Constructive Criticsm, The Right Way
polycounter lvl 12
Hello everyone,
I wrote a quick article on some thoughts I had about providing constructive criticsm. Since we are in the media age, a lot of artwork is shared and a lot of feedback goes back and forth. I decided to elaborate on some experiences of mine, and provide some feedback that i'd thought i'd share in terms of criticism.
I know there are a lot of lurkers here, and I encourage everyone to constantly share their work, asking for feedback is a necessary part of personal development. Yet there are so many factors that inhibit and ultimately result in the lack of proper response to a nurturing environment, as well as constructive, motivating criticism.
Hope you all enjoy.
The Article can be found on my blog.
http://shogun3d.com/blog.html
"It looks too flat."
"This scene contains too much noise."
"Your materials/lighting are letting down the scene."
These are all too common quotes you would see in various responses to work in progress environments shared by other artists to see. Unfortunately, many professionals or other students for that matter, take the lazy route in providing positive and elaborate constructive efforts to communicate issues that junior artists truly need. Not only do these type of responses or comments degrade the value of constructive feedback, they generally demoralize the artistic sense of a student or artist. A response which could quite literally, make or break them.
The common ideals of a competitive industry are to generate unique and personalized pipelines that retain the efforts of a single artist to being convenient, and familiar with a solid end result. A lot of this promotes a sense of elitism and status that ultimately accumulates to a self given pedestal, in which any artist of lesser skill fall under their demeaning character. In that sense, there are two types of professional artists that deal with this common trend. To share or not to share. Between self work, devotion and labor, many artists develop and hone their skills to an elaborate workflow which truly define them. This instills a sense of pride, and belonging to an elite group of artists that are subjugated to the unknown in secrecy. It's a class of artists that never were.
When we as artists share our work for the world to share, we depend on it's impact, and feedback. To not only provide us the alternative aspect we need, but to question it's authenticity and level of craftsmanship. We share our work and ask ourselves, "What can I do to make this better, why is it that I am not happy with it?" Unfortunately many of times, we are left with a comment or suggestive pieces of advice that really leave us at no solid place to stand. Responses such as those mentioned above, leave us but a shallow level of guidance, that really only tells the artist "Basically, that looks like shit, because of this reason". While the rudimentary level of underlying problem could indeed be the fact that something could quite possibly look terrible, I as well as many could question that would be the only reason.
Reason and explanation give a positive response to those in which lack of knowledge restrict their effort. This would be the suggestive method in communicating the positive efforts of others in refining their trade, but what if it were you?
When another artist, see's another piece of work, especially that of someone junior in experience, the automatic dreaded feeling of competition sets in. To be the best, to be on top. To be unique, and to be recognized. The self goals any competitive artist can outrun the true spirit of art in itself. To interpret into imagery the emotion and feeling that any intellectual could not provide through words. Art, as a field of self expressionism, is and will always be that. But when it comes to an industry of standards, those whom end results follow a successful fanfare, become the next level of guidance. Copied, and replicated works soon follow, to master what ultimately is the solution of ones hard work. And in many cases this happens to many whom have separated many hours of their own lives, comparatively to those who haven't. The question of fairness and dignity soon disappears, and leaves but the original artist a distasteful attempt, to swallow his own pride in accepting the fact that his work was so widely duplicated by others.
It is ultimately because of this competitive outlook, that many dread witnessing other peers in surpassing their level of skill. All but the humble, would not appreciate the hard work and level of detail an artist would put into his work to instill the skills of art one has practiced for so long. It is ultimately this that other artists fail to properly communicate the level of leadership and guidance that another needs in growing and maintaining his/her effort in polishing their work as best as they can.
In this sense, come the range of passionate artists that are psychologically passive and less judgmental. They are more oriented to the aspect of expressionism and communication. The reward being the sense of accomplishment in instilling the ideals of aesthetically pleasing forms to those who equally appreciate, or not, the efforts of the teacher. In understanding the various aspects of feedback, there are three categories of all artists that provide criticism.
The Positive Critic - The positive critic stems from artists who are, and aren't professional. But those who capture a sense of aesthetically pleasing medium, can describe in detail and non-confrontational way, to another artist the sense of feeling, emotion, and foundation in which makes the piece in question pleasing. This critic places an emphasis in positive psychological reinforcement, by motivating another artist by elaborating on the positive aspects, and equally on the negative aspect, but finishing with a judgement of character. He/she communicates his or her desire to see certain changes that would ultimately polish the piece of art at their own undeniable level of understanding and confidence.
The Brute Critic - The brute critic often suffers from a lack of empathy or emotion, by quickly glancing at work and immediately picking up on areas that could be improved on. Often with brute critics, they gain confidence by instilling that which they instilled in themselves, and that is by old fashion dedication, hard work and harsh reality that "wakes up" a person, so to speak. By providing a non-passive argument and judgement that can borderline offensive, they communicate changes they would like to see, reinforced by the standards of what is above average, and "professional".
