StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Posted: **2010-03-10 01:13am**

So, running the home-office for my wife's mural business I have an RSS aggrigator set up to get any gigs that come up on Craig's List for "murals". I was looking through some when I came across this little gem and had to save it:

Re: Design a Logo - You can thank me later! (Getalifeville)

(check out the graphic) http://yoursite.xtgem.com/designer.gif

Every day, there are more and more Craigs List posts seeking "artists" for everything from auto graphics to comic books to corporate logo designs. More people are finding themselves in need of some form of illustrative service.

But what they`re NOT doing, unfortunately, is realizing how rare someone with these particular talents can be.

To those who are "seeking artists", let me ask you; How many people do you know, personally, with the talent and skill to perform the services you need? A dozen? Five? One? ...none?

More than likely, you don`t know any. Otherwise, you wouldn`t be posting on craigslist to find them.

And this is not really a surprise.

In this country, there are almost twice as many neurosurgeons as there are professional illustrators. There are eleven times as many certified mechanics. There are SEVENTY times as many people in the IT field.

So, given that they are less rare, and therefore less in demand, would it make sense to ask your mechanic to work on your car for free? Would you look him in the eye, with a straight face, and tell him that his compensation would be the ability to have his work shown to others as you drive down the street?

Would you offer a neurosurgeon the "opportunity" to add your name to his resume as payment for removing that pesky tumor? (Maybe you could offer him "a few bucks" for "materials". What a deal!)

Would you be able to seriously even CONSIDER offering your web hosting service the chance to have people see their work, by viewing your website, as their payment for hosting you?

If you answered "yes" to ANY of the above, you`re obviously insane. If you answered "no", then kudos to you for living in the real world.

But then tell me... why would you think it is okay to live out the same, delusional, ridiculous fantasy when seeking someone whose abilities are even less in supply than these folks?

Graphic artists, illustrators, painters, etc., are skilled tradesmen. As such, to consider them as, or deal with them as, anything less than professionals fully deserving of your respect is both insulting and a bad reflection on you as a sane, reasonable person. In short, it makes you look like a twit.

A few things you need to know;

1. It is not a "great opportunity" for an artist to have his work seen on your car/`zine/website/bedroom wall, etc. It IS a "great opportunity" for YOU to have their work there.

2. It is not clever to seek a "student" or "beginner" in an attempt to get work for free. It`s ignorant and insulting. They may be "students", but that does not mean they don`t deserve to be paid for their hard work. You were a "student" once, too. Would you have taken that job at McDonalds with no pay, because you were learning essential job skills for the real world? Yes, your proposition it JUST as stupid.

3. The chance to have their name on something that is going to be seen by other people, whether it`s one or one million, is NOT a valid enticement. Neither is the right to add that work to their "portfolio". They get to do those things ANYWAY, after being paid as they should. It`s not compensation. It`s their right, and it`s a given.

4. Stop thinking that you`re giving them some great chance to work. Once they skip over your silly ad, as they should, the next ad is usually for someone who lives in the real world, and as such, will pay them. There are far more jobs needing these skills than there are people who possess these skills.

5. Students DO need "experience". But they do NOT need to get it by giving their work away. In fact, this does not even offer them the experience they need. Anyone who will not/can not pay them is obviously the type of person or business they should be ashamed to have on their resume anyway. Do you think professional contractors list the "experience" they got while nailing down a loose step at their grandmother`s house when they were seventeen?

If you your company or gig was worth listing as desired experience, it would be able to pay for the services it received. The only experience they will get doing free work for you is a lesson learned in what kinds of scrubs they should not lower themselves to deal with.

6. (This one is FOR the artists out there, please pay attention.) Some will ask you to "submit work for consideration". They may even be posing as some sort of "contest". These are almost always scams. They will take the work submitted by many artists seeking to win the "contest", or be "chosen" for the gig, and find what they like most. They will then usually have someone who works for them, or someone who works incredibly cheap because they have no originality or talent of their own, reproduce that same work, or even just make slight modifications to it, and claim it as their own. You will NOT be paid, you will NOT win the contest. The only people who win, here, are the underhanded folks who run these ads. This is speculative, or "spec", work. It`s risky at best, and a complete scam at worst. I urge you to avoid it, completely. For more information on this subject, please visit http://www.no-spec.com.

