draculaz ( My point, I guess, is that there is more to art than it being just in the eye of the beholder ) I disagree with that, without the eye of the beholder art is basically useless except for the creator, who may of released some stress or anxiety or expressed some emotion while creating it. But the real pleasure the artist receives is when they view their finished work ( eye of the beholder ). Without the eye of the beholder art has no real value. It stirs no emotion or it tells no stories. The beauty about art is one artist painstakingly precisely applies every brush stroke to the canvas, and another walk up and splatters some paint on a canvas. One might become rich and famous and one might starve to death. All depending on the eye of the beholder. My point is, from the days of cave drawings to this age of digital technology. Art always has been and always will be dependent on the eye of the beholder. As for people critiquing and comparing work with ones, you may not feel aren't worthy, or as good. All I can say is, get used to it, because that's part of being an artist.

Stephen Ray