The Empathizing Critic - There are some artists, who almost always feel that with a sense of empathy, they deliver an unquestionable devotion to compassion. To win the heart and mind of an artist that can reflect their own inspiration in the completion of their piece. Almost no negative feedback is given and in most cases, will excuse minor details and sharing personal success to provide the level of quality and motivation for an artist to come terms to. It is a sensitive nature, and one that rewarded them, to provide a sense of belonging, and union of fellow artists.
On the flip-side of critics, are those who place extraordinary levels of dedication to their work, only to attempt at supporting those in learning, Asking themselves, why should I share my hard work, to those who are not willing to do the same for themselves? While everyone at any point in their lives, will always be a student of art, there are differently levels of dedication versus hard work. Whether it would be through traditional practice and retention, or through sheer talent and self taught bliss, all of us come from a background of learning and feedback that allow us to refine our practice to that of a professional grade.
Becoming a critic is just as easy as becoming a student of art. There is no fine line but the line of interpretation proven by a history of aesthetically pleasing guidelines founded on the bed of traditional art skills. Those who are refined just retain a greater knowledge through experience and practice. Yet many students find this level of understanding quicker than others. Or by all means, slower. Still, we see the same trend in students that follow categories.
The Motivated - We are all students of art, but those recognized in their status of experience and level of craftsmanship, know where they want and need to be. Thus they seek mentors who can pitch in and ultimately refine them to building what they can repeat, and that is the level of quality expressed by successful artists. Sometimes they ask none, where they learn, and in other times they learn, and almost always ask. In general, they are not afraid to expose at the sense at their own expense.
The Lurker - There are many whom resorts to passive methods of retaining knowledge and seeking answers for themselves. In almost all cases, they believe the answers have been asked before and that what they are seeking is established, elaborated, and already given. By witnessing the pipeline and process of others, they establish their own knowledge by building a fortress of confidence based off of the self-critique. To compare to others and to soak off of their questionable doubts, in confiding to the belief that if they push their level of art to that of another, it will meet standards in which they find resolution.
The Sensitive - The sensitive often find themselves questioning their work, at a higher grade than the norm. By retaining a firm belief that if they nitpick their own piece long enough, it would reach a standard they would find solid resolution for. Yet it is upon those who provide criticism, they almost always reach a level of sensitivity. Sensitives would passively wonder if their piece of art would garner much attention, or ultimately be trashed by it, and to that regard, would make them feel devastated. While the ultimate fear of pairing a sensitive with a brute critic result is the demise of any artist, some often find it a self realizing aspect, and accomplishment, by taking that which many wouldn't be able to handle in the first place. Ultimately, like any other artist, they want their work to be appreciated, and almost always backed by exterior positive influence and motivation.
The Ignorant - I originally categorized three level of critique responsive artists, but decided on a fourth. This level needs no explanation because no amount of explanation will appease the, well, ignorant. Their work, will almost always remain at the same level.
So where does this leave us, as artists?
Is it right to provide a level of critique when responding to anothers work? Absolutely, but how far would you care to go? Why would I place a categorized level of compassion when another artist truly fails in where I succeed? Perhaps it is the level of understanding and self-learning, to introduce others through finess and harshness. Realistically, we all as artists seek the same truth in sharing our work, that is the question of pleasing others, and pleasing ourselves.
Be the critique, not the critic
The worst thing anyone could do is provide a rudimentary statement that provides little to no detail in communicating the hows and why's certain pieces do not express their original intentions. So in this case I would like to present a piece of work as an example, with given permission by another artist, a level of progress in his/her work they decided to share and receive feedback on. Note that this is work in progress.
A fellow game artist of practice, decided to share his work publicly, in which it's progress has received quite literally, positive and negative feedback. All which could nearly be categorized by critics.
This sci-fi complex is under development by an artist under the username, Skybex. Credit due to him. Now we see and understand as he has communicated, that this is his latest work as an environment artist, in providing a artistically pleasing playfield that meets the norm of science fiction and attracts those who are fans of games such as Halo, Mass Effect, and others. Why choose this piece, compared to that of traditional art forms of matte, composite, film and concept backgrounds? The goal of a game artist is to capture the traditional aspects and foundations of art, into a next generation medium of technology and with that comes several iterations of texturing, color, lighting, form, and shapes to always define the game players experience in story telling, level design, direction, and playability.
In reviewing this particular shot that was provided among a myriad, I found that almost every issue was common place with the others, so I provided just one. Equally, I found that the level of criticism provided, were just as abundant.
While it is easy for me to provide a one liner to the scene, it is ironically more difficult to provide elaborate details? Why? Well for one, let's break it down.
"Too much noise"
This tagline is exactly that. A critiqued tagline. Well we can take this one of two ways. Assume the artist providing statement reads entirely too much general noise, or he's just being a dick. Well you be the judge, after all, it is your work right? Wrong.
