Woodturning critiques- a discussion on where to draw the line?

[Roger Chandler]

Something that has bugged me for some time.....perhaps now is the time to get it off my chest! Hope I am not opening a can of worms! :eek:

First off - I appreciate constructive criticism! I have learned much from many turners with more experience than I have.......much appreciation for all the help along the way, and believe we can all up our game to some degree by the pointers that others give us!

That being acknowledged by me, over the last couple of years I have noticed that there seem to be some forums that seem to have either "self appointed" or some "appointed" that seem to think their view of how something ought to look or should be done is "the way" to do it, or else the piece is dismissed summarily in the discussion on a forum.

I think there are so many ways of looking at things, and all of the observers have subjective views to some degree, and their particular biases.........

When the intent of the "artist" is not factored in and the bias of the one "critiquing" the item is given all the weight of legitimacy in the discussion, then I for one, question the validity of that critique.

Giving pointers to newbies, and helping them through the learning process is one thing, but given someone who has achieved a degree of merit and quality in their work, then some things are subjective as to style and form preference....and some ideas push "established' norms we are used to looking at and accept......these are areas that are not always factored in to the critique or discussion.

Now, I personally have no gripe with anyone, but have noticed a few instances along the way as I have viewed different forums where there seems to be a group of regulars on a forum [ I will not speak to which of the number of forums I visit that I am talking about] ...those regulars seem to have a "mutual admiration society" going on and others seem to be almost ignored.

That being said.......[B]I am not referring to myself.......I have not been slighted in the least, and no member of any forum is either compelled to comment on any item that is posted, and we are all free to interact in any way we choose to do so.........it just seems to me that some posters are not given the time of day in discussions and some who are in the "mutual admiration society" get a lot of attention, even when to my own perception, their work is less than stellar.......as has been some of my own over time, without a doubt!

I am not trying to be controversial.........but all this observation has brought me to a point of conclusion......that is, a person had better be able to know when to accept "critiques" and know when to dismiss one as the bias of someone, or even in very rare cases, the vitriol of someone.

One also had better have some thick skin if they are going to put their work out in public.......no matter how good you might be, there will always be someone who does not like what you do, and you have to be able to discern between comments that help you grow and those where the bias of the commenter is seen by you for what it is! You must come to a point where your self confidence is not shattered by negative comments.......most people who post are truly interested in being helpful, but know there are no doubt some who just see things their way, and if you do not agree......you are held to be somehow "less informed" or inferior in your perception of things........

Has anyone else noticed this at all? By the way......I am glad to be a "Creeker" and appreciate the great forum we all enjoy here........some truly nice folk and helpful at that! Oh yeah.......I am certainly not speaking of SMC!!! ;)

[Sean Hughto]

So a lot of thoughts there.

My 2 cents:

- in any group there will always be the regulars who know and interact with each other the most. We used to call tehm clicks in high school. That's just human nature.

- as far as the artist's intent, I don' think intent matters at all in judging quality. The only thing that matters in judging quality is the actual quality of the physical work - the piece itself as realized. Now, the question then becomes, who is a fair judge of that quality. Everyone has a opinion, but that doesn't make all opinions equal. A person with a good eye is someone who is a connoisseur of the subject being judged - they have made themselves students of the art or craft form at issue and truly appreciate it. They have also worked to eliminate prejudices and preconceptions. They also must truly love the form; for example, if someone hates jazz music as a general matter, they are not fit to judge what jazz is good and what jazz is bad.

- one must definitely have a thick skin to put stuff in public. My approach is to try to simply follow my bliss - try to please myself first. I hope some others might agree with my choices and like the object too, but I know it is inevitable that you will not please everyone. People have different tastes. What I personally find the most harmful to my creative process in this vein is when when off hand negative comments leave an association in your mind with the piece - you may not agree with the criticism, but once you hear it, you can't look at the piece without thinking of it.

[Roger Chandler]

My thoughts on intent, were this Sean.....some prefer a different form for a bowl than for example the ones you do with beads. To me, there are not many who equal your form and quality in bowls, and I like the beaded foot on some of yours, and your ogee curve..........when I think of bowl forms I want to emulate.....yours come to mind.

There may be some who believe a bowl form with an ogee is not what a bowl should be..........then dismiss the form you do as not up to par......[that may be an unlikely scenario, but we will just use it as an example]......in that example, their bias and their insistence that they are "right" just makes their critique illegitimate!

