An artist is not constrained by consistency of style
... unless they absolutely, positively ... need the money.
Take the case of Kinkade...
With 5 daughters and thus his need for serious income ... his kitschy country paintings supported his household.
However Kinkade also painted seascapes, landscapes and more. They just didn't sell nearly as well as his kitschy country paintings.
Now comes the good part ~
Kinkade came to hate that niche so much that he set up an assembly line to get those paintings done.
With interns/ apprentices doing most of the work ... he came along at the end - added a few flourishes and signed his name.
Now this happens
if your paintings engender the kind of demand in the market place - that you find impossible to fulfull.
Most artists are all over the map with their work.
In short ... only the individual artist can actually answer this question for themselves.
Imagine the horrible future ~
Your art rep tells you - 'I have a pending contract for you - you will 'net'
a million dollars.
The Company wants you to paint 300 pictures of dogs playing cards.
Because they know they can sell them.'
And the answer is ... some artists will and some won't.
It all comes down to personal choice
~ whether you have an animal mortgage, outrageous student debt ... or 'whatever.'
- Just speaking for myself - I would take the million dollars -
as long as I get could $200k - $300k up front ...
and paint whatever I want ... on the side!
And other artists would tell the rep ... 'thanks but no thanks.'
Why would I take the money
... because if you have an idea of what to do with it ...
Amazon - 6-24-19 stock price= $1913/ share
in june 2006 stock price was $33.35/ share
$100k in 2006 would buy 2941 shares.
2019 those shares would be equal to $5,626,133.00
So ... the artist who is thinking 'outside' of the box ... always has an advantage over the artist who is narrowly focused.
... hindsight is always 20-20 ... but we live in an age where seminal, life changing discoveries are happening everyday.
Rembrandt died a pauper. Shakespeare did not.