Reading into the details and whats expressed is the single detail repeated along the piece entirely, is noise. That in which we understand is the primary issue which is distracting the viewers ability to search for an aesthetically pleasing focal point in sight.
But what about the person behind the statement? Should we question him? Sure, should you question yourself? No. After all you are the artist, right? Correct. Always question, always learn. When an artist provides feedback, it is correct in assuming their judgement and level of critique could be questioned, but what cannot be questioned is the amount of criticism you receive in one particular aspect, or an aspect you question yourself. This is based on a theory which one suggestive line of criticism would elevate the quality of your work, backed by several artists. The problem however, is that not many artists would receive this in positive light, therefor unlike the motivated artist who would be able to deal with this quickly and on the front, a sensitive artist could almost take it as a near insult, ignoring those without vocal praise and level of motivation.
So why don't we provide a level of critique that would overall express the level of work that could be refined and provide the artist behind it the motivation needed in inspiring the basis of art itself, inspiration?
"Great work, I really enjoy the amount of detail, but fear it's at the expense of a solid focal point and lighting balance. It's providing too much noise overall, and by possibly adjusting some lighting to provide more shadow or emphasizing a particular area of focus, this would be a solid piece."
By providing just a few more sentences I've expressed what I enjoy the most, at the same time providing a constructive feedback and a quick solution to possibly alleviate the scenes issues. The most important aspect of criticism is to provide the foundation of positive reinforcement.
Appreciate the scene in emphasizing areas you like, and the overall sense of direction an artist is taking to really make the scene stand out. Give reason to the problem and provide possible resolution, and motivate the artist in turn. The motivation leads to an artist next step as it is the step beyond inspiration, by in which this stage the artist has already obtained.
Let's take another example. A scene created by aspiring Environment Artist, Starfrogsplash.
Let's provide a constructive analysis of the scene. Since he titled it as a Matrix inspired subway scene, that is exactly where i'm going to go for reference. Fortunately, in his development process he began by constructing a moodboard, an important and great start.
"While I see some general continuities between the original matrix scene and your version, there are some general absence of natural material and population that distracts the scene from a fully constructed environment. I really like this shot in terms of placement. You captured the natural angles of the structure of the subway that leads the eye down the tracks, which is excellent. However, with some attention to detail, and placement of more assets to populate the area, this piece can be greatly improved. I would suggest providing some more natural blending between the floor the walls and ceiling, similair to the grunge you placed at the bottom of the pilairs. The floor tiling overall, appears too perfect, and we need to look to imperfections to really make this scene appear natural. Provide some subtle cracks, dirt in places, as well as breaking up the height of tiles, will provide interesting detail while we guide our eye down to your focal point.
At this time, your focal point is conflicting between design and lighting. The elements of architecture lead us to look down the subway, yet your lighting suggests that the subway posters on the right are to be clearly seen and read. I'd suggest toning down the lighting values there, and providing more emphasis of the hallway by repeating lights down the subway, and ultimately an area of interest. In terms of post processing and color values, the values of the materials in your scene is very flat, but appealing in terms of color since it reminds me of the mood of The Matrix. You should try playing with additional colors, maybe an alternative light source to bring in warm vs cool colors, and allow your materials to reflect that by providing different materials in tile. things such as metal, vs concrete, wet and dry spots, and cables running in various locations. All in all, keep up the good work, the piece is shaping up, and with some more detail and focus to balance and composition, this piece is portfolio worthy. Great work!"
As I pointed out in the previous critique, I went through several steps of providing positive criticism by appreciating, identifying the problems, providing solutions, identifying more issues, and re-iterating some solutions, and ultimately motivating the artist to further enhance his scene.
The next scene is an environment developed by Jonas Axelsson. I wanted to feature this scene as it's extremely well done both technically, and compositionally. It is both portfolio worthy, and above average standards in the industry. However, with some elements of feedback, there are always room for improvement. Once again, we follow the steps to provide him as an artist, the tools necessary to take his work to the next level.
"Extremely satisfying piece, I enjoy the colors, and the lighting of the scene. The foliage compliments very well with the architecture and could easily translate a painting to 3d in terms of mood. However, I think you took a bit of a safe side in terms of choice of lighting and color balance, where as it feels a very early noon time lighting, I think you could have been equally or more successful with a more dramatic lighting situation such as an evening lighting choice. The natural elements could both benefit from very warm to cool colors, with more dramatic shadows that are stapled by the height of your trees and architecture. At the same time, this scene makes me feel very happy, and curious, so I don't doubt your choice of lighting was equally excellent.
