Constructive Criticism Or Bullying ?

There can be some sniping but most are trying ti give genuine advice.

Hi, Mr. Naive....
Artists are no different than anyone else. I just figure by the time an artist puts his/her work up on the internet, they should know how good they are and not have to ask anyone "Am I good enough."

more maturity and intelligence.....I think you thought wrong.
people are just people, hiding behind their monitors.....

Are you talking about me Robert or in general ? Nice that you called me Mr Naïve though.

I know what & who you are talking about, Karl! It's true, some folks can get pretty rude, to say the least. I've had lots of members tell me they no longer participate in the 'community discussions' for that reason alone, NOT because they 'need to get a backbone', but because they don't understand 'why' grown-ups [artists or not] just can't be civil to one another, even when it's someone asking for a critique. It's the way of this world; everyone can say what they want, and it's up to you & me whether we want to deal with it or not.
I still take part, and post topics, too, but I address the negative comments head on. No matter how positive, uplifting & inclusive I make the topics, there are always those who cannot help but be 'negative'. I choose to remain positive, honest & engaging...but, don't always attract the same, unfortunately!
Good luck, though...and, btw, feel free to comment in any of my discussion posts. There is one going on right now re 'the winds of change'. You will find that I'm a very kindhearted, welcoming & attentive moderator! Have a good night, Karl.

Thank you for your kind words and support Brooks.

If you are talking about asking for a critique of your work --- do you want honesty or useless praise? Its up to the individual to process the feedback and decide it its valid or not.

I wasn't asking for anything. I was commenting about reading other artists rudely commenting back and forth about each others work. A little petty if you ask me.

people can get fiesty at times. I find some are very good at being blunt. I am not one that is hiding behind my pc. I am more of a writer and a visual person so I feel I communicate better in this setting. Perhaps others also feel that way. Can u give some specific examples

" I just figure by the time an artist puts his/her work up on the internet, they should know how good they are and not have to ask anyone "Am I good enough."

Totally agree!

It wouldn't really serve any purpose to point out certain people or comments and I would only be doing the same as them. I was only voicing my opinion based on two specific threads and was testing the waters to see if others felt the same.

Floyd Are u saying that artists should not require critiques when going online with there work? All levels are accepted here. Perhaps they came in that way and lost some of that confidence along the way hoping a critique may help them

Karl I think an example would serve the purpose of clarifying, knowing what your definition of sniping is, and learning. At least for me. Personally I hate bullying and if I did that to someone would want to auto correct and improve my comm. skills

Unless someone asks for a critique of their work, the general rule is not to discuss people's work. If the question is "why am I not selling?" then the artist's work becomes one of the factors in the equation.

Karl, I totally agree with you on this one. Some of the personal attacks are so cruel. I have backed off of the discussions for that very reason. As bad as I would like to participate, I am to gentle spirited to argue or bicker and I certainly do not want to be on the receiving end of the cruelty.
There are a few exceptions though from a few who frequent the discussions that sound mean but are truly taking the time to help. I suppose when you have been active long enough you will be able to discern between those who are being helpful and those who are just abusive.

I must have missed something. Any commentary I remember that was very blunt was given to critiques requesting this or because they were selling which like Edwards says leads to the art needing critique. Well I will say if I have done this my intent was to help and I must have felt they were asking for genuine info.

I am not saying artist should not get critiques. I am saying that very few people here are qualified to give a professional critique.

A lot of people that are asking are already in doubt and probably somewhat fragile. We have seen people with really good images ask for a critique, get "the brutal" truth as, some like to call it, and that is the last we ever see of that artist.

As Robert said by the time the artist uploads his art, they should have already decided they are good enough to be here. Any one in doubt or looking for a valid critique should seek a professional in their circle of friends, fellow artist, teachers or other professionals that going to know more about the artist and how fragile they may be.

Any one in doubt or looking for a valid critique should seek a professional in their circle of friends, fellow artist, teachers or other professionals that going to know more about the artist, what their goals are and how fragile they may be as well as other pertinent information.

When some one here gets a critique all they are getting is someones opinion, that is not a critique, that is merely an opinion that is very often wrong.

About three months after I got here, there was a critique thread that got stated and some people were doing a number on a couple of people that asked for a critique. I was shocked at some of the things they were telling them.

