the time we took to judge others work i noticed a common theme, that was the artists at first glance (the good ones) had created something that was eye catching and noticeably correct but when closely looked at, most of them either manipulated light and sometimes completely changed it to make people think it is a nice peice of art.
The great thing is that most people would over look the technical side of the drawing and decide that it is a great piece of work due to the master artist that can manipulate a scene to the point that the untrained eye cannot notice there is anything wrong. We agreed that the sketches we saw where technically wrong but they were artistically well thought out. the artist behind the work could probebly draw a scene with photographic realism but then again a scene that looks perfect would be correct on a technical level but look altogether boring.
http://www.artisthideout.com/technical-detail-vs-artistic-license/
this blog reminded me that even though its possible to draw like a camera can take pictures it isnt necessary as..well..thats what cameras are for.
"It may be because I am lazy or it could
mean that I just like the feel of natural art that I enjoy over detailed work that I feel I enslave myself to for the duration of the piece. I’m okay with that as long as I realize it and don’t try to present things the way the really are not."http://www.artisthideout.com/technical-detail-vs-artistic-license/
this artist understands how an image looks but prefers to occasionaly use a little bit of artistic liscene rather that real technical ability to make a good image great. it isn't what is a good peice of art but what makes it a good peice of art. there are some things that need to be taken into account.
i found a discussion forum that contained many opinions on good and bad art. this is one i agree with to some extent.
"There are three factors to consider--the viewer's reaction, the artist's enjoyment, and the technical correctness of the piece. A piece that fails on all three counts is, yes, a failure; it's bad art if anything is. But a piece that does well on one or more of these three fronts is successful on some level and could be called "good art" simply because it has a purpose for existing."
there are more things to take into account that a first impression. looking deeper can almost always give a different reaction that the first glance.
if someone other than me liked an image i drew then its good even if someone else dislikes it.
not to say that you ignore the bad crits and enjoy the good ones but if you accept that there are always bad drawings and good drawings due to people have different opinions on what is good and what is bad, even with technical merit. good can be bad and bad can be good depending on who is looking.
