Ok, first of all, I do apologize if this topic is a dead horse... I don't seem to be very good friends with the search function though, so I'm going to ask anyway :)

I'm new to the site and was quite surprised at how civil and polite people are here when commenting on images in the gallery. It's rare to see any kind of critique at all. I try to offer constructive criticism when I can, but I'm afraid I might offend people by doing that since it doesn't seem to be the norm... do I have that backwards or what do you people feel?

I troll another board where people can request different levels of C/C from 1 to 5 (1 being "be nice, please" to 5 being "every little flaw will be mentioned") and it seems to really help the artists, as other people might notice things they don't think about themselves as well as offering new ways of improving the image. I'm aware there is the option to focus it on critical comments here as well, but I've never seen anyone choose that option (it's easy to miss too).

Personally I enjoy getting C/C, as I'm still a complete Poser newbie, so it can be extremely helpful.

Anyways, was just wondering what the consensus is here. Thanks for your time :)

In the galleries most things are 'nice' although there's the occasional constructive comment. Once in a while you even see a bit of de-constructive criticism [grin]. I encourage people to post images in the Forum when they genuinely want constructive criticism. That allows them to indicate how constructive they want the criticism, what specific areas (if any) they may want help in, and interact with those who reply. It also gives them a chance to 'know' those that are replying - they can look through the forum posts and get a sense of where the 'critic' is coming from.

do I give criticism?

no. you see round here, criticism of any type is often construed as a personal attack which calls forth abuse on the criticiser and in the fact the TOS round here forbids any real criticism (see personal attacks) ... so I just don't comment anymore... it's not worth the trouble it generates.

Thanks for the input! I will be careful not to be too critical then :)

Fact is comments are given on the basis of how many people you know and "talk" to round here!

If you have a lot of contacts here you will get a lot of comments [ususally nice ones].

If you comment on peoples work, then they will most likely reciprocate and do the same to you!

There are exceptions to this of course, the amazingly talented artist will always get lots of comments [mostly].

I have seen many, many images here that have few or no comments at all, but are better than other images that have 30+ comments, that's just how it is round here!

Oh! and to answer your question, No I don't, I did it once to someone I thought needed it and I got slammed for it even though there was a "stand out" flaw in the image. Nobody had mentioned it, just gushing praise like you have seen.

If I see or don't like something then I'll just click the little "x" and move on!

Just like thefixer said, it's pretty hard to give constructive criticism in the galleries without getting slapped down.  Usually, if I spot a flaw that I think needs to be fixed I'll IM the artist but even that doesn't insulate me from reprisals so I don't comment much any more.  I used to, a lot, but not now.

it's a big mistake to give anything but approval to a gallery image here. criticism is usually interpreted as trolling, and to be fair, it often consists of negative comments that are unhelpful, sometimes extremely so.

There is now an option at gallery upload which gives you the choice of asking for critical comments, all types of comments, or nice-and-fluffy only. This option is there with the intention of guiding viewers into leaving crits where they will be appreciated.

Personally I went back through my gallery and changed it all to "critical comments preferred."

You can see just above the comments field what the artist has selected so you can let this guide you.

A note on the TOS: considering we now have this guide, we are far LESS minded to remove harsh crits if someone cries about them, unless they selected the fluffy bunnies option. There is a big difference between constructive critique and personal attacks: "I'm not sure about the lighting - maybe less pink would give this a better feel" is fine, but "omg this rilly sucks you looser" is definitely going to get removed ;-)

"Constructive criticism.. do you do it?"

Yes. But never in the galleries. I do it in the "Art Theory" forum, when someone asks for C/C, or in any of the other forums I visit (again, when someone asks).

I don't visit the galleries at all. I don't view them (except when somone gives a link for C/C in a forum thread) and I don't upload to them. (I'll not give reasons why that is so.)

If I'm having problems with a WIP, I'll post a pic in the relevant forum(s), and ask for C/C there.

IMHO, there's not enough of that goes on here, but then that's life.

I'm not a professional artist. I do have a reasonable aesthetic sense. Sometimes I can provide possible solutions to something in a pic that "looks wrong" to me. And if I spot something that looks wrong, I'll point it out, and if possible provide a method of improvement.

But never in the galleries...

Cheers,
Diolma

(I know - too much info, but anyway...)

Yes. But never in the galleries. I do it in the forums when someone asks. 

To me a gallery is a place to show what you've done, and not a place for someone to come in and give you suggestions of what they feel you did "wrong" or what they would have done.

