The change sounds awesome imo. Feels like Artstation has always been by artists for artists, so I think that's a good solution to what has been happening with all the "fans" that don't upload art but just follow and like stuff. Recently it feels like Artstation has been turning into Pinterest.
I don't think it has anything to do with the lewdness but more that artists and fans (Huge generalization going on here ofc) have different tastes and that kind of messed up the site imo. For example other artists are going to have less interest in subject matter and more interest in quality? I speculate!
I use Artstation to get other artists and employers to look at my stuff, I have 0 interest in having the public look at my portfolio. So I think it's good that you no longer have to cater to the general public in order to get people to look at your stuff! Sounds good in theory and I hope it works in practise, they seem to have the right intentions anyways!
I don't know how it will solve the problem of newcomers being at a disadvantage?
I don't know how it will solve the problem of newcomers being at a disadvantage?
The theory here is that if an established artists find your stuff, their vote counts for more. So let's say you're a concept artist, you don't have many followers so not may people get notifications when you post stuff, hence you don't get a lot of views or likes. Now, let's say Sparth finds your work and likes it, that bumps you up more than it would a random person finding it.
It still relies on initial discovery though. If your stuff is burried so deep that Sparth never finds it, it won't help. Like/vote based systems are always going to be necessarily be self-perpetuating to some degree.
I'm not sure that this will make a huge effect, but I think it's probably a good chance in any case.
I don't know how it will solve the problem of newcomers being at a disadvantage?
The theory here is that if an established artists find your stuff, their vote counts for more. So let's say you're a concept artist, you don't have many followers so not may people get notifications when you post stuff, hence you don't get a lot of views or likes. Now, let's say Sparth finds your work and likes it, that bumps you up more than it would a random person finding it.
It still relies on initial discovery though. If your stuff is burried so deep that Sparth never finds it, it won't help. Like/vote based systems are always going to be necessarily be self-perpetuating to some degree.
I'm not sure that this will make a huge effect, but I think it's probably a good chance in any case.
I figure the weight of established artists wont skew the trending too heavily, but all I could think was "Hmmm... what's all this T&A doing on the trending page? Oh... looks like an industry vet got drunk again..."
So just to add for those who may have not read through the entire post.
If you've submitted anything since the end of March it has been with the new algorithm.
We quietly rolled out this new Trending algorithm at the end of March. The results were immediate. Most of the shiny, sexy fan art didn’t trend as highly. There was a big difference in the variety of work that was trending and some really interesting pieces that would have otherwise been missed caught our attention. Our advisory council opened the new Trending wall and were really happy with the results. “Today is a day of glory and celebration!” one said.
Is this system perfect? Probably not. There’s always room for improvement and we’re likely to revisit it again and continue to tweak and improve it. But this has been a positive step forward in resolving the concerns brought by the community.
Gadorian said: WTF? I just went on Artstation to get some inspiration and to see what's new, and the front page is riddled with tits, asses and chicks in suggestive poses with little to no clothes. My question is - do artists do these kind of pieces for views? I mean, you look into any of these pieces, and they have thousands of views and likes, then there are some stunning environments, sculpts, and some beautiful art in general, that once you hold for more than a second and appreciate the work and thought that has been put into it, and they have little to no views and likes, like wtf? Do people just scroll through works, see tits and upvote? I mean, if I want people to notice my work, should I add tits to everything? It's just the idea that I'm getting from watching Artstation feed.
What are your thoughts on this matter?
It's cyclical end of story.
T&A especially traditional 2D generated work either tactile canvas, pigment, turps-linseed oil material based or digitally formatted. I wouldn't worry too much about it. I mean if it's quality content and accordingly judged for a front page plug all good as far as I'm concerned. This titillation perceived rendition of the female anatomy has been debated since God was in short pants. Italian Renaissance era Popes defaced Greek/Roman plus contemporary figurative sculpture masterpieces. For example ordering edicts for drapery to be painted or carved marble leafs covering the "offending" male appendages, seen today in the Vatican museum.
....just human nature being what it is essentially.
Company email something like this: "Hey, we're going to do an artstation takeover - here's the format to use. Because it's free advertising - weta and blizzard does it so fuck it right?"
Have you noticed the variety in the "picks" section as well?
Characters.
Sci-fi character, sci-fi robot, sci-fi helmet, sci-fi illustration, sci-fi concept, sci-fi high poly, sci-fi design. Oh look, a sci-fi fire hydrant!
While we’re talking about Trending, people are definitely going to ask
about Picks. Currently Picks is still done manually by staff at
ArtStation, and we do strive to pick a diverse set of works. In the
future, we have a vision to have picks run by the community as well, but
that’s still a ways off while we work on other higher priority things
on the roadmap.