So to artists/designers/illustrators looking for work, do everyone a favor, ESPECIALLY yourselves, and avoid people who do not intend to pay you. Whether they are "spec" gigs, or just some guy who wants a free mural on his living room walls. They need you. You do NOT need them.

And for those who are looking for someone to do work for free... please wake up and join the real world. The only thing you`re accomplishing is to insult those with the skills you need. Get a clue.

-- Anonymous from craiglist

I can't tell you how many ads I see every week that want top-quality artwork and expect to pay next to nothing for it. I've even had people get angry with me when I tell them that my wife's murals can cost up to $50/sqft because they thought our pricing should "be more in line with a Craig's List clientelle" i.e. cheapskates.

Also, the #6 up there is very true. When she first started my wife did some idea sketches for a company called Sky-High Sports that did trampoline-type games and things. They said they'd review the work (which they paid $150 for) and then hire her to do murals. We never heard from the guys again and figured "Oh well, that's that." We were driving around months later and saw their facility and in the window were Lacy's sketches - blown up to 10'x10' posters

We decided to let it go, but just couldn't believe that they'd misused her work like that.

Feel free to commiserate.

If a Mod feels this would be better in OT it can be moved.

Posted: **2010-03-10 07:47am**

Heh, so true.

That´s one reason why i appreciate working for other artists or at least for people who know how much work art is. Every one else just assumes that it´s "just a picture/animation/model" and therefore shouldn´t cost more than 99.95€ even though it might take days or weeks to create.

They´re usually the same people who will demand changes when the work is nearly done and then complain if these changes cost money.

Architects are some of the worst offenders even though they should know better being artsy folk themselves. However, they usually will only pay very little from the beginning and you can be 100% sure that they´ll want major changes on the evening of the last day without wanting to pay for these changes. Architects are pretty much the worst people i´ve ever worked together with.
Museums tend to be low paying customers as well but at least they serve an educational purpose, so working for little money isn´t just for the financial benefit of some stingy asshole.

Posted: **2010-03-10 08:03am**

Hah, have i ever ranted about the architect who didn´t pay me and then when he needed help a year later had the gall to ask me if i wanted a job?

It all began that he asked me to do a 3D model of some house he had planned. I did the work and sent him the images and bill. After a month or i hadn´t recieved the money so i sent him the usual overdue notice. Two more weeks late i still didn´t have any money so i sent him another one. The same happened again two weeks later and it was clear that i´d never see my money unless i´d get a lawyer and court involved.
The sum wasn´t big enough to justify the cost and hassle so i just wrote the money off and moved on.
Pretty much exacly a year later the same guy wrote me an email, telling me that he´s in dire need of a 3D artist and that he had transferred the money. Of course the late payment wasn´t his fault. It was all because his customer didn´t pay on time which clearly makes it right to let me wait as well.
I don´t think i even replied. What an asshole.

Posted: **2010-03-10 11:09pm**

Sometimes that attitude delivers its own comeuppance, e.g. "I don't see why I should pay $5,000 for a wedding photographer when my nephew has a shiny new DSLR who'll do it for way less," and then all the wedding photos are terrible and the family is miserable because no shit you get what you pay for.

Posted: **2010-03-13 11:36pm**

If you like that post, you should like this parody video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2a8TRSgzZY

Your wife should appreciate that one if she's run into a lot of people trying to get free work out of her. Between me (web design) and a friend (photographer), we've heard variations of all of those arguments.

And spec work (#6) is increasingly popular in digital design work. Check out 99designs.com for an example. It makes it almost seem like a viable way to earn money.

At least now I know a number of people in my industry (not web design) that, when asked to do design tests for companies looking to hire them, they demand to be reimbursed for the time/hired as contract. Too many companies get people to do art tests or design tests for a job, don't hire them, and then use the work in the final product.

Posted: **2010-03-14 01:19pm**

Heh, that youtube video is great.

Posted: **2010-03-14 02:12pm**

Oh, god - I could go on and on myself.

Fact is, our society just does not value the arts. That's why people think they can get away with this sort of theft (and stealing work, or refusing to pay for work, is theft). It's not just visual artists but really everyone - musicians, writers, actors...

Then there is working for a non-art company that knows you're an artist, and suddenly you're expected to do your artwork for them for free - not even the normal hourly rate you get for THEIR work!

