Maggi Carstairs 28 Jan 2005

I just want to ask... How would you rate a Constable, Rubens, Renoir, Picasso, Kadinsky, Michel Angelo, Klee, Miro, Amslem, Donatello and a toddlers painting?

Art is subjective....and there is nothing wrong with that..We view art through the Heart as well as the Mind.

Heike Andresen 29 Jan 2005

I think that you do have a point, but rating art work, or better yet discussing if you actually can rate art. Which all depends on the actual definition of art. Do you define art as an expression of thought or emotion? Or rather as portraiting something? Does art need to involve creativity. Is it neccessary to posses skill for great art?

From what you say, your definition of art doesn't involve much skill.

I on the other hand see especially online art communities as a good way to improve your skill level. You do need creativity for art, but that's nothing that can be taught to you. The same goes for talent, but skill is an entirely different thing.

A photographer for example that constantly shoots blurry photos is doing something wrong, and it's the purpose (IMHO) of an online community to point out what so they can improve and raise their skill level. That also involves that other photographers help him and not people who know nothing about photography.

The same goes for people who draw or paint. Bad figure anatomy is not a matter of style. It can be used as an artistic effect, but it's not an effect if you simply can't do it better. All the artists that you mentioned have one thing in common: no matter what style they actually prefered they had a great skill level and actually chose the style and did it not because they didn't know any better.

More over especially in digital art there is a trend of some people to just take a photo and just apply a couple of filters, which is not only very uncreativ but lacks any sort of skill. Filters don't make art, they can help you greatly, but they should never be all you do.

The same goes for fractal renderings. There are some amazing artists who can do amazing things with photoshop and fractal rendering programs, and then there are artist who put a simple 5 minute Julia rendering online, get tons 10s and feel they did something incredibly right - which they IMHO did not - and continue to put up fractal renderings that require zero skill level, and lack creativity on the whole.

Furthermore, no matter how good a piece of art is, it should be an enormous exception to give out a 10. A ten means "perfect", which for me represents, that the artist put much thought to the piece, has been very creativ with it and displayed an incredible skill level and created an amazing piece. Again, this view comes from my personal definition of art which may differ from others.

In fact I am rather sure that the majority of people on art wanted have an entirely different view of things, as displayed by the popularity of works, that I would hardly dare to call "art".

I visit art wanted more and more rarely, because it isn't a place that actually helps artists. It has become a place where artists fancy themselfes and celebrate the thought that just about anything is art. You cannot evolve as an artist here, because most people will tell you that just about anything you do is "perfect", which is pathetic.

Everyone likes getting 10s, me, too. But that doesn't mean that it's good for my progress. I cannot improve myself if I get the feedback that there is nothing I could possibly improve about what I do. And an artists journey to get better IMHO never ends. It may be a nice thing to just give out 10s, but it won't help anybody to get anywhere.

Also I think that, people should start to actually read what the ratings mean. a 5 is 'average'. As in - most pieces go with that rating. Higher ratings are for outstanding pieces. A 7 means 'very good', it is a compliment! There is no reason to be offended at it, the person who rated your work 7 actully liked it a lot, but does think that it could've been done better.

Of course 7 does sound bad, if you are used to get 10s all the time, which is again a result of people going around and saying anything is art, therefore 10 for everything! This has become an inviorment, that makes it extremely difficult to improve yourself on the feedback that you get.

So if you're a photographer and see a comic image and know that you don't know anything about comics... well, go with Socrates' view of things and don't rate the image. It really is as simple as that.

More often than not I leave artwanted.com shaking my head in disbelieve, promising myself not to go there again anytime soon.

David Díez 29 Jan 2005

Exactly

RQ Trietsch 29 Jan 2005

Not everyone wants an HONEST OPINION. Key word...OPINION!

I've started a list of people I've rated that do not have the common courtesy to say thanks for looking. So I will be sticking with the people I know and ignoring the ones on my list.