I didn't actually know "Art Blasts" were a thing, despite their having been several before this one. Maybe this one just has more/better content; or maybe the algorithm changes mean something needs to change with how "Art Blasts" work. If art blasts already have their own category; do they really need to show up in both Trending and Picks? That seems excessive.
tl;dr Community is the one true tab (edit: am I too late to invent the term Artvertising?)
The artwork for HZD is great, but that is spam (in my humble opinion).
Hopefully they'll implement the community picks in the future, where volunteers with recognized experience in different fields will be picking artworks related to their expertise.
Because, currently, that alleged effort to pick "diverse set of works" usually ends up privileging artworks simply because of their "wow" factor.
Whilst I think it's nice that Artstation are trying to come up with a fair solution, it has occurred to me that all the top tier artists have to do is band together (which kind of happens anyway), and like each other's work in order to swamp the front page. It wouldn't surprise me if we start seeing people selling likes in the future either.
Whilst I think it's nice that Artstation are trying to come up with a fair solution, it has occurred to me that all the top tier artists have to do is band together (which kind of happens anyway), and like each other's work in order to swamp the front page. It wouldn't surprise me if we start seeing people selling likes in the future either.
Not an easy problem to solve for sure!
Don't know about that, I don't think anyone would actually sell this kind of thing, they would just be in too much risk for something not really that worth. At least I don't think that anyone who relies on freelance would do that, this person would just hurt too much their on image and they really need a good reputation to get a decent job...
But yeah, this solution that they have right now doesn't seem like ideal, but this art blast aside, I think it can work pretty well (it's not like the old algorithm didn't make the same kind of art appear everywhere anyways).
Idk, they could at least plan with the studios this kind of stuff and create a separated tab for a day or something like that for them.
Yeah hilarious. Ceo letter talking about how they are trying to level the playing field for artists - followed immediately by a heavily favored effort to push art from a big title into everyone's faces.
It really is hilarious.
"We want diversity," they say. So non-artists only deserve 3/5ths of a vote. After all, they aren't really people. Now here's a corporate art dump!
I hoped artists would be more conscious about this authoritarian shit. Instead, many are plainly jealous of guys like Hazardous, people that build huge fanbases doing explicitly sexual work. And why?
It's amazing how many so-called artists are intimidated by anything sexual. You can even see it in this thread. The real 12 year old boys aren't the ones sculpting tits. They're the ones who feel uncomfortable when they see tits, whether because of personal inadequacies or because of an ideology they've submitted to. Sad!
Let people like what they want to. And as for yourself, make stuff that people like. Don't take votes away or Tweak The Algorithm or talk about how Problematic Boobs Are for 6 pages on polycount
I had read the open letter and jump to the site just to check. No tits on the Community trend and I though the new algorithm fixed the tit-fest. Jumped to Trend and noticed the same BS with Hzd imagery...
I honestly don't understand how a trending algorithm can be difficult to write...
likes / time it's been up.
done.
If you're doing anything other than that, you're deliberately biasing results, which is a form of censorship. Too many boobs trending? newsflash, it's probably because a lot of people like boobs!
if you want a separate page with staff picks or whatever, go for it. but don't censor things just because you don't like them. That's the fast track to people starting to make political statements about your site which you'll find very difficult to defend.
HZD = Horizon Zero Dawn, my fault to depend on you reading the entire thread or understand my broken english.
And I like boobs. A lot. I just tough we were talking about a rating system that gives an opportunity to different style/subjects - so as a viewer we can be inspired by the different artwork.
So have a couple of sorting methods: trending (as i described) newest random (picks all submissions within the month and sorts them randomly)
This Horizon Zero Dawn thing would've happened with the old algorithm aswell. I do agree that the diversity thing is a bit of a weird reason. But if Horizon Zero Dawn artists has posted their work seperately they would probably all still hit the frontpage, it's good art, no?
I honestly don't understand how a trending algorithm can be difficult to write...
likes / time it's been up.
done.
If you're doing anything other than that, you're deliberately biasing results, which is a form of censorship. Too many boobs trending? newsflash, it's probably because a lot of people like boobs!
if you want a separate page with staff picks or whatever, go for it. but don't censor things just because you don't like them. That's the fast track to people starting to make political statements about your site which you'll find very difficult to defend.
Artstation is biasing towards their audience which is Artists as they clearly stated in the article. Their old algorithm that worked the way you're describing didn't work because their audience, Artists, where being outnumbered by fans. I for one, and some seem to agree, don't care about what fans thinks, but what other artists and employers think I guess.