So I took two different images of my own work and asked for a critique on them.

I was told that they were full of noise, the color was all wrong, the composition was no good, etc, etc. I was also told they would never sell and if they did sell FAA would not print them.

What I had not told them was these were images I had already sold multiply copies of and FAA had already printed them and they were not returned. I had been selling these two images for years before I even joined FAA on top of it.

Robert Frank Gabriel, thank you for a good laugh.

I don't think artists are like everyone else. Ask your friends for the truth if this is a surprise to you. Artists are usually more passionate about things that don't even matter to normal people. I also notice that artist's are usually blunt, to the point, not able to conceal the truth, extremely intelligent, not always open minded, and extremely socially off or non-conforming. But that's just my opinion...it surprises me NOT that artist's have opinions and strong ones too boot. They mean you no harm at all, as most are gentle spirited in person.

Lisa! I could not agree with you more!

And a lot of those traits are exactly why most artist, lacking the proper training, should not be giving what could be career altering critiques to people they know nothing about.

I see Floyd. People in fragile states do need to be handled with care. I personally would not go to a circle of friends they are the worst and somehow cannot see fragility in there own friends. Many that are not having success won't have finances to pay someone. So I think they don't know what else to do and feel desparate

I agree Lisa

Well I think peoples profiles will tell us something about them. I think the critiques they ask for are from the viewpoint of a buyer. And I think people do understand that its all just opinion. I have had prof. training. So I always base it on what I was taught. I am not just calling myself an artist cuz I can take a picture or paint a decent likeness

Lots of what you're seeing Karl also has to do with a history between some of the commentators. Sometimes it is a very lengthy history or a conversation that has been ongoing through years and threads. Lots of between the lines stuff.

It's a struggle for the soul of artistry... :)

I remember my first Art teacher ,At first he liked my work and said I could study with him,I was working on a landscape,He said it was "Shit" and "There was no talent in that work as fare as He could see". It was not my best work,but I did think It was an interesting work of art.I did not paint for a long time.He is a great painter and a professor in figurative Art.But a year later I did study with an brilliant landscape painter and He was impressed by my work and said He would introduce me too Odd Nerdrum(a figurative genius). To this day I'm not sure if the critique made me a better painter or a fear was born in me.Maybe both. I remember that landscape and when I paint something that reminds me of that landscape I'm never sure if I it a good painting. I still think I have a talent for traditional Art,I'm just not sure how "great"my talent is.But I have never had a teacher that have learned me much I'm teaching myself everyday,so I know my work in 20years will enter a higher level.

visual artists are a different sort. Maybe too much paint thinner or staring at pixels. Our craziness is legendary. Not an excuse to bash someone but I think our moderators are doing a great job shutting down the offenders.

Explain how their bio is supposed to tell you if someone is a great artist or photog please. If you typed biography and meant portfolio, I understand that.

A bio will tell you their accomplishments and what they have done in the art community. Have you ever gotten a job without a resume.
Portfolio would help as well

i can make up tall tales about all the things i won. that tells you nothing. it's a big boast and makes me think the opposite. the bio isn't a resume, and resumes are often filled with lies or enhancements to look better. only a fool hires someone based only on their resume, but it's the only thing people have to go on. most are on trial when they get a job because of that. if someone told you they won XYZ national awards, and they have a body of work that can be best explained as the art you would find on a refrigerator, then the bio is meaningless. it doesn't even matter if you sell well. if the work supports the critique they gave none of that matters.

it's not a matter of marketing. i know what many people say - they tweet a 1000 times a day, and send mail to everyone, but if the work is no good it won't sell. if the work is known it might sell. good work often sells any place. but you wouldn't know who is selling the best just basing it on a bio.

my my bio talks about the work i sell. that's it. anything else won't enhance a sale, or entice a buyer. is my work not good because i don't list accomplishments? do i need to win awards to impress someone? no.

---Mike Savad

Is the person giving the critique capable of giving a critique? Does he/she understand your style? Does he/she hate the type of work you do? Asking someone who does fluffy HDR work to critique your nitty gritty straight street candid shots is like asking a cat to critique a mouse. Use common sense and ask someone who has your style and is successful with that style. You don't ask a rose expert to critique your pics of furniture.