That is the kind of thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, because they have dismissed the intent of the artist, and as you say are not qualified to be a judge of others who play jazz! ;):D

[Bob Bergstrom]

"There may be some who believe a bowl form with an ogee is not what a bowl should be..........then dismiss the form you do as not up to par". It has been said of a famous hollow turner that if you ask him about a segmented piece he won't acknowledge that is is even a turning. Yes we all have our buttons to push or ways of voicing our dislikes for certain pieces. If a post asks for opinions on the turning then he or she should be ready for positives and negatives.

[Brian Kent]

Thank you for starting the discussion, Roger.
There are mistakes and bum moves with every system. That said, here is the pattern I see in the turner's forum (which I think is pretty darned good).

Beginners - like me - and first-time super beginners on the next step of learning - like me: We get all kinds of encouragement and ideas on techniques. We are hungry for the kudos and for the ideas. People are really respectful of first-efforts. Further recommendations are usually offered after a pat on the back with careful words like, "You might want to give this a try…"

People who have turned a few: Always a thumbs up on every piece, but a little freer with critique like, "Good job on the finish. That form doesn't do it for me, but you stepped outside the box and I have to give you credit for trying something new."

Intermediate turners: Same, with a little more comfort in saying, "I like your last one better than this one. The foot was more subtle. But it is beautiful grain."

People who sell their stuff in galleries and get their work displayed in WOW: These folks already have confidence in the fact that they can do excellent work, so people go to great detail on each subtle curve. The comments are received and respected and often tried in the next turning.

So I learn a lot by these detailed comments even though I am too new to understand how anyone could find a flaw in something that perfect.

And a note about cliques - where I work we just try to make sure when there are circles of friendships we remind each other to look for people who don't have a circle of friends and invite them in. I have to say that as a 6-year woodworker but a 1st year turner that I am amazed how many turners of all levels - including the WOW experts - are willing to take time to teach me and encourage me, even when I feel like I'm asking a ridiculous number of questions and show off every little bowl I try along the way. (Thanks everyone!)

[Dan Hintz]

Roger... a few pieces posted anonymously would go a long way to determining how biased someone is to the artist (and I see that happen here often enough). I may like a specific piece, but I don't gush over the next one simply because it was done by the same person... the next piece had better be just as interesting if I'm to gush again.

[Roger Chandler]

well said, Brian!

[Wally Dickerman]

Roger, I agree with just about everything you have said. Especially the mutual admiration society. Yes, there will always be "self appointed" critiquers on every forum. I think that most, but certainly not all, give critiques that I agree with. I have been doing this for a very long time and I've noticed that certain forms become the "norm" for a time and if a piece that is being critiqued doesn't come up to that, many will fault the piece. For instance, the "tucked in" look at the bottom. 15 or 20 years ago almost nobody was doing that. The tiny openings of HF's is something that is relatively new. Were the pieces done 25 yars ago with wide openings and not tucked in,poor forms? By todays standards some seem to think so.

When a person asks for a critique I feel that I have to be careful about what I say. There are some fragile egos out there. What some really want are the usuall attaboys. Lets face it....once in a while someone posts a piece that in my opinion is just butt-ugly. In that case, I remain silent. Some of the regulars feel that they have to comment and will say that it's a nice piece which doesn't help the person at all. A critique that isn't a constructive criticism isn't helpful to the turner and is a poor critique.

There is a big difference in critiquing a piece from photos compared to actually handling the piece. In my classes I always do a critique of all the work that's done. I do this for the benefit of the class and I really say what I think. They are there to learn. At my club meetings we have an instant gallery and I critique the pieces. (Hey, they gotta be nice to the senior turner) Over time I've learned to first say something nice about the piece. Then, some members really want an opinion in depth and others don't. I make an effort to find out who just wants an attaboy. Don't want any hurt feelings.

I hate to see poor advice given to newbies but it often happens. When asking about tools and techniques they are hopefully getting advice from someone who has the experience and knowledge to give good answers. That isn't always the case and unfortuanately, the newbie doesn't know how to sort out the good from the not so good. That's a pet peeve of mine.

[Roger Chandler]

Roger... a few pieces posted anonymously would go a long way to determining how biased someone is to the artist (and I see that happen here often enough). I may like a specific piece, but I don't gush over the next one simply because it was done by the same person... the next piece had better be just as interesting if I'm to gush again.

That is the thing......most of these forums do not allow anonymous postings......nor should they IMO....we just have to remember not everyone sees things in the same light.....which is good!!!