Who gives a shit if the public sees your portfolio anyways? It's only function is to get you a job?
If we want to interact with the public we can just post art on our facebook or twitter instead? I'm GUESSING Artstation what a more professional environment and not becoming yet another blog type thing?
With the new system I've seen alot of less fan art and boobs, so I think there's a difference between what Fans and Artists enjoy. Having Diversity as a reason is a bit odd though, unless they mean Artists have a more diverse taste than Fans? Because all they're doing is putting more power into the creators hands and less into the fans'?
Honestly, I just think the Horizon Zero Dawn thing is bad timing. The algorithm has been in place since, I think, March, without anyone noticing. But because they announced the new algorithm just before the Horizon Zero Dawn dump, people think it's some major issue with the algorithm.
It was just a bad idea to announce the change when they did. Honestly, I think it's probably a great change in the long run.
But man, as beautiful as Horizon Zero Dawn is, I'm kind of sick of seeing the art from it, after it took over my artstation feed.
I don't understand the bitching about the Horizon stuff. The art is on various artist pages, the studio probably had guidelines for a date when artists were allowed to upload to artstation or their own portfolios and obviously has guidelines as to what format should be used. It is trending because many people like the artwork. When the Uncharted 4 art appeared on the site it took over the trending page too, and this was before the new algorithim.
Obviously the big blockbuster AAA game art dump is going to trend more than people posting their mediocre character or environment but that is the nature of things.
Everyone isn't going to like all the stuff on the trending page, but at least there are decent filtering options you can use while browsing.
Interesting idea for them to have their algorithm favour renown artists' opinions over fans. I'm not sure how effective it will be. I appreciate that they're being transparent about it though.
In my opinion this is a non-issue. Artists working at a studio very rarely have the opportunity to show their work, therefore it's totally understandable that they would make the most of that opportunity - probably involving getting higher ups to agree with them spending a few fridays a week to work on a unified presentation and cool screenshots ... before eventually going back to the anonymous daily grind.
Sure, Artstation could do some kind of grouped thumbnail or special category, but is that this much of a problem really ? After a few days everything goes back to normal T&A anyways
If you're doing anything other than that, you're deliberately biasing results, which is a form of censorship.
censorship? hyperbole much?
artstation is a privately run website. if they decide that the only likes which will matter is from a guy named jeff, they can do that. its not a election, giving likes its not your god given right, claiming it is only shows of an astonishing entitlement.
i think this is interesting. not because i think people with a lot of followers should hold the power, but because artstation at least tries to challange a unspoken rule on the internet currently; popular opinion = correct. i dont know why there is this consensus that sorting information on popularity is the best. its like the laziest solution. ESPECIALLY when it comes to subjective stuff like art.
I don't understand the bitching about the Horizon stuff. The art is on various artist pages, the studio probably had guidelines for a date when artists were allowed to upload to artstation or their own portfolios and obviously has guidelines as to what format should be used. It is trending because many people like the artwork. When the Uncharted 4 art appeared on the site it took over the trending page too, and this was before the new algorithim.
Obviously the big blockbuster AAA game art dump is going to trend more than people posting their mediocre character or environment but that is the nature of things.
Everyone isn't going to like all the stuff on the trending page, but at least there are decent filtering options you can use while browsing.
I think this pretty much sums it up. But I must say that I didn`t expect the picks to happen. (not sure everything was picked from the art dump or only parts of it.)
The site's got mainstream. you arent entitled to visibility, and practically you can't have it when there's both massive quantity, and extremely high quality stuff floating around. whether it's AAA art dumps timed so all involved get exposure at the same time, or tits because most of its users are straight men and like tits.
I disagree with what artstation have proposed in their page regarding this, but end of the day it's up to them innit. Just like it was before the change.
I will say this though: its not up to artstation to make sure you get noticed. Their platform doesnt exist in isolation, you can and should be guiding people there any number of ways from other places i.e your website, blog, twitter, here.
As for the new algorithm? How does giving the people who made supposedly do too many titties the most power? surely you'll get more titties. If the highest weight goes to the most popular already.
Stop fucking with it.
I'd rather just see them implement a good way of finding art manually. Leave the feed showing me what's popular, I want to see what's popular. I also want to find great gems that are to my own particular taste but i'd rather do that myself. You can't cater to everyone's individual desires, so just show what's popular and give us a good search tool. The search system _sucks_ but everyone has ignored it because they'd rather be fed shite.
Man, the new algorithm has made ArtStation actually usable now, good stuff! The FanArt porn is still there for you to get your jollies off too boys, don't worry.
