Constructive Criticism Where does one draw the line?

Chibihaku and Silk ... I still believe you can't understand. Βlues or jazz vocals are a bit rusty but still melodic please google the words . black metal , death metal , hardcore , go to youtube see videos and hear the vocals from p.e. Darkthrone or Mayhem and then you 'll see what Luka Rodina means cause I think you have never heard the music I refer ... I used to listen to such music but now I suppose I'm too old for that still I don't hold such a strong position against those species as Luca Rodina or my bel canto teacher even if I'm inclined too by my training ... but seriously hear the bands above and you'll see how naive to even compare such styles with jazz or blues ... because it's just ridiculous to compare a melodic music like jazz with a highly unmelodic one like the ones above. NONE of us said NOTHING bad about jazz ... so try both to listen Darkthrone and Mayhem black death metal and hardcore to see what we mean with unmelodic vocals and this went far too out of theme already .. (I didn't even spoke bad about unmelodic music I just said it follows different rules , and that my teacher was too strict ,so please mercy!!)
As about grunting if you realy have heard death metal "grunting". Sorry it can destroy a voice! Cause, singers will be not able to sing melodicaly ever after that ... and after some years the singer couldn't even do this grunting and is obvious in lives (in studio computers do miracles)... most singers of this style have their throat's bleeding after some years.Sooner or later every such singer will come across that. But that's enough out of theme, isn't it?
As I don't like to be put words in my mouth : my post
http://www.denofangels.com/forums/s...raw-the-line&p=8246486&viewfull=1#post8246486
Luca Rodina's post : http://www.denofangels.com/forums/s...raw-the-line&p=8250871&viewfull=1#post8250871
**(Silk Luka Rodina wants me to add that especially her never said anything bad about jazz contrary she said the same things with you about jazz please read her post linked above to see that's a misunderstanding , she still holds her position about the death/black/core etc , she won't respond to this thread)


As about the painter with the hairy armpits the think I try to explain is that If someone does it for hide something is naive, but if is p.e. a critical realist painter painting a savage woman he should make hairy armpits because in a savage situation women actually have hairy armpits and critical realism is against beautifying the truth ... saying he should beautify it is like saying to him becoming a classicist p.e. is like saying to Gustave Courbet he should paint like the salon de Paris those days demanded (google both Courbet who also used to do hairy armpits and salon de Paris)

And that's what I mean if you are not aware of the style (or here in hobby forums both style and level*) someone wants to achieve and if you lack technical knowledge you easily project your personal opinion as an absolute , {as a thesfaton - Θέσφατο}
*As about dolls someone might not even want to evolve , it's just a hobby some just want to have fun ...

Also what I said to punkyphresh is that you might give an advice and the person decides that this advice doesn't suit him/her for whatever reason, he/she thanks you and then says that for x reason I won't do that ... and so what??!!! Well your advice is ignored and the person learned there is another option to what is doing, but chooses differently(or knew this option already and by purpose avoid that) ... Personally when I give an advice, I do it to open a door, but I'm aware that it might not be the door the other seeks for, so he/she can perfectly ignore my advice ...In everything in life not only arts you might give an advice, and the advice ignored for legitimate reason or for no reason, but it's bad manner's to keep bullying someone to accept your advice no matter what, cause sometime he/she'll turn to you and say "yes you already told me that and I already said no" . Giving advice is fine but insisting in said advice when the other says he/she doesn't like that is not so cool nor kind ...

But still I can't understand such a fuss in a hobby forum , I think we make the easy things hard ...
(I won't respond again to this thread I think I already have been clear I think we just tearing apart our guts for no reason than to argue ,so peace!! )

 

Agnes Agatha - I suggest you hunt down a band called The Butterfly Effect - the lead singer switches frequently between thrash metal vocals and more traditional classical vocals. The two styles can actually exist in harmony. =)

I fully understand that one shouldn't force criticism upon someone if they don't wish to hear it. but I believe that you can still learn from areas that aren't your main focus. I might not appreciate a zombie modification on a doll, but I can still see the skill with which it was applied, and learn through reading about the techniques used how to better my own. I might not like the sound of thrash metal, but I can learn through the techniques presented how to better my own technique. ('Growly'/glottal singing is actually a technique, as much as projection or sonoral resonance. Sure, if you do it in the wrong spot you'll kill your pipes, but you can easily do that by singing outside of your range as well - read up about Australian singer Delta Goodrem who gave herself polypial cancer by singing outside of her range.)

