Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach become critics.<< ARRGH I hate that saying! Fortunately, I'm told that I can do about as well as I can teach though...I just hope that's a compliment. ;) Take care. SnowS

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Y&Artist=igohigh

I try to put as little post work in mine as possible (not good at post anyway). But I do try to see how close I can come to those who do. I'm just a hobbyist with No Art schooling at all, actually I'm a tech-head who uses my 'art' as a way to unwind. (got evolved when I began teaching color-digital theory/reprographics for Sharp Electronics) If ya wants to "critique" my gallery go ahead. If ya wants to troll, don't waste your time as you couldnt get under my skin if ya wanted to.. However, if 'critiquing' is really what you enjoy then I am all ears! Go ahead, you won't hurt my feelings...

Though not necessarily related, it's an example of people who can't do something but know how it needs to be done. I tried for years to play volleyball. Not "backyard" volleyball, but the "real thing". I knew what needed to be done but I just couldn't do it. Call me uncoordinated but I couldn't jump as high as I needed to, couldn't sync with the ball as well as I needed to, and couldn't "finger" the ball as well as I needed to. But, for some reason, I could convey what needed to be done to other people. I could see what they were doing wrong. And I could point it out with suggestions that made the other team members better. Soon, I became coach for our team. Seems like I had a knack for knowing "my" players, knowing weakness on the other team, knowing when someone was "on" and when they were "off". Knew when to change the tempo of the game and which plays to call. They had the talent and I helped them use it. (I can still remember "my" best spiker...he had such power and jumping ability...during one game, he broke the fingers of a would-be blocker! But, the original coach almost cut him from the team). No, we weren't pro or anything, but our team, from a small army base, made it to the East Coast Intramural Army Invitational. Yeah, we didn't win. Finished in the middle (in case anyone is interested). But, I believe my coaching got us there. My way of saying it's quite possible someone knows all about the various aspects of art yet can't draw a stick figure. Is Tigershark a troll? Possibly. But, s/he isn't a troll and isn't necessarily inept at critiquing (sp?) just because s/he doesn't have art to show everyone.

Charlie Tuna... it was a Vickie render of a new texture a guy had put in freestuff... I simply shot down Tigershark for attacking it for saying it was too pale to be Egyptian. Just because it was a redhaired pale Vickie, and I simply wrote there were redhaired Egyptians in the Bronze age. In fact there were quite a lot of caucasians in Northern Africa in those times, if you look at Egyptian art depicting Syrians, who were always drawn as caucasian people. Redheads are by genetics, partially melanin deficient anyway, and are going to be paler than people in their same gene pool that don't carry the redhair trait. I used for historical reference, Ramses II, whose hair on his mummy has been tested to be naturally redhaired... researchers believe his hair was dyed with henna after death to approximate the colour it had been in his youth. the render was fine... average, had some nice lighting, and some pretty nice hair painting too. I guess the guy didn't like having crits, but then not many do, and well, the one that he got really wasn't talking very about the tech merits of the picture. I gotta agree... if you are using poser to do storyboarding, then post some of your storyboards and show us what you think is good composition. Poser is about composition, posing and expressions to me anyway, we all know it sucks wind as a renderer.

Attached Link: https://listhost.uchicago.edu/pipermail/ane/2002-March/001118.html

the link about the tests on Ramses II hair.

Funny thing about art.
I know how to critiqe my students on their labs and exams, I know how to critiqe a young skydiver after a jump (called 'post-diving') and we call it "constructive critisism".
But when it comes to art the 'art critic' seems to always be depicted as a troll. I mean like even in the movies the art critic is always someone with their nose up their but* ***** and slamming everything and everyone...well, except untill they come across some color swatches painted by a chimp or an elephant.

Is this an 'art thing'?

FYI, I found this link some time ago over at 3DCom:
"Giving Critique - a Check List for Critiquers"
and another here:
Giving Critique By Owen Richards

Someone appears, offers his help, and all you do is smack him? If you don't want other people to comment on your work, just don't check that checkbox next time you upload to the galleries.

stewer, I have no idea who you are, but your suggestion is degrading and rude. Everyone that is new here should feel free to post in forum and in gallery and seek constructive feedback. As for this new gun in town that has come here to tell us how to do Poser, well, you have to earn that right. As a self proclaimed message, he says he doesn't do art and doesn't do poser, so how is he supposed to help? Clearly, he can't and any professional critic will know that. That guy IMHO is either a troll, or a real buffoon who is not long to last in the art critic world. The very first thing that a professional has to do when wading into adversary is to understand the position of the adversay and convey that. Here, we are just told the opposite. He does not understand the program, knows nothing about Poser lighting, and didn't even give us a link to his work web site. Troll it is IMHO.