Pardon me, I feel a sudden urge to beat up a wall with my head....

Posted: **2010-03-14 11:12pm**

Yes, but this article assumes that artwork is worth as much as the job performed by neurosurgeons, certified mechanics, and IT professionals, when in reality those people do real work and the artists are just glorified scribblers. Arts is overemphasised in our culture, so much so we believe that art = culture when really it's a tiny, almost worthless part. Engineers are underappreachated. Doctors are underappreachated. Artists get tons of credit for nothing at all.

Posted: **2010-03-14 11:21pm**

open_sketchbook wrote:Yes, but this article assumes that artwork is worth as much as the job performed by neurosurgeons, certified mechanics, and IT professionals, when in reality those people do real work and the artists are just glorified scribblers. Arts is overemphasised in our culture, so much so we believe that art = culture when really it's a tiny, almost worthless part. Engineers are underappreachated. Doctors are underappreachated. Artists get tons of credit for nothing at all.

I think you missed the point of the comparision, at no point did I see him imply that an artist should be paid as much as a neurosurgeon. If anyone is overpaid I'd say it's not the art designers and illustrators this is refering to, but hollywood actor's and sportsmen. And to put this into perspective, I invite you to consider that poor art design/direction/UI will ruin a well programmed game/software. (note I don't mean simple or simplistic art design, I mean poor.)

In any case, in my culture, you'd be looked at as being foolish if one choose to go into arts as opposed to medicine or engineering. And even in Western culture I'm not sure you can actually call doctor's underappreciated, given the prominence they get in pop culture. (ER, Grey's Anatomy, etc.)

Posted: **2010-03-14 11:51pm**

open_sketchbook wrote:Yes, but this article assumes that artwork is worth as much as the job performed by neurosurgeons, certified mechanics, and IT professionals, when in reality those people do real work and the artists are just glorified scribblers. Arts is overemphasised in our culture, so much so we believe that art = culture when really it's a tiny, almost worthless part. Engineers are underappreachated. Doctors are underappreachated. Artists get tons of credit for nothing at all.

Artists - professional ones - spend years honing their skills so that, in fact, they can do things that others don't' have the training and/or inclination to do. What they do is worth at least as much as what athletes do, or what your average "sandwhich artist" at Subway does. What artists would like is sufficient payment as to constitute a living wage. Not extreme wealth, not ridiculous compensation, but enough to live on as comfortably as anyone else who works for a living. If you wouldn't ask a plumber to work for free, or ask someone to shovel the snow off your walk for free, or ask a taxi driver to give you a free ride somewhere then neither should you ask an artist to work for free. That has nothing to do with equating graphic illustration with neurosurgery, it DOES have to do with respecting the fact someone works.

Most artists - whether visual, musicians, writers, whatever - do NOT make enough from their artwork to rise above poverty. The vast majority have a day job in addition to working in their art field, or work 12 hours a day for minimum wage or less. That edges from "under appreciated" to "exploited".

By saying art is nothing more than "worthless scribbling" you betray your contempt for a significant segment of the population, as well as your ignorance of where art fits into our culture - yes, in amongst the engineering and technology. Who do you think designs the attractive packaging that the latest computer crap comes in? Who do you think illustrates the manuals and instructions on a thousand difference consumer goods? Who do you think produces the entertainment for all those other people, the books, the graphic novels, comics, movie sets, costumes, the look of your favorite computer games? Is it on the same level as life-saving surgery? No - but then neither is much of the rest of life, either. Very little is actually life or death you know. At the very least, art produces something enjoyable, unlike, um, investment bankers for instance. (Now THERE is a category of useless, over compensated parasites!)

One of the most disheartening things I learned about during art school is that the Field Museum pays their scientific illustrators nothing - scientific illustration is a highly disciplined, difficult segment of art, requiring a very high degree of accuracy, to produce illustrations for scientific articles. The Field Museum seeks out such people but, I repeat, pays them nothing at all for their time, materials, and effort. It's supposed to be reward enough, I suppose just to be part of the process I guess.... except, of course, you can't live on good feelings. I recall hearing people at the Field complain at the dearth of scientific illustrators... I dunno, maybe they should trying paying people if they expect professional work at that level, hm? Sure, photography can replace that for some functions... but not all. So people who have an interest in doing such work often wind up working for a magazine like Discover because at least they'll get paid something so that they in turn can pay the rent, buy food, and all that other wonderful stuff.

