HOME | DD

LS-1302 In reply to BATTLEFAIRIES [2020-01-07 02:22:24 +0000 UTC]

Hi BATTLEFAIRIES, 

I appreciate the well written and thought out review. I'll leave the interpretation up to the viewer, because what I had in my mind I cannot really say. This was just executed upon without really an agenda. I made what I wanted to see, so in many respects this piece reflects a personal side of me. 

On a technical standpoint, I would ask you use the medium given to you as best as you can. The rating system is an instant, and useful tool for giving the artist the BLUF. It provides instant context about the body of text you have written. I also can hone in on the areas you think I need to improve. The critique, in my mind, is designed to cut the artist. It's supposed to be a little scary. That's how one gets better, your body reacts to the psychological stress and adapts. 

That's just my philosophy, of course. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BATTLEFAIRIES In reply to LS-1302 [2020-01-07 10:24:55 +0000 UTC]

Ah, now that's an interesting development! dA is so diverse, everyone expects something different from a critique - I very much doubt every deviant making use of the widget knows they're essentially placing the product of their hearts and minds on a disecting table.

If you want me to, I can address vision, originality, technique and impact here:

- vision is of course a bit hard to discern when we're discussing abstracts. As you were able to read, my own vision probably differs from your own: I'm very figurative-minded most of the time, and will often associate colour and form even when they're not meant to be associated with pysical things. Can I glean the intent of the artist through that fog? I'll go with this angle: the reason I perceive existing subjects here has all to do with your artistic choice or intuition to maintain these defined aread in your piece, as opposed to letting entropy take over and create homogenous chaos like Pollock for example would. I discern clouds and waves because one element is billowing, the other streaked. I very much enjoy having these 'entities' in an abstract. So there, I can safely say I like your artistic vision, your plan with this piece a lot better than I'd do Pollock. Two and a half stars is maybe not enough in that regard, or even three.

- originality: again, tough to apply to abstract paintings and in a way, appreciating vision can't be done without taking originality into account. Have I seen this before? I may have, or something similar. It is like other abstracts out there, but not like all of them. Is it genuine? Ah, now we're talking. To me, this does not appear to be a vain piece meant to make the artist feel legitimate - this is real. So it is 'original' in its truest sense, even if no new school of art was invented, so to speak. Three stars sounds about right.

- techique I can be short and sweet about: it is on point. I spot sponteanity but with mastery and knowledge of the medium: these oils won't crack like Karel Appel's works. The medium was made subservient to the vision and the vision didn't ask of the medium what it couldn't provide, so all is in balance. I also feel the oils on canvas were the right choice for this, so three and a half stars sound appropriate.

- Impact then: I feel I've communicated that one exhaustively in my initial comment so I won't repeat that here. Still, what with the painting being a photograph on a website, there's a lot that goes missing in translation. Would that I could stand before this canvas in the light of your own workshop where it was conceived - would I be more impressed, or less? Four stars I'll give, to account for the uncertainty.

In closing, I am not sure how much you mean to learn from all this. I don't feel like I am a teacher in this situation, but of course we all want to check our intentions against the reactions of the spectator and at least I feel I am a better spectator than some! Question now is, who are you going to listen to when making your artistic choices? Whose is the opinion that matters more?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LS-1302 In reply to BATTLEFAIRIES [2020-01-08 19:05:08 +0000 UTC]

First off, thank you for your very excellent critique. That's the best I've ever had on here. I very much appreciate biting criticism. It's literally the fastest growth yield one can experience  from point A to B because of the emotional component. I believe if you can accept the emotional response, and still allow the information to be analytically processed, then one is on their way to their destination faster than their peers or their enemy. Your 1st and 2nd responses were extremely generous and I appreciate the time and effort put into them. 

To answer your questions: Who do I listen to when making artistic choices? 1. Hmm.. Well, i'll say have increasingly been spending more time in art museums studying Moran, Sargent, Picasso, Cezanne, Matisse, Rembrandt, etc. By virtue of living on the east coast, and having proximity to DC, I am able to look at their art in person and take notes. That's primary source information for me. 2. I source Art (with the big A) and information about it from current masters, or what I consider to be current masters. I spend a lot of money investing into my education. It is immensely pleasurable and equally effective. I'm thinking Colley Whisson, Jeremy Mann, Lindsey Kustusch, Lynn Bogess, Mark Boedges, to name a few. Some I have gone to their workshops, some i'm currently enrolled into their mini academies. 3. Professional reading. I have a great many books on the technique and more of Art. 