If he's a troll, just ignore him.

well I can see how well I'm appreciated. For those who were offended by less than sugar coated comments today - my apologies for upsetting you. Those who have called me a troll? Why thank you for the title. If you examine my comments today, I actually left several positive ones. For those who have asked for critiques, I shall be looking over your galleries and making some comments. If you would prefer, I can email them privately as apparantly a less than gushing comment is not suitable aorund these parts. Who knew? For everyone else? breathe easy .. I shan't go where I'm not invited. I had mistakenly thought this to be a site for serious artists to communicate and improve their works. Alas, it appears to be yet another clique ridden self sustaining ecology for the most part. But at least you have that in common with most professional artists societies, so I commend you for that much. As to my abilities? I am by and large a book designer and page layout artist with a background in typography and logo design. I've recently started working with Poser 4 and 5 to help realise images before artists are hired. I also write art reviews for several NYC based publications. And a last note on the Egyptian piece - the hieroglyphs on her arm are 1st and 2nd dynasy, predating any graeco/roman contact and therefor highly unlikely for a caucasian Queen. If the title had been 'Goth Princess' I wouldn't have mentioned it. (incidentaly the 'glyphs spell the word 'goat' which I thought quite funny) Pleased to meet you all, TigerShark

Well, TS, my offer still stands. Anyone looking at my work is appreciated. So, have at it if you think it's worth your time. No need for private messages...just leave comments.

What an amazing turn. After all the complaints about lack of imagination in the galleries, boring, amateurish talentless, vaucous naked Vickys, great art being buried etc., ad infinitum... And now, mirable dictu, it's all about fun, just playing around and Poser really doesn't do that good a job anyway. We don't need no stinkin' critics! Shark, you may be a troll. At the very least, you are guilty of perceived immodesty and of course, critique sans gallerie. For those sins, you have earned the death penalty. But, in view of your remarkable achievement in transforming the local zeitgeist, you get my non-artist vote for commutation of your sentence to time served. Now if you're smart, you'll swim away while your jaws are still in your head and not mounted on the wall. PS. there was a thread at Renderotica a while back lamenting the lack of serious criticism, but be warned, there are some serious anglers over there and they don't believe in catch and release.

Well...I don't know in what countries other members live, but where I live we have such things as free speech or equal rights. I actually think this is a good idea and that this is the way the internet should work too. Wether one thinks he's an artist, a lawyer, a critic or a hamster - we should not care, he should be entitled to express his opinion just like everyone else. If we don't agree with his opinion, we offer our own opinion, but we should treat him with the same respect we expect to be treated. If, for any reason, you should meet someone who's you cannot respect for some reason: Don't bother with him, you've got better things to do. Anyhow - how come someone giving comments to other people's work gets to read personal insults, where people asking for warez get the funniest answers ever? After all, this is an open community and we should welcome everyone who's playing by our rules. Warez people don't, but critics do. Getting comments from people who don't know Poser is a huge advantage IMO. They are the ones capable of thinking outside the box, where Poser users themselves tend to think "nice textures, I'd love to know what Vicky morph that is, where'd he get that nice sword and temple from?" while not paying attention wether the image as a whole is able to express the artist's message. I for one love hearing comments on my renderings from a friend who's a photographer as he's paying attention to details I'd never think about. Listening to outside opinions is, IMO, a way of opening your mind.

Doesnt seem like a professional art critic need be much removed from going through a celebritys waste bin on a tabloid. TigerShark, whereas a simple SPELLCHECKER used assiduously will help your typing, judging or understanding artwork of any calibre takes years of hard work, not weeks at a local craft class for the unemployed.

Some of you people need to come up for air! Does wonders for the thought process. And makes it even easier to sleep at nights knowing you haven't trounced someone without giving the person a chance. My take? If he's a troll just having fun...it will die its own death by virtue of not having roused the masses. Any trolling and "uncalled-for" comments on your art will be recognized by anyone else as a "troll" comment. If he's not, then savor the attention. Or perhaps, like I've read so often, people only post their work to get cheap "pats on the back". Reminds me of the many times people have flocked to a "warez hanging" without allowance for any kind of innocent request. Are your egos THAT fragile?