To me it's just one of those things.It's no different from the loads of work that pertains to violence or death.The majority of characters we come across is some deadly creature or human soldier.Even props tend to be some type of weapon.We see a lot of this because these things sell.The same applies to sex.I have no problem with what other artists chose to create. There is still much diverse work out there.There will always be that large body of people creating big boobs.
First off, I applaud ArtStation for this change, and doubly so for going public with it. Let's be perfectly honest, they could have kept this information private and nobody would be crying about it, but they went ahead with it knowing full well that it would upset some people. Props to them for having the balls to do so. Additionally, if ArtStation would have explained their previous algorithm, a lot of people would have bitched about that as well, simply because it differed in some way from how they think it should work. As soon as people know how the sausage is made, they have strong opinions. Tough titties to that, if you want to be in charge, make your own insanely popular website and run it how you please.
Secondly, these ridiculous black and white arguments are downright embarrassing to read. Wanting to see more variety does not mean that everyone who holds this opinion is a sexually repressed basement dweller who is easily offended, uncomfortable with nudity, sexuality etc. This is a total straw-man. Seriously, you guys can do better than childish insults and absurd generalizations.
Personally, I'm perfectly okay with the human form (both male and female). I don't have any problems with nudity, sexuality, etc. I respect the right of artists to create whatever the hell they want, it's not my business to dictate what type of art people make. I would also like to see a wider range of variety on sites like ArtStation. It would be nice to feature less pinup girls, not because the basic concept offends my delicate sensibilities, but because it tends to be vapid, derivative, lacking in depth, complexity, and originality. So how can I possibly be okay with sexualized content, okay with people making it, but want to see less of it on ArtStation? Because none of these ideas are binary, they're not mutually exclusive concepts. The human brain is capable of nuanced thought if you can get past the knee-jerk reaction.
At the end of the day, regardless of any argument about how appropriate sexuality is in art, I think catering less to the lowest common denominator will result in a better overall experience. This is something I would say applies to most things in life. McDonalds may sell way more food than my favorite restaurants, but that doesn't mean the food is better. If the world's best museums were curated by public vote, the quality of work would definitely go down.
But if I truly enjoyed making this sexy type of art I would be feeling discouraged to engage in the Art Station "community".
Isn't this sort of what it was doing to non-sexy character makers, before the change? When trending is largely sexy fanart, it doesn't feel like there's much room for other things to become popular. I'd rather have the balance evened out, personally. It shows a broad range of interests, and can more easily be appealing to more people.
Troublesome precedent 2 - This vote counts more than other votes. Based on followers (the same non-artist followers)? That's an empty metric and can be easily manipulated through service agencies. How about Artists with artist followers +time served on art station. But how do you even quantify artist vs non? He wasn't specific enough.
The general randomness and clusterfuckery of the mob will always be a problem until Art Station somehow has actual curation, which is an interesting idea. This months curator team picked guns, this months picked great enviro pieces, this months picked sexy stuff. People can like "the show" or not and wait until next month.
1st point: Do you think people are going to game the system? Presumably the higher follower count people are the people that have earned the right. People game all systems, but almost always those types are a fraction of the user base.
2nd point: Isn't the new algorithm a curator-centric one? Sparth getting much higher influence IS curation. We look to the hard working, great artists like him to have influence, more influence then your average person. He would, most likely, be selected as a curator, but this algorithm gives him that ability, with FAR less input from the ArtStation staff. They have transferred the power back to the community. So by giving Sparth more influence based on likes, he elevates to a curator status, while me, who has little influence compared to Sparth can only affect so much. Sure that opens up the chance for fraud, but ArtStation seems to be pretty great when it comes to maintaining their website and I trust that if that was happening they would seek solutions.
For me, the trending tab is actually usable now. I didn't visit artstation nearly as much as I do now, because I can just stumble across awesome stuff that isn't just variations on pinups.
i sat down to have a go at that meet mat competition last night before realising it had already ended. Anyway here's my entry, thought i'd post it here as it has relevant tits.
I like good art. Pretty pictures are nice, and so are things that are cool. Artstation has a lot of pretty pictures and things that are cool, so that's great!
If the first page doesn't magically pick the coolest or prettiest of things according to my tastes, that is ok, because this is the Internet and I can search for whatever I want. The other day I wanted to look for some different ways people have handled trees, so I went to Artstation and searched for things like "forest", and I got a bunch of things relevant to my interests! I was pleased, and made to reflect upon how fortunate I am to exist in a time when so much art is so accessible.