Art is a subjective experience unique to each individual and and who am I to say what is or isn't "right" when it comes to making art?  I know what I like to make, I know what looks nice to my eye, and I know what "I would do", but that doesn't make what I do right and what others do wrong....just different.

when someone ask's...you bet!

but i think it's all in how you say it. you can still be constructive and supporting at the same time, it sometimes can be a juggling (sp?) act though! lol!

i will not troll the galleries and critique, but while trolling if i see something well done i will comment.

what would you want? personally, i don't want peps saying, "ohhh, that's great!" when they really think, "the lighting is sub-par". how else are we to learn as artist's? a comment is just someone else's point of view...nothing more. some really know what they are talking about and some just, well....

OK.   I heard this story somewhere.   An English academic gets a sabbatical at a Spanish university.   He is sitting in the Spanish university library, more or less underneath a sign that translates, "Library Users Are Requested To Refrain from Smoking".   A few feet away, a Spaniard is puffing away like The Flying Scotsman.   Englishman draws Spaniard's attention to the sign and Spaniard, with impeccable logic, points out that smoking is not  forbidden, merely discouraged.   I am reminded of this story when I see

**The artist of this image has indicated the following preference for comments

**That doesn't mean, as it stands, "Negative comments are forbidden", but merely, "The artist would be happier, if you kept your negative comments to yourself".   I think the wording should be more precise, if comments are liable to be deleted for causing upsets.

I think I have been on both sides of this argument.   I criticized a picture which had been copiously gushed over but really wasn't much good and I was immediately attacked by somebody  for my audacity.      That is Arnold Schoenberg's logic:  persuade people that one is a genius and they will be intimidated from expressing their natural criticism;  in this case, "Schoenberg" could leave the work to a loyal footsoldier..   My criticism was actually intended to be light-hearted, although it was entirely valid (they really did look like gigantic Wine Gums);  just as well I didn't say what the rest of the picture made me think.   Anyway, I suppose that that makes me a perpretrator of heartless critiques, as well as a victim of the Pavement Praetorians.   

as to giving them; only things I myself can see that can be fixed. If I know how, I may include how.
Always framed as constructive criticism, and encouragement to keep going.

As to receiving them; it's a consequence of being good enough to be pushed to get better..;) You can tell me I suck, but ya gotta tell me why..;)

spelling and grammatical errors are one of the freebie enjoyments..most of those I keep to myself..;)

wait a bit - wasn't it schoenberg who invented the 12-tone idiom? if so, he musta been a genius :lol:

OK, that's "genius" spelled "F-R-A-U-D".

Quote - OK.   I heard this story somewhere.   An English academic gets a sabbatical at a Spanish university.   He is sitting in the Spanish university library, more or less underneath a sign that translates, "Library Users Are Requested To Refrain from Smoking".   A few feet away, a Spaniard is puffing away like The Flying Scotsman.   Englishman draws Spaniard's attention to the sign and Spaniard, with impeccable logic, points out that smoking is not  forbidden, merely discouraged.   I am reminded of this story when I see

**The artist of this image has indicated the following preference for comments

**That doesn't mean, as it stands, "Negative comments are forbidden", but merely, "The artist would be happier, if you kept your negative comments to yourself".   I think the wording should be more precise, if comments are liable to be deleted for causing upsets.  

As Karen stated earlier, with the new choice for artists to choose whether or not they want constructive criticism or just "Ooohs" and "Aaahs", we are less likely to spend 30% of our time answering IM's and emails from site members who are just so upset that they can't stand it that someone said that there was a better way to tweak the lighting.  While we never really changed or deleted obvious good CC, if it was borderline or obviously attacking, we did. 

i'll be honest with you all here. i posted what i posted earlier and then went and trolled the galleries and was writing some comments and i found myself writing in a critique along with my handful of encouragment. because in my mind, when i first viewed the picture that (the critique)  is what stood out to me...artistically, as i viewed the image/scene.

i don't know. it's not that i have thick skin, but i would rather you be honest with me than to think you "had to" say something in particular just to post.

i just saw this great pic in the poser fanasty gallery and was writing a comment on it about some skin highlights, as i thought they were too strong/shiny and kind of detracted (for me) from the overall scene a little...but all in all it was a great scene. and i stopped writing because i remembered this thread. so i didn't post. so is that what you want?

i really only post when it's something i like. so if a "comment" comes along with 4 bear hugs...it's all good!

