Compose" Shape Critique

Critique time
Where do I begin with my discussion about the Summer Fire painting? It seems I've gained a lot of knowledge since 2004! I find it very difficult to talk about shape without including value somewhere in the discussion, therefore I won't try to isolate them. My photo reference for this work is long gone and I can't squint at it or the real scene. I'm left with the image I created.

• My first big mistake was not having the distant island, sky and water as one large shape rather than three smaller shapes. That would mean painting the island in the same value as the sky and water and setting it back in the distance as it was in real life.
• The tree line with its jagged points provides a nice relief from the straight lines of water and island. They also serve to interlock with the shape above it (always a good thing). In terms of value they are possibly too dark because they advance rather than recede. I would lighten them to set them back. In his response to the previous post Don mentioned the tips of the trees on the right being too close to the horizon line (that kissing rule) and that the eye is driven to the tips by the movement of the paint below. It's a very valid point and one I agree with. A bit of change in shape is in order.
  
• The next large mass (shape) is the line of fireweed and the clump of grass to the left of it. The soft diagonal works well and creates a gentle sway of energy. I would work with the values in this shape and include the grass beneath it using the same value which would be a bit darker than at present. Kathy suggested that I vary the shape of the flowers more as the edges are all "active" and therefore dominant. I agree with this point.
• The lower right shape is much darker in value and works to balance the strong diagonals above it. I had a simple solution for keeping the viewer in the picture plane. - I darkened the left side and the foreground right side. A bit too obvious ! In my own defense I did have three areas of dark to move the eye around.
• I feel there's variety in the shapes : simple and complex, small, medium and large, lights and darks. A big drawback is the lack of passive areas. If the sky, island and water are painted as one shape with lighter values this will become a more passive area and a foil for the more active fireweed.
  

The greyscale tells the tale of my penchant to paint in a tight value spread. Even my darks are not that dark. I have painted like this since the beginning. I am able to see the most minute change is value and when I think I am being very adventurous, I'm really not. To this day I have to fight with myself to include both ends of the value scale.

The response to my last post provided a number of suggestions for checking the shapes and values in a painting. I'd like to include them all in this post so they don't get missed.

Look at a greyscale of the painting
Kathy at Katherine A. Cartwright Studio suggested converting my painting to a greyscale in Photoshop. My proficiency in Photoshop is almost nonexistent, but having a reason is a great motivator. It was as easy as Image, Mode, Greyscale. I was just patting myself on the back about my new found skill when Don sent a comment to explain how to do it. hwfarber also suggested previewing the grayscale picture in print preview using different sizes. If you don't have Photoshop or a similar program, you can scan a coloured photo of your painting as a grayscale and print it.

Reduce an image to black and white
One of the things Ann Buckner does after taking a photo and converting it to b&w is to put the contrast all the way up. This reduces it to black and white and gives a good idea of light/dark ratio, rather like a Notan. She learned this from Rhonda Carpenter.

Look at the work in a darkened room
Kathy also suggested a technique learned from Susan Webb Tregay. Take the painting into a very dimly lit room or closet with the door slightly ajar. That way, there isn't enough light to see the colors, but there is just enough light to see the values.

Look through your camera viewfinder
hwfarber suggested setting your digital camera on black and white and looking at your painting through the viewfinder( a techniques learned from a Caroline Jasper workshop).

Look at your work in a mirror
Don Michael Jr. suggested one way to get a different perspective of your shape structure and the overall quality of your composition is to look at it in a mirror. If you go into the room with the light off, get the painting situated, and then turn on the lights you get an instant "snapshot" in reverse which tells you volumes.

Use a reducing lens
"Another good tool is the reducing lens, which Renaissance artists used and is still sold today" recommended Kathy.

Use a red tinted value finder
I made mine from plain red glass from my husband's stained glass selection. You can also buy ready made ones here. The first time I was introduced to this I thought it was magic. You see everything in shades of red which makes it easier to spot the value relationships and massing of shapes. These work best for work when cool colours are predominant.

Critique groups

Critique groups are a great forum for artist feedback . These groups can be in cyberspace, held in a community space as a membership service of an arts organization, or in an artist's studio. If you are joining a group that has already begun, you may have to follow the established structure, but if you initiate a group you can have some say in how it operates.

I've belonged to a critique group for three years. There are five artist members, working in different media with different levels of experience. Sometimes a member invites a guest along. All members are conscious of being fair and constructive in their responses. The location rotates each time. We usually bring 2 or 3 pieces of work and meet for two hours. Other times, an artist may request a special gathering of the group to discuss work for a show or some other special event. Our procedures have evolved over time, and we continue to change to meet our needs.

From this experience and other experiences in workshop situations, I make the following suggestions for effective group critiques that happen face to face.

• You need comfortable seating for the group and a location that permits everyone an unimpeded view.
  
• A sturdy easel and good light are essential (as are a cup of tea or coffee and a snack).
  
