Chainsaw of Critique
I have a gnack for tearing apart work which gets a lot of praise simply out of ignorance of the viewer. I was REALLY inspired by this piece...
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/265891/
... and wrote a length critique about why it doesn't look as interesting as it could. This is the message... and the reply.
Me -
"Your illustration OBVIOUSLY fails to tell the story behind itself so you have to tell us in your comments. This is a prime example of a weak piece of artwork. Story telling is the first and most important thing to focus on when trying to tell it visually. You must never lose sight of what your story might be, otherwise the work will suffer just like this does. If you took away your commentary on your own artwork, you would get people asking left and right “why is she crying?” “why is she crying?” “For fuck’s sake WHY IS SHE CRYING!?”. You see how your piece has just lost ALL substance because the viewer doesn’t know what the story behind it is?
Now lets talk about composition.
It seems as if you really wanted the composition to look boring as all hell when you first started by not only making it a one point perspective piece, but CENTERING the vanishing point right in the goddamn middle of the page. The foreground elements are all on a flat horizontal plane which again makes for a very boring image. Flat ground, flat grass, flat garbage pails, flat bench, there is just such a lack of depth in the foreground which is terrible because this is where you obviously want your focus to be since its where the character is at.
Speaking of the character… Her body language shows no signs of her emotions. She is supposed to be sad right? It looks more like something caused her to have an asthma attack. You depend too much on the tears to show emotion. Hell, even the face is pretty stiff looking. It’s like she suffers from facial paralysis and her tears leak from some kind of zygomatic pore. Tears and upward slanted eyebrows do not make for a sad character in good artwork, good acting and body gesture do.
The buildings in the background look very dull as well and compete with the foreground elements for the viewers focus as they poses the same amount of contrast to them, further adding the overall boring composition of the piece. Perspective is the most crucial thing to get right when doing architecture. Sure you have the perspective in there, but as I said before it’s in the most uninteresting position. Buildings will visually fall apart when you draw them at such an angle for anything more than a practice sketch.
What kind of tree looks like that? All the branches jut out of the top in a perfect crown formation, and the tree just STOPS immediately after. You’ve got tiny little branches which make the top width of the tree no more than 6 ft in diameter. There you have that entire thick base and nothing on top to make use of it. Form follows function, if the base is as big as you have illustrated it would be a fairly large tree with a large number of branches veining outwards grandiosely
To sum up everything in a very blunt paragraph of artistic annihilation, you spent 60 hours on this piece for all the wrong reasons. You started out with a good idea but a bad composition and went with it. You took this bad composition and developed it, merely adding more and more detail to try and mask up the bland feel of the piece. You probably spent an hour of development and then 59 additional hours adding unnecessary detail which not only ended up making the piece look worse, but in no way added to the feelings you wanted to convey with the image. My recommendations for you would have to be brushing up on your conceptual development and not just going with the first idea which pops into your mind. You should thumbnail out at least 12 initial compositional concepts before picking one to go with. People have been praising this piece left and right but where you see praise I merely see artistic ignorance. I feel you wasted a large amount of time on something which looks flat and boring as all hell. You’d get fired immediately after turning this in if it were for a job."
Them -
" Hello Mr. "I know everything about art and my view is the only one counting". I am always open for critiques of any kind, and I already had comments on this image, telling about only bad things, not mentioning that they like something on it - and they were still meaningul comments. Your comment on the opposite is just self-centered blabbering, you think you have the best knowledge of art of all people. I see, someone who draws images where some kind of a demon pulls his tongue into the downer regions of a woman must really be an art-pro. I have never seen such a lot of meaningless complaining on my art than your one, and over the years, I clearly got the knowledge to seperate between good critiques and self-centered complaints without an end. You wasted your time yelling at me, this image is a good one - since the BEST drawers I know gave me good support for it. They said - as I know clearly - it is not the best image on earth, I know it, but the loads of time and work payed off. These genious drawers told me I did a good job, it was worth the time, as well as everyone did as you recognized obviously. So I don't give a shit on your preferances, there are two possible reasons for your complaints here: Either it is totally the opposite of the art you like, or you are just jealous like hell. Since you wrote such a long comment, I suspect you to make me know of your thinkings on this. Don't try to tell me this would be a bad image, I know it is not. You can discuss with me about every crap, but your complaints about MY ART are useless. Your stuff isn't really the greatest thing to me either, but I wouldn't ever dare to tell, something isn't art. Your stuff is not well working for everyone, but it is art to the ones who like it. Your comment is a bad one, endless complaining isn't useful for anything. You wasted my worthy time with that comment."