Tigershark - I welcome you to comment in my gallery. I understand for a fact that art critics needn't themselves be artists. I can critic a book but that does not necessarily make me an author. I do not think you are a troll either as trolls don't come in announcing themselves publicly. I also understand the difference between critising and critic-ing. lol. My dream job would be to be a Movie critic - or a Holiday Resort Critic !! Maybe a better title would be "Reviewer" as a "Critic" tends to have a more negative connotation. Unfortunately, the real trolls have paved a way before you by making everyone skeptical, including myself, who has been a victim once. This makes the barrier of entry harder, here at Renderosity. However, having said that, if you can make a name for yourself and with constructive comments/criticism, and integrate yourself into this community, you will find that it is a friendly one.

On a note about a Troll,.. A troll once commented in my gallery ,.."this is the worst thing I've seen! My best bet is that you start from scratch" :-P Oh well. I am always striving to improve.

On reading the comments above, Why do those who had comments done by Tigershark have comments disabled ? That disturbs me a bit. Constructive comments are always welcome. If the comments are to tear down, you will find this place unwelcoming.

Well, TigerShark, you sure managed to stir up a debate here... Some observations: Claiming to be a professional art critic is of absolutely no value unless the artist whose work you are reviewing knows about your background, your own opinions about what constitutes good art and your knowledge of the softwares used to produce the images here. Respect as a critic is something you earn, not something you claim as a profession. That said, I can't rule out the fact that you indeed do have a good perception of how to review art and give helpful critique. But that is not the point, the way you presented yourself here made it tough for you to earn the respect that you might deserve. If you would have started out by giving helpful critique and advise without publicly advertising your professionalism and implying that your qritique is somewhat more valid than others, you probably would have become a valuable asset to the community. A little modesty might have helped. After all, many people here are professionals and have been with this community for a long time. When entering a new community, you must sense the spirit of the community before stepping up on a pedestal. It might not have been your intention, but that was the way it came across.

I agree with stewer about the "out of Poser" critics. If you want to improve and to develope in Poser, you can't just tell yourself "ok, that shadow in this image looks bad, but it's not my fault - it's Poser's fault, it doesn't render shadows well". People who see your art shouldn't care whose fault it is - if the shadow is wrong then the shadow is wrong. So try a different lighting, or try to fix it in postwork. You shouldn't allow yourself to be restricted within Poser's limitations. And I'm giving this example, because I do it myself all the time. I look at a picture I created, and I don't always see these little "faults". It's only when I show it to someone who doesn't do Poser, they can tell me "oh, what's that line on her face", and then I see the shadow is wrong. And I have to admit I didn't see the comment on the egyptian queen picture, but on the same note (and hopefully without offending anyone) - do you think middle-east people in Jesus Christ's time looked anything like they look like in all the renaissance paintings? I'm pretty sure they weren't so BLOND. :)

Great points Anat! You know, Art is all about interpretation in the eyes of the artist. Sometimes, one man's meat is another man's poison. The best combination would be for someone who has a love for art, is appreciative of a wide range of art forms and styles and is able to see it from an angle that "adds value". Having said that, some bad boys in art weren't considered artists in their time but became legends many years later!

Boy oh boy, great debate and thread! Welcome to Renderosity, TigerShark - great nick! :) I, for one, would love to see some good honest critiquing for those that want it. I would be happy to get critique on anything I do. Always up for improving!! I spend a lot of my time at other digital art communities because I know I will get great help for improving my art. No rubbing each other's egos' at some of those places, I can tell you! This place is far too cliquey and closed off to newbies (not necessarily newbies to digital art but newbies to rosity!). Especially the Poser community here. Just my thoughts on the matter! Di

I haven't seen any of the comments poster by Tigershark, but otherwise I think the reception here has been undeservedly rough. Why shouldn't he be a professional critic? Trolls say things like "this is all crap" to things that aren't crap, and TS doesn't seem to be in that category. There is nothing wrong with analysing Poser pictures as pictures. Saying "Poser doesn't handle lighting well" is no excuse. If a picture is to be considered a valid artwork, it has to be appreciated by anyone, not just someone who knows the technical basis behind it. Do you think that no-one should be allowed to comment on a singer's performance if they can't themselves sing? A good critic's skill consists in being able to perceive the strengths and weaknesses of an artwork and translate them effectively into words. It is not the same as a mentoring skill, which someone above evidently confused it with. Someone can be an excellent critic and a lousy artist, and vice versa.

