I’m not talking about a “professional level” critique. I’m talking about the basic basics, which, of course, professionals must consider in their critiques.
For example, IF you are evaluating images that are intended to be shown to others, and impart a feeling, emotion, or story to the viewer, you cannot evaluate them without addressing certain basic basics that deal with how people perceive images. That’s where learning and the craft come into play. The craft is being able to generate images that affect viewers in a certain way.
However, if the purpose and goal for the images is “I was just playing around and made this image, what do you think?” then there is no evaluation or craft. It becomes solely “I like it” or “I don’t like it”, and nothing gets learned.
So I agree, if people only want a “what do you think” from others, which is basically what happens now in the render threads, then just make a “what do you think” thread.
I see what you’re saying and I think you’re right. A critique thread should be more than a “what do you think” thread.
I’m being far too agreeable today. Something must be wrong.
Are the folks wanting to become ‘professional’ or do they just want tips and suggestions/critique on how to make their own personal artwork better. Not everybody here is on the professional career track. I’m guessing most just want to be better at using and understanding Carrara’s capabilities and improving their art for their own sake.
heh. don’t you hate the voice of reason?
My experience with critique groups?
In the year 2000 I helped to form a group of painters with the specific intent on having an active critique group. Come 2012 we are still together, we rent a full time studio and have had many successful exhibitions. We are still together after all that time because we treat each other in a courteous, civilized and intelligent way. As evidence? Our newspaper reviews. http://andrewfinnieportfolio2.blogspot.com.au/p/press.html
After that period of time I know how to critique and accept critique. I can also recognize criticism from a mile away. Especially when it is malicious and formed from ill intent, and usually is designed to make the ‘critisizer’ feel better about themselves - by using the Orwellian hypothesis of putting people down to make yourself look tall.
I am in also in two other online illustration critique groups. One is formed by about fifteen artists of whom half had have books published and a further two have just succeeded in ‘catching’ an agent . Our one intent is to help each other along the way. That group is going great guns because we treat each other in a “courteous, civilized and intelligent way.”
The other group I am in was going very well till we let in someone who had a poisonous tongue, who insisted he knew better than anyone else and proceded to shove his opinions down people’s throats. That group is now in dead water because one poisonous member left a bad taint in everyone’s mouths.
The moral? If your stated intent is to help someone, and this is your true intent, then you must first get them to listen.
Jumping up and down with malicious and derogatory critical remarks is never a way to get an audience to listen to your ‘critique’. On the contrary, it’s just a way to make someone dislike you and to ignore you.
With all due respect, I think I’m going to bow out of this one. I just don’t have the energy for it.
Honestly, while it’s admirable to say you want to “get better”, I really don’t think there is a common understanding of what that even means. Art is about expressing an emotion, feeling or story to others, and the craft is about how to do that. If people don’t even understand that, and only want to know how to make cooler pictures for themselves, there is no right way or wrong way or technique or skill. It’s all personal preference.
So I’ll let you guys decide where you want to go with this.
With all due respect, I think I’m going to bow out of this one. I just don’t have the energy for it.
Honestly, while it’s admirable to say you want to “get better”, I really don’t think there is a common understanding of what that even means. Art is about expressing an emotion, feeling or story to others, and the craft is about how to do that. If people don’t even understand that, and only want to know how to make cooler pictures for themselves, there is no right way or wrong way or technique or skill. It’s all personal preference.
So I’ll let you guys decide where you want to go with this.
I thought we were trying to come to a common understanding about the whole thing. I guess I was in a different conversation.
Sorry to see you go, Joe
Ok, guys/gals. Are we gonna go anywhere with this. I still think it’s an admirable idea that could produce some good result. Maybe we should go ahead and give it a go.
Are the folks wanting to become ‘professional’ or do they just want tips and suggestions/critique on how to make their own personal artwork better. Not everybody here is on the professional career track. I’m guessing most just want to be better at using and understanding Carrara’s capabilities and improving their art for their own sake.
heh. don’t you hate the voice of reason?
My experience with critique groups?
