why are you mentioning Pixel gods all of a sudden?
but only a few select people actually give useful crits, and it's usually the same...so I just figure I'd be better off hunting the people who crit well, then skip the intermediaries and asking them on a IM app.
Yeah.
I was using that to exagerate the point of making crits that last more than one piece, that arent just....fix that corner there..you know?I think you understood what I said with an extra level of presumption, I dont think a critique should be about what Makes the artist draw something a specific way, more about the way the artist usually draws things, about the little bad habits that plague him, say...you'd rather critique "dont use robes to avoid anatomy " than " make her knees show under that robe", they might adress the same thing, but one is disposable while the other ir re-usable, with the last one the pic might look okay when fixed, but the artist might repeat the mistake, unlike with the former one.
If you've seen enough of an artist's work to call for a more general crit that would help him, go for it. I did that with madtoaster, where my general opinion remained 'finish stuff more' after seeing some a lot of his art. But that's just case-by-case, there's times when it's called for, and there's times when it's not. It has to do with the artist's willingness to move forward. I wouldn't go 'hey splat, draw a few realistic pieces for us to see if you can' in his thread normally, because for one, I don't believe splat ( for the longest time this is, nowdays it may have all changed ) actually listens to radical critique. madtoaster was all 'I see what you're saying about it being unfinished, and I'm trying to find ways to make it look more finished' and so that warranted the more encompassing suggestion to move towards more finished pieces. Of course, later on, he mentioned animation and how he needs to keep it simple etc etc etc whatever, each to his own. But I find it interesting that you come to splat's aid in his thread talking about rezpecting the style of an artist, and then talk about FIXING THE ARTIST without realising that the two can't go together. Because there's mistakes, in a style. There's stuff that's wrong and stays wrong and that's part of what makes a style. And here you are, saying that we should respect the artist's vision, but still dig deep at what hurts their art. The two can't go together. You're either willing to step off your high horse and forget about your 'style' and get get critted like mad and take whatever you can from it, or you're better off revelling in the asspats and minor crits about what a 'stylish' and 'accomplished' artist you are.
I dont know what people in artschool do, but I honestly dont care, I dont think this is a similar system at all, so I dont see why that should matter.
Find out, and care. It's their paradigm that places like this should follow. Because they've been taught how to teach, and while we're teaching to be taught here, that's still half the same. There's ways and ways to go about critiquing, and there's a lot to learn there. Don't get dismissive and be all 'I don't care. I don't CARE about the jelly. Jelly? I don't care. Jelly? What IS jelly? I don't care. I don't care. Honestly, I don't care.' You should care.
Now about pixelart just being pixels, I dont agree, becuse pixelart is art, so it's not just pixel techniques all we need to discuss, we also need to learn anatomy, perspective, character design, animation techniques, and many many more things that pixelart is also a part of, you cant just go and ignore all the complex aspects that come into a picture because it's made of pixels.
now, from the start of pixelation, there's been a lot of critique about anatomy, perspective etc. But these are all side by side with pixel art critique. If someone here suffers from much anatomical problems, this place will not fix them. Sitting down and reading Loomis or posting on a fine art board or whatever might. There's never been any misunderstanding about that. Whenever pixel people critique anatomy, it's sometimes one-eyed leading the blind. Most people here are self-taught in anatomy and it's a risk to pass along crits with that sort of knowledge. I am not self-taught, and I still hesitate to go overboard with anatomical etc crits because simply that's not what we specialize in here. Sure someone needs to learn anatomy, and when you see a good pixel piece with bad anatomy, you go "learn anatomy." and the other guy either finds ways to learn or doesn't. On the wayside. This was, is, and will remain a place to discuss pixel art foremost. That's why this place exists, and why it will not drown amongst thousands of generic-purpose CG art forums. If you like another more, sure, frequent it, but pixelation will not turn into a non-descript CG concept art forum. Pixels. AA. Dithering. Buffering. Palette work. small-scale animation. It's a lost art we're keeping alive here, as best we can.
Are you seriously willing to relinquish your points though? because...I know you think mods as long as acting on rules shouldnt be questioned, and you seem to always push the same idea of that this is just for pixel techniques and no more...I'm not sure..please dont take it a bad way.
Take it up with pep if you think my point of view deviates from the original function of these boards. I'm talking as Helm here, not as a moderator. I don't have to talk as a moderator. I've been here for years, critiquing and getting critiqued and my opinion counts for what it counts without having to put on the moderator silly hat.