Originally Posted by whom
You really should look over your voting system as some artworks being posted are really not up to standard, feels like a bad joke when your own artwork gets declined and you see something far worse in the finished gallery accepted.... seems to me you are only voting based upon brushstrokes and polished for no reason, polished does not always makes an artwork better...
This does not usually get to me but now I have had 3 finished pieces declined in a row so I removed all of my work.
Maybe I will post my 3d work, I am not sure of that anymore though.
I can tell you right now that some of the judges LOVE expressive brushwork, and PREFER them over sterile, over-polished, soulless images.
What some people have to understand (and learn as an artist), is that not all "painterly" brushwork are the same. Many artists who aren't quite advanced enough yet, will often not understand the difference between brush economy/speed/messiness vs. deliberate expressiveness. Many of today's artists mistakenly think that messy brushwork = "cool speedpainting," and that is a very common misconception.
Expressive brushwork of quality requires selective detailing and precise handling, and the fact it is expressive does not mean it is inherently messy and unfocused. The brushwork has to describe the surface types you are depicting, and the way you build the forms and selective details has to have a sense of hierarchy in both narrative and compositional importance. One can't just indiscriminately slap on quick and vague brushstrokes that have no clear purpose in its deployment for specific surface type, description of form, and ability to focus or unfocus selective details according to the needs of the composition.
Now, I'm not sure which images you deleted from your portfolio, or which ones have been rejected most recently--I've been too busy teaching the CGWorkshop to have had time to do much Showcase Gallery judging lately (though I remember a couple of your images from the past). But it would be incorrect to assume they are rejected purely because of lack of polish, or any other reason you might think. Sometimes images are rejected simply because they are so cliched and boring, without demonstrating anything interesting or compelling in its composition, lighting, painting, and so on. Such images aren't "bad"--they are simply kind of "meh" in the eyes of the judges who rejected them. But not all judges agree on what is "meh." I personally would accept images that are technically and artistically sound, even if it's boring and unremarkable in any way (unless it is so boring and cliched that even I couldn't vote to accept it with a straight face). If I don't see glaring technical/artistic issues, I will generally vote to accept it, regardless of subject matter or style. Some judges are a lot more picky, wanting to see more than just the most boring/standard composition, uninteresting lighting, trite subject matter, etc.
I personally think your dragon image was quite good, though I don't think I had the chance to vote on it for the judging panel. Your other two paintings I see on your website are kind of borderline for me (I remember giving a critique on the sci-fi one).
As for the images that are accepted into the Showcase Gallery, I have previously explained in this thread that not all judges agree with each other on what should be accepted, just like how they often don't agree on what should be rejected. This is unavoidable, because unless we let machines do the judging, human beings will have different opinions, and no matter how objective we try to be, or implement a majority-vote system, there will always be disagreements. A majority-vote system merely means that the dominating opinion wins over the minority opinion, but it's still a disagreement.