In the year 2000 I helped to form a group of painters with the specific intent on having an active critique group. Come 2012 we are still together, we rent a full time studio and have had many successful exhibitions. We are still together after all that time because we treat each other in a courteous, civilized and intelligent way. As evidence? Our newspaper reviews. http://andrewfinnieportfolio2.blogspot.com.au/p/press.html
After that period of time I know how to critique and accept critique. I can also recognize criticism from a mile away. Especially when it is malicious and formed from ill intent, and usually is designed to make the ‘critisizer’ feel better about themselves - by using the Orwellian hypothesis of putting people down to make yourself look tall.
I am in also in two other online illustration critique groups. One is formed by about fifteen artists of whom half had have books published and a further two have just succeeded in ‘catching’ an agent . Our one intent is to help each other along the way. That group is going great guns because we treat each other in a “courteous, civilized and intelligent way.”
The other group I am in was going very well till we let in someone who had a poisonous tongue, who insisted he knew better than anyone else and proceded to shove his opinions down people’s throats. That group is now in dead water because one poisonous member left a bad taint in everyone’s mouths.
The moral? If your stated intent is to help someone, and this is your true intent, then you must first get them to listen.
Jumping up and down with malicious and derogatory critical remarks is never a way to get an audience to listen to your ‘critique’. On the contrary, it’s just a way to make someone dislike you and to ignore you.
Looking through the newspaper articles. You photograph well, don’t you? Must be all that surfing.
And Mr. Finnie, you’re right. There’s no reason to be malicious. It’s all about honesty and efficiency and truth and respect. Okay? Your credentials are impeccable in the field of critique, and I’m sure you’re incredibly respectful to everyone. Well, almost….
I never said to be cruel and malicious. Now I’m sure you’ll continue the argument about whether you think I’ve personally been malicious in your view, and try to prove me wrong, or hypocritical, or whatever you want. And you can continue to assume the worst about me, and try to prove it until the sun no longer shines, but that does nobody any good.
Get over it. Take the beneficial parts of what I say, discard the rest, but get over it, okay?
Looking through the newspaper articles. You photograph well, don’t you? Must be all that surfing.
Haha The last one he stuck a 28 mil lens an inch from my nose and got a great shot of the parsley in my teeth Yes I am a media whore…. did you know painters get groupies?? I didn’t know either, I would have become one sooner…...
Just kidding of course, my wife always searches my pockets for any phone numbers after our shows….
A critique group? Sure it sounds good. !!!
We also have the option of Polls so maybe we should have render challenges as well, where the person puts their work up and either asks for critiques or not. The other idea might be to have a ‘form’ where the critiquer fills in the blanks. Attached a bad example to give idea ...!
Small problem at the moment, is the forum software isn’t sorted so the last post in a thread is actually on page 1. Maybe Diz will sort that out eventually.
And Mr. Finnie, you’re right. There’s no reason to be malicious. It’s all about honesty and efficiency and truth and respect. Okay? Your credentials are impeccable in the field of critique, and I’m sure you’re incredibly respectful to everyone. Well, almost….
I never said to be cruel and malicious. Now I’m sure you’ll continue the argument about whether you think I’ve personally been malicious in your view, and try to prove me wrong, or hypocritical, or whatever you want. And you can continue to assume the worst about me, and try to prove it until the sun no longer shines, but that does nobody any good.
Get over it. Take the beneficial parts of what I say, discard the rest, but get over it, okay?
Sorry Joe I didn’t see this:
Oh in real life we can tell by the silence of the critiquer what they really think. Silence is very good as you know. In real life we also have the advantage of looking at an artists other painting stuck on the studio wall and saying “I think this works much better ... “because…..”
We also have jokes eg “I really like the shape of this canvas…” or…. “I love how your painting smells…”
We can joke and still be serious. It’s a luxury some of us have.
Looking through the newspaper articles. You photograph well, don’t you? Must be all that surfing.
Haha The last one he stuck a 28 mil lens an inch from my nose and got a great shot of the parsley in my teeth Yes I am a media whore…. did you know painters get groupies?? I didn’t know either, I would have become one sooner…...
Just kidding of course, my wife always searches my pockets for any phone numbers after our shows….
A critique group? Sure it sounds good. !!!
