It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
FFFFFF">The Alchemical Wedding: The Visionary Art of David Aronson
wow, that's really beautiful
Just know that I'm an asshole 'cause I have criticism and would share it without asking your permission first. Alas, it's not happening as I got logged out before I posted it and I lost the post. Anyhow, I'm still an ass 'cause I thought the image would look far better on a black field and I'm arrogant enough to copy your image and put it on a black field to prove my point.
Thinking the image looks better on black is an opinion, not a criticism, and certainly doesn't make you an ass.
To counter some of Michael's critique, wouldn't a pink background be better? It would correspond well to Tipharet and it could work so well as a logo for an occult brothel!
First of all, I promised a critique, didn't deliver and there was no request to not provide one - merely a challenge to my claim to be an asshole. Lol.
The difference between constructive criticism and rudeness is largely a function of the artist receiving it, what they do with it and how they interpret it.
If you receive criticism and it makes you angry, it's because you have indeed mastered your art to a degree of genuine self expression. The problem is if you've invested your IDENTITY in your creative work - a criticism of it can become a criticism of YOU making your reaction defensive, angry - and perhaps very right about your 'mistakes' in fact being 'style'.
It is true that at a certain point you do what you do and you are confident it's everything it should be. Criticism then holds no power to get a reaction out of you, if that's where you're at.
A paradox of excellence that to excel you have to nail down criteria to measure yourself against, but the mere fact of such a criteria boxes you in and cuts you off from many possibilities, it also colors what you are capable of appreciating. Such are the limits of my or anyones feedback. It's also why and how I look at artwork, and stuff others might not notice, consciously SHOUTS at me -c'est la vie.
I offer feedback not to be rude, I understand it may be accepted as rude, but if my insights are of any value - sticking them in an artist's subconscious is for the greater good and to refuse to do that would mean that my 'looking good' to others is more important to me than giving freely something that may be valuable. Ideas about light source consistency and line weight variation perhaps weren't there for this image, but they might be for his NEXT image.
And really, tattoos? You do know that the color fades far faster than the black line and that black line is REALLY important... right?
That's okay, I promise to be a better asshole and share NOTHING again, just patronize people about how beautiful their artwork is -as if they could never do any better. Damn! - that's really fucking rude...I don't know if I can do it.
Here's a promise though - the next time someone gives you feedback and it makes you angry, pretend they know something you do not and challenge them to teach it to you. You'll find yourself growing as an artist or musician that way - really. People give feedback in the spirit of contribution, it happens when they see you doing even better and they want to help. Try allowing them.
The asking for permission to give feedback, just doesn't sit right with me. It's like they are doing me a favor and I'm begging. No one begs to give something of value, the context devalues the feedback. As a teacher do you beg to give feedback? No, you demand to be paid!
That's a hot tattoo, I give you props for allowing the tattoo artist freedom to interpret your design, I couldn't have done better were I to re-ink and color your piece to my liking. I have a question relating to your art, but I suppose I'll need your permission to ask it.
That quote is brilliant! It fits nicely with some thoughts I recently had. A bit hard to explain here as you don't know the context in my life. I even looked up philosophical definitions of perfection and wondered why we might have "an" idea or ideas of perfection in our psyche, cause I noticed that this caused me certain (minor) troubles. But I have not finished my thoughts about that. But what that quote says was actually one aspect of what I dealt with then.
It's like an archetype of perfection is able to severely terrorize you, maybe even psychosomatically.
If you look around through the forum you might see that it's not so typical that anyone gets attacked here. You shouldn't believe that we are like that. This discussion has developed in some unfortunate fashion. I hope this will settle. I can only see that you and Michael have got very different perspectives on certain things. Sometimes two people meet who are so different in certain points that it just explodes. This doesn't stand for the whole group in the case of KIA.
I still like the picture, but I am not an expert in graphic art. I think it definitley fits the spirit of KIA even and of what others here create. I have a different way of looking at such a piece of art, but maybe this can also count. Naive as I am I can say, when I look at it, I can see nothing ugly in it.
I mean it's like I once heard a film maker argue: "This and that was not good in Titanic." But did the audience bother?
Now David and I posted at the same time so I was abit late with my words.
But there's another thing that comes to my mind which is important here. Many of us here "dabble" in one or another art form. And one thing I know from creating which is very important to me is the aspect of your own "determination". I mean the fact that you consciously determine what a piece of art should be is really a lot of the fun of it and something one can be very proud of in several senses of the word. I know this especially from my trashy little short films and clips - the control over it, to determine the product.
Now Michael actually asked David to change his piece of art from the beginning. If one has got this pride of "determination" I can really understand how this can upset you.
Do you know what I mean?
And right now I remember an example of something similar. In a forum for writers it occured for some time that people felt an urge to write "corrections" of posted literary writings. This upset the authors very often, and one time it also upset me very much. the problem was, that there were sometimes poems with carefully chosen words creating a certain effect. And then there were "corrections" where everything expressive was deleted out of such poems, because the "correctors" thought such things were inappropriate. The authors frequently got upset because they had not posted there texts to have 'em altogether changed by anybody.
David, the question I have is this. In your tattoo designs, especially the Kali, you belie a very well developed simplified and elegant cartooning style, and in your paintings you have a distinct very distinct and representational style. Why do there seem to be no examples of these styles blending? Why is the elegant simplicity of the cartoons absent in most of the paintings?
My own experience of learning to draw is one where I found there were two distinct drawing skills that inform one another - the 'drawing what you see' from a model or photo and the construction of an image with no model, just with imagination, knowledge and geometry. I can see how the model yields representation and the imagination yields simplicity and pleasing geometry as a way to understand your two major styles. But, in my own experience again, I've found my ability to use geometry and imagination helps immensely with life drawing, and the life drawing impacts my constructive drawing geometry as if by osmosis.
I really would like to see both styles present in the same painting. And, sure - who gives a fuck what I think.
As far as how I respond to art criticism, I never bitch that it should never have been given. I lived for over ten years with a boyfriend who was consistent in his opinion that my art was just plain ugly.
Try doing it intentionally? I'd like to see.