Just because someone has a different view than you does not mean that you can't learn from that viewpoint. They shouldn't force it upon you, but neither should one dismiss someone else's opinion just because of where that opinion is coming from. This is the point I was making with my Jazz comparison, not which genre was better or worse. I learnt something from classical singing I could apply to Jazz. I could just have easily said I yodelled or did inuit throat singing (Glottal singing at it's finest!), and I learnt something from classical music. The point would have remained.

Don't try to distract from that point by jumping on the fact that I used Jazz rather than thrash metal. And please stop making assumptions about what music I have or haven't listened to.

As for critique, when someone actively is seeking critique by posting in the critique board, I am well within my rights to give my viewpoint to them - if the viewpoint is focused on helping the artist improve, offering suggestions and given in a tactful way. If they are posting outside of the critique board I will not give them critique. But as this thread deals with critique and as the DoA rules restrict critique to the critique subforum, one would assume that people who are posting there are looking to better themselves.

If someone with a limited skill level says something on the critique board along the lines of "I'm not sure if you noticed, but the eyebrows are a little wonky. Maybe you could use a masking tape guide to make them straight?" How is this any less valid an input than if someone with high skills says the same? If they choose not to accept that advice, that's their perogative, and you're right, it shouldn't be forced on them. But if they're posting in a section of a board that is designed to be a place of learning and improvement and critique, why can't they learn from someone who has differing tastes and skills to themselves, even if that learning is solely on a technical level, and not an aesthetic one?

 

@Agnes-Agatha: I wasn't talking to you, nor offended by what you wrote. There was something in the wording of Luca Rodina that struck a wrong cord. And I CAN understand what you're talking about, I have ears and have listened to the same music you were refering to before and my sister and brother in law both make metal music (although their music falls more in the progressive metal genre). But since this is not a music forum, but a doll forum, I won't go into music theoretical detail.

The problem is that if you (general) have technical know-how there's also the risk that you are opinionated, only this time it's not called having an opinion, but 'being a professional'.
In Holland, for example, we have a literary genre that's actually called 'Literature'. It's considered the highest form of prose and all other books (thrillers, but especially science-fiction, fantasy and other 'obscure' genres) are considered inferior. People think that Tolkien and Asimov are not worthy in comparison to Huxley or Mulisch. And because of this focused viewpoint, as I want to call it, books outside the literary genre are not judged fairly and disliking the literary genre is explained as having amateur taste.

Now, going back to constructive crisicism: If someone created a steampunk outfit for her doll and asks for feedback, you are not going to help her by discarding the entire fashion ... eh... genre, because you think haute couture is the only thing worth discussing. You're also not going to help her by seeping that statement through every helpful advice you're going to give her (by only giving her haute couture references, for example). The entire point of giving feedback was about helping her, not venting a professional opinion.

 

I think that's a valid point. I'm of two minds about it, though. As chibihaku says, "Fresh eyes" can see clearly that something is wrong. But the person with technical knowledge has a better grasp on what exactly the person is doing wrong and how to fix the problem.

 

I have to disagree with the notion that only seasoned professionals or those specifically educated in a subject are the only ones qualified to offer critique or an opinion. Even if someone can't offer a specific method or technique by which to fix something it's still helpful to the creator if they can point something out, even if it's simply "This seems a little off."
Just as an example, I can't draw for toffee and the extent of my education in the subject is highschool art classes but I can still tell if the anatomy in a picture is wildly wrong, even if I can't say exactly how it should be fixed, that's still something the artist themselves may not have picked up on while they where drawing as can be the case sometimes. Just because I don't have a Masters in Fine Art doesn't mean I can't form an opinion on a picture and offer a critique. I have eyes and I have an opinion, that's all the qualification a person needs to offer their crit on a piece of art.