I feel your placement, in particular of the vertical trees/shrub, could have been better articulated in these shots. In the first shot, the natural flow leads me from the bottom right to the top left, but almost in a conflicted angle, perhaps adjusting the height or placement could better reinforce the natural flow and experience in this scene. The second shot reinforces the conflict of shrub. While it's important to mitigate the areas to be seen or not seen in both composition and silhouette, the trees are placed sporadically, providing an up and down angle where the eye flows. The focal point is indicated by the dirt path, by leading my eye to the cottage, it should be grouped or kept somewhat clear. Overall however, I applaud your efforts in finishing this piece, and hope to see more from you!"
In every situation, there are always room for improvement. There is a tendency to sway towards a competitive or jealous reaction, or a tendency to sway towards that of dominance and self loathing. To balance art is to be art in itself, as a person and an artist.
To provide a fulfilling and meaningful set of critiques, is just as meaningful of self fulfillment.
I encourage every artist, to find a humble path in providing the secure and nurturing environment every artist should deserve, at the same time find a place to balance the importance of hard work, respect, and compassion in appreciating the underlying aspect of what every artist aims to achieve.
I wrote a quick article on some thoughts I had about providing constructive criticsm. Since we are in the media age, a lot of artwork is shared and a lot of feedback goes back and forth. I decided to elaborate on some experiences of mine, and provide some feedback that i'd thought i'd share in terms of criticism.
I know there are a lot of lurkers here, and I encourage everyone to constantly share their work, asking for feedback is a necessary part of personal development. Yet there are so many factors that inhibit and ultimately result in the lack of proper response to a nurturing environment, as well as constructive, motivating criticism.
Hope you all enjoy.
The Article can be found on my blog.
http://shogun3d.com/blog.html
Constructive Criticism, The Right Way
"It looks too flat."
"This scene contains too much noise."
"Your materials/lighting are letting down the scene."
These are all too common quotes you would see in various responses to work in progress environments shared by other artists to see. Unfortunately, many professionals or other students for that matter, take the lazy route in providing positive and elaborate constructive efforts to communicate issues that junior artists truly need. Not only do these type of responses or comments degrade the value of constructive feedback, they generally demoralize the artistic sense of a student or artist. A response which could quite literally, make or break them.
The common ideals of a competitive industry are to generate unique and personalized pipelines that retain the efforts of a single artist to being convenient, and familiar with a solid end result. A lot of this promotes a sense of elitism and status that ultimately accumulates to a self given pedestal, in which any artist of lesser skill fall under their demeaning character. In that sense, there are two types of professional artists that deal with this common trend. To share or not to share. Between self work, devotion and labor, many artists develop and hone their skills to an elaborate workflow which truly define them. This instills a sense of pride, and belonging to an elite group of artists that are subjugated to the unknown in secrecy. It's a class of artists that never were.
When we as artists share our work for the world to share, we depend on it's impact, and feedback. To not only provide us the alternative aspect we need, but to question it's authenticity and level of craftsmanship. We share our work and ask ourselves, "What can I do to make this better, why is it that I am not happy with it?" Unfortunately many of times, we are left with a comment or suggestive pieces of advice that really leave us at no solid place to stand. Responses such as those mentioned above, leave us but a shallow level of guidance, that really only tells the artist "Basically, that looks like shit, because of this reason". While the rudimentary level of underlying problem could indeed be the fact that something could quite possibly look terrible, I as well as many could question that would be the only reason.
Reason and explanation give a positive response to those in which lack of knowledge restrict their effort. This would be the suggestive method in communicating the positive efforts of others in refining their trade, but what if it were you?
“Interpretation is the revenge of the intellectual upon art. ”
― Susan Sontag
― Susan Sontag
When another artist, see's another piece of work, especially that of someone junior in experience, the automatic dreaded feeling of competition sets in. To be the best, to be on top. To be unique, and to be recognized. The self goals any competitive artist can outrun the true spirit of art in itself. To interpret into imagery the emotion and feeling that any intellectual could not provide through words. Art, as a field of self expressionism, is and will always be that. But when it comes to an industry of standards, those whom end results follow a successful fanfare, become the next level of guidance. Copied, and replicated works soon follow, to master what ultimately is the solution of ones hard work. And in many cases this happens to many whom have separated many hours of their own lives, comparatively to those who haven't. The question of fairness and dignity soon disappears, and leaves but the original artist a distasteful attempt, to swallow his own pride in accepting the fact that his work was so widely duplicated by others.
It is ultimately because of this competitive outlook, that many dread witnessing other peers in surpassing their level of skill. All but the humble, would not appreciate the hard work and level of detail an artist would put into his work to instill the skills of art one has practiced for so long. It is ultimately this that other artists fail to properly communicate the level of leadership and guidance that another needs in growing and maintaining his/her effort in polishing their work as best as they can.
In this sense, come the range of passionate artists that are psychologically passive and less judgmental. They are more oriented to the aspect of expressionism and communication. The reward being the sense of accomplishment in instilling the ideals of aesthetically pleasing forms to those who equally appreciate, or not, the efforts of the teacher. In understanding the various aspects of feedback, there are three categories of all artists that provide criticism.