[Roger Chandler]

Roger, I agree with just about everything you have said. Especially the mutual admiration society. Yes, there will always be "self appointed" critiquers on every forum. I think that most, but certainly not all, give critiques that I agree with. I have been doing this for a very long time and I've noticed that certain forms become the "norm" for a time and if a piece that is being critiqued doesn't come up to that, many will fault the piece. For instance, the "tucked in" look at the bottom. 15 or 20 years ago almost nobody was doing that. The tiny openings of HF's is something that is relatively new. Were the pieces done 25 yars ago with wide openings and not tucked in,poor forms? By todays standards some seem to think so.

When a person asks for a critique I feel that I have to be careful about what I say. There are some fragile egos out there. What some really want are the usuall attaboys. Lets face it....once in a while someone posts a piece that in my opinion is just butt-ugly. In that case, I remain silent. Some of the regulars feel that they have to comment and will say that it's a nice piece which doesn't help the person at all. A critique that isn't a constructive criticism isn't helpful to the turner and is a poor critique.

There is a big difference in critiquing a piece from photos compared to actually handling the piece. In my classes I always do a critique of all the work that's done. I do this for the benefit of the class and I really say what I think. They are there to learn. At my club meetings we have an instant gallery and I critique the pieces. (Hey, they gotta be nice to the senior turner) Over time I've learned to first say something nice about the piece. Then, some members really want an opinion in depth and others don't. I make an effort to find out who just wants an attaboy. Don't want any hurt feelings.

I hate to see poor advice given to newbies but it often happens. When asking about tools and techniques they are hopefully getting advice from someone who has the experience and knowledge to give good answers. That isn't always the case and unfortuanately, the newbie doesn't know how to sort out the good from the not so good. That's a pet peeve of mine.

Thank you for weighing in on this Wally........good perspective you have brought to the discussion!

[Fred Belknap]

SMC is one of the best run forums going. I appreciate all the nice comments people make when I post something that is less than stellar but I'm really not fooled into thinking my stuff is in the same category as many here. Promoting turning and knowledge along with mutual enjoyment and friendship keeps me coming here. I appreciate the respect that most show toward others. A good squabble might be fun but I for one am glad they aren't allowed here, I do appreciate a respectful disagreement.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I suggest everyone be familiar with the Critique Sticky thread written by Creeker Chris Hartley concerning how to give a postitive critique: http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?56171-Critique-Documents-Sticky.

When someone asks for a critique, they need to be prepared that some people can be brutally blunt and frankly, those type of critiques are of little value. If a critique insults or hurts the feelings of the artist, the information will probably be disregarded and.....the person giving that blunt critique could be seen as a jerk.

Art is subjective. An artist's "intent" can also be subjective and thus observers may not see it in the same light as the artist. What may appear as obvious to one, may not be so obvious to another. What may appear beautiful to one....may not be beautiful to another person on this planet. Subjective...allows for personal interpretation and views.

A critique is an opinion and I don't know that it is required that the person providing the critique be skilled......it's a review...a critical review or opinion.

But it can be done without being caustic or brutally blunt.

[Sean Hughto]

I've made some bowls without beads. ;-)

But intent, what I was tryign to say is that the maker is presumably always intending to make something good - sometimes the maker suceeds, and other times not so much. The intent - the aim - to make something good or with whatever attribute you care to name won't change the piece sitting in front of you. If I meant to make a comfortable chair, but the one I produce causes back aches, should the kind critic give me points for aiming to make a comfortable chair? Would you want that chair in your house?

So I hear you using the word "intent" a bit differently. You too are talking about the artist's aim, but are assuming the aim has been realized and that the would-be critic is not a fan of that aim. Like if I aimed to make a Shaker side table and succeed in making a kick ass one, and someone says "it sucked because Shaker tables suck no matter how well made, Federal tables are the only valid form." And yeah, that's a crap critique, because someone who doesn't like the form/style/genre etc., doesn't even have to see the piece to know they won't like it. It's the ultimate prejudice. They simple cannot even see it for all intents and purposes - they have ruled the intial aim/intent invalid a priori.

[Roger Chandler]

I've made some bowls without beads. ;-)

But intent, what I was tryign to say is that the maker is presumably always intending to make something good - sometimes the maker suceeds, and other times not so much. The intent - the aim - to make something good or with whatever attribute you care to name won't change the piece sitting in front of you. If I meant to make a comfortable chair, but the one I produce causes back aches, should the kind critic give me points for aiming to make a comfortable chair? Would you want that chair in your house?