We agree to disagree on that. Usually if someone win awards for their art, its because it was judged by real artists. they have Google that you can look that up on these days to see if a person has lied about that. Sales don't have any meaning to me at all from these types of sites because you could be the one buying your own work here for many reasons, like for a show. Family members and friends might feel sorry for you and buy them.

Yes Robert, I agree. it gives the person some sort of idea what type of work you actually do, and if the person critiquing your work even knows how to do it. It doesn't mean they are better than anyone else, just tells you a little about them and what they do.

no it's a misnomer to think the person needs to see your vision, needs to do what you do to understand it. a person with basic skills can make a critique. only the ones in denial assume they need some kind of background in that one particular thing.

a rose expert may very well be an expert in other things. don't assume they have a background in only one thing. for example, if your a street photographer who has never sold a thing and has no idea why they haven't sold a thing. then asking someone who has sold them successfully is a good idea. asking other people who never sold why they didn't sell won't help them to sell better.

you can either listen to what they have to say or don't. if your goal is just to post what you see then you achieved that. if your goal is to sell something, then maybe it's a failure.


as for contests - its meaningless. it all depends who you were against during that contest. if you entered something that was fantastic and everything else was kind of eh, then you win. if you enter the same piece again and everyone else's is much better, then you lose. contests hold very little meaning to me. i can judge if a person knows what they are doing just at a glance at their work. i can also see when they stole something based on other things. i don't buy my own work here, and you can't fake the location of where its bought. i would need a warehouse and fort knox to fill and afford to buy what i've sold. while there are some that buy their own, it's pretty pointless to even mention it. to this date i don't think a single family member bought anything from me.

---Mike Savad

First job in TV, I got a job with no resume. I interned there during the summer and he saw my work. When we were talking on my last day of interning, he said, "Keep in touch. Next job that's open, it's yours." Next job that came open, I got it.

I barely read the bios here. I skim over to see who is going to put in that they are "self taught" and were born with a pencil, brush or camera in their hand. When I see people listning their accomplishments, I roll my eyes. Who cares? Let the work speak for itself.

If you critique work that you have no clue what it took to make it, or how it was done, your not making a true critique, your just making an opinion. Not all art is understood, and noone that I know of is that great, but maybe your the first.

everything is an opinion - to you - what is a critique?

anyone can make a critique, i do agree you should be in the same field. i had a welder critique stained glass once. well whatever he said was pointless. if i shoot photos, and you shoot photos - then i am very well qualified to critique you.

if i shoot street photos, landscape, still life, etc, i can rate you because i do that too. i don't however rate or at least recommend anything beyond my expertise if i don't know what i'm talking about. like lighting a model for example. i think i know my stuff well enough to recommend what is better. and its up to you to decide it i am right or wrong. there is no such thing as a real critique, it's always an opinion. always.

its not possible to know what someones vision is - unless they tell you. if i see images of random people in the street, with a sour look on their face, seemingly random images of things where the goal was not art, it wasn't showing the life of this person, and so on. the goal was - i got away with it and it's legal, nyeah nyeah - then that type of person isn't critiquable, because nothing will line up with their vision - the vision is - i'm random and i got away with it. yet i'm totally authorized to say what i think because yeah, believe it or not i do the same type of work, just differently..

---Mike Savad

We really need some way to better track who is speaking to whom in these threads. Like, for example, using names in our posts, Kevin.

i don't need to be a chef to tell you your food tastes bad. it would be kinder to tell them there is too much salt, sugar or what have you. if i was a chef i could narrow it down even more. but anyone can rate it- the people on the street are probably even better because if they don't like it, they won't buy it. they don't need to be an expert in something.

---Mike Savad

I disagree as far as having done work in a certain area to judge it. If you understand the basics of art, you can evaluate something based on composition, balance, lighting, shadow, etc. In art school we were taught to critique a variety of art styles based on specific criteria, first and foremost being the technical aspects of basic art technique. It didn't matter what style of art you were pursuing, photography, painting, illustration, graphic design, etc. You were taught to analyze what you see before you and give your critique based on what you see right, what you see wrong and what you personally get from it. It gave the graphic design crowd a chance to look at paintings and the painters a chance to look at photography and I think you get the idea.