Bottom line - people want pretty stuff, but they don't' want to pay for it. If you don't think art is worth paying for then stop buying books, music, computer games, posters.... all that stuff. Otherwise, you're a fucking hypocrite for being willing to pay a corporate middleman to supply your fix of pretty stuff but not wanting to pay the artist who creates it in the first place.

Posted: **2010-03-15 01:27am**

open_sketchbook wrote:Yes, but this article assumes that artwork is worth as much as the job performed by neurosurgeons, certified mechanics, and IT professionals, when in reality those people do real work and the artists are just glorified scribblers. Arts is overemphasised in our culture, so much so we believe that art = culture when really it's a tiny, almost worthless part. Engineers are underappreachated. Doctors are underappreachated. Artists get tons of credit for nothing at all.

Uhh...I did not feel that vibe at all from the article. The point of it was to clearly show how many people take professional design for granted, and you are serving as a nice example of that.

You say that the arts are a tiny and worthless part of our culture? The very definition of the arts includes the expression and conveyance of a society's aesthetics, beliefs, and ideas through some kind of medium...be they pictures, songs, literature, etcetera. In other words, the things that represent a culture. Consider one of the methods we use to study various ancient civilizations around the world; you guessed it, using their many forms of artwork! Rome may have been constructed by engineers and their laborers, but architects and designers were the ones that shaped it to take on what we consider the Roman "flavor".

For a more contemporary example, think about the design of your favorite user-friendly website, or the artwork of your favorite graphic novel, or the content of your favorite story. These things don't just come out of a void - it takes a great deal of work to conceptualize and bring these art forms out into reality. A good designer is able to create a website layout that is both pleasing to look at (i.e. it doesn't burn out or twist around your eyes at a glance) and easy to use. A good graphic novel artist is able to draw recognizable and proportioned living forms, and believable, detailed settings to go along with them. A good story writer is able to tell his or her story in an easily-understandable form, without boring one to tears in the process AND keeping suspenseful interest along the way.

I will agree that medical doctors and engineers are worth more to a society than artists and designers, but to say that artists are nigh-totally worthless to a civilization? I think that's just intellectually dishonest.

Posted: **2010-03-15 03:35am**

I myself am something of an artist, I just also know my place, which is firmly below people that do real work. The fact of the matter is, things like games and packaging and illustration and sports and television and all that are, well, wastes of time. That's literately what art is; it's something you look at when you aren't doing something productive.

Our culture may not overappreachate artists, but it places far to much emphasis on art. People go on and on about how art is the soul of our culture when it wouldn't even exist without scientists and engineers and construction workers and tradesman and pretty much every other profession ever enabling people to forego improving our society so they can instead paint pretty pictures. Art is fun; it is not nessesary. Artists should know that if they want a living wage, they get a real job, and do art in their spare time.

Posted: **2010-03-15 05:14am**

What do you think real work is, exactly?

Posted: **2010-03-15 06:06am**

open_sketchbook wrote:Engineers are underappreachated. Doctors are underappreachated.

Apparently you underappreachate the work of English teachers.

Christ, I don't even want to get into this with you. You have the most narrow definition of 'productive' in the history of mankind. You might not think art is necessary, and I guess strictly speaking it isn't, but try to imagine a world without art. You try that, and then you try to tell me that it would be a great place to live.

EDIT: lol oops

Posted: **2010-03-15 06:40am**

Ford Prefect wrote:
open_sketchbook wrote:Engineers are underappreachated. Doctors are underappreachated.
Apparently you underappreachate the work of English teachers.

Christ, I don't even want to get into this with you. You have the most narrow definition of 'productive' in the history of mankind. You might not think art is necessary, and I guess strictly speaking it isn't, but try to imagine a world without art. You try that, and then you try to tell me that it would be a great palce to live.

Certainly I would be rather less motivated to do "productive" work if I had only 'amateur' art and entertainment to look forward to. (To wit: "I took engineering* so I could support you artsy people's livelihoods

") I mean, seriously, It's one thing to laugh at how easy arts students have it from an engineering perspective, but I've never met a real engineer or doctor with the almost absurd level of disdain you're showing here.

