• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Painters vs Musicians

I was thinking the other day, Painters vs Musicians, both artists, both spend months and months working on there product, but why are paintings always more expensive? I know this seems like a menial thing to think about, but why??
 
They are not very comparable careers imo, for many reasons. Artists don't have the equivalent of playing covers to make a little scratch as redoing someone else's artwork is considered plagiarism. Paintings are not particularly lucrative unless you are a very well known artist. Songs are of virtually no monetary value, regardless of quality, unless you are either a well-know musician or it happens to be your career launching single. :) Artist usually aren't collaborating with anyone. Artwork is much less open to being changed mid-stream.
I don't know of many musicians who work on a song for months - most claim (as I do) that when inspiration hits the majority of a song comes together fast, like minutes or hours at most. On occasion you have a song start you can't finish despite having like 3/4 of the lyrics - I know several artists and that doesn't seem to happen to them very often. I think you don't start an artpiece unless you have some idea of what it will be when done, song starts are a little different "gee, will be nice if I come up with a great idea on how to end this, since I've started it". Artist frequently have a piece that is so large it would be physically impossible to do in a few short days. I worked with/for a bronze sculptor for about 7 years - he would spend 4-6 months on a single life-sized figure, and that was working with clay. People doing stone-chiseling type sculpture frequently take years to do a piece. My daughter's an artist - she did a store's window painting of about 50' of holiday scene last year, spent 2-3 weeks on it.

I've jumbled this all together, it's just different.. YOMV (our opinion may vary)
 
I disagree Edpal. House painters are the cover artists of the painting world. They make decent money, and they seem to work a lot, but they don't get a lot of respect from the guys who paint bowls of fruit.
 
I disagree Edpal. House painters are the cover artists of the painting world. They make decent money, and they seem to work a lot, but they don't get a lot of respect from the guys who paint bowls of fruit.

brilliant.
muttley_zps38a8d775.jpg
 
I disagree Edpal. House painters are the cover artists of the painting world. They make decent money, and they seem to work a lot, but they don't get a lot of respect from the guys who paint bowls of fruit.
So what you're saying is cover artist painters cover crappy paint that other paint artist put down and get paid well for it? Maybe bluewine is painting houses now? :)
 
Eh, cover musicians are more like painters who paint copies of an original, you know, the art you see in the department store or in the mall parking lot. One guy makes up the original picture, then a bunch of junior artists paint hundreds of copies of it.

House painters are more like DJs... :hiding:
 
Lots of painters do reproductions. Tijuana is filled with velvet Elvis paintings and dogs playing poker, both of which are the 'Sweet Home Alabama' of the reproduction world.
Tidbit - those dogs were commissioned by a cigar company in the 1920's to decorate their boxes. There were 11 different versions, including a "cats playing poker" version. I used(paid usage) the cat version for a postcard ad for my brother the attorney, shortly after the big 3 bailouts. "Fat cats in Washington passed themselves a winning hand. Turn this card over for YOUR personal bailout."
cats.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fraublugher

Latest posts