The Positive Critic - The positive critic stems from artists who are, and aren't professional. But those who capture a sense of aesthetically pleasing medium, can describe in detail and non-confrontational way, to another artist the sense of feeling, emotion, and foundation in which makes the piece in question pleasing. This critic places an emphasis in positive psychological reinforcement, by motivating another artist by elaborating on the positive aspects, and equally on the negative aspect, but finishing with a judgement of character. He/she communicates his or her desire to see certain changes that would ultimately polish the piece of art at their own undeniable level of understanding and confidence.
The Brute Critic - The brute critic often suffers from a lack of empathy or emotion, by quickly glancing at work and immediately picking up on areas that could be improved on. Often with brute critics, they gain confidence by instilling that which they instilled in themselves, and that is by old fashion dedication, hard work and harsh reality that "wakes up" a person, so to speak. By providing a non-passive argument and judgement that can borderline offensive, they communicate changes they would like to see, reinforced by the standards of what is above average, and "professional".
The Empathizing Critic - There are some artists, who almost always feel that with a sense of empathy, they deliver an unquestionable devotion to compassion. To win the heart and mind of an artist that can reflect their own inspiration in the completion of their piece. Almost no negative feedback is given and in most cases, will excuse minor details and sharing personal success to provide the level of quality and motivation for an artist to come terms to. It is a sensitive nature, and one that rewarded them, to provide a sense of belonging, and union of fellow artists.
On the flip-side of critics, are those who place extraordinary levels of dedication to their work, only to attempt at supporting those in learning, Asking themselves, why should I share my hard work, to those who are not willing to do the same for themselves? While everyone at any point in their lives, will always be a student of art, there are differently levels of dedication versus hard work. Whether it would be through traditional practice and retention, or through sheer talent and self taught bliss, all of us come from a background of learning and feedback that allow us to refine our practice to that of a professional grade.
Becoming a critic is just as easy as becoming a student of art. There is no fine line but the line of interpretation proven by a history of aesthetically pleasing guidelines founded on the bed of traditional art skills. Those who are refined just retain a greater knowledge through experience and practice. Yet many students find this level of understanding quicker than others. Or by all means, slower. Still, we see the same trend in students that follow categories.
The Motivated - We are all students of art, but those recognized in their status of experience and level of craftsmanship, know where they want and need to be. Thus they seek mentors who can pitch in and ultimately refine them to building what they can repeat, and that is the level of quality expressed by successful artists. Sometimes they ask none, where they learn, and in other times they learn, and almost always ask. In general, they are not afraid to expose at the sense at their own expense.
The Lurker - There are many whom resorts to passive methods of retaining knowledge and seeking answers for themselves. In almost all cases, they believe the answers have been asked before and that what they are seeking is established, elaborated, and already given. By witnessing the pipeline and process of others, they establish their own knowledge by building a fortress of confidence based off of the self-critique. To compare to others and to soak off of their questionable doubts, in confiding to the belief that if they push their level of art to that of another, it will meet standards in which they find resolution.
The Sensitive - The sensitive often find themselves questioning their work, at a higher grade than the norm. By retaining a firm belief that if they nitpick their own piece long enough, it would reach a standard they would find solid resolution for. Yet it is upon those who provide criticism, they almost always reach a level of sensitivity. Sensitives would passively wonder if their piece of art would garner much attention, or ultimately be trashed by it, and to that regard, would make them feel devastated. While the ultimate fear of pairing a sensitive with a brute critic result is the demise of any artist, some often find it a self realizing aspect, and accomplishment, by taking that which many wouldn't be able to handle in the first place. Ultimately, like any other artist, they want their work to be appreciated, and almost always backed by exterior positive influence and motivation.
The Ignorant - I originally categorized three level of critique responsive artists, but decided on a fourth. This level needs no explanation because no amount of explanation will appease the, well, ignorant. Their work, will almost always remain at the same level.
So where does this leave us, as artists?
Is it right to provide a level of critique when responding to anothers work? Absolutely, but how far would you care to go? Why would I place a categorized level of compassion when another artist truly fails in where I succeed? Perhaps it is the level of understanding and self-learning, to introduce others through finess and harshness. Realistically, we all as artists seek the same truth in sharing our work, that is the question of pleasing others, and pleasing ourselves.
Be the critique, not the critic
The worst thing anyone could do is provide a rudimentary statement that provides little to no detail in communicating the hows and why's certain pieces do not express their original intentions. So in this case I would like to present a piece of work as an example, with given permission by another artist, a level of progress in his/her work they decided to share and receive feedback on. Note that this is work in progress.
A fellow game artist of practice, decided to share his work publicly, in which it's progress has received quite literally, positive and negative feedback. All which could nearly be categorized by critics.