• Decide who will go first. Some groups are very organized and keep track of this from meeting to meeting; we just decide at the meeting.
• Limit the viewing to one work at a time unless an artist has a series that needs viewing together. Once everyone has had a turn, begin again. It might be necessary to use a timer to control the amount of time spent on any one piece.
  
• Set at least one minute to quietly look at the work before anyone speaks. This helps control the "blurters".
  
• Sometimes the response can be to a specific question about the work, other times the artist just presents the work without any comment. There are certainly times that an artist might want to set up the viewing experience by providing background information.
  
• If a member of the group is getting bogged down in minute details about the work, try to raise the level of discussion by making a more general comment or asking how these details affect the success of the overall artwork.
• Sometimes the discussion never gets past the analysis level which is very limiting. It is a good idea to keep a copy of the critique process questions handy to prompt higher order questions/comments about the work.
• Have a notebook handy to jot down all the words of wisdom for future consideration.
  
• Try different response structures for variety.

Additional response structures

I love "What's the first work that pops into your head? This is a rapid brainstorming technique where group members keep providing descriptive words for the work until everyone's ideas have been exhausted. The artist records the words so the members can see them and then the work is discussed based on the words that have come up. I love the spontaneity of this process and the range of words that come up. Some of the most insightful discussion about my work have come from this approach.

Another simple but effective approach is Two stars and a wish. I know, it sound hokey, but it works well. I've actually used this in primary grades to get children looking and responding to work in group settings. The two stars are two strengths of the work. The wish is something your would like the artist to think about in reference to the work. It works best if group members jot down their responses before beginning the discussion.

Then there's If this was my painting... This is a quick and dirty response activity whereby the responder steps into the artist's role and suggests one thing they would do differently and why. Remember the artist doesn't have to accept any of the suggestions, but they provide lots of ideas for consideration.

Critique Etiquette

So you've decided to jump into the critique vehicle for a short trip. You have a structure to use to help you look at a piece of work, but is that enough? Exactly how should you make those comments without sending the other person into a state of depression for a week? It is important to find ways to engage in a discussion about an artwork that provides the artist with objective and helpful feedback. It is always easier when critiques occur when the artist is present because it allows for questions and clarification. Both the viewer and the artist have roles to play in the critique process.

The Viewer/Responder
Consider the artist's level of experience
The approach taken to critique and the depth of analysis carried out should be balanced with where an artist is in terms of his/her career. Emerging artists might need a little more TLC than artists settled into their career.

Separate the artist from the work
When a work is critiqued, the focus should be on the work not the person who created the work. The best way to place attention on the work is to avoid the use of “You” statements. E.g., You didn’t …., You used… You can’t… “You” statements put the artist on the defensive, causing that to become the focus rather than what is being said about the work

Involve the artist in the discussion
In face to face situations when it is a struggle to find positive in a work, or the work is confusing, ask questions to draw the artist out. This will provide more information about the work that will enable the responder to move the discussion of the work along.

Highlight areas of concern; don't boss
While the responder wants to help the artist, it isn't his/her role to tell an artist what to do and how to do it. Remember the artist has a personal style, a reason for creating the work, ways of handling materials, etc. that is unique to his/her creative process. It is better to provide comments that highlight any concern or issue with the work rather than telling the artist how to fix an identified problem.

Encourage the artist to problem solve
If the artist responds to a comment with a question, try sending the question back to the artist by asking a more general question like “Have you had this problem in the past?, What did you do then?” or “Do you have any thoughts about it? “

Provide suggestions if the artist asks
Sometimes an artist is truly stuck and would like to have suggestions to ponder. You can help by brainstorming ideas and discussing possible solutions with the artist.

The Artist

Be Willing to Grow
No one is perfect all the time. Even if an artist has reached dizzying career heights , there is always room to grow.

Feel free to ask questions
If the artist isn’t clear about a comment made during critique, questions should be posed that will help the responder elaborate on the comments.

Don't take it personally
Remember the critique is about the work you created- a product, not about you –the person. It is important to separate your own emotions from your art.

Take notes for future reference:
It is helpful to record comments from a group critique so the artist can decide in the comfort of his studio what might be acted on or ignored.

References that informed this post:
How to Give an Art Critique and How to Handle Art Criticism -Empty Easel.
You Suck, the (not so) gentle art of critique.

A process for art critique

Where do you start when you are asked to critique someone's artwork? I find it a bit daunting because I don't want to hurt the feelings of the artist who is often a friend. I have to keep reminding myself that I was asked to comment and that a considered response could be very helpful to the artist. It also helps me if I think about it as giving feedback or response rather than critique. I know, it's just semantics, but it helps me. It became a little easier for me when I discovered a process for viewing and responding to an artwork that allows me time to sort through the work and reach a conclusion or judgment about the success or failure of it. Always I try to be considerate of the other person when making comments. I'm currently writing a post on the "Etiquette of Critique" which will be up in several days. Now on to the purpose of this post.

