O

[Enzie Shahmiri]

I have noticed that over the last months, participation in the forum has dwindled and I find this phenomena rather sad. As I read the reasons given by visitors why they are not signing up and the reasons given by the moderators why they refuse to comment, it leaves me wondering what has happened to this once bustling, friendly place where artists exchanged information and learned from each other.

Maybe it is time we find a common ground of appreciation and gratitude for knowledge offered and an understanding and tolerance for individualism, different ways of expression and different speeds of learning. After all, is it not fun to see how even portraiture has evolved into different styles? Exchange and change are factors that make art an evolving entity necessary to avoid a static existence!

I hope I don't have to start looking for the 'Salon des Refus

[Richard Bingham]

Enzie, this "dwindling" isn't something unique to this forum. For many years, I noticed heavy traffic on a few of the fora where I liked to read. During this period, I made a number of "online" acquaintances, availed myself of a wider range of materials sources, and traded "blows" with some good and knowledgeable folks on the subjects of aesthetics, materials, methods of working, market conditions, and approaches to painting, and it was interesting and worthwhile.

I'm now far less likely to "leap into the breach", because participating on internet fora has become something of a "been there, done that, bought the tee-shirt" sort of thing for me. I think we'll eventually cycle out of the doldrums though, and interesting, vital correspondence will return to these and other boards.

[Enzie Shahmiri]

Hi Richard,

What does "doldrums" mean? I am not familiar with that term. You do make a good point about "having been there and done that" and I agree that is also a contributing cause.

Steven brought up a great point under Visitors Polls:

The ideal would be for a larger body of qualified members to accept a kind of apprenticeship relationship with the lesser accomplished -- something that is actually highly instructional for both parties. That might be accomplished through greater membership numbers, but the question, really, is how to successfully rally the current membership to contribute more. If every member committed to one critique per month, the site activity would skyrocket.

1. Who would determine who should be the qualified member to critique?
2. Would there be an open voting for your 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice in a poll format?
3. Could one ask to be the apprentice to a given person?
4. Maybe there should be two critiquers for every new post, maybe one from the Seasoned Pro section and one from the Pro section
5. Should critiquers be a different person than moderators? (asked, simply because of work overload)


I find when too many people critique, especially if they work in a different style, it can become rather confusing, especially if you are just starting out.

[Steven Sweeney]

Enzie, this doesn't address the "bigger issues," but as to who is entitled to critique, any member is free to offer his or her observations. Cynthia does have a notice that critiques might be coming from relative beginners as well as long-time practitioners. It's a bit of a "caveat emptor" -- Buyer Beware -- situation. We all have to take critiques for what they are, an opinion, more or less informed. Some opinions are worth more than others. Some members are inextricably glued to a practice or philosophy and will endure no others in their presence and will take up arms reflexively against heathen-horde schools of thought.

Sometimes the long-time practitioner is the one who says something that I don't agree with! I've often written that I don't often critique on composition, because my personal preference is for a rather nontraditional, slightly unbalanced composition. I think, though, that it would be a disservice for me to insist that anyone else adhere to my preference. In such an instance, a relative beginner's observations may well trump mine.

Again, the artist whose work is being considered has to accept the critique in a professional manner. Leaping into the path of perceived darts and arrows isn't productive.

When I broached the matter of an apprenticeship approach, I was intending to speak more to an attitude rather than a program. The fact is, mentors are few and far between in any pursuit. Most of us have to wing it.

[Steven Sweeney]

Originally Posted by Enzie Shahmiri

5. Should critiquers be a different person than moderators? (asked, simply because of work overload)

I think the role of moderator was never intended to be one of responsibility for instruction and critique. That happened rather by default and, dare I suggest, generosity in wanting to get the Forum off to a sound start.

This can't be a communal effort without participation by the community. It's too often like a barn raising at which only 12 of the promised 56 workers showed up.

But if the barn isn't a piece of art, about 44, at least, will make notes and let the 12 know of their blueprint for changes.

The 12 are becoming weary.

[Richard Bingham]

Steven, that was a perfect analogy.

Some things that make it really wearing for "The 12":

1. Answering the same basic questions repeatedly (e.g. - "can I thin my paint with gasoline? I don't like the smell of turpentine.") Doesn't this site have a search function?
2. Queries from people who want neither information nor instruction, who are only seeking affirmation for what they are already doing.
3.Gainsaying by "other experts" who believe there is only One True Way to paint, and they own it, and any deviation from methods they espouse is intolerable.

[Mischa Milosevic]

Richard you took the words right out of my mouth (1,2,3). Thank you!