This sci-fi complex is under development by an artist under the username, Skybex. Credit due to him. Now we see and understand as he has communicated, that this is his latest work as an environment artist, in providing a artistically pleasing playfield that meets the norm of science fiction and attracts those who are fans of games such as Halo, Mass Effect, and others. Why choose this piece, compared to that of traditional art forms of matte, composite, film and concept backgrounds? The goal of a game artist is to capture the traditional aspects and foundations of art, into a next generation medium of technology and with that comes several iterations of texturing, color, lighting, form, and shapes to always define the game players experience in story telling, level design, direction, and playability.
In reviewing this particular shot that was provided among a myriad, I found that almost every issue was common place with the others, so I provided just one. Equally, I found that the level of criticism provided, were just as abundant.
While it is easy for me to provide a one liner to the scene, it is ironically more difficult to provide elaborate details? Why? Well for one, let's break it down.
"Too much noise"
This tagline is exactly that. A critiqued tagline. Well we can take this one of two ways. Assume the artist providing statement reads entirely too much general noise, or he's just being a dick. Well you be the judge, after all, it is your work right? Wrong.
Reading into the details and whats expressed is the single detail repeated along the piece entirely, is noise. That in which we understand is the primary issue which is distracting the viewers ability to search for an aesthetically pleasing focal point in sight.
But what about the person behind the statement? Should we question him? Sure, should you question yourself? No. After all you are the artist, right? Correct. Always question, always learn. When an artist provides feedback, it is correct in assuming their judgement and level of critique could be questioned, but what cannot be questioned is the amount of criticism you receive in one particular aspect, or an aspect you question yourself. This is based on a theory which one suggestive line of criticism would elevate the quality of your work, backed by several artists. The problem however, is that not many artists would receive this in positive light, therefor unlike the motivated artist who would be able to deal with this quickly and on the front, a sensitive artist could almost take it as a near insult, ignoring those without vocal praise and level of motivation.
So why don't we provide a level of critique that would overall express the level of work that could be refined and provide the artist behind it the motivation needed in inspiring the basis of art itself, inspiration?
"Great work, I really enjoy the amount of detail, but fear it's at the expense of a solid focal point and lighting balance. It's providing too much noise overall, and by possibly adjusting some lighting to provide more shadow or emphasizing a particular area of focus, this would be a solid piece."
By providing just a few more sentences I've expressed what I enjoy the most, at the same time providing a constructive feedback and a quick solution to possibly alleviate the scenes issues. The most important aspect of criticism is to provide the foundation of positive reinforcement.
Appreciate ----> Problem
> Resolution
> Motivate
> Resolution
> Motivate
Appreciate the scene in emphasizing areas you like, and the overall sense of direction an artist is taking to really make the scene stand out. Give reason to the problem and provide possible resolution, and motivate the artist in turn. The motivation leads to an artist next step as it is the step beyond inspiration, by in which this stage the artist has already obtained.
Let's take another example. A scene created by aspiring Environment Artist, Starfrogsplash.
Let's provide a constructive analysis of the scene. Since he titled it as a Matrix inspired subway scene, that is exactly where i'm going to go for reference. Fortunately, in his development process he began by constructing a moodboard, an important and great start.
"While I see some general continuities between the original matrix scene and your version, there are some general absence of natural material and population that distracts the scene from a fully constructed environment. I really like this shot in terms of placement. You captured the natural angles of the structure of the subway that leads the eye down the tracks, which is excellent. However, with some attention to detail, and placement of more assets to populate the area, this piece can be greatly improved. I would suggest providing some more natural blending between the floor the walls and ceiling, similair to the grunge you placed at the bottom of the pilairs. The floor tiling overall, appears too perfect, and we need to look to imperfections to really make this scene appear natural. Provide some subtle cracks, dirt in places, as well as breaking up the height of tiles, will provide interesting detail while we guide our eye down to your focal point.
At this time, your focal point is conflicting between design and lighting. The elements of architecture lead us to look down the subway, yet your lighting suggests that the subway posters on the right are to be clearly seen and read. I'd suggest toning down the lighting values there, and providing more emphasis of the hallway by repeating lights down the subway, and ultimately an area of interest. In terms of post processing and color values, the values of the materials in your scene is very flat, but appealing in terms of color since it reminds me of the mood of The Matrix. You should try playing with additional colors, maybe an alternative light source to bring in warm vs cool colors, and allow your materials to reflect that by providing different materials in tile. things such as metal, vs concrete, wet and dry spots, and cables running in various locations. All in all, keep up the good work, the piece is shaping up, and with some more detail and focus to balance and composition, this piece is portfolio worthy. Great work!"
As I pointed out in the previous critique, I went through several steps of providing positive criticism by appreciating, identifying the problems, providing solutions, identifying more issues, and re-iterating some solutions, and ultimately motivating the artist to further enhance his scene.
