More reading material wont matter, it wont be read or agreed upon. Cut and paste is because CGTalk isnt an art institute asking members 50 grand a year. The work you are referring to is voluntary and reference to that work in a belittling manner is fairly poor thanks for a free service.
To the OP, it is normal for you to be confused about the quality or impact of your own work. Many of our members are able to take a step back and read the information provided objectively. Your work has been viewed by people who have collectively looked at countless images over the years and together they are trying to aid you in your journey towards awesomeness.
Regardless of what and how much you write egos are always difficult to control.
I can’t speak for the guys who aren’t experienced 2D painters, but the more experienced 2D painters among us can tell the difference between careless and rushed work vs. expressive brushwork. Artists who really know what the hell they’re doing understands that speed/brush economy is not the same thing as expressiveness. Expressive brushwork can be painstakingly executed, and its looseness is deceptive. Compare such works to works from those who mistakenly think sloppy, speedpainting is the same thing, the difference should be obvious to those with experience.
Not sure why you are getting pissy at me for suggesting a way to avoid these kinds of threads being posted every week. Leigh and other mods have written detailed tracts about why images are or are not accepted. All I’m suggesting is aggregating those into one spot and including a link to it with the C&P reply. I’m not criticizing anything (except that this thread is a near weekly occurrence).
A worthy impressionistic work requires a higher level of skill and thought process to pull off than its photo-real counterpart. The latter may take longer to noodle out, but time spent on a work is not always directly proportional to quality. A good impressionistic work conveys an economy and poetry of marks that captures the essence of what they describe in a sense that is greater than photographic reality. Loose doesnt mean quick and easy, though it may appear that way to the novice or non-artist.
Did it read like I was dissing speedpainting? I happen to admire Sparth, Levy and Mullins A LOT. I actually “get” why it’s good. I have their books and love looking at them.
I’ve never said I left the paintig loose. I said I’ve worked the different parts of the painting in a different way. I’ve washed out some details in areas which are not the focus of the painting. I’ve worked the two hands without the same details bacause one is next to the viewer and the other one is far from it and should not be rendered in the same way.
What he meant was that it’s impossible to compile a list that will fit every single possible scenario, because each rejected piece has unique combination of problems. I tried writing such a list once and it became unmanageable. Also, even if you have such a long-winded list, the person reading it will have no idea which ones apply to him. That’s why it’s better to simply point people to the WIP critique area so they can post and get in-depth feedback from the community.
I’m not confused about the quality of my work. I’m confused about the way someone of you judges images. If I look at the first page of the showcase there are paintings which are not so good (and no better than what I submitted) and if you would like to be sincere and you’ll look at it you cannot deny that.
It’s to simple for you to turn the omelette and say that. I don’t have any problem. I did this painting for a contest and it has been chosen as one of the winners so I’m ok with my ego because I managed to get the result that I wanted. The real problem imo is in that way the showcase is lacking credibility. There’s not a REAL standard quality to be included in it. You just should have the luck to be judged by a moderator who knows what’s looking at. Or most probabily to not get the one which doesn’t know that unrendered doesn’t mean loose or weak or without love or rushed…
It’s not important the amount of time you spent on an illustration. The important thing it’s the result. As Lunatique said a good artist is capable of understanding if the result is good and solid even if not everything on it is rendered like hell.
Yes, the system is not perfect, and it’ll never be, because art is subjective. Even if you get a group of the most respected artists in the world together to judge, they will still disagree among themselves, because they have different tastes too, and they have different ideas of what excellence is. Some people will put weight on technical achievement, while others will put emphasis on artistic vision, and some might even be impressed by very esoteric things that other judges just don’t care about. We can try to be as objective as possible, but there’s no such thing when it comes to judging creative works–there’s always some kind of bias no matter what. If art could be quantified so precisely and so fairly, then it wouldn’t be art anymore–it would be math and science and engineering. If you observe any competition from around the world–from movie awards, music awards, literary awards, beauty pageants…etc, you’ll see that in just about every single one of them, there are decisions you do not agree with, or even find to be unfair–that is just how human society is.
Like I said previously, there IS a tipping point where a piece of work is so good that even those who don’t favor the style or associated techniques will have to grudgingly accept it as a great piece of work. When your work elicits that kind of response from people overall, there would no longer be any question to whether it should be accepted or not. If two of the judges don’t feel your work has reached that tipping point, then it just means you now have the option to do something that will blow them away and win them over. The best revenge is not to destroy your enemies, but to win them over to your side–it’s far more rewarding and meaningful.
At least we now have a small group of judges instead of just one person. When Leigh was the only one, people bitched and moaned, but you know what? That actually was more consistent since it’s just one person. But people hated the idea of one person’s subjectivity, even if she tried to be as objective as possible. Now we have a different system and people will still be unhappy.
Those of you who are unhappy–if we put all of you together into a group and let you take over the entire system, I’ll bet you that you guys will end up facing the same problem–there will be people who will be unhappy with your decisions and methods.
If you guys have ideas for the PERFECT system, then let’s hear it. If you propose an idea, it ought be really amazing and backlash-proof, and actually realistic to implement so the judging process is very quick–remember, we have tons of incoming entries that needs to be judged 24/7, nonstop.