Out of my last 20 comments given, only two...2...responded. So now I look and comment, (besides the people I know, on those that have their rating turned off.

Ellen Brucks 29 Jan 2005

I have watched the many comments over the past months on marks, comments, ect. I am perplexed. First of all I think there must be quite a few of you that personally know each other. Am I right?

R.O. Trietsch, Maggie Caarstairs and Heike Anderson, I just read your thread. So I am going to ask you a question or two. From the tone of your words and others am I right in thinking that only trained and experienced artists should be on this site, or critiqueing. It seems that the ones in charge want everyone to critiqu. I agree with you that the high marks are given too freely but of course there are consequences if you don't. I've been on for awhile and have justpaid for the premium site but I am now thinking it is a waste of you great artists time and my money as I was hoping this site would give me some honest criticising. I enjoy the ppeople here but maybe there is another art site that works differently. Any suggestings?

Maggi Carstairs 29 Jan 2005

Amen to above...I agree totally.

To the question asked about whether only 'experts'(????????) should critique..the answer is a definite "No". The site is geared for anybody who joins to get the privilege of rating works displayed for rating. Where it has gone wrong is, that there is a 'clique' of people who have been on here for ages and they get all the ratings and the placings and others who are say, not as well known at AW, don't. A member saying he gets 40 placings each time surprised me... as this means that well known members actually dominate the rating. My answer was for this group...who are already known to get 10 for everything, to not be rated anymore, so the others could have the pleasure of seeing their images and get on the Top Ten. This means that newer members have more chance of seeing their images on the Top Ten. Everybody should and ought to give critiques and comments, but they should not give low marks, because the current system means that 300X10's, 1X7 and your rating immediately drops to 9.something, because of that one mark.This is not fair if an artist deserves the higher rating. After this happened to me on a couple of my top photos, I took myself off the rating system. (We all mostly know what are good photos and what are not).

There is a critique section for you to show works you wish help with...and this should be used for that purpose. You should be placing works in your portfolio you think are your best.... if you are showing the portfolio to the world....and that is what you are doing here.

I still think doing away with the numerical rating is the way to go, as its causing far too much friction between members, and it is also very biased towards those who have been here the longest or worked the hardest to get votes. Very political...like getting into Parliament. Maybe this is can be considered a training ground for vote getting..I know I have learnt heaps of tricks from just being here 2 months. Grin!!! I too am not going to worry about this site as much...if this is going to be such an issue for me. I came here to show my best works and have them commented on...admired or some constructive criticism given and maybe to see if I could sell some photos for a small income. I did not come here to see people hurt and get involved in negatives. I do this for a living, so don't want to do this in my leisure and funtimes too. Its a good group...be fair with what you give people and don't be too mean...we all want a decent rating and if you don't like it, skip it...don't give a low mark and spoil someone's rating. Its called 'Playing the Game' Maybe AW should cancel all ratings from the past and start again...with firmer rules about the rating system.

Maggi Carstairs 29 Jan 2005

To RQ Triesch... I am sorry but I don't have the time to email a thankyou to everyone I rate..today I got 106 images on Artwatch to rate. What I have chosen to do instead of sending an email, is visit their site, and vote on one of their images; and I am happy to have people do that to me too. Its nice to get an email now and then when I rate, but getting 106 would kill my email package... People with websites get far too many emails as it is... email when there is something to say or share is more meaningful. So please don't be ofended if I don't email you a thanks...I do care, but what I do is visit your portfolio, vote on an image, add you to my Artwatch, and then vote on your new submissions..and that is much better in my opinion than emailing a 'thanks' every time. If you do want an email from me..please add it to your comment and I will be happy to email you instead of giving you a vote and comment.

Heike Andresen 29 Jan 2005

Maybe you are actually right. If you think that we all should just 'play the game' the site would be much better off without the rating system. As I have seen images IMHO worth less than 5 (AVERAGE) rated witha rediculous amount of tens. I mostly just would skip them, as to not offend the artist, by simply stating my opinion that that particular work is really not the best.