It's the attitude that you absolutely must be knowledgeable in a subject to offer an opinion on it that really discourages people from offering critiques. And that's really kind of saddening. Sure a person who has more technical knowledge can offer more technical help on how to fix something but that doesn't make someone's critique less valid if they're only able to say "That looks off to me."

 

I agree with River, when a person asks for critique of their work they are just as likely to get good advice from an "amateur" as a professional artist. Art isn't just about technique so why should it be the province of the technically brilliant? (or merely proficient!)

That goes for music just as much as the visual arts, a piece can be technically correct but lacking in passion or feeling and leave the viewer/listener completely unmoved. To my mind, the person asking for critique is also free to listen to every piece of advice and then disregard them all if nothing rings true. We all have to follow our own head in the end.

 

I agree! But sometimes a fellow-student who's just learnt how to do something is the very best person to explain it to others. A great scholar who taught at Oxford and Cambridge Universities wrote once how schoolchildren were sometimes better at showing each other how some problem in maths or language was done than their teachers. It wasn't that the teachers were bad, but schoolchildren had a very lively sense of what puzzled other schoolchildren -- something that teachers couldn't always be expected to know.

 

Or you could take Professor Stephen Hawking as an example too. He wrote a brief history of time to explain his theories to the layman and later realised that it was still way to complex to be understood by a large number of those who read it. So he then wrote a simplified version... which he is rumoured to now think is too simple!

Being an expert doesn't automatically make a person a brilliant communicator (not in any way indicating Hawking now!) or empathetic toward the person asking for help. The same will be true on the Critique forum. As has been mentioned earlier, there are so many ways for meaning to get lost when people can't communicate face to face. The person asking for help may simply misunderstand the advice they are being offered and the commenter may have completely misunderstood what the poster is needing help with.

I don't think any of these considerations should stop people asking for crits or give pause to those brave souls who offer it. In an ideal world the critique forum would be less of a squee-fest and those asking for help wouldn't be fobbed off with a pat on the head either. I'm sure many of those who post do so because they genuinely want advice so that they can improve whatever they are asking about. Honest, straightforward un-biased critique is what will help them, simple as that.

 

I'm always more flattered when little kids say something nice about my work than when adults do (so far, kids have commented on my drawing and guitar playing) because at 2-5 years old, they usually don't know how to say things just to be polite - if they say they like something, I know they really like it, and it feels amazing! A two year old dancing has been my favourite reaction to my music yet.

Speaking of music, when did this become the singing technique forum? I know there's a connection since we're talking about critique, but it becomes tenuous at best when going so far into genre comparisons. Not that a little off-topic chat bothers me, I just find it amusing...

Going back to critique and trained/untrained opinions - when it comes to giving advice about technique, then yes, a trained eye is valuable. But one need not be trained to know what "looks right." Let's face it, if you're in an artistic field, you're usually not trying to sell your work to other artists. You're trying to reach the general public. So you should listen to what they have to say.

 

Oh, I don't think only trained professionals are qualified to offer critique. They might just be in a better position to offer pointers on how to fix the problem, that's all. That doesn't mean professional critique is better or more valid.

That said, if you are an amateur and a professional gives you a pointer, you're wasting a good opportunity if you don't at least consider what he/she says.

 

If it's possible to get both perspectives, I like to get both a 'qualified' and an 'unqualified' critique. Somebody with technical expertise can tell me specifically what I did wrong and what the appropriate fix for it is. But an educated layperson or "armchair enthusiast"-- i.e. someone who's been looking at dolls for years, despite never having attended art school or done a faceup-- can still tell me whether something does/doesn't work, at-a-glance, and can often articulate exactly what's bothering them about it without knowing the mechanics.

It's like having your writing critiqued in a workshop or by a professor, vs. hearing a critique from an avid reader who has really good critical-reading skills; both can be equally valid on different grounds.

