This particular question has raised more questions than answers, it just keeps unfolding and unfolding, it's a never-ending vortex that can devour a poor soul. In my professional experience, unfortunately, I've not found a unity among artists with the answer to this question. Only confusion and more questions.
What I have learned from the experience, is that it comes down to your "why" for doing it. Right here is where artists disagree. One person's "why" may not be sufficient for another. Does that make it so? No.
Some believe if you make money selling your art, you're not a true artist. Where does it say in the hand guide we're to be penniless paupers? In the same breath, one can exclaim credibility for an artist whose work sells for thousands. Some believe in absolutely no reproductions, others have becomes a household name because of this technology. Others believe in solely creating what they choose, any other guidance in the process - is not art. Which one is right? Is there such a truth? The ONLY TRUTH I have discovered with art, is that there are no absolutes. Why? Because success in this arena is different for everyone, based on unique, individual situations. No one can write your chapter but you.
If you're still confused, try these on for size!
Vincent Van Gogh only sold 1 painting in his lifetime, The Red Vineyard, to his brother:
The Red Vineyard
Michelangelo's majority of commissioned works came from the Popes' during his lifetime, and surrounded biblical themes in subject:
Michelangelo's Works
Leonardo Da Vinci was also mainly commissioned by Church's, biblical themes, while trying to become a "court artist":
Leonardo Bio
Salvador Dali was an extremely wealthy artist in his lifetime: not just "after death"
Salvador Dali Bio
"The thermometer of success is merely the jealousy of the malcontents." - Salvador Dali