What you all in all want is for everyone to be happy about their works and the comments they get. A numerical rating system gets in the way of, what is understandable to some degree. I also see your point, that everyone is free to post images to the forums for concrit.

I don't think, just because the option for posting the image to get in-depth feeback exists, should hinder people to state their honest opinion on what they think of the artists work. Which is basically the oppsite of 'playing the game' and would actually give artits a clue as how people in general view their works. In-depth feedback is one thing, many people voting for single images to make up an average rating is entirely differently.

Moreover you are right, under certain circumstances a VERY GOOD can kick an image out of the top ten reports, because it's not anymore who got the best score in the top tens, but who has scored most 10s. Again that's because of to many people 'play the game'.

Which usually involves not even considering something really low, because the artist might go to your own gallery and take "revenge". Because we are all very mature and and feel confident about our works and want a honest average on how our work is percieved and one only one bad apple...

On another note: If you display your work to the whole world (as you truthfully stated), you probably pick your best works (I know I do it at AW, you said you did), and you have toexpect to find people that like it and people that simply don't like it. And there is no good reason other than "not making the artist feel bad" not to say that you think a work is VERY GOOD (thus COMPLIMENTING IT) and not PERFECT. This is indeed a public forum. As in everyone can see, and everyone has the option to say what they think. Unless of course they chose to 'play the game'.

If you want to 'play the game', I cannot prevent you from it. And seeing that many people actually do 'play the game' the rating system over here has become utterly pathetic and worhtless. To you it may all be good - because if you only recieve PERFECT for your work and not anymore VERY GOOD you feel incredibly better about yourself. It actually gives me rather strong headaches, which is why I'm not here very often. Especially lated the moment I even type www.artwanted.com and hit the enter button I know I will end up with a headache, and I haven't been disappointed at all.

*(Sorry for extensive caps lock use, it usually isn't my style, but I felt a neccessarity to use it).

Heike Andresen 29 Jan 2005

I do have to agree with ou yon the 'firmer rules for rating' aspect. I personally would sugest that you can rate only a certain oercentage of you ratings '10'. Maybe one in fifty or even more. To get peoples feet back on the ground and to actually make them think of what the numbers mean. A '9' would be available one in twenty ratings you give, an 8 one in five, 7 and lower would be available all the time. A conept like that would be my suggestion for a new rule on the rating sytem.

Maggi Carstairs 30 Jan 2005

Wow!!! I know what you mean... Thanks for this thoughtful reply..maybe its time AW administration considered someway of 'balancing the act' so to speak... This is my final say on this subject..I just think the system needs looking into..maybe once you get x number of 10's, you have to concede that you are fabulous and remove yourself from the ratings..maybe with a special 'Master Certificate' left on your site so others still know and acknowledge your level. Have a happy year all.....

RQ Trietsch 30 Jan 2005

Thanks for the insight Maggi. Much appreciated.

Ellen Brucks 30 Jan 2005

To Heike I have not seen your work but it must be great. If looking at our work gives you a headache, and since I want some honest critique, would you consider putting my painting on "add to art watch" so I can receive some help. I won't burden you with a lot of paintings. Thanks

RQ Trietsch 30 Jan 2005

Hieke I like your suggestion of people getting their feet back on the ground.

But the percentage aspect just will not work.

I dare anyone not to find some sort of flaw in anyones work, whether it is your medium or not.

It would be nice if more 8's were given instead of 10's, without the fear of repercussions by artist or friends thereof....

David Perkins 30 Jan 2005

I have had a few low ratings but at least it means that some one has actually thought about my photographs, I dont mind if people do not like my work, why should I? I dont like some of what I see on AW most of it is good some of it is exellent, but you have to admit some of it stinks. We should get over ourselves and rate what we see not what we want others to rate us... (rant over)

When I get comments I try and visit the portfolios of the commentor and find work I like to rate back, this I surpose is playing the game. It just seems polite.?