I think this is an OK dead horse to beat. I often pause when I'm about to lay a crit on somebody who already has 8 gushing comments of extreme approval and impressedness. I figure I'm going to look like a jerk. Still, I usually give crits on technique, not the art, and only if I have a solution I'm sure about. If somebody posts an ugly fat guy in vinyl pants, okee dokee, I say nothing about the artistic choices. But if he has "nostril glow", then I usually say something like:

"Interesting render. I couldn't help noticing, though, that your character has Poser nostril glow. You can fix that, if you like. Here's a link where I explain how ..." followed by the link. Of course, by "interesting" I meant, "ewwww, why did you waste your time?"

Acadia wrote: "Art is a subjective experience unique to each individual and and who am I to say what is or isn't "right" when it comes to making art?"

I totally agree with that. However, if somebody is posting a render under the "Realism" category, and the render has a photo background with shadows going a different direction than the rendered ones, I say so. Or, here's another super pet peeve for me, somebody posts a Poser 6 picture with reflective water in it, and they didn't use refraction, and the figure standing in the water looks like they are standing in blue smoke, not water. Usually this is not the artists "artistic intention", so I try to help them find out how to use refraction.

My 2 cents.

Oh hell, while I'm whining :) Here's another gallery thing that drives me nuts. I see "constructive" crits like this "I think the spectacular light could be softened a bit." Jeez this drives me nuts! The word is SPECULAR not SPECTACULAR.

Write it down: S P E C U L A R

I'm no artist and never claimed to be. I'm a software engineer. I just enjoy the process of computer graphics - I got nothing to say with my renders other than "look at what I made my PC do, bwaahaahaa!".

Then one day, somebody posted a comment in my gallery, something like: "beautiful art"

And there you go, I'm now an artist. PFPFFPPFPFPPT

The main problem is Picasso telling Rembrandt what's wrong with his painting will only tell Rembrandt how Picasso would paint the picture...but Rembrandt doesn't want to do a Picasso...Rembrandt wants to do a Rembrandt.

Most serious constructive critiques tell one artist how another artist would render the picture. Even if it's well intended it's pretty much wasted UNLESS the posting artist expl;ains what her/his goal is with the render and the critiques are about achieving THAT stated goal (not what THEY would do with it).

99% of the critiques, even hardcore well-intentioned critiques, are a waste because they are not focused on what the artist is trying to achieve.

I also think the clique thing is perfectly okay. For some artists, this whole Poser thing is more about being part of a community than trying to be the next Norman Rockwell. Just because someone uses Poser or some art application doesn't mean their goal is OUR goal. In this too I think we project our artistic values on others just as we do when we comment.

Artists have to tell us what kind of help/interaction they want or our efforts to aid them are a waste of each others time...

in my opinion

Well I do check the box to get all comments. I want constructive comments and usually copy/past them to my notepad for later reviewing. Do I offer critiques? well not often. If I see somethig I know could be improved, I'll say so in a polite way. Do I only comment on those who return comments? No. I often surf two or three galleries and look over all the work. If I see something of interst i check it out and leave a comment.

I think I understand a bit better now and I'll definitely not offer CC unless the artist specifically asks for it.

Even if most people have the "both critical and non-critical comments are welcome" tag on, I suppose that's just because it's on by default and not because they really want critical comments.

Thanks for all the input!

I don't browse the galleries often, and I rarely comment unless a render really reaches out and grabs me. When I do, it's generally more on the feeling that the image brought out as I was viewing...and occasionally if I see something off I might mention that too, but only if I know a way to fix/adjust it.

I just remember critique day in sculpture class....my instructor and I never got along when looking at someone else's piece, and I think it is in part of each person (even unintentionally) projecting themselves into the work. That's what a part of it is...I fell I can't very well comment on something I don't know or haven't experienced.

I leave my settings at both critical and non-critical comments are welcome because otherwise I'd probably get none at all (ha ha)...and I don't get all that many to start with. (goes for views as well...I must be doing something wrong...=P ) If someone just wants to gush fluffy bunnies all over me, I won't stop them. At the same time, I welcome people to say "did you think about trying this?" or "This/that works, but how about trying this?"

I rarely comment, I only give crits to those people  that I know can take them and those are generally of the nice kind. Anything more and I am yelled at via PM. Even with the new guidelines I doubt many people would deal well with an art school crit here.

Quote - I rarely comment, I only give crits to those people  that I know can take them and those are generally of the nice kind. Anything more and I am yelled at via PM. Even with the new guidelines I doubt many people would deal well with an art school crit here.