*Yes, I have an engineering degree, and I work in IT. Also, I've tried freelance copy writing on a side once to help a friend. To be honest, after that I decided I preferred my Day job so much more. This "writing" art is still work, ya know.

I mean seriously, "do art in their spare time"? You go and tell people like kanastrous he should just "make sets on his spare time and get a real job"

Posted: **2010-03-15 07:02am**

open_sketchbook wrote:Art is fun; it is not nessesary. Artists should know that if they want a living wage, they get a real job, and do art in their spare time.

Hey, can't wait for the day your children come up and tell you they want to study art. Better prepare your soul crushing speech so they can become productive little drones.

open_sketchbook wrote:I myself am something of an artist, I just also know my place

Translation: I sometimes do some half-assed artsy thing, and since nobody likes it, I need to bash on artists to feel better about myself.

Art is the heart of our culture because it is the way to express the things that make us human, like our wants, our feelings, our hopes and dreams, something that pure functionality cannot do.
Creative solutions to problems can also be considered an art, by the way, I personally feel I'm in full art-mode both when drawing or when solving a complex programming problem. Art is not about the tools or the function, but about the mindset and the meaning, it's about the person building the item rather than the item itself, and that's why our culture hinges on it (being human culture, you know).

Posted: **2010-03-15 07:13am**

open_sketchbook replace "art" with "design" in everything you said and you should see how utterly useless your comment was.

Posted: **2010-03-15 07:37am**

open_sketchbook wrote:Art is fun; it is not nessesary. Artists should know that if they want a living wage, they get a real job, and do art in their spare time.

That is pure and utter nonsens. Art you do in your free time is fun because you get to decide what you want to do and therefore pick a something that you actually like.

Creating a piece of art for a customer is not necessarily that much fun. Hint: You have to do what the customer wants and customers tend to want boring shit.

Customers should know that if they want a decent looking web page/animation/model that looks like and functions the way they want, they have to shell out money. Or they can do it themselves. Oh, wait, they can´t because they´re not competent in that field.

It really doesn´t matter if the art itself is worthless. If somebody wants me to do something, no matter if it´s worthless or not, he´d better give me money.

Posted: **2010-03-15 09:24am**

Hey Sketchbook, what we're not going to do here is turn this thread into "Heh, artists, am I right guys?" - especially when your excuse for doing so is a claim that Kodiak's article never made.

e: salm is not Kodiak

Posted: **2010-03-15 09:51am**

Simplicius wrote:Hey Sketchbook, what we're not going to do here is turn this thread into "Heh, artists, am I right guys?" - especially when your excuse for doing so is a claim that salm's article never made.

Eh, it was Kodiak who posted the article.

Posted: **2010-03-15 10:20am**

open_sketchbook wrote:I myself am something of an artist, I just also know my place, which is firmly below people that do real work.

Hey, shitstain, your "I myself am something of an artist" is like an overweight couch potato who plays a pick-up game with relatives once or twice a year claiming he is "something of a football player" and then professing to be an expert on what it takes to play on a professional level. Just because YOU are an incompetent fuck doesn't mean other people are.

The fact of the matter is, things like games and packaging and illustration and sports and television and all that are, well, wastes of time. That's literately what art is; it's something you look at when you aren't doing something productive.

When YOU do it, it's a "waste of time", but somebody has to create those time-wasters for you - and that's where it becomes a job. You are a moron.

Art is fun; it is not nessesary.

Fun actually IS necessary for a human being to mentally healthy. In fact, it's necessary for most, if not all, mammals and birds, possibly other creatures as well. Even wild animals play. That doesn't mean one's entire life should be fun, but "wasting time" as you put it seems to be necessary to most critters.

Artists should know that if they want a living wage, they get a real job, and do art in their spare time.

Translation: I am an ignorant, utter failure at this segment of human endeavors and therefore since I am such a fuck up at it no one else should be allowed to do it, or at least not profit from it, because it makes me all butt-hurt I'm such a failure at it.

Posted: **2010-03-15 06:05pm**

I have to wonder exactly where architects fall under Sketchbook's bizarre definitions.

Posted: **2010-03-15 07:06pm**

open_sketchbook wrote:I myself am something of an artist, I just also know my place, which is firmly below people that do real work. The fact of the matter is, things like games and packaging and illustration and sports and television and all that are, well, wastes of time. That's literately what art is; it's something you look at when you aren't doing something productive.

