10-09-2014, 11:45 AM
Hey Rene,
I totally agree with the general rule that exploitative spec work is a bad thing! I am not disputing that at all. I am questioning whether an overly simplified rule like that is good enough for all situations. What about if it is work for a small charity organisation for example? Altruism is a much better character trait than greed in my opinion. Granted that example is a bit contrived and it is not relevant in beardleys case but it does show up a flaw in the don't work for free ever rule doesn't it? It is understandable that what I said might not make sense if you have this very simplified black and white perspective of things.
What I was trying to bring into the mix is the fact that everyone's reality, situation, expectations and willingness are different. Just because it works for you does not mean it automatically is the right thing for everyone.
Just because, for the general case, spec work is considered bad, there is absolutely nothing to say that someone could not in any way benefit from doing such work if the balance leans more towards a benefit for the artist. I personally have had both good and bad experiences with low end work. I now prefer not to accept doing it anymore as I said, but at the time it was mostly fine and I learned a fair bit from the process of having "clients" and contracts and workflows and working in a production team; All those soft skills that aren't purely about a "show me the money or screw you" attitude. The artist is ultimately the judge of whether they should or should not be doing this type of work.
If they want to do it, despite all justified stance on spec work , and if they will get some genuine non-monetary benefits out of the work then why the hell shouldn't they do it? Who is to say the artist will in all cases be making their "own life hell"?
There is clearly a market for lower paid work in the Indie market for developing artists. I have seen and worked for many Indie games companies that aren't exploitative in any sense of the word, running purely on passion, are a great bunch of people who unfortunately have a tiny self-funded budget. They are hardly out to shaft everyone over, or through their "idiocy", undermine the entire industry. Of course there are those out there that are trying to get away with something for nothing, but it is up to the artist to judge which kind they are and if there are other benefits for them.
Again just to be clear, what I am saying is not that spec work is good, what I am saying is Beardley should use his own judgement, take into account all the views out there and make up his own mind on whether to do it, based on what he will get out of it for his own development.
Money is also not the be all and end all of becoming an artist. It becomes more so when talking about becoming a pro, but nobody ever starts out of the gates as a professional able to command 3 figure hourly rates. Yes of course it would be awesome to have our work valued more than it is, more consistently, I'm all for that, believe me. I am just wary about the rote application of rules when it comes from a very rigid, black and white, us v. them, with us or against us, perspective. These things tend not to be the most flexible models able to cater to changing and varied situations as they are completely fundamentalist in nature.
I totally agree with the general rule that exploitative spec work is a bad thing! I am not disputing that at all. I am questioning whether an overly simplified rule like that is good enough for all situations. What about if it is work for a small charity organisation for example? Altruism is a much better character trait than greed in my opinion. Granted that example is a bit contrived and it is not relevant in beardleys case but it does show up a flaw in the don't work for free ever rule doesn't it? It is understandable that what I said might not make sense if you have this very simplified black and white perspective of things.
What I was trying to bring into the mix is the fact that everyone's reality, situation, expectations and willingness are different. Just because it works for you does not mean it automatically is the right thing for everyone.
Just because, for the general case, spec work is considered bad, there is absolutely nothing to say that someone could not in any way benefit from doing such work if the balance leans more towards a benefit for the artist. I personally have had both good and bad experiences with low end work. I now prefer not to accept doing it anymore as I said, but at the time it was mostly fine and I learned a fair bit from the process of having "clients" and contracts and workflows and working in a production team; All those soft skills that aren't purely about a "show me the money or screw you" attitude. The artist is ultimately the judge of whether they should or should not be doing this type of work.
If they want to do it, despite all justified stance on spec work , and if they will get some genuine non-monetary benefits out of the work then why the hell shouldn't they do it? Who is to say the artist will in all cases be making their "own life hell"?
There is clearly a market for lower paid work in the Indie market for developing artists. I have seen and worked for many Indie games companies that aren't exploitative in any sense of the word, running purely on passion, are a great bunch of people who unfortunately have a tiny self-funded budget. They are hardly out to shaft everyone over, or through their "idiocy", undermine the entire industry. Of course there are those out there that are trying to get away with something for nothing, but it is up to the artist to judge which kind they are and if there are other benefits for them.
Again just to be clear, what I am saying is not that spec work is good, what I am saying is Beardley should use his own judgement, take into account all the views out there and make up his own mind on whether to do it, based on what he will get out of it for his own development.
Money is also not the be all and end all of becoming an artist. It becomes more so when talking about becoming a pro, but nobody ever starts out of the gates as a professional able to command 3 figure hourly rates. Yes of course it would be awesome to have our work valued more than it is, more consistently, I'm all for that, believe me. I am just wary about the rote application of rules when it comes from a very rigid, black and white, us v. them, with us or against us, perspective. These things tend not to be the most flexible models able to cater to changing and varied situations as they are completely fundamentalist in nature.