The one thing these forums cannot convey well is emotion and expression. Sometimes without both of those things, words can be easily misunderstood.

YMMV

Opinion - When a person likes, enjoys, or doesn't enjoy your piece of art, they may tease you, saying they're better than you, they may even just go to extremes and send people after you to make fun of your skills. Just so you know, that's not critique, that's just being a bully. Yes, everybody is open to their own opinion, but then doesn't mean they have to push it against you like it's a bad thing that you're doing what you love in life, such as writing and drawing, or photography, maybe even other things, speaking, basically anything that can have a creative aspect. Opinion is what you think, not something to put against somebody, sure it's not fun to hear that you didn't do well, but remember, without the negative, you won't have the positive, learn from your mistakes.

Critique - When you're either asked or just a professional at it, you may give a person a critique, now remember, this is only if you're going to state the facts, not your opinions. In other words, you may tell somebody that they missed a bit of originality in something, or they got proportions off when they were trying to draw something (This only goes for that, if they were trying to draw something that came straight from their mind and wasn't a specific creature, you weren't in their head at the time they either made it or dreamed it up, so you can't have the ability to belittle them from the way they drew it). This is far away from opinion because you're stating the facts, not just something you think about the artist, but of course, as we all know, compliments are nice, it's always good to give one at the very end for effort.

Kevin - part of giving a good critique is also stating how the work makes you feel. Does that not fall under the realm of opinion?

Roseann, you wrote both of these in your paragraph,

1- I disagree as far as having done work in a certain area to judge it
2 - In art school we were taught to critique a variety of art styles based on specific criteria

based on your definition - i have not seen any opinions here given by people for the most part, giving critiques. if anyone was made fun of, they would have been banned. so if your reading it that way, that's your issue. facts are also opinions depending on your view point. the proportions may be correct because that's their style.

a good critique will point out whats good and bad about a subject. it will tell them why its good, why it works, and so forth. and why its bad. is it technical issues, blurry, noisy, crooked? it will say - there is no subject in this,it's not all interesting. it's cluttered, etc. it will tell them what they should know. but all critiques will always be opinions, nothing is a fact unless you decide its a fact.

your definition of an opinion is considered mocking someone. i haven't seen too much teasing except from the jealous.


---Mike Savad

Yes Roseann, I think that does if you say how it makes you feel

To go along with Mike's chef analogy, most of us can tell when a movie is good or bad without ever directing one ourselves. We can form an opinion on an acting performance without ever acting even in a small stage production in our hometown. So I think we can certainly tell our fellow artists and photogs why we *think* something of theirs works or doesn't work.

Kevin - yes I did state both of those things. Your point is?

Yes Joseph, I agree that is an opinion

an opinion is usually biased, it's more like - i think this looks terrible, because i think street photography is stupid in general. that's an opinion. a critique is stating that while it's street photography, and its supposed to have a spontaneous feel, it should still tell a story of some kind to keep people interested in it.

the movie thing works here too. if you were a film student and you had a background you could be more exact. but as a film goer, you can compare it to things you liked better and you just know that it doesn't work because of basic reasons. we are the audience they have to impress, it would be actually smarter to listen to us, then a basement noir film director.


---Mike Savad

Well if what Joseph says is accurate then when someone posts an image here and asks for a critique, they are asking for the opinion of the community. Otherwise they would pay someone to give them a professional critique.

Karl- Try not to be disheartened. I agree that artists are just people too with inadequacies. Some people are sweet and some can't be bothered to be kind. Just keep on being yourself and doing your thing. :)

Mike does not have a clue as to what I am doing with my nitty gritty street portraits. Or if he does have a clue, he has a strong dislike not only for my style but for the way I capture my images. I don't want his critique, would never ask for it, and don't even want him to say anything about my work.

That said, I find it rather ironic that I love Mike's work. I think he is a real artist and I love his images. I would never attempt his style but I appreciate what he is doing. He is the Norman Rockwell of photography...And I mean this as a very sincere compliment.

Itīs very hard for me to critique other artistīs work. I either like it or donīt. Another thing are technical issues, but most of the times somebody else was faster ;-)

A critique is not about whether one likes it or not.
f that is what an artist wants, then simply ask...but don't ask for a critique.