We also have the option of Polls so maybe we should have render challenges as well, where the person puts their work up and either asks for critiques or not. The other idea might be to have a ‘form’ where the critiquer fills in the blanks. Attached a bad example to give idea ...!
Small problem at the moment, is the forum software isn’t sorted so the last post in a thread is actually on page 1. Maybe Diz will sort that out eventually.
Those wives sure can get in the way of fame, can’t they?:lol:
I think we could all benefit from some good old fashion critique. I still think it’s a good idea and everybody who chose to participate stands to benefit.
And Mr. Finnie, you’re right. There’s no reason to be malicious. It’s all about honesty and efficiency and truth and respect. Okay? Your credentials are impeccable in the field of critique, and I’m sure you’re incredibly respectful to everyone. Well, almost….
I never said to be cruel and malicious. Now I’m sure you’ll continue the argument about whether you think I’ve personally been malicious in your view, and try to prove me wrong, or hypocritical, or whatever you want. And you can continue to assume the worst about me, and try to prove it until the sun no longer shines, but that does nobody any good.
Get over it. Take the beneficial parts of what I say, discard the rest, but get over it, okay?
Sorry Joe I didn’t see this:
Oh in real life we can tell by the silence of the critiquer what they really think. Silence is very good as you know. In real life we also have the advantage of looking at an artists other painting stuck on the studio wall and saying “I think this works much better ... “because…..”
We also have jokes eg “I really like the shape of this canvas…” or…. “I love how your painting smells…”
We can joke and still be serious. It’s a luxury some of us have.
A little humor can go a long way.
Andrew, please don’t take this the wrong way, but I really LOVE how your paint smells. Dreamy!:)
Haha For the last two months since I ripped my shoulder tendon off and had it reattached my wife has had to open my paint tubes for me. I tried opening them myself with my teeth but the cadmium red just tastes ... , well, poisonous… So they smell good but taste lousy!
Haha For the last two months since I ripped my shoulder tendon off and had it reattached my wife has had to open my paint tubes for me. I tried opening them myself with my teeth but the cadmium red just tastes ... , well, poisonous… So they smell good but taste lousy!
Blah blah blah waffle blah blah (smileys are not working for some genious DAZ reason) <—SMILEY HERE!
I suggest we move on to the part where we make up the RULES. Once we have a few good suggestions we can create a POLL and have a vote on what rules we like the best.
Off the top of my head, here are some suggested rules/reminders:
SUBMITTING WORK:
- no tears. This is for your benefit (even if the advice is all bad, this was done for your benefit).
- be forgiving. Expect that others are struggling to put their thoughts into words JUST FOR YOU. You won’t agree with everything, sometimes people are *actually* saying things about their OWN work. Be prepared that some criticism will be unhelpful, or worded badly. Try to see around the words to the intended meaning.
- work does not have to be complete BUT you must state your GOAL with the work (ie: realistic hair, submission to an art site, comicbook character, narrative animation, etc)
- You MUST keep the scene file and at least CONSIDER some of the criticism (are changes possible? Are they necessary? Does a suggestion go against the goal?) Even if you don’t remake the work, it would probably be helpful to consider a What If…
- No one OWES you attention, if you are unwilling to hear the advice of others then don’t submit. You’re wasting everyone’s time.
- Line-by-line responses are NOT ALLOWED (no flame wars)
- the WORST CRITICISM must be rephrased (if it was said another way, would it be helpful? No? Then it is not valid criticism)
- it might be helpful to say something about how you got to this point (render took days, spent time morphing dials but couldn’t edit the actual model, Spent a lot of time tweaking Highlight shaders trying to get a velvet look, etc) especially as related to stated goals
SUBMITTING ANALYSIS:
- You are only allowed to give ONE critique on each submission (no flame wars). Same rule applies to critiquing another person’s critique (no flame wars) Keep it short. If the work is re-submitted you can take it from there, but let’s keep the signal-to-noise ratio high.
- If requested by the Artist, you must be able to rephrase your criticism (not expand it into an essay, just put it in other words)
- Analysis must stay within the submitted work (saying “This flat lighting is like all Carrara pics…” NO!)
