What you post on ArtStation.
interpolator
A few weeks ago, there was a popular post on an Artstation blog (and followup) detailing how it should probably just be for professional level work and experienced artists to host their portfolios.
https://www.artstation.com/nimlot/blog/zr6L/let-s-talk-a-bit-about-what-you-post-on-artstation
To take some of the blog for the impatient.
A lot of artists, both in the comments and online agree with this sentiment: a call for the bar to be raised. Artists trying to break in can be stuck in a torrent of "10 minute quick sculpts". They're worried that Artstation will lose it's value if it becomes another "DeviantArt-tier Website", with great art drowning in a sea of doodles and sonic fanart.
Likewise there's an equal amount of people calling out this kind of elitist gate-keeping, who decides what is good art and what isn't? We have a pretty length thread about the merit of nudity on Artstation. Not to mention that Artstation has a comment section, why cant it be used to help artist improve themselves?
At this very moment, Artstation advertises ways for budding artists go learn and grow. Both with online courses/classes and even brick and mortar schools advertising on it.
So what's to be done? Will the current trend continue forward and artstation become another "Deviant-Art Tier" image hosting website? Or are things fine and more artists posting will allow for the quality to raise even higher as people improve?
I don't have any easy solutions that wouldn't gate out a lot of jr artists, students try to land their first gig, or freelancers looking for their first bit of commission work. Any sort of "checkbox to make sure you only see professionals" would lead to a pretty serious gatekeeping issue where anyone not flagged as a pro will be ignored. Maybe a "Pro only" section? but again that would gate out people that don't want to pay the yearly artstation fee.
Or is that just the cost of doing business these days?
https://www.artstation.com/nimlot/blog/zr6L/let-s-talk-a-bit-about-what-you-post-on-artstation
To take some of the blog for the impatient.
He's not trying to shit on anyone, just asking to raise the quality of what gets posted on Artstation, as it's basically the premier portfolio hosting website. Thousands of artists, art directors and HR people browse it, looking for inspiration, reference and new talent....a cry for moderation on Artstation or at least for junior artists to understand that this is not the place where you post your WIPs and first sculpts...
Artstation is your businesses card...it's the place where you show off your amazing artwork so that people in the industry can see you and reach up to you with job offers. By posting this kind of stuff you're just making things worse...for you and everyone else since we all have to navigate all this junk posts to actually find some proper artworks.
A lot of artists, both in the comments and online agree with this sentiment: a call for the bar to be raised. Artists trying to break in can be stuck in a torrent of "10 minute quick sculpts". They're worried that Artstation will lose it's value if it becomes another "DeviantArt-tier Website", with great art drowning in a sea of doodles and sonic fanart.
Likewise there's an equal amount of people calling out this kind of elitist gate-keeping, who decides what is good art and what isn't? We have a pretty length thread about the merit of nudity on Artstation. Not to mention that Artstation has a comment section, why cant it be used to help artist improve themselves?
At this very moment, Artstation advertises ways for budding artists go learn and grow. Both with online courses/classes and even brick and mortar schools advertising on it.
So what's to be done? Will the current trend continue forward and artstation become another "Deviant-Art Tier" image hosting website? Or are things fine and more artists posting will allow for the quality to raise even higher as people improve?
I don't have any easy solutions that wouldn't gate out a lot of jr artists, students try to land their first gig, or freelancers looking for their first bit of commission work. Any sort of "checkbox to make sure you only see professionals" would lead to a pretty serious gatekeeping issue where anyone not flagged as a pro will be ignored. Maybe a "Pro only" section? but again that would gate out people that don't want to pay the yearly artstation fee.
Or is that just the cost of doing business these days?
Replies
my thoughts on this whole thing was always, well, despite the various people involved phrasing it in what i think a lot of people felt were condescending tones, that there was a point to be made:
first and foremost, as i interpreted it, artstation was a portfolio website for professionals, the context of the website was about getting jobs and presenting professional work to do so. that was it's USP.
if a young artist wanted feedback, to post wips, etc, then personally i think a more appropriate context would be a community like polycount, where the primary focus is the process, workflows, learning, critque and feedback, although i would also say the artstation blogs might be a good place for that as opposed to the portfolio page itself.
