Plaag wrote:I think artists keep the physical art and send in a digital representation and the rights to the company. (This from the couple I know, so may be different in different circles). The company can use the art how they want, the artist can sell it or reprints personally, but not to another company for use.As for Blackmoor, seems ZG is now distributed by Code Monkey Publishing: http://www.codemonkeypublishing.com/sto ... hp?cat=421 (and Temple of Frog is not released yet).ShaneG.
goatboy wrote:Kevin, Didn't you do the cover to Temple of the Frog?
Prufrock wrote:Aneoth, I happen to agree with most of your sentiments. However, I wish you could make your points without calling up the divisive labels such as "liberal". It leads to exactly what sauromatian responded with. So the good points you made are lost. And he responded with exactly what you really wanted, which is a flame war.
Dan Proctor wrote:Yep, as Jason said, I pay on acceptance. I always do contracts, and I plan to do this even after I have relationships that have developed over time with artists.Having a contract isn't just about trust. For instance, I've already worked with Jason enough to see that he is a trustworthy guy. But a contract also defines what rights are being handed over, so it protects the artist and the publisher both. If in a few years the artist has an opportunity to reuse (sell again) art, and that art was "sold" in a hand shake deal, does anyone remember later what rights were given? What if the two parties no longer agree on what rights were passed on? It is very clear when there is a contract, and it can protect against hard feelings as well. This is why I use contracts even for volunteer work or work for comp copies. This way the artist/editor/writer knows exactly what the terms are. There is no room for misunderstanding. If an artist turns in a few pieces of art for a comp copy of a book, and the contract defines the rights handed over as non-exclusive, then there is no ambiguity at all and the artist can go on and resell the work or do whatever else he/she want to with it.
kevin mayle wrote:That of course would be the ideal way to conduct business, but unfortunately when you try to break in, the competition is so fierce that if you can find anyone that will give you a chance to get your foot in the door, you will often times jump at whatever offer you're given and just hope they don't screw you over. As you get more established, not only can you make more demands up front, but you can get to a point to where you don't even have to apply anymore, because the companies will be calling YOU up. Until then, it is too easy for unscrupulous business owners to pass on a veritable "nobody" who is making demands (as fair and reasonable as they are), and just go for any of the 100 or so other artists that applied that day, who can also do work just as good and will hand it over for free, just to get the exposure and an addition to their resume.
Dan Proctor wrote:This is why I use contracts.. the artist/editor/writer knows exactly what the terms are.
Dan Proctor wrote:IMHO a reputable publisher who operates in a professional manner shouldn't turn you down if you ask for a contract. IMHO you shouldn't even have to ask for a contract, it should be a given. Even if you do free work, ask for a contract.
kevin mayle wrote:I always got a contract. Didn't have to ask for them either. The contracts state "Payment after publication." The problem isn't getting a contract. The problem is doing the work and the books not being published. Or when they are published, much, much later, you can't get ahold of anyone anymore, or start getting the run around, month after month, when trying to get a comp copy, a paid for copy like a regular customer, or payment for your work. I was talking about how it would be ideal for those contracts to state "Payment upon receiving work."
Dan Proctor wrote:Something I was thinking about is how it would be useful for freelancers to have a website where they can openly post their experiences with publishers. Just a short, facts only comment line for a publisher, sort of like ebay feedback. The site could be a hub for publishers and freelancers, so that feedback can only be left by people with an account and who took a job ad.