Feldman (1972, 1981) proposed a formal, objective and open structure for viewing an artwork that encourages describing, analyzing and interpreting prior to placing a personal judgment on the work. This sequence of viewing steps ensures that the viewer has gathered information before leaping to like/dislike conclusions. It certainly isn't necessary to answer all the questions listed in each section. They are there to give ideas about what could be considered in each one.

Description
Describe what you see in the work. This is a listing of facts without judgment statements.

• Note the title and the year created.
• Describe the materials used
  
• What type of work is it? e.g., landscape, still life, etc.
  
• What style is it? e.g., photo realistic, abstract, impressionist, etc.
• What is the subject matter? Describe it.
  
• If it is non-objective work, describe the art elements used (line, shape, colour, texture, value etc.)

Analysis
Focus on the elements and principles and how they are organized. Separate the composition into its parts in order to determine the expressive power of each part and the relationship between the parts and the whole.

• Has a range of values been used ? Has a value dominance been established?
• Has colour temperature dominance been established? (warm or cool dominance)
• Has colour harmony been achieved?
• Are colours repeated throughout the work?
  
• Is there variety in the shapes represented? Have the shapes been grouped together to create a coherent whole?
  
• Is there a clearly organized structure to hold the viewer's eyes?
• If a centre of interest is included, is it effectively established? How?
• Are active areas balanced with passive areas?
• Does the design in this work break the rules, and if so, is it successful?
• What principles of design are used?
  

Interpretation
What does the artwork mean ? This is the viewer's opinion. Here you try to formulate a specific explanation of meaning that fits with the evidence gathered in the first two steps.

• How does the artwork make you feel? What does it make you think about?
• What do you think the artist is trying to say?
• What is the most memorable aspect of this artwork?
• Why do you think the artwork was created?
  
• How does this work relate to other ideas or events in the world or to other artwork?

Judgment
Evaluating an artwork means ranking it in relationship to other works in its class; it is a way of deciding on its artistic and aesthetic merits. It moves well beyond I like, I don't like; it is about how well the artist has succeeded .

• How does this work relate to comparable works? Does it conform to or depart from other works in its class?
• What is original or compelling about the work?
• Does the artwork communicate any major feelings or ideas? (What value do you find in the work? ) e.g., beautiful image, conveys important social message, created insightful connections, connects with history etc.
• Are the ideas /feelings in the work historically or culturally relevant?
• Does the technique used support or diminish the impact of the artwork?
• What are the qualities of the work that engage you?
• Does the artwork come together as a whole?
• Has the artist created a successful image?
• How could the piece be improved on?

Who knew there was so much to giving your opinion ?

Pursuing art critique

The term art critique can have negative connotations, especially for artists who endured demeaning experiences as part of their post secondary art training. I would argue that critique is an invaluable part of creation, and that its success depends on the knowledge of the viewer and the viewer's ability to present feedback in an objective and supportive manner.

In this post, I am referring to any situation artists initiate to gain feedback about their work, not what happens when your work is complete and presented for public consumption. I guess you could refer to it as " in process" critique. Art blogs are a wonderful vehicle for in process critique, but interestingly enough, most of the comments readers give are very positive and supportive. While that makes us feel good, it does not move us along in our thinking about what we create. I think most people don't get into the discussion because of fear of offending the artist, or because they don't quite know how best to express what they truly think about an art work. There are other opportunities for "in process"critique that artists can pursue:

• posting your work on an online critique site,
• organizing a studio visit with a curator, gallery owner or visiting artist;
  
• joining a critique group;
  
• calling upon a trusted artist friend to discuss your work.

Sometimes we are blind to aspects of our work and it takes a conversation with someone else to bring forward things we never thought about. There are certain points to remember if you are going to actively pursue critique of your work and not be crushed by the process. Remember that:

• Artists put themselves in a strong position when they engage in self critique of their work before bringing it to a more public forum for discussion.
  
• Viewers look at art from their life experiences, education, likes and dislikes, emotional state and personal tastes.
• All responses to an artwork are the l opinions of the viewer and should not be taken as a personal criticism of the artist. (that's the most difficult to remember)
  
• There can be great disparity in interpretation between the views of the artist and the intended audience.
  
• Artists do not have to act on or agree with the information gained from a critique.

Over the years as a teacher, curriculum specialist and workshop leader, I've had reason to research formats for art criticism. While there are different formats in use, I was interested in one that allows the viewer time to develop an informed opinion that can be supported with specific references to an art work. One very established method was put forward in 1972 by Edmund Feldman in Varieties of Visual Experiences. This is a much used format for art critique in education today. In my next post I will explore the four elements of this process - Description, Analysis, Interpretation and Judgment and how we can use the sequence to lead to more informed discussion of art work.