I'm not a personal fan of all sexy arts all the time, but that's ok, because there's a lot of great art out there and it's really not hard to find with minimal effort on my part. It looks like Artstation has openly acknowledged trying something that might lean even more towards my personal preferences. Yay! If it doesn't work out, well, that's ok, because I can still find art I think is awesome with about as much effort as breathing.
Troublesome precedent 1 - This art is "vapid, derivative, lacking in depth, complexity, and originality" - this art isn't.
I could say that about a gun, a mech, a jungle environment painting.
Certainly I agree. The interesting thing about this change is that it doesn't actually target any specific type of art, it weights by user type. The basic assumption is that more popular artists will generally be more skilled, more experienced, and probably have more refined tastes. I think in a general sense this is a good assumption.
Troublesome precedent 2 - This vote counts more than other votes. Based on followers (the same non-artist followers)?
See, I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with certain people having more votes. This is generally why experts are chosen to judge contests, and why you would probably trust Anthony Bordain's food recommendation over your uncle Jimmy.
The right to a "vote" on ArtStation (or Polycount or any other public website) isn't a right at all, its a privilege. None of this is really all that important in the grander scheme of things either. If AS puts in a bad voting system, they can tweak it later. Nobody is going to die from lack of health coverage or anything like that.
That's an empty metric and can be easily manipulated through service agencies. How about Artists with artist followers +time served on art station. But how do you even quantify artist vs non? He wasn't specific enough.
++
Sure, I think this is the biggest risk, that the system is now somehow open to being exploited. We don't know the actual math though or if they are accounting for that in some way, and we don't know if the previous system was open for exploitation. At the end of the day, Leo and his team are smart fellows, so I don't think they'll stick with a system if it proves to be broken.
"crying about it" - I don't remember crying... I remember talking about it and speculating about motivations of a for profit company with staff with titles like "Product Manager" and "Marketing Services Director" and bills to pay.
Fair, honestly your points were well reasoned and salient.
"if you want to be in charge, make your own insanely popular website and run it how you please" - The end to all discussions. See also - If you don't like 'murica u ken git out! -
Haha yeah, I mean my sentiment is hyperbolic for sure. But really, whenever these sort of topics come up there is always an argument from an extremely entitled perspective. "If you don't do it like I think you should you're going to hell!" sort of argument. Really, if it matters that much to you, prove the people who are making these decisions wrong by doing it yourself. It's sort of like the whole Anita Sarkeesian thing. It's very easy to complain about something that you have very little knowledge of how to do well, but very difficult to actually do it, and even more so to do it while pleasing everyone. So I will always sympathize more with the people who have the task of inventing and implementing these systems rather than those who simply complain.
"Secondly, these ridiculous black and white arguments" - Specifically who and which arguments? If you're going to call someone out you should There's a lot of ridiculous shit being said but there's some good stuff too. -
Not looking to get personal here, so I've tried to address the general sentiments expressed in the thread.
"Personally, ... ... The human brain is capable of nuanced thought if you can get past the knee-jerk reaction." - Totally agree, these talks always go off the rails because one side labels the other less macho or a white knight if you don't want to see this kind of art everywhere. Then the other side labels them as cis-normative pigs jerking off on their waifu pillows. Then explosions.
Yap, the extreme positions of these sort of arguments rarely represent reality.
"McDonalds may sell way more food than my favorite restaurants, but that doesn't mean the food is better. If the world's best museums were curated by public vote, the quality of work would definitely go down." -This is a great point. Probably all you needed to say :P. But quality can't be quantified unless the curator takes a stance.
There are many types of curation, and curation by quality alone is certainly valid. It's really the only feasible way to curate massive amounts of content where there is little or no restriction on who creates and submits it. The museum analogy is not a direct 1:1 match. Exhibitions are curated based on many considerations such as who owns the content/legal issues, physical limitations of the space, overall goals of the organization and various other factors.
Sites like AS have completely different goals and different restrictions on types of content (no physical space restrictions, no ownership restrictions no time restrictions, etc). With a massive amount of content that is all equally accessible (in that it's all publicly visible via the same process, not that certain works are or are not easier or harder for the user to discover), and constantly growing, it needs to be curated in some sort of automated fashion.
AS is curated today, that's what the picks section is. It's true that there isn't a real obvious theme to this curation - other than what the editors personally like, but even then, the picks section is quite reliable in highlighting excellent artwork which is the main goal. Though I would agree, it would be cool to see some sort of themed curation, perhaps in addition to the current systems.
Which (other than Sexy Fan Art is bad) Art Station has not. Anyone can join and post because AS likes the traffic. When you have an art show even on the museum level there's some overall theme guiding the selections. Same principle if you designed a menu at French Laundry vs. Arbys.
