Certain people would of course still do so. But of comparable scale and quality? Maybe a few, truly-committed souls, but there would certainly be an impact. Without money, even if an artist produces one work, he will quite possibly lack the means to produce another.
There is the argument that what the market wants is not always the "best" or "most innovative", but the value of art is basically determined by a "market" (even if the artist seeks validation rather than $$). It's a subjective matter, so such a problem is somewhat inherent.
There is the argument that what the market wants is not always the "best" or "most innovative", but the value of art is basically determined by a "market" (even if the artist seeks validation rather than $$). It's a subjective matter, so such a problem is somewhat inherent.