FA+
Shop
Guidelines for Writing A Helpful Critique v1.0
Some content for 
ilovecritique, at long last! :)
Rewritten/expanded guidelines for critique, in an image submission instead of the profile header. Hurrah!
Note: You MAY repost this image, so long as it remains unaltered & credit is given. Thank you!
ilovecritique, at long last! :)Rewritten/expanded guidelines for critique, in an image submission instead of the profile header. Hurrah!
Note: You MAY repost this image, so long as it remains unaltered & credit is given. Thank you!
Category Other / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 671 x 820px
File Size 463.9 kB
There needs to be one for the artists as well:
1. Be brave enough to accept your critique. You are often too close to your work to see the problems and NEED objective eyes.
2. Do not be snippy when you get critiqued, someone just spent time trying to help you.
3. Put WIP somewhere if your piece isn't done, if you don't people think it's done.
4. Do not make excuses to avoid making the fixes, "Oh they don't get it" (we do, we really do), or "Oh that's not what... etc...." Look, if the critiquer made the comment, something isn't clear. Make the changes.
1. Be brave enough to accept your critique. You are often too close to your work to see the problems and NEED objective eyes.
2. Do not be snippy when you get critiqued, someone just spent time trying to help you.
3. Put WIP somewhere if your piece isn't done, if you don't people think it's done.
4. Do not make excuses to avoid making the fixes, "Oh they don't get it" (we do, we really do), or "Oh that's not what... etc...." Look, if the critiquer made the comment, something isn't clear. Make the changes.
I'm assuming that the people who are being critiqued actually want it. If you're giving critique to a stranger without asking first, it's considered rude.
I only give critique to people who subscribe to this group. But even in here, there's a lot of excuses not to fix things. Which reminds me to add:
5. An honest critiquer is not attacking you, and is not out "to get you" or publicly shame you. As an artist you need to separate yourself from your work. By doing this, you will be open to the changes that need to be made, and make the work stronger. The critique is about your work, not about you.
I only give critique to people who subscribe to this group. But even in here, there's a lot of excuses not to fix things. Which reminds me to add:
5. An honest critiquer is not attacking you, and is not out "to get you" or publicly shame you. As an artist you need to separate yourself from your work. By doing this, you will be open to the changes that need to be made, and make the work stronger. The critique is about your work, not about you.
I know this is kinda old, but I wanted to throw in my two cents. I sort of disagree with your 4th rule. Even if they get the critique they needed, the artist isn't necessarily obligated to make those changes. If they feel it isn't worth their time to go back and fix something, that's their decision. Maybe they'll use that lesson for a future work.
You can lead a horse to water...
You can lead a horse to water...
I disagree. If you want to yell at someone then yell at someone. However if you want want someone to listen to you and improve (which is the whole point of critique) then you don't do it by bashing them. People who feel attacked stop listening.
So, if you are actually going to spend the time to help someone, then you'll do it in a way that way that will make them listen. Otherwise you're just wasting your time.
So, if you are actually going to spend the time to help someone, then you'll do it in a way that way that will make them listen. Otherwise you're just wasting your time.
Another point add is don't critique on things that are a matter of personal taste, like aspects of character design. Such things as whether a character is "too muscly" or some other trait that is a legitimate part of the character's design. Of course when it comes to designs that are completely garish I can see offering suggestions to make them more cohesive.
I could use the example of an artist I watch that got critiqued on how she drew her one character because she gave him feminine curves intentionally for the sake of feminizing him. Even after she explained this the critiquer kept on with how she was still drawing him too feminine.
I could use the example of an artist I watch that got critiqued on how she drew her one character because she gave him feminine curves intentionally for the sake of feminizing him. Even after she explained this the critiquer kept on with how she was still drawing him too feminine.
This is very well written. The only thing I would have changed was I would have pressed a little more about redlines, as they tend to be far more useful than written descriptions and it can help make the person giving the critique really get to test what they're saying.