Phantast, very nicely put and I totally agree.

Hello Now i feel very strongly on this subject,i know artists are among the most imaginative and higly sensative people on the planet,buy you must realise with the birth of the artist comes the birth of the art critic. Since the dawn of time there have been artists and art critics,if the artist cannot stand critic on there work then dont post work were peopl will see it You have to be able to understand what the critic is saying about your work, if it be nice critic or bad critic you can only get better from learning and understanding how an image is made. Some people are born to make art and some made to critic it,thats they way it works, i have no gallrrie here yet but i used to as i used a diff alias then and i had bad and good critic and i took then for what they were someone looking at my work and judging in there own minds eye if at all it is art or not. If you are too sencative then dont make art for peopl to see and comment on,or you only be hurt by what is said. This place is a good place to learn and make new freinds,but keep in mind that not every one is proffesional,i have been making images for nearly 30 years one way or another and it always thrills me when i show a finished piece to any one critic or outherwise. Please please dont take what to many people say about your work to heart,i know its hard but if you want to make it in the art game you have to be a liullte thick skinned thanks for liustening seeklight

"Those who have called me a troll? Why thank you for the title. " ... "I had mistakenly thought this to be a site for serious artists to communicate and improve their works. Alas, it appears to be yet another clique ridden self sustaining ecology for the most part." Well, at least you stand up to your title. As for my work, anyone is welcome to commentate, but I'm not an artist, just a GP who lets off steam in an artistical way, so you may feel you're wasting your time on my "sunday paintings".

I suppose I was a bit trollish myself in my other post its just that I know some artists and some very capable art experts and yes, some art critics. Some of the latter are hybrids of the preceding two and they are not the minority but compared to some Ive seen who arent, this one is mild. A skill to acquire is to judge differently when you see different things. I dont think Ill view Renoir in the same thingie as Ken Done.

I like to have response for my 'artwork'. If it's good, I am full of joy. If it's bad, I try to learn something from it. You have to have a thick skin as an artist. Anyway, TS appearance was kind of rude. It sounds like: 'I'm am a critic and see if you can handle me', but there's no need to see him as a troll. He simply wants (needs) attention. Maybe he will really help, so give him a chance. In the end there are a lot of people here leaving comments. I like most, when they tell me how to improve my work and what they think was done well. If someone simply says 'this is bad and that is bad', it doesn't help much. Most of the time, I know myself what needs improvement, but knowing and doing is different as TS stated. Some things are hard to do in Poser and I like to learn more. So combine critics with links to helpful tutorials or hints. I think this will help us all. ...and don't get easily offended...

Devil's advocate time, for a moment. To be fair, there's a lot of attitude in the 3D forums that comments should only be of praise, for fear of hurting feelings. Criticism isn't the problem -- the trouble is often in how it's delivered. But even constructive criticism gets jumped all over by some sensitive folks. I don't even comment on something unless it's damned near perfect, now. I used to offer a lot of constructive feedback, until one person got really touchy about not getting a completely glowing commendation (for some folks, there can be a language / cultural barrier which I understand, but this wasn't the case). He then proceeded to delete his whole gallery in indignation, post in the forums about how visious I was (now that no one could read the comment for themselves) and stir up a lynch mob, one member of which proceeded to hack my website, post personal info on the www, subscribe me to piles of SPAM lists, etc (I've since clarified things with this person). That was one of the reasons why I'd left the 3D forums for about 2 years. And honestly, the comment was something along the lines of "This is good and that's good, but the elbow needs a little post work, and then you'll have a great pic." So please don't misunderstand my attitude toward ThunderShark. While I haven't embraced him as a critic, I also haven't concluded that he's a troll. It's purely "wait and see," and (knowing that I don't know everything and have lots of room to grow) I don't mind constructive criticism in the least. Constructive feedback does more for us in the long run than praise. > Saying "Poser doesn't handle lighting well" is no excuse. Fair enough. I said it to offer context moreso than an excuse (P4 is a terrible hindrance to good light -- I can remember having to do about eight different renders and then blend all the layers on one image, just to get the shadows right). Those who've commented on this are right, though -- it doesn't matter where the fault lies. Take care; Chas