See, we really don’t envy people who run governments or institutions, because you just can’t please everybody–it’s impossible.
I’m going to think out loud for a moment here:
What if the system has a set embargo period of let’s say, two to three days. Then, all images in that three day period will get votes from all the judges who had free time during that period, and then the majority vote will win. That way, it’s not just whoever the first two judges that had time to judge the work (and agreed with each other) has the final say, but a bit more democratic. It’ll help a bit, but it’s still not perfect, since if most of the judges are on vacation, then it’ll be up to just one or two judges during that period.
Anyway, I’m being very open with you guys because I believe in transparency of any governing system. But you guys need to realize that ideas are hard to implement because of technical issues, so just because you have a good suggestion doesn’t mean it’ll be realistic to implement.
I wouldn’t do it for cash… (well, maybe for cash ).
I think the only improvement would be a brief “custom” reason for rejection (pretty much what everyone says) but it’s been stated as logistically not possible. Judging is opinions and you just have to seek feedback and try to improve.
I’m not sure, I like the pose, surroundings, colors, etc. I think it’s a cool piece.
I just don’t like the loose style. For me it looks unfinished, but that’s my personal gusto, I love fine linework or neat rendering (or sharp abstract art like Andrew Jones)
So while I like the mood and idea behind the piece I would love to see it “finished”.
And I think most pics in the gallery look more finished (except two or three which I would reject too)
Thank god I don’t have to judge, because I don’t know if it’s right to reject something because you don’t like the loose look of something.
But well, you know, you got your award for this piece, so you know its good.
I can’t tell if you just had bad luck with the mods (who think like me) or if it’s really a standart (it has to look “finished”)
You can try to send it in again and maybe you get other judges.
If it’s still rejected you know it’s just not suited for this gallery but it’s still good work.
As you see, I didnt quote your whole post only the part that expresses the attitude of many where the difference should be obvious, but isnt. A loose painting can be done by someone who is well versed with impressionistic mark making or simply by an inexperienced painter. The difference is pretty clear. Most artists that can wield a loose brush are skilled representational artists as well–the former is an evolution of the latter.
The look of inexperience is not a style.
I like the part you edited out:
I just think the technique (as the love in your post demonstrates :love:) is trendy at the moment and perhaps swaying judgements away from work that is more original but less “flashy”.
I would comment on it, but you axed it for good reason.
As long as there’s no structural solution to the gallery submission problems this will never go away. Despite defensive explanations in favor of the current system it is clear that it still does not function very well.
It’s all way too subjective which is a noisy way of deciding.
With humans involved this is always a problem, but power by number removes subjectivity by removing noise. It’s just a matter of sampling
I don’t know how many moderators there are now?
I think it becomes lopsided to compare rejected work with a few pieces in the gallery that one deems sub par (or equal in quality) to their own work, since you dont see all of the rejected work. Im sure that there are a number of rejected pieces that could be deemed better than yours. Unless you actually think that its impossible that anything better than your piece could possibly be rejected. :shrug: It appears that your piece resides within that wide enough, blurry gray threshold where it is just as likely to be accepted as it is to be rejected. As Lunatique said:
Like I said previously, there IS a tipping point where a piece of work is so good that even those who don’t favor the style or associated techniques will have to grudgingly accept it as a great piece of work. When your work elicits that kind of response from people overall, there would no longer be any question to whether it should be accepted or not.
Your piece is just not there yet. You also have to keep in mind that the gallery standard bar has risen since your last submissions.
About that Beauty & Nightmare contest you placed in over at CA, didnt you partner with Mathias Kollros on that diptych? Where does he fit in, credit wise, for the placement, I wonder?just curious.
I find it odd that people whose work is rejected often bring up the apparent credibility and/or ability of those doing the validation; the moderator team handling the gallery are all professional artists with a lot of experience in the field. Taking myself as an example, I studied fine arts, I do traditional oil and acrylic painting (actually in a loose style not too dissimilar to your own), I’ve been working as a texture painter for many years in a number of high profile studios, I do regular life drawing, I’m currently even learning how to tattoo, and, perhaps most importantly, I’m a lover of art. You’ll find me spending a lot of time in art galleries and museums because I adore looking at art, paintings in particular. Some of my favourite artists include as broad a spectrum as Turner, William Blake and Vermeer. I imagine this same passion runs through the veins of everyone else doing the gallery voting too - we wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for these shared interests.
I didn’t see your painting on the list myself, as it must have been rejected before I logged in, but you shouldn’t take it as a rejection of yourself as an artist. The painting isn’t bad; the subject matter isn’t my taste but the painting undeniably shows that you have some painting skill, and I think you should be proud of the piece.
Look at the man’s right hand and foot.
Look at the panther’s face.
There are no details at all in this places. Do you think if the painter would have painted all the details in that areas the painting would have been better? Do you think the artist has rushed it?
This paint has a loose style but in it you can see superb color variations, composition, edge variations, line work, mood, economy, flow, etc. It has a loose style but it’s a great piece of art.
Of course I don’t want to compare mine to this one. I just want to show you than even if you don’t like loose style, there are in it so much things to consider that if you know them you also know that the painter has been coscious of his choices.
By the way this is a piece by Jeff Jones, one of my favourite painters and a constant inspiration.