I also really appreciate you adding point number 1. People can be very pushy and aggressive about critique, and it's frustrating when you're not interested in it (and didn't ask for it)to have people act like they're doing you a huge favour and you'd better kiss their butt for it.
I also really appreciate you adding point number 1. People can be very pushy and aggressive about critique, and it's frustrating when you're not interested in it (and didn't ask for it)to have people act like they're doing you a huge favour and you'd better kiss their butt for it.
Critiquers: although many points apply to art (drawing, animation), i'd like them applied to my
kevinfoxboy47 writing as well. The point about redlining seems to mean the critiquer copies the art with lines superimposed. I'm willing to let people critique my writing with short quotes so I know what to revise or add explanation to.
Ok, gulp, what I did wrong too. If you're offended, say why. The subject? The way I present it? I'm guilty of thinking "if they don't know what this means, they're bright enough to look it up" because that's what i'd do.
Thanks for reading, and tails high!
kevinfoxboy47 writing as well. The point about redlining seems to mean the critiquer copies the art with lines superimposed. I'm willing to let people critique my writing with short quotes so I know what to revise or add explanation to.Ok, gulp, what I did wrong too. If you're offended, say why. The subject? The way I present it? I'm guilty of thinking "if they don't know what this means, they're bright enough to look it up" because that's what i'd do.
Thanks for reading, and tails high!
but what if we catch flies with poo or rotting flesh? don't those flies deserve love too?! gaww!
*joking*
would be kind of nice to see about maybe some editorial critique guides too one day for us writers. :)
given a lot of us -NEED- and -WANT- such but never get it. :V
it is nice to see the group finally post something nice like this for newer/younger critics though :)
*joking*
would be kind of nice to see about maybe some editorial critique guides too one day for us writers. :)
given a lot of us -NEED- and -WANT- such but never get it. :V
it is nice to see the group finally post something nice like this for newer/younger critics though :)
There are some other things to keep in mind that some reviewers might overlook or hit a blockade with the artist, and it does happen.
1. Make sure you as well as the artist being reviewed are aware of the differences between subjective aesthetic taste and required fundamentals of art.
Some artists like to throw up "Art is subjective," and "It's cartoony, it's meant to be unrealistic" as an excuse to ignore serious anatomical and perspective flaws in a work. Most artists when drawing their original characters use the human body as a template, then make necessary changes to meet their interests. What is better, green or blue hair IS subjective. Watermelon-sized tits, while improbable is also subjective taste. What isn't however is when the body fails to meet the necessary symmetrical or anatomical requirements to be balanced.
If one hand on a figure is noticeably bigger than the other without explanation, then that's is to be critiqued. Is one eye too high up on the face, failing to line up with its opposite sibling, then it is to be critiqued. Are the feet so small that they would completely be unable to keep the figure standing without extreme effort or magic, then that is be critiqued as well. Does the spine bend and stretch at such an awkward and disturbing angle that even a skilled contortions would fail to achieve a similar feat, then it is to be critiqued. None of these things are subjective.
If these artists were attempting something abstract or surreal WITH context like Picasso's Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, then yes it would be subjective but most artists are not attempting something like Cubism, and instead are trying to make cartoons or anime. To those people, if your anatomy is flawed then it's flawed. Quit using subjective taste as an excuse.
2. Be frank yet reserved, clear, and concise. Avoid sugar-coating your critique.
Now we all know that caustic critics are repelling to artists, even if they're sincere and well-articulated. Nobody likes to admit they've made a mistake, unless they get something of value out of it that isn't knowledge, and are quick to go on the defense if they feel like they're being attacked. So many reviewers try softening or sugar-coating their words so that the artist is more receptive.
While it's not wrong to think this way, remember the intention is regardless of approach is to make the artists aware of fundamental flaws in their work so that they may address them either in the current WIP or in future works. Sugar-coating can blur the message and make the artist think these issues are not all that important which can be just as bad as making them angry with the caustic approach that reviewers such as John Solomon of the "Your Webcomic is bad..." blog. Find a happy middle ground between aggression and sensitivity to make the artist aware without repelling or confusing them.