Personally I do not believe that comments should all be praise, how would anyone develop further? Nor do I believe that Poser images should be viewed as that. They should be viewed as art regardless of the medium used. Lighting problems can be addressed in postwork and by rendering in a different program. His comments on my art weren't really taken personally - I could personally care less. He gave his opinion and stated what he thought would look good, he preferred draping vines or some such thing and reflections - I did not, my choice. But to know that he charged into the gallery with no intent other than to criticise the works posted there and that so many turned off comments and to have read many of his comments and to see that there were several that were similar (historical reference) is quite frankly what I found annoying. An Art critic may look at an image and note that it breaks "artistic rules" but realize that it works for that image (how many of the greats originally broke the rules?). An image may not be historically accurate (all those pictures of Christ with milky white skin for instance) but it is no less a valid expression of the artist's imagination. It was his consistent manner of looking for something to criticise even if it wasn't about the art itself but instead about the artist's perception. As in the image "Persephone" and "Egyptian Queen". Troll or not - his opinion and mannerism is not one that I respect. A professional art critics opinion becomes more respected with time and after perceiving his comments, this ones behaviour didn't leave a lot of room for respect. If his attitude/persona aren't respected he could be the best artist in the world and I still could care less about his opinion. Essentially a "critic" of any kind does just that - gives their own opinions. One may love something while another hates it. Will it cause me to turn off comments? No, because on occasion a member here will give me a comment on something that they notice as "off" and I will look at it and say "yes, I can see how that would work" they will do that without trying to change teh "vision" and "concept" of the image. Those comments can often be invaluable. Do I care if he comments on my work - nope not at all.

Well Tiger, I am by far an artist and admit that lighting is a major downfall. I invite you to my gallery and welcome any comments that offer help:)

Wow! Talk about starting something! Okay! The best kind of criticism is to take a completed work, improve on it, and then tell what you did. Of course, some people may not agree that it is an improvement but it would help people learn new techniques. It is no good to criticize lighting, cameras, etc by saying that they are bad.

well if he is willing to comment on my poser art (which he has no knowlege of how it works) then i am willing to go comment on lightwave cause i dont know how it works either. i dont have much use for critics unless they have an idea for how to make a picture of mine better. but after my recent run in of a troll, i mean critic, i mean troll who had a piece of my work removed, i would think twice before accepting his comments without credentials or at least his trying to use this software.

TigerShark "visited" a few of my gallery images yesterday and left some "critics" as well. I have a pretty thick skin so it didn't bother me too much. But I do take offense to someone leaving constructive criticism that has no evidence of being constructive at all. Rather, it seems to be a teardown fest. I have a hard time dealing with any troll, errr, critic when they themselves have no examples (either their own (preferrably) or of others) that they deem "worthy". I mean if he is using poser at all there is no reason to have us take a look at his works is there? :-) To all those who were really offended by his comments, don't worry about it. There will always be someone in a group that harps on everything negative and get a joy from it...ho humm.. Keep Rockin' /gz

...of course I may get critiqued on my typos next :-) TigerShark "visited" a few of my gallery images yesterday and left some "critics"... critics should have been critiques. I need caffeine Keep Rockin' /gz

Well, of the 2 critiques I looked at (he did on you), it wasn't just a "ripping fest". He posted some suggestions. Doesn't sound like a troll to me.

Attached Link: http://www.purr3d.com

Go for it. I appreciate honest observation, and I use it to improve my skills. Chances are, I already know most of my shortcomings anyway. The link leads to my gallery. I'm a big fan of the 1:1 critique. Don't just say what you think could be improved. It's just as important for a person to know what they are doing right. It is also helpful, when giving critique, if you understand the tools used, so that you can make suggestions on how to improve the image, as opposed to just what is wrong or right with it. I find your grand entrance dubious at best, but I wecome honest and thoughtful critique from any source. *"Alas, it appears to be yet another clique ridden self sustaining ecology for the most part."* It can seem like that, yes. I find myself with the same opinion a lot of the time. I also take time to realise that there are a lot more people here, than those whose voices often rise above the rest. I think what most people (just my opinion based on observation)found offensive, was your bull in a china shop approach to a community of creative types, knowing full well you would be bruising some egos. That, coupled with you proclamation of professionalism, just screams arrogance; a quality that rubs most people the wrong way. Why the grandstanding? What's the point? You can send any comments you have to: momcat at purr3d dot com