But nothing is to say that a portfolio must comprise professional work, and at some point we were all hobbyists, and i don't even think we should stop people just posting personal artwork of any kind.
problem came as artstation became successful, they wanted to expand and offer education, etc, indeed now they offer prints, marketplaces etc so it begins to muddy the context of the website, and broaden the audience. students came flooding in, as well as hobbyists, and they want their needs and their context to be respected. for them it's about learning and as you say, artstation have opened the doors to them with the expectation that it is a place of education.
as for solutions?
Artstation need to choose carefully where they go from here - i dont think they need to exclude any audience here, just make sure there's a right place for the right content. give people a wip or experimental work gallery perhaps that isn't called or displayed with the portfolio. call it a SKETCHBOOK. just like in art schools the kids they have their sketchbooks, and their portfolio. that way people can confidently post anything there with the general understanding that it is what it says on the tin: sketchbook work.
in terms of site / feature development it is functionally the same as the portfolio, its just a second gallery but in terms of how users understand it, the meaning of portfolio and the meaning of sketchbook resolve all of this imo.
oh and for the love of god i've been waiting two years, artstation, can you just integrate search into the feeds directly? cos the feeds have fantastic filtering, but the actual search page has no filtering really. its a pain to find anything with search.
IMO sketchbooks solve the WIP problem, and the education problem. reenforce the message that a portfolio is intended to be a presentation of final pieces with a context that people offering and looking for commercial work are using that ecosystem for that purposes.
Use the sketchbook as the same thing but with a different context, where you just post anything you are working on. no big scary professional context discouraging newbies from getting feedback, and artstation's professionals dont feel as though their pool is being encroached on.
@R3D
"So what's to be done? Will the current trend continue forward and artstation become another "Deviant-Art Tier" image hosting website? Or are things fine and more artists posting will allow for the quality to raise even higher as people improve?
I don't have any easy solutions that wouldn't gate out a lot of jr artists, students try to land their first gig, or freelancers looking for their first bit of commission work. Any sort of "checkbox to make sure you only see professionals" would lead to a pretty serious gatekeeping issue where anyone not flagged as a pro will be ignored. Maybe a "Pro only" section? but again that would gate out people that don't want to pay the yearly artstation fee."
These and many other concerns have been raised since inception, so basically symptomatic of their own burgeoning success over a very short time since well the demise of CGHub. My hope is that ArtStation doesn't become a central hub for all things CG and yet ends up catering too none.
You can't just say okay pros go here and nonpros go over here. Whats the distinguishing feature? Working in industry? Working Hours accumulated? Skill points unlocked? Having a pro membership?
Then it becomes a member only site if the only way to see professional work is to be a pro subscriber. I don't believe recruiters are going to go to the non-pro space of a site in order to find the best candidates for their company that's just not doing the job right.
Yeah I agree with you completely that there should be a stronger separation however that only happens through like you said taking a stance and then reinforcing that stance through moderation.
given appropriate structure i believe most people will conform appropriately and self/inter correct. its when the structure isn't there for them, that they improvise and create grey areas.
Same level of engagement, same easy interface to post.
One thing is for certain : had they taken such an approach when they originally launched, it would have been perceived as incredibly pretentious and short-sighted.
- - - - -
Now, on a somewhat related topic ("pro art" vs "newbie art") ... I personally still cannot wait for the day Polycount will be able to put both on the same pedestal. With ... drumroll ... thread thumbnails !
Now of course I understand that most people just want to look at cool stuff and are therefore perfectly happy to browse the featured page for that. But for those who enjoy having a look at less perfect stuff (because "newbie" stuff can be very original in its own right ; but also and more importantly, because users creating not quite stellar work are precisely the ones who would benefit the most from constructive criticism) there's just no way to do that without having to dig through multiple pages/links - and no one has time for that anymore.
The raw/barebones nature of the forum before it got the featured page had one thing going for it : threads were a surprise, with no way to pre-filter then based on a subjective "good art" criteria (besides maybe page count, but that comes later). This naturally encouraged critique.