The next scene is an environment developed by Jonas Axelsson. I wanted to feature this scene as it's extremely well done both technically, and compositionally. It is both portfolio worthy, and above average standards in the industry. However, with some elements of feedback, there are always room for improvement. Once again, we follow the steps to provide him as an artist, the tools necessary to take his work to the next level.
I feel your placement, in particular of the vertical trees/shrub, could have been better articulated in these shots. In the first shot, the natural flow leads me from the bottom right to the top left, but almost in a conflicted angle, perhaps adjusting the height or placement could better reinforce the natural flow and experience in this scene. The second shot reinforces the conflict of shrub. While it's important to mitigate the areas to be seen or not seen in both composition and silhouette, the trees are placed sporadically, providing an up and down angle where the eye flows. The focal point is indicated by the dirt path, by leading my eye to the cottage, it should be grouped or kept somewhat clear. Overall however, I applaud your efforts in finishing this piece, and hope to see more from you!"
In every situation, there are always room for improvement. There is a tendency to sway towards a competitive or jealous reaction, or a tendency to sway towards that of dominance and self loathing. To balance art is to be art in itself, as a person and an artist.
To provide a fulfilling and meaningful set of critiques, is just as meaningful of self fulfillment.
I encourage every artist, to find a humble path in providing the secure and nurturing environment every artist should deserve, at the same time find a place to balance the importance of hard work, respect, and compassion in appreciating the underlying aspect of what every artist aims to achieve.
Replies
Then there is the fact that newbs, including myself take good criticism badly, and then this discourages the person who was trying to help. So it goes both ways.
In my most recent thread, someone told me to basically go for more realism. But I'm still trying to figure out how much realism I want to go for as I try to gain skill. So if I blatantly say that I'm not going to do exactly what was suggested in the critique some people may take that the wrong way as well and think, "Oh well he's not serious then if he's not taking my advice just as I give it to him". That's the problem with online, you will get misunderstandings very often.
In a perfect world we'd all have people we could go to IRL for good critiques where you could talk things out a bit. Anyways, good effort on what you're trying to do with the article.
I'm all for reading mind you, but when the article is about making a point vs. noise, and the article itself loses itself in noise, it becomes really...weird, and not fun to weird.
That said, I don't know what thread you're referring to so I may be a little out of context here.
ZacD has said it quite nicely, critique (in my opinion) is about finding problems and suggesting solutions. Technically it's also used for merit/praise but each to their own I suppose. I find it quite dangerous to compliment/appreciate a piece and then deliver a fatal blow, it's like your boss firing you right after a compliment sandwich.
"You're really fun to work with!"
"but you're not doing much work"
"I really like that shirt!"
... "oh and you're fired"
That said, if the praise helps explain the problem then it's all good in my books, an example would be "The sharp edges on that chest plate really catches the light nicely but his gloves look kind of soft in comparison"
Now, there is... to my mind, quite a vast difference in "technical" and "artistic" critique... technical is obviously quite logic-based. "your UV's are packed horribly, try something like -this- and you'll get more out of it" Whereas artistic would be more along the lines of "I'd be tempted to push those glows out a bit more so it creates a type of misty-aura"
One points out a problem, the other offers an option for improvement (if you agreed)
Of course, it also all depends on the OP. What have they asked for help with? Have you seen the reference before commenting? What are they aiming for?
It is very sad to be this way though, I can only imagine what I(as I am sure many) could have done if they had more knowledge/guidance of how to get their points across better.
I am using my current w.i.p. to study my habits and to find solutions on my own, I posted it to see if I would get comments that might be helpful and to also see where I am lacking.
On the side lines I am finding where my flaws really lye and what I have to do to lift my progression to the next level and I realize I have to get out of the toon-ish style already...
The new road is going to be much harder for me but (as the standard excuse I hear is) that's life.
Edit:
Thanks shotgun for the read, I agree with most of this but what you said about the "critics" resonates with me.
I'm to the point where I'm not too concerned with egos or the closed door mentality of other artists. I've gotten so used to observing, dissecting, and practicing that I'd rather try to deal with it myself than deal with an attitude. But I'm still more than willing to discuss or show off my own work to anyone who has something worthwhile to say about it.
I think sometimes as an artist (and I'll speak only for myself here), I get way too wrapped up in the quality of my work and other people's opinions of it. We have to continuously remember that judging art is somewhat subjective and might mean nothing when it comes to our overall success. (I think there's a lot more to say about this but I won't get into it now).
I"m all for the others with the problem/solution policy. And usually when people post they'll get to a specific point although I'm guilty of "what do you guys think" which is much more open-ended and hasn't gotten me the responses I've hoped for. Praise is good when applicable but one thing I hated when being a teacher was being asked to give praise for something that had nothing good to say about it.
Also, I couldn't read it all because you're throwing in commas left and right. It makes it difficult for me to read. A lot of your comma use is grammatically incorrect and it'd serve you well to learn the rules of using them properly to aid your writing - It reads like you're out of breath and gasping for air.
