>>6213115>The point is, a better paid artist means more content and improvement.
You're making a lot of assumptions in that statement. You're assuming that the artist is drawing at every waking moment (unlikely, they likely only draw their commissions and then idle around), and you're assuming that artists simply don't hit a skill ceiling. RFS is a perfect example of this. The guy can't draw a background for shit, and he's been jammed at the same writing level for ages.
Sketch has seemingly struck a plateau honestly, given that his faces still don't look quite right (among some other anatomy issues), and I Haven't really seen improvement recently. He did get a spike of improvement after he returned from his "I quit" phase, but he hasn't really improved since then. I will say that he's the best at drawing a diaper bar none though. >>6213121
That's not really my point, although I do agree to an extent. The fact remains that a single digital image costs that much, and I find that absurd. If he was drawing on a canvas with real paint, that's one thing. Paying that much for something that doesn't really exist is the issue. It's like paying for those absurdly overpriced mounts in WoW. You don't really own it, it's not a tangible object, and you still blew shitloads of money on it.