@Purika> I understand the feeling. Don't worry about it. Some opportunities just aren't for us.

No matter your art skills, you can sell it. "Good" art can only be judged by the artist. If you successfully draw what you intend to draw - if the end result is what you had in mind - then that's good art.

Concerning opportunity: I've seen some outstandingly ...unlikely... art, like in video games and kids' books and whatnot. With skills like yours, you could nail a career easily, even if you didn't care about improvement at all.

Herf, being honest, my lazy art could probably even pull a career, next to some of the stuff I've seen at stores. x.x

OK, but seriously, I can relate. But, what fun is art, if you're on contract, and you have to draw certain things on demand? I'll admit, requirements and limits can actually help creativity a lot of the time.

Your skills would definitely sell, but would the opportunities be worth your skills? It'd be a shame to waste good art!

@Purika> You're quite welcome.

I personally quite enjoy your art - not just seeing it, but appreciating it. Your art has depth, and get the idea that it is presented as a sort of experience, and not just an image. (I don't know if that's what you're going for, but it's just what I get from it.)

In truth, as with judging good art, artwork can only be fully appreciated by its designer. If art is only meant to present raw subject matter, diagrammatic accuracy is "good". The opposite is complete abstraction, which, even if taken to the extreme of pointlessness, is still "good".

Then there's the study of underlying meanings and personal projection and whatnot, which kinda move into psychology more than art. A skilled artist will paint whatever he wants, and a skilled viewer will react however he likes.