First reply to them -
I'm not at all self-centered. I DO know many things about successful artwork, and when I see something significantly less professional getting monstrous amounts of praise, I desire to let the artist and the viewers know what the level of skill and aesthetic context are. This does not mean my work is at all a good example of professional work, no. The knowledge I have about artwork stems from dealing with the professionals who have jobs in the American industry. Since your obviously European of some sort, your "genius'" might have that as a basis for their opinions. American industry standards are much more crucial when it comes to something catching the viewers eye immediately. I base my critique upon general standards and leave all biased opinions out of the mix. Sure I could have said some nice things about your art but I felt everyone else pretty much did that for me, and then some. Don't get me wrong, you implemented a lot of good techniques into the image, however as I stated those techniques did little to your aid if they were made upon an already visually weak layout. perhaps now you can appreciate my words and what I'm trying to tell you a little more. Or would you rather just get the blind praise and continue seeing my critique as an attack to be ignored?
Them -
I don't see your "critiques" as good ones, because they possible go too far in direction of industry. Who ever said this should be something I wanna earn money with? This piece of art is only for the intention to make me and my viewers happy, with something looking very good. Obviously it does. That is why all the other are praising it, because I did it for my and their liking. They would almost ignore the image, if I did it for industrial meanings. So I think I got it, why you wrote so bad. I wouldn't have wanted to do it in a way that it works with your industrial view. You know, I am an artist, I draw and do other creative things in my free time, it's my hobby. If I anyway would like to follow industrial points, I couldn't, since I don't know them. I actually currently do a graphics apprenticeship, there I should learn this - but this apprenticeship sucks like nothing else, it will be good for NOTHING when I will have it finished. I only live with that because of my knowledge, I got by my hobbies.
But also these are already good. Just recently, I came to a working deal with a company, only because of exactly THIS image!They are industry, but like it very much!
You must be honest: Sure my art (as this image) wouldn't work in all ways, but it is usable art for industrial meanings. I know there are issues in the planning, the visualisations of image parts, but since now I can follow your points, I still don't agree with most of them. I simply guess, me and the other people see this image in a completely different view than you do, and since what you say on it will not make it change much, you should nevermind the image. It is my style, it worked for a long time - also keep in mind, it is my hobby, even if it will never get to work in industrial meanings, as in a possible future job, I don't care about if it won't do. I don't even assume it, that it will do. Since classic drawing isn't used that much in industry, especially not the manga-like one like I do use.
As last statement, I would prefer if you don't call me less professional or something. I don't need someone to tell me that to know, since I am no pro in industry - I am also no pro in hobby drawing, but I am coming closer to this. I don't wanna really draw in my later job, it should stay as my hobby. So no needing of comparing these things. I have done some industrial images already, if you would give me your opinion on these ones, I would accept it. I have none of them online, since, as I said, people on such a site wanna see exciting art, not industrial visualisation. And I might say, that is what my image is.
In my reply.. I feel I must convey a certain level of respect for them and their objective thinking which would be tainted by biased opinions by most other people.
******************
Now am I really losing my grips on what makes good art? I know my own art lacks a large number of elements which would make them more interesting, but this shouldn't mean I cant go around telling other people their own work also lacks those elements does it? Or does this mean this person is just to benumbed by my harsh critique to fully understand the substance behind it? Seriously people, help me out here.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/265891/
... and wrote a length critique about why it doesn't look as interesting as it could. This is the message... and the reply.