I am of the opinion that a starving/striving artist are the same person and deserve the same attention when critiques are concerned. I admit that some of the things I say, when critiquing someones work, is not a 100% correct a 100% percent of the time. Still, I accept my shortcomings, in stride, and do my best to give individuals sound advice, advice that has been passed on to me bu reputable artists/teachers.

I have heard Mr. "G" American artist, deceased recent years, say that he went back to Paxton for two years in order to study drawing because his drawing was average.

Many artists of today have the notion that it is all about painting and the drawing will come automatic. This is like putting the cart in front of the horse. I toss this out being that many reputable artists critique and encourage this practice. Even when someone is painting it is still about drawing and color/values.

Sure it is important to work from life, especially when portraits are in question, but some have a difficult time with this fact, for what ever reason, and all they have is photos. Some do not have a talent but have a strong desire. Do you just brush them aside? NO! I believe that everyone should have a chance but they should be encouraged to practice sound techniques especially in drawing. If the drawing is sound one can use any color and make a face look fantastic. I believe that the impressionist and the movements of that time have done a grave injustice by branding academic studies as evil. It is not the studies that were evil it was the monopoly that brings things to not. I truly believe that this was the fight of that time, the impressionists.

I am of the opinion that everyones work should be critiqued, pro or not, before it should go to unveilings section. Why? First because even a pro can fall in love with the work and will miss some critical points that can present his/her work in a bad way. Second, a pro can benefit from such a critique. Third, another artist can benefit as well from such critiques, most artists make similar mistakes. The list is endless.

All can take part in the critique section and this is good and this can be humbling. When I was at the academy one of the instructors came to me and gave me a critique. I accepted the critique and moved the entire eye 3mm towards the nose. After the eye was moved I realized that it was not the eye that needed adjusting rather the nose needed the attention. It took two such critiques before I realized that it was up to me to way the information offered. Now when accepting a critique one is to test, check, think before moving a eye, nose etc.

Please excuse me if I have discouraged anyone by my comments it is never my intention to do such a thing. I stand to be corrected on any point and offer my thoughts only towards the positive.

Thank you for taking the time.

I wish you nothing but the best

[Enzie Shahmiri]

Posted by Steven: When I broached the matter of an apprenticeship approach, I was intending to speak more to an attitude rather than a program. The fact is, mentors are few and far between in any pursuit. Most of us have to wing it.

Well program or attitude, the idea remains the same, to take someone under one's wing and help them progress in their skills. I agree with both of you that having to repeat the same issues over and over is a tired some affair, but that's what a mentor does. The students change, but the subject remains the same.

I was only throwing out some ideas and actually getting off track about what I really wanted to address.

Posted by Steven: I think the role of moderator was never intended to be one of responsibility for instruction and critique. That happened rather by default and, dare I suggest, generosity in wanting to get the Forum off to a sound start.

I totally agree. I think our moderators have been more than generous with their time and I also believe that some fatigue has set in due to the 1st mentioned reason. I agree that more people need to step forward and participate in the critique section. But I don

[Enzie Shahmiri]

Misha.

am of the opinion that every ones work should be critiqued, pro or not, before it should go to unveiling section. Why? First because even a pro can fall in love with the work and will miss some critical points that can present his/her work in a bad way. Second, a pro can benefit from such a critique. Third, another artist can benefit as well from such critiques, most artists make similar mistakes. The list is endless.

That is an excellent idea! I think before one is invited to post in the unveiling section, there should be an introduction in the critique section with a short write up as to how this piece came to be, any special things learned, any new materials used, etc. Then having let it sit there for a week for every artist to comment on, the artist could post in the unveiling section. I want to point out that I am not for having the worked juried in, rather than having it up for a general discussion before unveiling.

Some of the post are so full of ah's an ooh's that it becomes rather embarrassing to say:"But, I think this could benefit from that...."

The final call weather to make changes or not has to be that of the artist, and critique givers should not feel offended. Just because this time around something did not get changed, for reasons we might not be aware of does not mean that the critique was not taken to heart and corrections be applied to the next project.

By having work in the critique section before unveiling it, it also forces every member to contribute and get an exchange of ideas and topic going.

[Richard Bingham]

[QUOTE=Enzie Shahmiri] I agree with both of you that having to repeat the same issues over and over is a tired some affair, but that's what a mentor does. The students change, but the subject remains the same . . .

After reading several posts I got the impression that there is this an undercurrent perception that this forum has become somewhat snobbish and intolerant. . . . I like this forum because it sets a high standard, but just like the Academy, which really shot itself in the foot by being too stringent, we need to be more tolerant of people