I had typed up a post a few times but couldn't articulate my thoughts well enough to submit it.  However you raised the issue that I wanted to comment on, so I'm going to try again :)

Here is the standard definition of "gallery" where art is concerned:

Definition of (art) Gallery:

• a room or series of rooms where works of art are exhibited

Where the galleries here are concerned there seems to be a divided consensus as to their purpose.

1.  There are those who consider it a place for them to showcase their art and accomplishments (see standard definition of  "art gallery");

2.  There are those who look to it as more of a school setting for learning.  This can be further broken down into 2 categories:

• The gallery "owner"  who are learning and post their work looking  for people to tell them what they got right or what they got wrong;

• The viewer:  who visit  for their own enjoyment and learning and to get ideas.

1.   And there are some who consider it both #1 and #2.

Then there is the wonderful "Comments Box" that lends itself to even more confusion. Again, different people view its purpose differently:

• Some consider it more of a "guest book"

• Some consider it a place to leave gushes and praise

• Some  see "comments" and feel compelled to leave a  "critique" of  what they would have done instead, or to point out what they perceive as flaws

A clash occurs when the 2 different views come together.

Regarding "Constructive Criticism" (aka complaint):

The goal in constructive criticism is to critique an individual so they will benefit or improve.

A person giving this criticism has to genuinely feel it is important to give it. The person receiving the criticism must have some level of understanding of your role, and understand that you truly want them to improve.  The latter is harder to achieve as quite often the person "critiquing" is unknown to the artist. 

Also, criticism is usually better received in private so that the person on the receiving end isn't embarrassed and  made to feel inadequate in front of their peers.

Plus there is an art to giving criticism.  It's important to give a compliment first (say what you liked about the image). It's important to never point figures (never use "You"). It's important to never make the person justify themselves (never ask "Why" they did something). Give your opinion and offer a potential solution.

Too many people are quick to criticize, but don't offer a potential solution.

That was a very nicely written and easy to understand post. I do have one observation though. It appeared that "Constructive Criticism" was equated with "complaint." I'm not sure that's quite accurate. As you point out, the goal in constructive criticism is to benefit the person recieving it. However, the goal of a complaint is usually to benefit the one who is complaining. It's possible that you used that term as a reference to how constructive criticism is sometimes received in the galleries rather than directly attempting to correlate the two. --- Part of the problem is that the term 'criticism' has a strong emotional content. Objectively it means the same as "evaluate." One can evaluate something and think it's totally awesome. However, the emotional connotation of the word criticism is very negative so even when one has the best of intentions (and think the piece is totally awesome) if that term is used it can stimulate a negative response.

Acadia, I went to art school and a lot of that was taught to us and I try to do that but it jsut seems most people here want the gushing and praising even if they say they want crits.

I think the "complaint" is what the person with the picture sees the crits in her example but I am not sure.

Quote - It appeared that "Constructive Criticism" was equated with "complaint."

It essentially is a complaint. If you look in a thesaurus, you will find the following alternative words for "Criticize":

• disapproval
• flak
• bad press
• quibble
• fault finding
• carping
• niggling
• nitpicking
• pestering
• nagging
• pan
• knock
• slam
• snipe at.

"Constructive Criticism" makes it sound "softer" than what it really is.  Which is why there is an art to presenting it so that it doesn't come across so harshly.

Quote - TPart of the problem is that the term 'criticism' has a strong emotional content. Objectively it means the same as "evaluate." One can evaluate something and think it's totally awesome. However, the emotional connotation of the word criticism is very negative so even when one has the best of intentions (and think the piece is totally awesome) if that term is used it can stimulate a negative response.

Precisely!

The thesaurus is reflecting how the term is commonly used - including it's negative connotation. A dictionary (www.dictionary.com for example) will include it's more objective meaning as I described. However, that's getting into word semantics - which is not necessary for this discussion. We appear to agree on the main point. Precisely! ;-)

Quote - Acadia, I went to art school and a lot of that was taught to us and I try to do that but it jsut seems most people here want the gushing and praising even if they say they want crits.

Yes, that is what some people want.

For me personally I consider the gallery a place for me to post what I've done.  Once it's up there I consider it finished and will only remove it and replace it to fix a flaw in it.  I spend a great amount of time on my art and pay close attention to detail, or try to.  Sometimes I fail in that though and miss something like fingers digging into a dress, hehe

-If you like it, by all means tell me.
-If you hate it, by all means tell me, but don't be rude, but please tell me why you hate it.
-If you notice something like fingers digging into a dress or other such flaws, tell me.
-If it evoked a certain emotion from you,  I'd like to hear what it was. I create my art with a lot of emotion and feeling.
-If you have a suggestion on how I could improve the lighting (my bane), please tell me.
-If the image seems imbalanced, please tell me, but also tell me in what way and offer a potential solution.