Featuring "good stuff" on a specific page unfortunately tips the balance in favor of pieces that don't need much criticism in the first place, and that's a bit of a shame. I know it sounds great to let the community decide/suggest what could be featured, but honestly this feels almost a bit outdated in a way, because, well, every forum out there does that and there is no shortage for polished CG art everywhere.
Now of course I am not trying to say that the Featured page should go - it has some great value for sure. Just saying that the way it promotes good stuff has the unfortunate, built-in consequence of burying down the art that needs a bit of help.
Therefore : thread thumbnails
Whereas, Username.artstation IS the portfolio. I wouldn't put WIP here. Only finished projects.
Again though, as ken originally highlighted, artstation itself has diversified so much that there is a lot of disagreement from different audiences about what they want. but i think at it's core it for a long time wanted to be a presentation platform for professionals rather than a place for learning and discusssion.
As for the blogs feature mentioned above, yeah i mean i initially said the blogs were a good idea for it, but really the issue is the 'portfolio' galleries being filled with work that a lot of people consider more to be sketchbook type work - so for me giving that its own type of gallery and its own filter in the feeds is ideal. and the blogs really should be for blog writing about what you're doing - its WIP, but its not just an image is it, and if you did just post an image it's hardly the best format to see all of your WIP stuff and flick through it. it want's it's own space.
However we're working on a new host, where we have the freedom to do what we want...
And of course, I totally understand that I am in the minority by wanting to see more rough stuff.
There's just something quirky and refreshing about taking a diametrically opposed approach to that of websites that just want to "look pro". I think that's probably why DeviantArt has been doing great through the years, while a place like Conceptart.org collapsed. I guess even internet forums have egos !
Since it's launch in 2014, the site has become synonymous with showcasing one's work for a potential shot at the 'big time' i.e. Portfolio hosting service "...where's your ArtStation". Which indeed, primarily it's core reason for being, in my honest opinion but if I've a hankering for a large helping of AAA eye candy I'd just click an AS or dedicated private website bookmark too see what latest entry one of ten industry (film/games) veterans I'd followed for more than a decade & a half may've posted...
Self curated approach as above...pretty much common sense without resorting to implementing on site gate keeping and possibly alienate a sizable audience besides; Plus negate an inadvertent consequence of possible 'brand' tarnish if such explicit measure/s were too ensue and that's the trick I previously alluded to upthread.
How far is far enough when balancing the books?! will an over reliance on monetising it's offered services devolve to some extent a market perception the brand evokes?! Of course their organisation tread a fine line as a business, I totally get that because these days to maintain an online presence is horrendously expensive so tuning a 'workable' financial model that fits all will be I think a principle challenge going forward.
However blogs are only available to Pro accounts!
peope are overthinking this...
usually I separate it by categories. one day I will put some of my selected sketches/2d art also .
if you really proud of your work then you should put it up there.
just acknowledging it that our work would impress some and would turn some other people off,
It's like this, suppose you stare at a brick wall which contains over four hundred bricks, now I told you one of the walls has a small 1"x"1 inch black X on it; the odds are it's not going to be easily found right away compared to if I make a huge black X that covers a entire brick; that is what I mean when it comes to Art Station. It's not to say that Art Station is not a valid place to show case your work, it's just you are one of hundreds of bricks.
Now there isn't always the option to make a site, whether learning a new skill or time, therefore Art Station can be valid until you can, if you choose to ever make your own site; I suppose it depends if you want to be more independent, rather then just another portfolio.
Ditto, you ever been to a site and just see a bunch of broken formatting and broken files?
It might sound pretty bad, but nowdays when people apply with a non artstation link, I immediately brace myself for super student/junior artwork. 99.9% of the time the website is hard to navigate, with small images or weird slideshow things going on and I have to search for contact info rather than just hit a PM button. not only that, I will never remember their url should I lose the link they sent or forgot to add to their linkedin.
I cant add their images to a collection of potential candidates like i can on artstation easily etc etc. i could go on and on but most of you guys know I wrote a massive article on it a while back.
for me, nowdays having a custom website for your portfolio is like "sprucing up" your resume with stat bars and "creative" designs. at best it can be passable, at worst its an obvious distraction attempt from an overall lack of skills and a form of trying to compensate. artists should spend their time producing art relevant to their desired job, not trying their hand at web design.
as for the initial post topic....