Whose opinion matters more? I base my input or I determine the gravity of the input I receive by the source's believability rating. Basically, if they have substantial pull in my life and I value their opinion, I'll take it more seriously. 

I value all input though, and I discard whatever I want to discard. At this point, my professionalism in this Art Profession is growing, and it's getting easier and easier to determine who is value added, and who is not. 

Again, Thank You! 
Thomas

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BATTLEFAIRIES In reply to LS-1302 [2020-01-13 09:26:38 +0000 UTC]

Thank you - I never start out scathingly, because there's always the risk you render someone too downtrodden to want to consider your viewpoint. And then the critiquer would have achieved nothing, and the artist would change nothing. It's a different kind of 'thick skin' altogether.

1. That's awesome. Would love to see which kinds of notes you took - it's easy to see a piece is a masterpiece, but harder to discern why.

2. I sometimes wonder what contemporary art tutelage is like - used to be someone was trained to perform just like the master, and I used to know an artist personally who was influenced significantly by his to the point of sometimes regretting it. But I expect it takes some restraint and self-awareness from the master to keep from wanting to mould a student according to their own desires and preferences, as far as art goes.

3. Always a good idea, if you ask me.

Thank you for answering me, btw; sorry I took so long in replying!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LS-1302 In reply to BATTLEFAIRIES [2020-01-16 23:05:38 +0000 UTC]

With respect to your number 2 paragraph, that's really only an issue for (2) types of artists:  The no kidding live-in apprenticeships (which i'm not sure who's even doing that anymore, and I can't speak for the apprenticeship, because I have no idea what that dynamic is like) & the poorly educated. The more educated you are, the more armed you are to combat against that type of scenario. I usually find that an artist can retain a significant portion of their (what I'll call) DNA within their work, while simultaneously adopting new techniques or principles. Often, professional artists speak the exact same language, in terms of value, color, perspective, etc. but they bend those rules to some degree to achieve their unique look (E.G. Picasso, Matisse, Dali, Van Gogh being extreme examples of this). So, an artist climbing the latter up their career are going to be more susceptible to plagiarism, essentially, while learning the ropes. The more educated an artist becomes though, the more they'll fundamentally understand WHY artists are professional, and why they have a certain look. They will eventually be able to copy cat, but a true artist is looking for authenticity, uniqueness, respect from not only collectors/galleries, but other artists. So they'll keep putting in the "brush mileage" until their style becomes apparent, it breathes and looks like the artist who created it. That can only come from a place of honesty in my opinion. And like you said, "Self-restraint and self-awareness" is critical in this process. Absolutely 100 Percent correct there. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BATTLEFAIRIES In reply to LS-1302 [2020-01-20 08:45:44 +0000 UTC]

Oh he may very well have been a case of the first - that artist was already seventy years old when I was little. He eventually did move away from his teacher's style by a lot, but in some details like the hands etc. you could often still see it.

It's hard finding examples online however, or else I'd have linked you to some of their respective works.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LS-1302 In reply to JustACapharnaum [2020-02-23 14:57:21 +0000 UTC]

I'm glad you see that! I had something planned along those lines, and thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

JustACapharnaum In reply to LS-1302 [2020-02-23 14:58:42 +0000 UTC]

You're welcome! You're very talented

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LS-1302 In reply to JustACapharnaum [2020-02-23 15:05:29 +0000 UTC]

Thank you, I'm getting there

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

JustACapharnaum In reply to LS-1302 [2020-02-23 16:06:50 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LS-1302 In reply to ikazon [2020-02-23 14:56:50 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much! 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LS-1302 In reply to cogwurx [2020-02-23 14:56:41 +0000 UTC]

Thank you Cog!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cogwurx In reply to LS-1302 [2020-02-23 19:04:57 +0000 UTC]

Welcome!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LS-1302 In reply to Skeukry [2020-01-07 02:24:12 +0000 UTC]

That's a very dark interpretation, but thank you! I appreciate the comment and your time writing it. 

👍: 1 ⏩: 0

LS-1302 In reply to Apfelmaeuschen [2020-01-04 20:00:10 +0000 UTC]

Awesome!! Thank you for the great compliment! 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0