Me -
"Your illustration OBVIOUSLY fails to tell the story behind itself so you have to tell us in your comments. This is a prime example of a weak piece of artwork. Story telling is the first and most important thing to focus on when trying to tell it visually. You must never lose sight of what your story might be, otherwise the work will suffer just like this does. If you took away your commentary on your own artwork, you would get people asking left and right “why is she crying?” “why is she crying?” “For fuck’s sake WHY IS SHE CRYING!?”. You see how your piece has just lost ALL substance because the viewer doesn’t know what the story behind it is?
Now lets talk about composition.
It seems as if you really wanted the composition to look boring as all hell when you first started by not only making it a one point perspective piece, but CENTERING the vanishing point right in the goddamn middle of the page. The foreground elements are all on a flat horizontal plane which again makes for a very boring image. Flat ground, flat grass, flat garbage pails, flat bench, there is just such a lack of depth in the foreground which is terrible because this is where you obviously want your focus to be since its where the character is at.
Speaking of the character… Her body language shows no signs of her emotions. She is supposed to be sad right? It looks more like something caused her to have an asthma attack. You depend too much on the tears to show emotion. Hell, even the face is pretty stiff looking. It’s like she suffers from facial paralysis and her tears leak from some kind of zygomatic pore. Tears and upward slanted eyebrows do not make for a sad character in good artwork, good acting and body gesture do.
The buildings in the background look very dull as well and compete with the foreground elements for the viewers focus as they poses the same amount of contrast to them, further adding the overall boring composition of the piece. Perspective is the most crucial thing to get right when doing architecture. Sure you have the perspective in there, but as I said before it’s in the most uninteresting position. Buildings will visually fall apart when you draw them at such an angle for anything more than a practice sketch.
What kind of tree looks like that? All the branches jut out of the top in a perfect crown formation, and the tree just STOPS immediately after. You’ve got tiny little branches which make the top width of the tree no more than 6 ft in diameter. There you have that entire thick base and nothing on top to make use of it. Form follows function, if the base is as big as you have illustrated it would be a fairly large tree with a large number of branches veining outwards grandiosely
To sum up everything in a very blunt paragraph of artistic annihilation, you spent 60 hours on this piece for all the wrong reasons. You started out with a good idea but a bad composition and went with it. You took this bad composition and developed it, merely adding more and more detail to try and mask up the bland feel of the piece. You probably spent an hour of development and then 59 additional hours adding unnecessary detail which not only ended up making the piece look worse, but in no way added to the feelings you wanted to convey with the image. My recommendations for you would have to be brushing up on your conceptual development and not just going with the first idea which pops into your mind. You should thumbnail out at least 12 initial compositional concepts before picking one to go with. People have been praising this piece left and right but where you see praise I merely see artistic ignorance. I feel you wasted a large amount of time on something which looks flat and boring as all hell. You’d get fired immediately after turning this in if it were for a job."
Them -
" Hello Mr. "I know everything about art and my view is the only one counting". I am always open for critiques of any kind, and I already had comments on this image, telling about only bad things, not mentioning that they like something on it - and they were still meaningul comments. Your comment on the opposite is just self-centered blabbering, you think you have the best knowledge of art of all people. I see, someone who draws images where some kind of a demon pulls his tongue into the downer regions of a woman must really be an art-pro. I have never seen such a lot of meaningless complaining on my art than your one, and over the years, I clearly got the knowledge to seperate between good critiques and self-centered complaints without an end. You wasted your time yelling at me, this image is a good one - since the BEST drawers I know gave me good support for it. They said - as I know clearly - it is not the best image on earth, I know it, but the loads of time and work payed off. These genious drawers told me I did a good job, it was worth the time, as well as everyone did as you recognized obviously. So I don't give a shit on your preferances, there are two possible reasons for your complaints here: Either it is totally the opposite of the art you like, or you are just jealous like hell. Since you wrote such a long comment, I suspect you to make me know of your thinkings on this. Don't try to tell me this would be a bad image, I know it is not. You can discuss with me about every crap, but your complaints about MY ART are useless. Your stuff isn't really the greatest thing to me either, but I wouldn't ever dare to tell, something isn't art. Your stuff is not well working for everyone, but it is art to the ones who like it. Your comment is a bad one, endless complaining isn't useful for anything. You wasted my worthy time with that comment."