That's what life is and what makes it worth living, you insufferable cunt. What purpose is production without being able to enjoy the time when you're not producing? There is no fucking reason to build a home or have a family if you're just all just cells grown to produce munitions and raw materials through organised labour. There is no reason to protect the environment if the only purpose of life is the eternal productivity of bare-bones social perpetuation. Why should the perpetuation of society have any value if wasting time is seen as always inferior to production?

You sound like a catholic railing against contraception, after all, sex without a chance at children is a waste of time. That's literally what non-reproductive sex is; it's something you do when you aren't doing anything productive. The same goes for love, really. Ideally, for the ultra-modernist, human reproduction should be an impersonal affair in between shifts at work, preferably by artificial insemination. The offspring are taken as soon as possible to the indoctrination centre; the mother placated with emotion stabilising drugs and spurred back into production for the war effort/material allocation. Ideally, the orgasm response should be removed entirely from the human anatomy, the family destroyed and the resultant time be taken up with production. After all, what sense is there in leaving people with spare time?

Our culture may not overappreachate artists, but it places far to much emphasis on art. People go on and on about how art is the soul of our culture when it wouldn't even exist without scientists and engineers and construction workers and tradesman and pretty much every other profession ever enabling people to forego improving our society so they can instead paint pretty pictures. Art is fun; it is not nessesary. Artists should know that if they want a living wage, they get a real job, and do art in their spare time.

Society as it is only exists because of art. Did you know that? Without sculpted art, the neanderthals never had widespread cultural exchange, nor any impetus to do so because pretty much everything vital could be attained by living in small groups. You know what the h. sapiens groups did? They spread far and wide and kept in communication to exchange "objectively worthless" artwork as currency. Currency enabled co-operation, which enabled out-competing the neanderthal.

P.S. society itself has continually, in every single form it has ever existed, gone against what you say. Art is real work - skilled work, and it has always been valued as such. Your self-lacerating dehumanising modernism belongs in a world of pollution and the death of the human spirit. What the fuck is the point in living in a world where there is no time to waste? Life is only worth living when you can waste it with the people you love in the way you like. Pleasure time has been constantly eroded in the endless search for growth and ever-increasing production. You can go get fucked if you want more. Everyone likes entertainment, likely, everyone needs it to stay sane, thus its value is as real as anything else in human priorities. Work is an indignity we have to suffer to get entertainment as a reward. Entertainment is a particular form of labour tailored towards people in their downtime. Life isn't about production, it's about seeking more time to waste.

Posted: **2010-03-15 07:16pm**

Heck, if we apply his line of reasoning in a broader sense, engineeers, IT professionals and tradesmen involved in such activities such as, I dunno, the construction of a toy production line are equally as worthless* as the artists being supported

*arguably though, the engineer, regardless of his social standing ("underappreciated", appearently) will be far better compensated monetarily on average than the average artist of the sort this thread was originally about.

Posted: **2010-03-16 12:25am**

I'm trying to imagine a world without art right now, and all I'm coming up with is something between Fahrenheit 451 and Equilibrium. I don't think that's exactly what he had in mind...

open_sketchbook wrote:I myself am something of an artist, I just also know my place, which is firmly below people that do real work. The fact of the matter is, things like games and packaging and illustration and sports and television and all that are, well, wastes of time. That's literately what art is; it's something you look at when you aren't doing something productive.

You really don't have a realistic understanding of the role of art in your everyday life if you think it's only relegated to entertainment products and marketing. Everyone else has already covered the enrichment aspect, so I'll just point out the practical necessities of having professionally trained artists.

There was a team of artists and soft-science designers that helped develop the Windows OS so you'd be able to figure out what was going on without reading a two-hundred-page manual. Artists create the visual concepts for architecture firms so clients can get a good idea of the final product before they break ground on that new building. They make those instructions in airplanes that teach you what to do in case of emergency. They created the look of googlemaps so you can read it so easily. One of the artists I work with creates 3D models of organs for some medical training program on the side. Which, you know, helps save lives. That program would be useless without the art.

I can see why someone could overlook these kinds of things, but it's not excusable to just rant that art is worthless without an understanding of the topic at hand and how much easier it makes your life.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List

Re: All artists should read this- Funny ad on Craig's List