- You can reference other artwork BUT ONLY AS IT’S RELEVANT TO THE ARTIST’S STATED GOAL (If the goal is an abstract you are not allowed to compare it to Da Vinci’s photorealism, that’s not helpful)
- Keep the artist’s skill level in mind. No one can do it all at 100%... Intense detail work is a time suck. Demanding every image be re-rendered with global illumination or hand-painted textures or original models isn’t helpful.
- If you can’t say ANYTHING nice, then consider saying nothing at all. Not all work deserves your input. Silence can say a lot!
Maybe a general rule of analysis could be to say what is/isn’t working and leave it at that. DO NOT attempt to say how it *should* look or how it *should* be done. It’s up to the artist to figure out the right solution….
Blah blah blah waffle blah blah (smileys are not working for some genious DAZ reason) <—SMILEY HERE!
I suggest we move on to the part where we make up the RULES. Once we have a few good suggestions we can create a POLL and have a vote on what rules we like the best.
Off the top of my head, here are some suggested rules/reminders:
SUBMITTING WORK:
- no tears. This is for your benefit (even if the advice is all bad, this was done for your benefit).
- be forgiving. Expect that others are struggling to put their thoughts into words JUST FOR YOU. You won’t agree with everything, sometimes people are *actually* saying things about their OWN work. Be prepared that some criticism will be unhelpful, or worded badly. Try to see around the words to the intended meaning.
- work does not have to be complete BUT you must state your GOAL with the work (ie: realistic hair, submission to an art site, comicbook character, narrative animation, etc)
- You MUST keep the scene file and at least CONSIDER some of the criticism (are changes possible? Are they necessary? Does a suggestion go against the goal?) Even if you don’t remake the work, it would probably be helpful to consider a What If…
- No one OWES you attention, if you are unwilling to hear the advice of others then don’t submit. You’re wasting everyone’s time.
- Line-by-line responses are NOT ALLOWED (no flame wars)
- the WORST CRITICISM must be rephrased (if it was said another way, would it be helpful? No? Then it is not valid criticism)
- it might be helpful to say something about how you got to this point (render took days, spent time morphing dials but couldn’t edit the actual model, Spent a lot of time tweaking Highlight shaders trying to get a velvet look, etc) especially as related to stated goals
SUBMITTING ANALYSIS:
- You are only allowed to give ONE critique on each submission (no flame wars). Same rule applies to critiquing another person’s critique (no flame wars) Keep it short. If the work is re-submitted you can take it from there, but let’s keep the signal-to-noise ratio high.
- If requested by the Artist, you must be able to rephrase your criticism (not expand it into an essay, just put it in other words)
- Analysis must stay within the submitted work (saying “This flat lighting is like all Carrara pics…” NO!)
- You can reference other artwork BUT ONLY AS IT’S RELEVANT TO THE ARTIST’S STATED GOAL (If the goal is an abstract you are not allowed to compare it to Da Vinci’s photorealism, that’s not helpful)
- Keep the artist’s skill level in mind. No one can do it all at 100%... Intense detail work is a time suck. Demanding every image be re-rendered with global illumination or hand-painted textures or original models isn’t helpful.
- If you can’t say ANYTHING nice, then consider saying nothing at all. Not all work deserves your input. Silence can say a lot!
Maybe a general rule of analysis could be to say what is/isn’t working and leave it at that. DO NOT attempt to say how it *should* look or how it *should* be done. It’s up to the artist to figure out the right solution….
waffle, waffle, waffle, blah, waffle, waffle, waffle:-) (Smileys are working for me. The forum likes me better than you.)(oops! spoke too soon)
OK. This looks like a good start to me. Now, I know the artist is going to ask questions, i.e. How would I do ___________? or whatever. Would a critique thread be the place for things like that. I easily see a conversation developing on points like that. I think that’s fine if that’s what we want. It would be more like a critique/learning thread. If we don’t want that, then how would we handle an artist’s questions? By PM, in a separate thread for that purpose, or what? I only ask because I can easily see such a situation happening.
I also think having something like headwax’s critiquing guide above might be helpful to include in the initial rules post.
That’s my two cents. If you want more, I’ll have to go to the bank.