All this business of someone not being able to provide constructive criticism on artwork using tools one is unfamiliar with just rubs me the wrong way. The tools involved are inconsequential. It is the skill and the art itself that matters. Your agument would imply that just because a person cannot, or does not, cook, that they are unqualified to say whether or not something tastes good, or if it needs more salt. If the comments left in fretshredders gallery are anything to go by, I'd say there was a great deal of overreacting going on. I'd like to see more of these comments, so that I can decide for myself whether or not I respectthis persons opinion.

Seems like people are confusing two kinds of criticism. One is the criticism of art as art...and for that, it is not necessary to know how the graphic is created but evaluating a graphic on the basis of any artwork. Yes, a watercolor artist can comment on a sculpture. I see no reason that an oil painter couldn't comment on a Poser graphic even if they didn't know how to turn a computer on. The other is criticism of technology. An expert at Poser will recognize that a person has done something unusual or original with a Poser graphic because of the technical difficult of doing that thing with a program that has some inherent limitations in it. What few criticisms I've seen of TigerShark's seem to perfectly fit in the first category. The ridiculous notion that only people who use Poser should be allowed to comment on Poser graphics is very narrow minded and self limiting. Just as an oil painter can learn about light and shadow from a water colorist, or form from a sculpture, a Poser artist should be able to be open to suggestions from someone coming from another point of view. But of course many people want to do basically the same graphic over and over again to the anticipated and predictable applause each time. If you only want a standing ovation, then you should say so up front on your graphics. And,of course, knowing your audience's tastes and meeting them is why the gallery has so many identical looking pictures, but originality and imagination has nothing to do with this. And if you can't take criticism, turn off the comment area. In fact, I'm going to do that now to get off this thread.

OT: Momcat - what a totally groovy site! :) (sorry, couldn't just let it pass by, lol)

Thank you! >^_^

I agree with Momcat. Now, maybe the "tone" was a little blunt but the actual criticism was actually, what seemed to me, pretty helpful.

"The best kind of criticism is to take a completed work, improve on it, and then tell what you did." - spurlock5 Once again, if you'll excuse me being pedantic, that is not criticism so much as mentoring. True criticism is not really intended to help the artist at all. It is intended to help the viewer/reader. That is certainly the case with professional criticism, it may be a bit different in practice here. But we are dealing with someone who is allegedly coming from a professional position. The best kind of criticism, as I have seen and read it, is criticism that opens up a picture to interpretations you didn't realise were there, and brings you to an awareness of the details of the structure of a work which again, may have passed you by. Of course, in the case of an artwork that is totally shallow, the critic can have nothing to say other than to point out the emptiness of it all. Even that can be informative. But this is meant for the reader, not the artist.

chuck - fretshredder is a good example - in his "Persephone" image the comments were in regards to his "perception" of the character and not in regards to the art itself. That's not an art critique that is looking for something to pick at imo. And yes momcat is totally correct it is more his approach than anything else. Momcat!! you changed your site!! Looks good!