I got a 3 not so long ago and I was MAD but I went to there portfolio and I really liked the guys work and rated his work highly (which sucked to start with) the guy came back to my portfolio and liked some of my other shots and said so which really ment something to me...

It's easy to take one shot (painting / drawing) out of context and give it a poor rating I guess I think you should try and look at a body of work from an artist before giving them a really low mark.

David.

Heike Andresen 31 Jan 2005

Ellen, I never said, that I consider myself better than the majority on AW, and frankly I am rather far from it. What actually gives me headaches is, that people rate other work in a way that I do not understand. There are many great pieces of art here, and many of those don't get enough recognition IMHO. Instead there are too many people who actually only give out tens (at least that's how I explain myself the gap between mediocre works with high ratings and excellent works with average rating). There are mostly some very good works with very high rating, but also pieces in which I don't see what's even good about them (and no, I'm not judging by their style or topic). And often I just don't get why, which is, what gives me headaches.

I'm sorry if I came across as though I was having headaches over the actual content, the rating is what actually causes me headaches.

Patrick Miller 31 Jan 2005

Ratings suck

Jude 31 Jan 2005

After reading about ratings again and again and again!

I think it would be a good idea to rethink what a 10 is. Is the art perfect? Compared to what, my view of perfect, or the one who created the arts view of perfect. I know I am going to re think how I rate, and I wont be handing out 10s like candy.

There is a lot of good art here on the site. And to rate it a 6-7 says that it is good. No one should be insulted when they are told their work is good.

Good is good and perfect is beyond Good. If some one has achieved perfection then they really do not need to have anyone comment or rate their work. If it is best to spare there feelings, if I rate some one a 9 it is not to knock them out of top 10. I dont look to see who is in the 10 club. I have been rating the art random where /Rate Artwork/ with out looking to see who the artist is or if they have all 10s.

I am sure there is a lot of art here given 10s that I think is only a 6. If that puts me on the &#*^ List, so be it.

I dont intend to ever get in to the game playing here and I dont believe in getting even with someone who thinks my art junk. I dont think that I need to justify why I only think someone's art IS GOOD and NOT PERFECT.

I always keep this in mind, one mans junk is anothers treasure so to speak! One mans palace is another mans empty crate/box!

This is just my opinion/my own point of view/its what I think/who cares/so what!

Ellen Brucks 31 Jan 2005

Hi Heike, Thanks for your reply. There are definitely some top artists here but with all thee problems they have quit commenting and giviiing helpful critiques which is why I joined. I thought maybe if you were one of those and you believed in being honest I would get some help. So far I have nothing I would dare put up for sale anywhere without knowing it was good enough for that. If the art on this site was judged by a few basic criteria like I presume you who have studied art were taught. maybe it would be easier to grade or comment on it. (contrast, lighting, appeal, depth, ect.)at least for photograpphs, ppaintings, drwings.

Sean Lynch 01 Feb 2005

I dont do it anymore Ellen.And its not because I'm afraid they will target me,cause I really dont care.Its because people cant handle honest crits.So I totally stopped.If I go to someones folio and comment they get a ten.The ratings are meaningless to me.There are many very good artists on here.There are also some people who are very close to going to the next level.But when you point something out, I have found people to be very insecure and get an attitude...So,I dont offer any suggestions anymore.If you have something up I like,I comment.If not...I pass it by...And I am sorry about that because I think there are some people I could help a great deal.....And Maggi,I disagree.Most of what I see here is sub par artwork.I'm not talking about technical skills.I'm talking about execution,composition,Someone who actually put some time into their work.Most of it I would not line my cat litter box with.You dont have to be Frank Frazetta for me to look at and appreciate your work,but ya gotta have some heart and soul put into that image...

bonnie blackshear 17 Feb 2005

i rated art from my veiw i was honest and maybe i went to far...but i was trying to help. i hate so many hate email calling me names, went to my site and rated my art 1 but its ok..i don't mind bad rating because i know i need lots of help. i will not rate aet again unless i rate it a 10...so why brother

Reply