3. Promote study of multiple art styles, mediums and art history, introduce the artist to new (old) ideas.
Now this suggestion is purely subjective and a choice to be made by the reviewer, but as an artist myself I find that limiting yourself to one style of work such as anime can be restricting and cause your work to stagnate once you reach a plateau. Those who have gone to art school are probably aware of this valuable advice, but most young self-taught artists aren't quite as privy to its usefulness. When you study and incorporate multiple approaches to art, such as human sculpture can give you a better understanding of foreshortening and definition as well as how a light source affects solid form in ways that using a live figure cannot. I can't think of a better example than that of of Michelangelo, whose works had some of the best drawn figures in this or any age. A more basic example, sprites and pixel art can be an effective method of learning hue shifting as the simplified minimalist philosophy this art form uses makes it more comprehensible and easy to build upon in more complex forms of art both traditional and digital.
If anything, it can be a healthy change of pace. Breaking up the monotony of the current popular styles and influences.
4. Leave the door open, make it possible for them to contact you for more information and critique.
Art is an endless progress, one can always and will continue to improve their work. Critique tends to be a blip on the radar in that regard. It comes, it goes and that's the end of it. Most reviewers don't realize that advice can be forgotten if not consistently reminded, and new mistakes can be made. If an artist finds a reliable reviewer, would it not make sense for them to keep seeking advice from that reviewer on the road to improvement?
Of course it does! So the wise thing to do is that if a reviewer is dedicated to the improvement of his art community, and does sincerely wish to help his/her fellow artists then allow those artists to remain in contact via notes, messenger, email, etc so they can get further correspondence.
This is especially good for younger, amateur, non-academic artists who don't have access to classes or a mentor for which they can rely on for further advice and support. Critique shouldn't end at the single comment on some person's page, it should keep going until the artist and reviewer feel there is nothing more to improve upon or the artist's skills have surpassed the reviewer's knowledge.
Again, that one is more subjective and of personal interest than anything, though I still feel to be no less a valid suggestion, as they all are.
1. Make sure you as well as the artist being reviewed are aware of the differences between subjective aesthetic taste and required fundamentals of art.
Some artists like to throw up "Art is subjective," and "It's cartoony, it's meant to be unrealistic" as an excuse to ignore serious anatomical and perspective flaws in a work. Most artists when drawing their original characters use the human body as a template, then make necessary changes to meet their interests. What is better, green or blue hair IS subjective. Watermelon-sized tits, while improbable is also subjective taste. What isn't however is when the body fails to meet the necessary symmetrical or anatomical requirements to be balanced.
If one hand on a figure is noticeably bigger than the other without explanation, then that's is to be critiqued. Is one eye too high up on the face, failing to line up with its opposite sibling, then it is to be critiqued. Are the feet so small that they would completely be unable to keep the figure standing without extreme effort or magic, then that is be critiqued as well. Does the spine bend and stretch at such an awkward and disturbing angle that even a skilled contortions would fail to achieve a similar feat, then it is to be critiqued. None of these things are subjective.
If these artists were attempting something abstract or surreal WITH context like Picasso's Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, then yes it would be subjective but most artists are not attempting something like Cubism, and instead are trying to make cartoons or anime. To those people, if your anatomy is flawed then it's flawed. Quit using subjective taste as an excuse.
2. Be frank yet reserved, clear, and concise. Avoid sugar-coating your critique.
Now we all know that caustic critics are repelling to artists, even if they're sincere and well-articulated. Nobody likes to admit they've made a mistake, unless they get something of value out of it that isn't knowledge, and are quick to go on the defense if they feel like they're being attacked. So many reviewers try softening or sugar-coating their words so that the artist is more receptive.