• if the image seems pixelated, let me know.
• if I failed at achieving the soft focus camera look, tell me, but also tell me how to go about doing it right.
• are my camera distances screwy? Tell me, but offer a solution.

What I'm not  interested in hearing is what you would have done instead (IE different shadows, different figure, different colour, different car/boat etc).  It's my image so it doesn't matter to me what you would have done in my place.

Art is subjective. I know when I make something I make it to please my eye. It's impossible to make everyone happy, so all I set out to do when I create something is to make me happy. If others happen to like it after the fact, that's just a bonus to me.

I am all for improving my technique, and am very open to people helping me learn better ways to do things like lighting or glowing effect or softer looks or a post worked effect etc.  It's how we learn and grow and get better.

As Karen stated earlier, with the new choice for artists to choose whether or not they want constructive criticism or just "Ooohs" and "Aaahs", we are less likely to spend 30% of our time answering IM's and emails from site members who are just so upset that they can't stand it that someone said that there was a better way to tweak the lighting.  While we never really changed or deleted obvious good CC, if it was borderline or obviously attacking, we did.

You're missing the point and so has Acadia, as it happens.   The assumption seems to be that "criticism" is, by definition, derogatory.   It isn't.   Criticism can be favourable or unfavourable, positive or negative.   (The root of the word is the Greek adjective "kritikos", meaning "capable of discernment". )  Someone who welcomes criticism is laying himself or herself open to either good or bad comment, or both.   This is pretty obvious:  if  "theatre critics" or "film critics" only ever delivered negative verdicts, they 'd never make it into the auditorium.   The moderators are removing comments from the galleries, justifying their action by the wording of the comments' when the criteria governing comments in the galleries are ineptly phrased, to put it mildly.  I can sympathize with your not wanting to spend so much of your time responding to complaints, but more intelligent expression would probably assist with that.

"Criterion", like "criticism" is a neutral word from the Greek "krinein" meaning "to judge, decide".

For the record, "thesauros / thesaurus" meant "treasury", before it acquired its modern meaning of a book scribbled in a hurry by a short-of-cash academic who is too thick  to compile a proper dictionary.

The moderators are removing comments from the galleries, justifying their action by the wording of the comments' when the criteria governing comments in the galleries are ineptly phrased, to put it mildly.

What kind of comments do you think we're removing?

The vast majority of comments that get pulled are gems such as this (and these are all true, I swear, and this is the whole comment, not an excerpt.) I've deleted the expletives for the faint of heart ;-)
*keep your mouth shut slut
**If I made a piece of ****ing **** like this. I'd ***ing kill myself!
*Its amazing how you can get these morons to say they like anything you put up here!
*You're still a constipated **** even if you did change your avatar.
*What's great about this??
*Not even flies like **** like this.
*Stupid white men!
**You still trying to peddle this *ing **** to people? You ing talentless mother.

Ah yes, Karen...I had one, and only one, such comment on an image of mine and the moderator deleted it. The person who put it there did the same thing to many other artists the same evening. I am glad it was removed. But never has a constructive comment been removed. And never have I taken a constructive comment the wrong way.

LOL ....priceless comments :-)

Fine, but, firstly, your colleague was hardly making that clear.   Secondly, I'm sure that that sort of thing would be removed and has always been removed as a matter of course (I certainly hope so) and I absolutely don't envy your job of having to do that.   The fact remains that that really isn't what this thread is about, as, I think (or hope, anyway), you know very well.   It's about honest criticism, where the intention is to help the owner of the posted image to improve his/her results, or at the minimum, to point out genuine flaws (or, conversely, to praise things that deserve praise - as I said, criticism works in both directions).   Plain abuse has always been unacceptable and I can't see how the new text has changed that.

Sorry morgano, but I must be missing your point.

We don't remove critique unless it violates TOS.

It is possible (though unusual) for a comment to be both critique and personal attack: "Maybe you should have added some ground shadows, ****-for-brains!" comes to mind...

Maybe they should program the site to ignore the asterisk key so people could no longer use that kind of language. [grin]

LOL Bobasaur.
I usually have to go back and censor myself, because I've got a mouth that's filthier than a dockhand's handkerchief.

well don't hold back, tell me how you really feel..;)

cool! ;-)