The general randomness and clusterfuckery of the mob will always be a problem until Art Station somehow has actual curation, which is an interesting idea. This months curator team picked guns, this months picked great enviro pieces, this months picked sexy stuff. People can like "the show" or not and wait until next month.
To generalize a whole genre of art as "less than" and common people as the lowest common denominator is an old story. BUT we'll see how it goes all we're really in control of is what we make. Back to work!
Yeah it remains to be seen how effective any of this is and how it will unfold long term, but it will be interesting to see.
I thought it sounded a bit sketchy at first, but I guess all it does is just cater to artists rather then fans, and the trending wall do look more interesting recently as well as my own stuff got to sit at the top a lot longer then it normally does.
I wonder how much extra power people with more followers get though, I hope it's not too much, even myself I don't always just like something because it's awesome but because I like a certain detail that I might want as reference, so I like it to save it into my like folder. Might have to rethink that if my likes have more worth now then it used to.
After a game has shipped most studios give guidelines with respect to the format in which to present the art and the date at which the art can be posted publicly. The spouting off I am seeing here saying studios just get together and force the artists to do something and are abusing the algorithm is silly.
Heaven forbid that artists who are proud of their work post it online and are not considerate that the amount of their awesome posts might offend you. On top of that, they coordinate with ArtStation for exposure, *booo hisss*, on something they worked really hard on, lest they threaten you and fan the flames for the the conspiracy theorists out there.
I simply cannot believe this is even a topic for debate. ArtStation is active in making it a great place to show off art and they are trying to make it better and more focused, and somehow its a topic to argue over.
Instead of arguing over it, work on your portfolio. This way when you make something cool and post the art it won't be covered up by cheap art. Then when the folks in charge of hiring can quickly find the person (hopefully you) to fill the role, you can thank the algorithm later.
Replies
@Tectonic I miss CGHub :,(
Recently it feels like Artstation has been turning into Pinterest.
I don't think it has anything to do with the lewdness but more that artists and fans (Huge generalization going on here ofc) have different tastes and that kind of messed up the site imo. For example other artists are going to have less interest in subject matter and more interest in quality? I speculate!
I use Artstation to get other artists and employers to look at my stuff, I have 0 interest in having the public look at my portfolio. So I think it's good that you no longer have to cater to the general public in order to get people to look at your stuff! Sounds good in theory and I hope it works in practise, they seem to have the right intentions anyways!
I don't know how it will solve the problem of newcomers being at a disadvantage?
It still relies on initial discovery though. If your stuff is burried so deep that Sparth never finds it, it won't help. Like/vote based systems are always going to be necessarily be self-perpetuating to some degree.
I'm not sure that this will make a huge effect, but I think it's probably a good chance in any case.
Lol...
If you've submitted anything since the end of March it has been with the new algorithm.
We quietly rolled out this new Trending algorithm at the end of March. The results were immediate. Most of the shiny, sexy fan art didn’t trend as highly. There was a big difference in the variety of work that was trending and some really interesting pieces that would have otherwise been missed caught our attention. Our advisory council opened the new Trending wall and were really happy with the results. “Today is a day of glory and celebration!” one said.
Is this system perfect? Probably not. There’s always room for improvement and we’re likely to revisit it again and continue to tweak and improve it. But this has been a positive step forward in resolving the concerns brought by the community.
Gadorian said:
WTF? I just went on Artstation to get some inspiration and to see what's new, and the front page is riddled with tits, asses and chicks in suggestive poses with little to no clothes. My question is - do artists do these kind of pieces for views? I mean, you look into any of these pieces, and they have thousands of views and likes, then there are some stunning environments, sculpts, and some beautiful art in general, that once you hold for more than a second and appreciate the work and thought that has been put into it, and they have little to no views and likes, like wtf? Do people just scroll through works, see tits and upvote? I mean, if I want people to notice my work, should I add tits to everything? It's just the idea that I'm getting from watching Artstation feed.
What are your thoughts on this matter?
It's cyclical end of story.
T&A especially traditional 2D generated work either tactile canvas, pigment, turps-linseed oil material based or digitally formatted. I wouldn't worry too much about it. I mean if it's quality content and accordingly judged for a front page plug all good as far as I'm concerned. This titillation perceived rendition of the female anatomy has been debated since God was in short pants. Italian Renaissance era Popes defaced Greek/Roman plus contemporary figurative sculpture masterpieces. For example ordering edicts for drapery to be painted or carved marble leafs covering the "offending" male appendages, seen today in the Vatican museum.
....just human nature being what it is essentially.