While it's not wrong to think this way, remember the intention is regardless of approach is to make the artists aware of fundamental flaws in their work so that they may address them either in the current WIP or in future works. Sugar-coating can blur the message and make the artist think these issues are not all that important which can be just as bad as making them angry with the caustic approach that reviewers such as John Solomon of the "Your Webcomic is bad..." blog. Find a happy middle ground between aggression and sensitivity to make the artist aware without repelling or confusing them.
3. Promote study of multiple art styles, mediums and art history, introduce the artist to new (old) ideas.
Now this suggestion is purely subjective and a choice to be made by the reviewer, but as an artist myself I find that limiting yourself to one style of work such as anime can be restricting and cause your work to stagnate once you reach a plateau. Those who have gone to art school are probably aware of this valuable advice, but most young self-taught artists aren't quite as privy to its usefulness. When you study and incorporate multiple approaches to art, such as human sculpture can give you a better understanding of foreshortening and definition as well as how a light source affects solid form in ways that using a live figure cannot. I can't think of a better example than that of of Michelangelo, whose works had some of the best drawn figures in this or any age. A more basic example, sprites and pixel art can be an effective method of learning hue shifting as the simplified minimalist philosophy this art form uses makes it more comprehensible and easy to build upon in more complex forms of art both traditional and digital.
If anything, it can be a healthy change of pace. Breaking up the monotony of the current popular styles and influences.
4. Leave the door open, make it possible for them to contact you for more information and critique.
Art is an endless progress, one can always and will continue to improve their work. Critique tends to be a blip on the radar in that regard. It comes, it goes and that's the end of it. Most reviewers don't realize that advice can be forgotten if not consistently reminded, and new mistakes can be made. If an artist finds a reliable reviewer, would it not make sense for them to keep seeking advice from that reviewer on the road to improvement?
Of course it does! So the wise thing to do is that if a reviewer is dedicated to the improvement of his art community, and does sincerely wish to help his/her fellow artists then allow those artists to remain in contact via notes, messenger, email, etc so they can get further correspondence.
This is especially good for younger, amateur, non-academic artists who don't have access to classes or a mentor for which they can rely on for further advice and support. Critique shouldn't end at the single comment on some person's page, it should keep going until the artist and reviewer feel there is nothing more to improve upon or the artist's skills have surpassed the reviewer's knowledge.
Again, that one is more subjective and of personal interest than anything, though I still feel to be no less a valid suggestion, as they all are.
Something that may be worth adding to # if listing a series of observations, do not, ever, close a string of compliments with a criticism, connected with "but"... eg: this part is great, and that's awesome, but this bit here is less than perfect. The impression it leaves is that none of the good stuff matters in the face of even the most minor of faults. I think the word is responsible for turning legions of artists into neurotic perfectionists. This isn't a matter of an artist being sensitive to criticism, it's just what the word "but" is for: the sole purpose of the word is to annihilate what comes before it in favor of what follows... eg.: if prefacing a criticism with "I'm sorry to say this, but" it means you're really not sorry at all.
A note on subjectivity vs. objectivity: subjective comments have their uses, most notably in compliments: objective statements, such as "this aspect is well done" can be argued and contested, whereas subjective comments such as "I really like this element!" are incontrovertible. It helps if subjective comments are phrased as such: "I think this is good" is okay, but "I like this" is better ("is" being more objective and concrete).
A note on subjectivity vs. objectivity: subjective comments have their uses, most notably in compliments: objective statements, such as "this aspect is well done" can be argued and contested, whereas subjective comments such as "I really like this element!" are incontrovertible. It helps if subjective comments are phrased as such: "I think this is good" is okay, but "I like this" is better ("is" being more objective and concrete).
A lot of folks I've run into lately keep forgetting about the first point. :/ It's been getting at my nerves. I'm eventually making a transition to just drawing carefree and for fun, but everyone just kinda shows up with a critique ready. The last one was kind and courteous, but the last two were just like "meh, I bet I'd love this better if it were on-model!"
Thanks for making this though. :) Maybe it might help people focus.
Thanks for making this though. :) Maybe it might help people focus.
Comments