instead of reconcile at all.

It's like I said before, even with the wait and debatable circumstances regarding the readability of the ref, (which is pretty much the only grounds as to why this was accepted in the first place) everything else is on the OP.

You've stated that you will be making some updates to your ref and that's a good thing, but please be certain to give any emphasis on your ref that you consider Must Have. If there is anything to your character you find you must have, no exceptions, make that clear on your ref.

I understand your eagerness after the wait but filing a charge-back after only an hour's wait is completely unreasonable. I even find the act of sending an ultimatum after only 24 hours to be out of hand on your part. And you clearly don't understand now menstrual pain can be for some people, because if you did, you wouldn't have pulled the hammer after only an hour. For some people the pain can be as bad as kidney pain and will literally make a person bedridden, which the artist in question did give an example of it's severity. It's as good as being sick. You don't have to answer this, but consider for a moment, if she said she had been ill, would you have been this impatient? Would you have still expected a reply within an hour or would you have been more lenient?

While I wouldn't go so far as to say your filing a charge-back is blackmail, it is underhanded. I can see why the artist made the journal in question, which does not name you in any way, and in submitting this you've outed yourself. It's not exactly professional to vent in a public journal about a client even unnamed, but I'm at least sympathetic to the artists' frustration due to your strong-arm tactics, and I can see the journal has since been removed.

I can concede that the wait without contact isn't good, and that at the very least she should have noted that the were 3 spikes in the ref, but everything else after that? That's all on you.

2 hours ago, theodor said:

I do agree that you messaged them way too much; unless you two were friend, I dont see the need to do friendly chatter within a business transaction. As an artist this would bother me a lot.

I emphatically disagree here. Considering they paid in April and heard absolutely nothing until they themselves until they themselves contacted the artist in June, and on top of the potential proposed deadline (despite the fact that the artist TOS claims they don't follow deadlines) The desire to ensure work is done both before the deadline, if at all, it makes sense to want to check in to ensure the deadline was met, which as we can all see, it very much did not.

All things considered, and with how much the OP was yanked around, the OP hasn't really IM'd the artist all that much. I've seen harassment-level commission inquiries, this isn't it.

You mention you've not had a lot of experience in getting commission work of your characters, but you seem to have a very good sense of what is or isn't good business as you were very spot on in every point you made. (also a little fistbump for sticking up for your previous commission work's artist) Almost nothing about this is appropriate for the artist to handle this commission. From the solicitation to the very end, every step was so poorly made on their part.

Any artist that has been doing commission work for some time should be using invoices for everything. It helps the artist keep it organized, it gives the clients a much more reliable paper trail of what they commissioned. And that's before even getting into the matter that specifically requesting a client to pay for or avoid the transaction fee, is a direct violation of PayPal's policy. I'd highly suggest avoiding any artist in the future that insists on Friends and Family payment.

I'm also floored that they blame you for the lack of updates. They could have at any point left you a message, Discord doesn't just reject messages for people that are offline, it even lets you know if a message didn't go through so it's not like there would be any ambiguity. They could have cut off the piece, asked you for clarification, anything, but they didn't put in any of their own due diligence in ensuring the work was accurate or that they judged their own time appropriately.

"No artist wants to see what another artist drew in regards to a commission"

This statement is the one that I just can't get my head around. This is clearly a person that has very little experience in doing commission work outside of video game characters. I assure you, everything about that statement is not true, so much of my work and other's work relies heavily on other artists' renditions of the characters and unique characters will have refsheets drawn by another artist. Knowing what you like about how another artist drew your character helps the next artist know what to shoot for in their piece, and even knowing what didn't turn out quite right, can help the next artist know what to avoid.

All I can hope is that they learn from this in order to better conduct themselves and gauge their time in the future.

3 minutes ago, cknsausage said:

There are a lot of problems with this artist's ToS but I don't think refusing to work with unpleasant people is a red flag in general*. In my ToS I state that I won't work with someone who's proven themselves to be arrogant, rude or unpleasant - but, I do state that if they've paid already, they will receive a full refund (even if I've started work). I had to implement this because of one persistent and incredibly rude commissioner who tries to circumvent my main block on his account by following me on his alts LOL.

Even if it seems like it's just splitting hairs, I think there's a world of difference between having a Right To Refuse Service clause and just straight up calling it an 'a-hole' clause. There's a certain lack of professionalism about that, and that in and of itself can carry some weight that you're willing to fling insults right within your TOS says a lot about an artist. It's not proof, by all means, but it's sure not a good look.