[Edit] Oops, already posted, I should read better what people say.
Characters.
Sci-fi character, sci-fi robot, sci-fi helmet, sci-fi illustration, sci-fi concept, sci-fi high poly, sci-fi design. Oh look, a sci-fi fire hydrant!
Yet the current picks is flooded with the Horizon stuff, which, while excellent, doesn't exactly scream diversity. I began to doubt the truth of picks being done manually until I was pointed to this: https://magazine.artstation.com/2017/05/guerrilla-games-horizon-dawn-art-blast/
I didn't actually know "Art Blasts" were a thing, despite their having been several before this one. Maybe this one just has more/better content; or maybe the algorithm changes mean something needs to change with how "Art Blasts" work. If art blasts already have their own category; do they really need to show up in both Trending and Picks? That seems excessive.
tl;dr Community is the one true tab (edit: am I too late to invent the term Artvertising?)
Hopefully they'll implement the community picks in the future, where volunteers with recognized experience in different fields will be picking artworks related to their expertise.
Because, currently, that alleged effort to pick "diverse set of works" usually ends up privileging artworks simply because of their "wow" factor.
Not an easy problem to solve for sure!
But yeah, this solution that they have right now doesn't seem like ideal, but this art blast aside, I think it can work pretty well (it's not like the old algorithm didn't make the same kind of art appear everywhere anyways).
Idk, they could at least plan with the studios this kind of stuff and create a separated tab for a day or something like that for them.
"We want diversity," they say. So non-artists only deserve 3/5ths of a vote. After all, they aren't really people. Now here's a corporate art dump!
I hoped artists would be more conscious about this authoritarian shit. Instead, many are plainly jealous of guys like Hazardous, people that build huge fanbases doing explicitly sexual work. And why?
It's amazing how many so-called artists are intimidated by anything sexual. You can even see it in this thread. The real 12 year old boys aren't the ones sculpting tits. They're the ones who feel uncomfortable when they see tits, whether because of personal inadequacies or because of an ideology they've submitted to. Sad!
Let people like what they want to. And as for yourself, make stuff that people like. Don't take votes away or Tweak The Algorithm or talk about how Problematic Boobs Are for 6 pages on polycount
Perfect example of what I just wrote
likes / time it's been up.
done.
If you're doing anything other than that, you're deliberately biasing results, which is a form of censorship. Too many boobs trending? newsflash, it's probably because a lot of people like boobs!
if you want a separate page with staff picks or whatever, go for it. but don't censor things just because you don't like them. That's the fast track to people starting to make political statements about your site which you'll find very difficult to defend.
trending (as i described)
newest
random (picks all submissions within the month and sorts them randomly)
Artstation is biasing towards their audience which is Artists as they clearly stated in the article. Their old algorithm that worked the way you're describing didn't work because their audience, Artists, where being outnumbered by fans. I for one, and some seem to agree, don't care about what fans thinks, but what other artists and employers think I guess.
Who gives a shit if the public sees your portfolio anyways? It's only function is to get you a job?
If we want to interact with the public we can just post art on our facebook or twitter instead? I'm GUESSING Artstation what a more professional environment and not becoming yet another blog type thing?
With the new system I've seen alot of less fan art and boobs, so I think there's a difference between what Fans and Artists enjoy. Having Diversity as a reason is a bit odd though, unless they mean Artists have a more diverse taste than Fans? Because all they're doing is putting more power into the creators hands and less into the fans'?
It was just a bad idea to announce the change when they did. Honestly, I think it's probably a great change in the long run.
But man, as beautiful as Horizon Zero Dawn is, I'm kind of sick of seeing the art from it, after it took over my artstation feed.
Obviously the big blockbuster AAA game art dump is going to trend more than people posting their mediocre character or environment but that is the nature of things.
Everyone isn't going to like all the stuff on the trending page, but at least there are decent filtering options you can use while browsing.
They removed all the pussy from the front page!
Oh wait no never mind
Sure, Artstation could do some kind of grouped thumbnail or special category, but is that this much of a problem really ? After a few days everything goes back to normal T&A anyways
artstation is a privately run website. if they decide that the only likes which will matter is from a guy named jeff, they can do that. its not a election, giving likes its not your god given right, claiming it is only shows of an astonishing entitlement.
i think this is interesting. not because i think people with a lot of followers should hold the power, but because artstation at least tries to challange a unspoken rule on the internet currently; popular opinion = correct.
i dont know why there is this consensus that sorting information on popularity is the best. its like the laziest solution. ESPECIALLY when it comes to subjective stuff like art.
But I must say that I didn`t expect the picks to happen. (not sure everything was picked from the art dump or only parts of it.)