Artstation is a social media platform, people can use it however they want. I only visit the picks or trending tabs 99% of the time, or look at my notifications and see work from people i am following, I never come accross the stuff the initial post was complaining about.
Like any social network, play with it, figure out what works, you are not going to break anything. you can delete anything later on. I constantly create WIP posts in my gallery to play with the algorithm and boost my visibility to get new people following me, and then hide that gallery post when i finish the project and re-post the finished work to get fresh engagement on it and shove it into trending if its good. It's just another "at bat"you can use to jab and get some attention to your work. I am gonna do a deep dive on artstation and probably write and article on how to grow your following soon, or a video now im doing the whole youtube thing i guess :P.
tl;dr....post whatever the hell you want, how you want and learn how artstation works. good work will rise to the top, and if you are not getting followers or engagement, your work probably isnt up to par yet. whatever you post should be a reflection of your current skill level, so even if you suck, start posting and learn how the platform works so when you start to get good you can hit the ground running.
Oh the irony. Also I looked through your posting history and couldn't find any art threads. Do you make art or have a portfolio that has gotten you a job? It's hard to tell. You might be a super badass artist or something, but you sure are making it hard for me to see your art.
Speaking as someone who has done a lot of portfolio review: Unless you're applying for a website design position, there is no reason to create your own site, and most people who put a lot effort into this, the site design gets in the way of the art. A fancy site design tends leave a bad impression on anyone doing portfolio review - it tells me that you don't have your priorities in order. You'd rather fuss about with your website than make art / get better.
If your portfolio is anything but an easy to use pile of renders, you're doing it wrong. ArtStation happens to make this trivial to set up and offers a free account option, so it's a great choice for students and experienced pros alike. AS pro offers a lot of customization options if you don't want the bare bones design as well.
Whether you make your own hand crafted website from organic pixels, or have a basic AS profile, you're still competing with all those AS folks, and it's going to be your content, not your web design skills, that stand out. Plus, ArtStation gets insane traffic, not being on AS is doing a real disservice to your visibility.
As @PixelMasher mentions, getting a non AS link these days is a warning that it's going to be some cringe worthy webdesign 101 monstrosity.
As to the topic at hand, it depends on what your current situation is. If you're not looking for a job, post wips, treat AS like a blog, whatever, it's not a big deal. If you're actively searching, edit your content back hard, only put up your best, more representational work, and target the genre, style and type of work that you want to do. As Steffen mentioned, if you want WIPs but need a clean section to present to potential employers, throw them in a WIP gallery.
Using Artstation as a sketchbook and not putting up your best work isn't exactly the end of the world, and plenty of artists putting up amateurish work is totally fine. I recall how scared my concept artist friends were of joining that concept artists forum because of the perceived elitist vibe of it, I can't confirm or deny if it is cause I'm not a concept artist. But, there is definitely a vibe of intimidation that pushes a lot of artists away from Artstation and kind of just renders it not worth meaningfully engaging in except to just drop portfolio stuff.
In a nutshell, people don't really go to Artstation for some of that Naruto/Sasuke pairings lmao.
As for WIP art, well... I personally don't mind it so much. It's very nice to see how other people's processes are. I believe that WIPs can go on your main Artstation gallery, but not in your personal Artstation website that you use to apply for jobs.
I'd like to know this person's opinions on "joke art" that top artists sometimes post. You know, the intentionally bad stuff that gets a thousand likes. Is that any better, really?
In my point of view, i eagerly look forward WIP art, wireframes, texture sheets, etc. I like to see how the artist did the work. How good it was his/her mesh topology, UV optimization, etc. That gives me more information about how well made is a piece of artwork.
Nowadays, artists tend to have a huge lack of know-how (about topology efficiency, traditional modelling, mesh optimizations, UV optimizations, etc.). All is Zbrush, zbrush and more zbrush using the same basemeshes from Daz studio or Cubebrush.
BTW, i love to see anime illustrators (chinese, korean or japanese) showcasing their work in Artstation. I love anime.
Anyways, the lack of quality may be there. I've seen very good works that passed unnoticeable due to the huge amount of posts per minute.