You've got a lot of good points in there, but the barrier of your writing is a hindrance. It might be a good idea for you to write out your article, let it sit for a bit, then proof read it with fresh eyes.
My critique for the OP was your post was really long and I barely skimmed it. Sorry mang my nights are short when my days are long X_X
This.
Also,
Being an Empathizing Critic I'd just say that almost any form of criticism is a gift and it's in every artists interest to treat it as such. Bash me all you want, run me into the ground for all I care, because if your argument has merit I'll learn from you and I appreciate it and don't really care about anyone sissying with me.
Never ever ever take things personally in this industry - that's all there is to it.
I find this is way more productive then going out to the internet and asking it to critique in a way that fits you. If you need knowledge, you do whatever it takes to get it. Be thankful that people even bother replying in the first place.
Folks around here know that I've given tons of profound-paintoverly-inspiring feedback over the years but I wouldn't expect anyone to do the same. If you want things to get better: know your stuff and give awesome feedback and people will just pick up on it. Lead by example - it's all you can really do.
And pardon the shameless self pimpage, but if someone was looking for a way to more constructive criticism I would recommend this.
Totally agree with ya, it wasn't proof read, or properly broken down. I really added a lot of unecessary fluff. Comes with the habit of just splurging my thoughts down. The results are grammatical errors.
Yes, this. 3d artists get into a tools and tricks mindset far too much, I think. Moving some wires around or whatever is great, and can improve a piece, but when an artist is looking to develop, they need direction and then to just put in hours and study. This goes back to the 'critique by skill level' charts that seem to be getting passed around here a lot, too: If nobody is offering you magical solutions to art, it's probably because you need to put in the work to get good.
Not everyone is great at giving critiques, but they know what looks bad and generally point out the obvious flaws. Generally it's the flaws that stand out at first glance are the most relevent things to change.
If someone told me the lighting looked too flat I would immediately go and research lighting techniques 'not' get depressed and start getting all demoralised.
There is a vast swathe of info on polycount,so much info that you could not read it all in a year - more than enough to become a genius 3d artist:)
My advice would be less complaining more working.
It kind of sucks that the middle guys get left out a lot of the time, but like Dustin, I feel like I'm not good enough to give out any great advice to peeps that are floating around and above my level, and I'm working all the time. so my few hours I have to myself at night is mostly spent on more self-improvement rather than paragraphs of critique beyond "it's too noisy"
You just gotta think, well no one is saying its shit, so you just have to keep pushing it further. Plus when in this stage if you just step back from what you are working on and come back later you might just be able to crit your own work. Being able to analyse your own work is something ever artist needs to learn and they wont with others always telling them whats wrong.
Unless you're a famous painter, you work for an audience and that audience pays your rent.
People that don't want to go out of their comfort zone or get really pissed about bad critics will always fail.
The harsher the criticism the better, take it in and grow from it.
There a few really really "talented" people and you probably aren't one of them (I certainly am not
If you need therapy sessions every time someone bashes your work, you're better off doing something else in life.
THIS!
totally resembles my perception of polycount.
i found that in the polycounter stage, it is best to ask coworkers for crits, because in this stage, you should be hirable.
and there should be quite a few artists where you work, so it should be easier to get feedback from them.
Feedback between client and artist is a different matter all together. The areas of relationship in constructive criticism and feedback my article's was directed towards artist to artist.
Sure artists have to have thick skin to a certain degree, but that's exactly what's amazing about our industry. There are so many different types of people, personality, and levels of talent.
I believe in Karma, the way you present yourself and handle yourself professionally, and personally as an artist. What goes around and comes around, even if bashing a piece of artwork knowing full that person's going to bust out in tears, it's a bit of common courtesy and respect. Sometime's we forget people are human and throw on their jeans the same way we do.
That's of course unless you don't wear pants.
Then by all means.
I totally agree about the karma thing and I guess i was a little bit off-topic.
However people on polycount are either professional artists or aspiring professionals,I won't tell my kids their drawings are shit but do you help an aspiring artist wanting to live from his craft by trying to spare his/her feelings?
Mind me , I'm not saying you have to bully people, just be honest and direct.
People that get a boner because they bashed a nooby, however are dicks ! (boner...dick...huhuhuhu)
Enjoyed reading the article and loved the somewhat abstract / theoretical approach to giving feedback. You get told all the time that you need iron scales to work in this Industry, and to a certain degree that's true depending on where you work or post, but at the end of the day and from my experience in this industry, being professional and thoughtful towards the person goes a long way.
I'd say there's a fine line between the good and the bad of feedback, and that different personalities prompt different reactions to work. At the end of the day you need to point out the problem and resolution as the core element of feedback, anything extra comes down to how you want to portray and present yourself as a whole, and in my opinion giving the type of feedback you talk about in your article is one of the best ways to go.