And, sometimes, the expert is too focussed to see the forest through the trees, & the layperson may give you a better overall/general critique.

Luckily for the Critique subforum, DOA is full of both types. ^^

(On the OT about singing + longevity, a PS: dear ol' Barney from Napalm Death is still touring and bellowing after 30 years, but isn't Celine Dion retired? ...)

 

Of course, I wasn't suggesting otherwise. Just that 'amateur' critique has it's place too.

 

About the singing thing: Oops! My bad! I hate having my arguments misrepresented and I can kinda get carried away. -_-;;;

I do strongly believe that there is a place for both technique from amatuers and critique from professionals. The reciever of the critique has to be willing to listen to the advice of others even if they don't use that advice. There's been stuff I've done for effect (Having a doll without eyelashes - he still doesn't, and never will) but the advice I got about eyelashes helped me in the future when I did paint dolls with eyelashes.

It's important for a commentator to read and understand what the person looking for critique was wanting. If they need clarification, they should ask for it, rather than just assuming that this is what someone means. It's important also for the person looking for critique to be open to advice, even advice that they may not eventually use. =)

 

I didn't read through the thread, but now I see what happened. At first, I thought they were serious, but then I read through more of it, and it made sense.

 

Well, a lot of the time people receive a whole bunch of contradictory advice and opinions, and, bar going into parallel realities, they couldn't follow all of it however hard they tried. One person says I like everything about this face-up except the eyebrows. The next person says no, no, no, the eyebrows are the ONLY good thing about it.

I think your art-school example is very useful, but it differs a bit from what we have here since the student has paid (quite a lot) for the tuition and is in a formal education setting. It's usually clear who the most experienced person is (the teacher). So most students will consider the pennies they've spent and probably at least want to consider what the art teacher (the most experienced person) says.

Our critique board here is more like writing groups who meet semi-formally and include people with lots of experience and people with none. Everyone is heard equally. Everyone to some extent is going off at an angle from everyone else. A lot of it is contradictory and exactly who is experienced and who isn't may not be clear at first glance. In this situation the newbie writer who brings their work to be critiqued will take the advice that makes sense to them and offers them a way forward in their development as a writer. A member of the group might be able to explain how to turn their first attempt into a novel to rival War and Peace, but if the explanation makes no sense to the newbie writer, or that's not what they want, then they'll quite rightly follow someone else's suggestion.

Developing as a writer or artist is rarely about logic, it's about feeling your way forward. The unconscious mind plays a bigger role than the conscious mind. If someone at the back of the room says something about your work and it gels with you -- it feels right -- that's what you go with. It might be inarticulate and, to everyone else, a complete non-sequitur. It doesn't matter. It makes sense on some sort of level to you and you're perfectly justified in rejecting a ton of well-argued, well-thought out critique in favour of it.

To bring it back down to a more practical level, I recently posted a couple of wigs on the critique board just to see what people said. I'd worked on them but I didn't really have any standard to judge them by -- I'd never made any wigs before and they aren't much like any wigs I've seen round the forum.

In a way I wasn't really asking "are they good?" -- I could see certain faults and problems for myself. I was really asking "are they wigs? Am I completely off track here? Have I made something or nothing at all?" I think this is a reasonably common question for a complete beginner, though the beginner may not realise it. They may phrase the question as "Is this any good?" because that's the question you're supposed to ask. But what they're really asking is: is this a face-up?; is this a painting?; is this a piece of writing?

It explains why beginners sometimes seem overjoyed simply to hear their work discussed -- it's the affirmation that this is a face-up, this is a piece of writing, this is painting. The worst thing you can do to a beginner is to suggest that no, it isn't.

 

psammed - that was really excellently phrased and thought out. I can certainly see your reasoning and I do agree that people do listen to what makes sense, and what they 'feel' is right. Especially in the case of people just starting out.

Does there come a point though, where the newbie creator is no longer a newbie and cannot just listen to advice that pleases them?