Attached Link: http://www.derm.med.ed.ac.uk/teaching/redhairgen.htm

You're not up to date on the research. The Hittites predate the Greeks and Romans by a long shot, their civilisation went down with the end of the Bronze age, no longer existed during Classical Greece, it was contemporary with the Mycaneans, Minoans, and Bronze Age Egypt. They spoke an Indo-european language. They were the main competitor with Egypt, the 'other' superpower, if you will. Ramses II even took a wife from a Hittite king, and the Hittites were already in decline during Ramses II. Some Turks are very fair skinned, depending on where they are from, there's even a Turkish family in my very town that you couldn't tell from Germans until they start speaking Turkish. People from the Black Sea area are rather fair. So, your comment is still not accurate. Redhaired people existed in Egypt, fair skinned people existed in Egypt long before the Greeks and Romans, Ramses II's hair even tested to be red and naturally wavy. This predates the Greco-Roman age by a long shot, and you still see fairer people living in countries such as Morocco, where the population is 40 percent Berber (the original population) Genetic testing of mummies show that the people of Lower Egypt share more in common with their y chromosome markers with other Mediterreanean peoples than they do with people from subsaharan Africa. Makes sense, as all these peoples were maritime cultures and traded often, it makes sense they intermingled too. Redhaired people evolved somewhere around 50,000 years ago, and most likely, the trait evolved in Africa first. It is a genetic "defect" to have red hair, a redhaired person is lighter skinned than other family members without red hair, as most redheads lack the ability to produce eumelanin, which causes the black/brown colouration in the skin (depending on whether they got a double dose of the gene or not, will influence how strong the lack of eumelanin is, the red hair and freckles are caused by the phaeomelanin, which is red and is still produced by a redhead). So red haired people do not necessarily have to be Europeans, even though they have lighter skin. It is simply a melanin mutation. Syrians have always been portrayed as white in Egyptian art, the Syrians also predated the Greco-Roman culture, this was also in the Bronze age. Berbers STILL live in lower Egypt, and many of them have Caucasian features and lighter hair, some even with blue and hazel eyes, though they have intermixed considerably with the Arab population by now... they are not originally Arabs, they do not speak a Semitic language either. (remember, the Hyksos invaded after the Old Kingdom...) There have even been redhaired mummies found in western China. Read up... those Scythian tribes got around, with horses. Where do you think everyone miraculously got horses from, an animal native to the steppes of Asia? They didn't run to the Sahara in the Bronze age on their own power. on the other hand, black people also existed in Egypt the entire time, and there were a few obviously black dynasties as well, even during the Old Kingdom, where the blossoming of the civilisation was closer to the Sudan than to the Mediterreanean, in Upper Egypt. Though most of the pharoahs were obviously Semitic in origin, not all of them were, Ancient Egypt totally lacked our modern hangups on race and was most certainly a multi-ethnic society. Now, if you are going to critique a picture, do it on the technical problems you see, not whether some figure fits your racial stereotype of what an Egyptian should 'look' like to you. An Egyptian, even from the Old Kingdom, could have been white, brown, or black, as it was then, as it is NOW, a multi-racial and multi-ethnic society.

.

Just further - I had a look at the picture by LadySilverMage that was commented on as being "too vertical", and it seems to me that the comments complained of were very reasonable and politely expressed. The only thing wrong would seem to be that they didn't say "Awesome!" like all the others. I disagree that ivy would help the image any, but I do feel that the composition of the image isn't working as it should. And I would be inclined to note that the girl seems to be stepping into saturated copper sulfate solution rather than water. Bright blue water is a Poserism that usually comes from using ineffectual Poser water props. But when the picture goes out into the wide wide world it has to fend for itself, and people are going to say "But water doesn't LOOK like that!" But I've largely given up making comments like that, because people accuse you of being a troll just for not praising everything.

Attached Link: http://www.absolutearts.com/artsnews/2001/06/23/28746.html

and here's an article about 'gingerella' a naturally mummified redhaired Egyptian from 3200 years ago. So much about redhaired Egyptians. Of course they existed, and existed from way back. I agree Phantast about the critic about the image from Lady Silvermage, but a critic can scare off a newbie to the galleries here, and so comments have to be handled differently then. A better thing is to have a forum gallery that is expressly for comment and critique, that way people that post there have AGREED to have a critique beforehand. I'd really like to see something like that here.

Phantast - as I stated I don't personally care if all my comments are "awesome" obviously you don't know me very well lol Nor did I say he wasn't polite in his wording. My issue is that the comments on several other images were based not on art but on personal preference and that it was obvious he had intended to simply hit the galleries and critique - not to view and critique when needed but to critique all he saw with comments enabled. Some of his critiques were simply not art based but based on his perception of how it should look. That is when I became annoyed - not because of his opinion of my image but because he flooded the gallery with his opinions and that several were simply not based on the art itself. That water may indeed need work - but not reflections - I didn't like them and won't add them again now. As for the vertical nature - I make no apologies, that's what I wanted and ergo that is what I did. I often fill the backgrounds in some manner and try to soften straight lines - in this image I simply chose not to as I wanted nothing to break the vertical lines. He/you/anyone/everyone may not agree with that - doesn't matter one whit to me, it's my concept that it be vertical with only the slight diagonal of the nebulas and the slight horizontal of the cloth. That is how I saw it therefore that is what I did - no excuses needed. Anyone can disagree with my concept others may agree - but don't accuse me of preferring only positive feedback - my ego simply isn't that tender.

...and I thought was scathing back in my trolling days.