Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mendonca]

Maybe we can get Armok to make a ruling or do a pole to decide if we should critique here.  Knowing what to expect from eachother help keep the intentions of the posters clear.  If someone was bothered and said something, then there are likely more people that were bothered, but said nothing.

Personally, I would prefer to see it kept in the Engraver's guild. In my ever so humble opinion, this should be a thread for people to post for fun, without fear of comment. ( unless criticism is requested, of course)

I just worry, slightly, that people who would want to post a picture, may be slightly more reticent when they see criticism being levelled (and I appreciate that all the criticism is by and large very constructive, but sometimes people just want be told how cool their stuff is ...)

Tofu, I love it !

[Buttery_Mess]

Yeah, Tofu, don't supposed you have a higher res version of that, do you? I instantly set it as a desktop background. I just bought a TV to use as my laptop's monitor, it needs 1920x1080 files now.


I actually hate an environment where people will compliment something whatever it is. People should be free to say when something's shit when they don't like it. At the other end of the scale, constructive criticism angers me because whereas there may be a skill to art, the skill lies in your ability to express yourself, not to express what other people want. I get annoyed by criticism because the person giving the critique gives the impression that they are more skilled. The problem is that clearly Fault is very skilled indeed, which tells me that, whether or not the person providing the critique is skilled, Fault is already aware of what mistakes he's made when he's created something. I know I am when I create something.

Look, none of this is a problem for anyone else. These are my feelings. I think it wouldn't annoy me if people criticised in this thread by saying something like, "I like it, but I'd like it more if..." rather than just listing flaws; not that someone elses work necessarily has flaws, because it may have been deliberate on the part of the creator, or maybe they couldn't put the effort in.

I mean, look at . . . . . . . . .'s work. It's impossible to criticise that because it's so wierd and abstracted. You accept it, because you assume the intent of the artist was well executed. Merely because Fault's work, for instance, isn't wierd and abstracted, doesn't mean it doesn't deserve acceptance. Before you criticise, it's important to at least say whether you like it overall.

I'm 100% certain that . . . . . . . . . is autistic. It's not a bad thing, but I simply cannot imagine his art coming from anyone who doesn't have an autistic spectrum disorder.

Besides, I always imagine that DF is like cracks for autists. The fact that I love it makes me wonder sometimes if I'm an Aspie.

[Tiruin]

Moaning on art? Constructive Criticism is better, viewed most of the thread already and I've to say, many are well made. Yes, a few errors in detail and lighting, but they grow.

9dots is not autistic 

Loving all art submitted, in whatever form.

[Ferozstein]

At the other end of the scale, constructive criticism angers me because whereas there may be a skill to art, the skill lies in your ability to express yourself, not to express what other people want.

Actually, it doesn't work that way. Or rather, most of the time it doesn't. Personal expression is one thing, but the laws of composition and proportions are more or less universal (unless you explicitly and deliberately decide to break them). Also, even very skilled illustrators often miss some fault in their work, and that's exactly where constructive criticism is for and where it comes in.

[Guardian G.I.]

In my opinion, if we compare a drawing thread, where constructive criticism is applied to everyone and a drawing thread, where constructive criticism is applied very rarely (or not applied at all), we can see a significant difference. Threads without criticism attract a lot of people, but serious art critics (like lordnincompoop, for example) would probably cry bloody tears at the overall quality of art in these threads (a good example of a such thread is "Draw your adventures" from the DF Adventure Mode Discussion forum). On the other hand, the art in a thread with applied criticism is much better in terms of overall quality, but most people will not post there, because once they see the (seemingly) good art being torn to shreds, they will think: "My art is too bad" or "I don't have talent" and leave. And if they try to post something there, the criticism will deter them away, and they will never return.

What will happen, if this thread transforms into a separate unofficial branch of the Engravers Guild? The criticism will deter everyone except serious artists from posting anything, and the overall art quality will improve. However, the amount of serious artists on Bay 12 has declined over the years (and, there weren't many of them in the first place), so if we start critiquing everyone and everything here, we will probably kill the thread.

Maybe it would be better, if critiques would be given only to people who specifically ask for it.

[Ferozstein]

I haven't seen any critiques of stick figure comics and the like. There is really no point. Crits are given out for the artists who, judging by quality of their images, aspire to be... professionals is perhaps a bit far-fetched word, but they're already somewhat decent at what they do, and are trying to improve. It's them who benefit from critiques the most, and frankly, I see constructive criticism as a compliment all in itself - it means someone thought I've drawn something worth it and goes out of their way to help me see the areas for improvement.

Regarding the Engraver's Guild, this is the first time I've heard of that thread. I looked through last 15 pages of this forum, and couldn't find it. Would it really be better to necro that old thread just for posting crits than critiquing art here on the spot?

[freeformschooler]

Necro? What?

[lordnincompoop]

Welp, I've lost my sketch. Great.

I still feel like I owe you guys something for my endless promises, though, so here's a crappy photo of some stylised dwarves dating back a few several months. I know it's a shitty substitute, but it'll do until I can whip up a new one.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Bluh bluh constructive criticism

whoa. whoa guys, chill.

alright, i'll stop - now let's get this thread back on topic, yes?

serious art critics (like lordnincompoop, for example)

hahahah
Nah, not very. I've never been particularly serious about what I say. If I've offended anyone, I sincerely apologise.


Also, there's only been a handful of times I've been upset at art, none of which were because of quality. I like the Draw Your Adventures thread, so back off. :p

[Armok]

Tofu: thats amazing! Love the lighting and the atmospheric effects!

Everyone arguing: I don't care WHAT you're saying; you're saying to much of it! Less words and more images!

[Fault]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

GHNNNNGGGRGGNGNNGNGN

Tofu you've done it again, that's amazing. I especially like the limning around the central figures!

it's just that in a few places (tree, neighbouring leaves, bottom right shrub, bottom of picture) it looks like it's been left unfinished instead of being intended that way

that reminds me, last couple panels I posted had most of the image very very sharp and without the painterly brushstrokes. I got complaints advising that the entire image should not be at the same level of focus, because it makes it hard for the viewer to know what to pay attention to, and messes with perspective.

so now, in this, I used a softer, blurrier aesthetic for the background and bottom figures, to bring out the figure with a speaking role (the topmost dwarf has a speech bubble in the final panel) and.. now people are saying the whole picture should be at the same level of focus and detail?

eh well. I guess I haven't found the right balance between these two elements yet!

[.........]

I'm not autistic.

[Rose]

I'm not autistic.

Glad that's cleared up.

[Siquo]

Diagnosing mental illnesses by someone's art is generally frowned upon. ......... just makes cool stuff, that is different.

Tofu, that lighting. It's very nice.

[Buttery_Mess]

The introduction of (often very subtle) motion into pixel-precise art, the exquisite blending of ordered dither, the contrast between stark geometry, accurate detail and broadly abstracted anatomical features; . . . . . . . . .'s work is like diving headlong into a seething whirlpool of madness and then inhaling a deeper, more fundemental order beneath the surface that defies all expectation.

Autism is one explanation. Genius is another.

[Karnewarrior]

The introduction of (often very subtle) motion into pixel-precise art, the exquisite blending of ordered dither, the contrast between stark geometry, accurate detail and broadly abstracted anatomical features; . . . . . . . . .'s work is like diving headlong into a seething whirlpool of madness and then inhaling a deeper, more fundemental order beneath the surface that defies all expectation.

Autism is one explanation. Genius is another.

The difference is that Geniuses find it harder to interact with people.