First reply to them -
I'm not at all self-centered. I DO know many things about successful artwork, and when I see something significantly less professional getting monstrous amounts of praise, I desire to let the artist and the viewers know what the level of skill and aesthetic context are. This does not mean my work is at all a good example of professional work, no. The knowledge I have about artwork stems from dealing with the professionals who have jobs in the American industry. Since your obviously European of some sort, your "genius'" might have that as a basis for their opinions. American industry standards are much more crucial when it comes to something catching the viewers eye immediately. I base my critique upon general standards and leave all biased opinions out of the mix. Sure I could have said some nice things about your art but I felt everyone else pretty much did that for me, and then some. Don't get me wrong, you implemented a lot of good techniques into the image, however as I stated those techniques did little to your aid if they were made upon an already visually weak layout. perhaps now you can appreciate my words and what I'm trying to tell you a little more. Or would you rather just get the blind praise and continue seeing my critique as an attack to be ignored?
Them -
I don't see your "critiques" as good ones, because they possible go too far in direction of industry. Who ever said this should be something I wanna earn money with? This piece of art is only for the intention to make me and my viewers happy, with something looking very good. Obviously it does. That is why all the other are praising it, because I did it for my and their liking. They would almost ignore the image, if I did it for industrial meanings. So I think I got it, why you wrote so bad. I wouldn't have wanted to do it in a way that it works with your industrial view. You know, I am an artist, I draw and do other creative things in my free time, it's my hobby. If I anyway would like to follow industrial points, I couldn't, since I don't know them. I actually currently do a graphics apprenticeship, there I should learn this - but this apprenticeship sucks like nothing else, it will be good for NOTHING when I will have it finished. I only live with that because of my knowledge, I got by my hobbies.
But also these are already good. Just recently, I came to a working deal with a company, only because of exactly THIS image!They are industry, but like it very much!
You must be honest: Sure my art (as this image) wouldn't work in all ways, but it is usable art for industrial meanings. I know there are issues in the planning, the visualisations of image parts, but since now I can follow your points, I still don't agree with most of them. I simply guess, me and the other people see this image in a completely different view than you do, and since what you say on it will not make it change much, you should nevermind the image. It is my style, it worked for a long time - also keep in mind, it is my hobby, even if it will never get to work in industrial meanings, as in a possible future job, I don't care about if it won't do. I don't even assume it, that it will do. Since classic drawing isn't used that much in industry, especially not the manga-like one like I do use.
As last statement, I would prefer if you don't call me less professional or something. I don't need someone to tell me that to know, since I am no pro in industry - I am also no pro in hobby drawing, but I am coming closer to this. I don't wanna really draw in my later job, it should stay as my hobby. So no needing of comparing these things. I have done some industrial images already, if you would give me your opinion on these ones, I would accept it. I have none of them online, since, as I said, people on such a site wanna see exciting art, not industrial visualisation. And I might say, that is what my image is.
In my reply.. I feel I must convey a certain level of respect for them and their objective thinking which would be tainted by biased opinions by most other people.
******************
Now am I really losing my grips on what makes good art? I know my own art lacks a large number of elements which would make them more interesting, but this shouldn't mean I cant go around telling other people their own work also lacks those elements does it? Or does this mean this person is just to benumbed by my harsh critique to fully understand the substance behind it? Seriously people, help me out here.