[root88]

A friend of mine ask a group of us to critique this image titled "I Watered My Plants Today." We couldn't explain why the image didn't appeal any of us, or give any constructive critisism, so I thought you guys could give it a shot.



(please don't hold back, that's why we are having trouble with comments.)

[Sharper-Image]

Well, is it not just a bunch of filter-monkeyed textures overlayed on top of each other?

It's incredibly muddy, and the values are just ugly in my opinion. That strange bevel/emboss on the red strokes is really lame.

It's too chaotic, and lacks any real visual appeal, in my opinion - and it's only an opinion.

[Molako_Plus]

i never understood this type of art...

the title has nothing or does it have somthing to do with this painting?...cuz i failed to see the connection. the things that bothers me most is the composition. i dont see any real movement from each elemnt. there's just a bunch of focal points that the eye skips on.

well i cant really critique this... im very prejudice towards people that call this art.

[EviLToYLeT]

Honestly, I think it's hard to critique abstract art... and its best that no critique is given at all. My initial reaction . (for about a second) was , it sucks.

It doesn't appeal to me because ... well, I cant make anything of it. I see where watering the plants came from but other than that... i can't see anything else. except an alien in the upper left (look hard, you'll see it as well)

its definitely pretty.... but sometimes pretty things are ugly.

I think its best that you just tell him the feelings that you get from it... how in the world do you tell someone how to improve their abstract art? (i hope its abstract...)

Mmm.. seems like a very tranquil peace, dying plants down tehre with the red.

[Atherium]

the point of analysis shouldn't be composition, or focal areas, color depth, tonal range blah blah blah.

Pieces like this should evoke the question
"what do I feel?"

If the artist wanted to create a specific feeling with this piece and people feel it then it is a success, if he didn't then well he needs to rethink his work. If he did it for himself then to hell what everyone thinks as to it is not intended for artistic analysis.

[brainwash]

The colors seem not be the correct hues for a triadic color sheme. I think it's quite disharmonic.

I am also not sure if this is a fake...!

[neff]

This isnt art,
its an old pizza or something

[ceenda]

"I Watered My Plants Today."

Other appropriate titles include:

"A man with his dog."
"Harbour and fishermen."
"Old lady picking up litter on a snowy November morning."
"House on a hill."
"3 oranges, a banana and a fondue set."

I mean, any title is going to fit the piece really, isn't it? One of those "it's what you want it to be" style paintings that challenges normally intelligent people to temporarily hide their sense of taste and join the masses in believing that it is, in fact, an astounding piece of work. HURRAH! SUCCESS!

Saddest thing is... this would sell...

Bah, I'm hungover and tetchy today. It's not astoundingly bad as a painting, just deceptive.

[ September 13, 2002: Message edited by: ceenda ]

[Snorkles]

Get rid of the red things and I think the painting would get (a bit) better.

[eyewoo]

I see a continuum of abstract art with Cy Twombly at one end - composition so chaotic and out'a whack it is exquisitly beautiful:



...and Robert Motherwell at the other end - compositions in total balance and harmony:



This piece sits right in the middle and is therefore very boring.

[ September 13, 2002: Message edited by: eyewoo ]

[Basement bound]

I use to think that abstract art was a big pile of cat doodie. Then I took a Abstract sculpture course and my eyes widened up. It is not so much about 'what' it is, but 'what' it is. I know that sounds confusing let me see if I can explain it.
[interlude: root88 I would let your friend know that if it was done in traditional media completely it would have had a better quality to it.]
Abstract art is mostly about the material used, and how it is put together. Craig has mentioned so much in the past that he works with elements that create a recognizable image. He has told people 'blur your eyes and paint what you see'. That is what we are talking about in regards to abstract art. You have to understand it, in order to like it. That is why so many see "artists" (the stereotypical ones) as the only ones that like abstract art. Abstract art is about lines, composition, shapes, textures, suggestions, relationships, size, and basic concepts like weight/balance, static movement, representation.

With that said maybe i can crit the image and perhaps that will shed some light on this. First for get the title. Now the painting is mostly the primary colours. signifying beginnings, early life, basic element. The overall texture is flat, but it is there non the less. Almost organic like, perhaps dirt, soil, mud. there is streams of blue paint from the upper right to the left. Representation of water, randomness, organic again, roots? The red in the lower has an interesting shape, flame like warmth, with a white glow sun representation. light, growth.
Looking at the general composition of the image there is a triangular comp. From the red collection to the beginning of the blues streams, down the end of the streams, then back to the red collection.
Blocking out the general shapes we get this

Then blocking out the general tones and silhouettes of the shapes we get this.


Over all I don't like the image. There are some interesting elements. The fact that it was done primarily or pieced together digitally really killed the image. There is little life to the image, not very vibrant. Tone of the image is flat, the dark black areas should be heavy. And being flat leave the viewer to have no relationship with the painting itself. Texture is not only visual but textile as well.
Root88 I hope this helps you and your friend.

[NextGen]

"Look mommy I made you a picture"

[defiant126]

Hi, I am the artist of the piece posted above.. First of all, I want to thank you all for taking the time to critique it. This is exactly the kind of feedback i was hoping to get, minus the ignorant comments by neff & nextgen.

The blue drips are from a picture i took of a section of a mural I painted. I tweaked it a little bit, but not much. (Originally, they were red drips on a flat white wall). I was going for a very organic feel with that.. And the red was meant to be a total contrast to this in every sense possible.

Basement bound's view was interesting, and i appreciate the fact that he still tried to feel it even if he didn't like the overall picture. (thanks for pointing out what wasn't working. I see what you mean now..)

It's obvious that most people who critiqued it simply couldn't feel it whatsoever. It's seems "lifeless". I suppose atherium was right. I will have to rethink this kind of style and where i want to go with it.

As for the title; "I watered my plants today", ceenda was 1/2 right. Yes, it was random, BUT there's a reason why it was. It's simply a poke at people who try too hard to give cheesy "deep" titles/meanings to their paintings.

-defiant [ice]

[Drunken Monkey]

To me art of whatever style it may be is appreciated by Work/Knowledge/Skill/Originality that was put into it.

This "piece" has neither. It looks like a dirty wall in an under construction building.

[eyewoo]

quote:

---

It's obvious that most people who critiqued it simply couldn't feel it whatsoever. It's seems "lifeless". I suppose atherium was right. I will have to rethink this kind of style and where i want to go with it.

---

Yes... I think you have accurately gauged the feeling of those that have looked and commented.

My sense of abstract art is very keen. If it is personal, if the artist has a real grip on what he/she undertsands about what he/she is doing, then it is clear to me that art is being created. It is also pretty clear when someone is really just waffling about, throwing color and shape together without really understanding the outcome - looking for something that looks abstract.

If you have a connection with abstract art, then you are walking on egg shells... It is very clear what is good and what is not. Those that align their work with abstract art and are successful at it have my highest regard.

[Cicinimo]

I�m feeling a nebulous image that doesn�t perplex, but rather channels its implication towards the intangible. Regardless of a nearly overbearing sense of universal disarray, fundamental archetypes are conveyed with nominal recoil. A mangled composition serves to endorse your evident inclinations towards pre-Rodenston organization. Likewise, I applaud your manipulation of a tired fa�ade. I believe a more Anistonian approach to color association would suffice, though only when counterbalanced with an asymmetrical consistency within the framework of texture. On the most basic level, your appeal resonates in any yawning essence, a plea of the pathos. Your insight is sincerely commendable.