I disagree with what artstation have proposed in their page regarding this, but end of the day it's up to them innit. Just like it was before the change.
I will say this though: its not up to artstation to make sure you get noticed. Their platform doesnt exist in isolation, you can and should be guiding people there any number of ways from other places i.e your website, blog, twitter, here.
As for the new algorithm? How does giving the people who made supposedly do too many titties the most power? surely you'll get more titties. If the highest weight goes to the most popular already.
Stop fucking with it.
I'd rather just see them implement a good way of finding art manually. Leave the feed showing me what's popular, I want to see what's popular. I also want to find great gems that are to my own particular taste but i'd rather do that myself. You can't cater to everyone's individual desires, so just show what's popular and give us a good search tool. The search system _sucks_ but everyone has ignored it because they'd rather be fed shite.
Secondly, these ridiculous black and white arguments are downright embarrassing to read. Wanting to see more variety does not mean that everyone who holds this opinion is a sexually repressed basement dweller who is easily offended, uncomfortable with nudity, sexuality etc. This is a total straw-man. Seriously, you guys can do better than childish insults and absurd generalizations.
Personally, I'm perfectly okay with the human form (both male and female). I don't have any problems with nudity, sexuality, etc. I respect the right of artists to create whatever the hell they want, it's not my business to dictate what type of art people make. I would also like to see a wider range of variety on sites like ArtStation. It would be nice to feature less pinup girls, not because the basic concept offends my delicate sensibilities, but because it tends to be vapid, derivative, lacking in depth, complexity, and originality. So how can I possibly be okay with sexualized content, okay with people making it, but want to see less of it on ArtStation? Because none of these ideas are binary, they're not mutually exclusive concepts. The human brain is capable of nuanced thought if you can get past the knee-jerk reaction.
At the end of the day, regardless of any argument about how appropriate sexuality is in art, I think catering less to the lowest common denominator will result in a better overall experience. This is something I would say applies to most things in life. McDonalds may sell way more food than my favorite restaurants, but that doesn't mean the food is better. If the world's best museums were curated by public vote, the quality of work would definitely go down.
1st point: Do you think people are going to game the system? Presumably the higher follower count people are the people that have earned the right. People game all systems, but almost always those types are a fraction of the user base.
2nd point: Isn't the new algorithm a curator-centric one? Sparth getting much higher influence IS curation. We look to the hard working, great artists like him to have influence, more influence then your average person. He would, most likely, be selected as a curator, but this algorithm gives him that ability, with FAR less input from the ArtStation staff. They have transferred the power back to the community. So by giving Sparth more influence based on likes, he elevates to a curator status, while me, who has little influence compared to Sparth can only affect so much. Sure that opens up the chance for fraud, but ArtStation seems to be pretty great when it comes to maintaining their website and I trust that if that was happening they would seek solutions.
For me, the trending tab is actually usable now. I didn't visit artstation nearly as much as I do now, because I can just stumble across awesome stuff that isn't just variations on pinups.
If the first page doesn't magically pick the coolest or prettiest of things according to my tastes, that is ok, because this is the Internet and I can search for whatever I want. The other day I wanted to look for some different ways people have handled trees, so I went to Artstation and searched for things like "forest", and I got a bunch of things relevant to my interests! I was pleased, and made to reflect upon how fortunate I am to exist in a time when so much art is so accessible.
I'm not a personal fan of all sexy arts all the time, but that's ok, because there's a lot of great art out there and it's really not hard to find with minimal effort on my part. It looks like Artstation has openly acknowledged trying something that might lean even more towards my personal preferences. Yay! If it doesn't work out, well, that's ok, because I can still find art I think is awesome with about as much effort as breathing.
I wonder how much extra power people with more followers get though, I hope it's not too much, even myself I don't always just like something because it's awesome but because I like a certain detail that I might want as reference, so I like it to save it into my like folder.
Might have to rethink that if my likes have more worth now then it used to.
Heaven forbid that artists who are proud of their work post it online and are not considerate that the amount of their awesome posts might offend you. On top of that, they coordinate with ArtStation for exposure, *booo hisss*, on something they worked really hard on, lest they threaten you and fan the flames for the the conspiracy theorists out there.
I simply cannot believe this is even a topic for debate. ArtStation is active in making it a great place to show off art and they are trying to make it better and more focused, and somehow its a topic to argue over.
Instead of arguing over it, work on your portfolio. This way when you make something cool and post the art it won't be covered up by cheap art. Then when the folks in charge of hiring can quickly find the person (hopefully you) to fill the role, you can thank the algorithm later.