So I hear you using the word "intent" a bit differently. You too are talking about the artist's aim, but are assuming the aim has been realized and that the would-be critic is not a fan of that aim. Like if I aimed to make a Shaker side table and succeed in making a kick ass one, and someone says "it sucked because Shaker tables suck no matter how well made, Federal tables are the only valid form." And yeah, that's a crap critique, because someone who doesn't like the form/style/genre etc., doesn't even have to see the piece to know they won't like it. It's the ultimate prejudice. They simple cannot even see it for all intents and purposes - they have ruled the intial aim/intent invalid a priori.

Sean........you have articulated exactly what I was speaking of.......because of bias, some form styles have no appeal to some who gladly pooh pooh the piece, no matter if the artist succeeded in doing his/her intended piece with skillful accumen.

[Sean Hughto]

A critique is an opinion and I don't know that it is required that the person providing the critique be skilled......it's a review...a critical review or opinion.



I think it's useful to an artist (or "maker" if you prefer a less loaded term) to get a sense of whether people like the work. Everyone is, of course, able to say what they like. Such a poll does tell the artist something generally useful. However, the most valuable sort of feedback for the artist is insight as to the quality level perceived by someone who knows what they are looking it - who has trained their eye to identify quality. Works don't exist in a vacuum and quality is relative. In essence, when judging a work, the critic is assessing how the piece in front of them compares to similar works now and historically. Think of a room in a museum full of paintings - rank them in terms of quality (which do you covet and why - which miss the mark in comparison to the others and why). A critic does not have to be an artist (i.e., your point re "skill"). To be a good critic, they just have to have earnestly looked at a lot paintings, so to speak.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Sean....when I think of intent......I think of it something less measureable....less quantifiable..than the quality of my work....

For example....I try to turn a piece that I intent to have a Pueblo indian "feeling" about it........not necessarily an exact style but more of an atmosphere.

[Sean Hughto]

Ken, I could have picked any attribute in my example. I was just picking the most general - aiming to make something "good." But I could have said, "the maker intended to produce something with a Pueblo Indian feeling;" "the maker intended to make a bowl with a fair curve;" "the maker intended to make a bowl, not a funnel." ;-) The piece as realized is either good it's not; either Pueblo feel or it's not; either fair or not; either a bowl or funnel. There's ultimately no "quality points" for simply trying (there may be other kinds of value in trying, of course), only for succeeding.

[charlie knighton]

i believe there are far more attaboys 2 years ago than today. i believe that there are many lurkers who are very skillful, who just do not post except for certain turners. i believe the skill level of this board has increased dramacticly, and with the new skill level an awareness of what is accepted as good has become standardized. Wally mentioned the changing standard. i would like more critiques, i just get carried away with what i am doing i do not pay any attention.

[Alan Trout]

I just don't post very much with critiques or post that much period. If I see something that suits my taste I might say something. Just like in everyday society there are those that are more popular and will garner more attention then others. Not that it is bad. Other times I will post on someone that are personal friends of mine. Those post are more on a personal level to me. Roger I fully understand what you mean. "Back Slapping" goes on all the time in many art forms. That is what the Academy Awards are all about.

What I personally like to see in critiques is if you like something, be specific with what you like. If you dislike something, be specific. This allows the maker and the other observers something to contemplate about the piece.

Having a thick skin in not a bad idea. I make what I like and if I did not like it I would not post a picture. Just be ready for someone that does not like it as much as yourself.

Alan

[Deane Allinson]

The Creek is a good place to go. Good people and good work here. Critiques are good for beginners, and most of the opions, from most of the responders are valid because experienced turners understand proportions, what is "eye pleasing", quality of finish, etc. Critiquing of non-beginner works is a little different. I see the "standard" art references mostly on other forums (picasso and rockwell (norman that is)). Well definately different camps, but both long dead, as in, not current. Craft pieces, artisan, technical pieces, etc. can't be criticized with the same standards as traditional turning.
I always ask for criticism on anything thing I post. One of my best pieces had several of the "the foot is too tall" comments. I just snickered and moved on.
I've seen several comments on C. Burchard's "selling out" to the art crowd on another forum. Pretty wierd. Granted less turning but then a lathe is a tool.
I personally like any type of criticism, good, bad, valid, invalid, even comical or tacky. At least it is seen and considered before it is pushed under the bead.
Remember that most turned bowls are really a pretty "Minimalist" art object.
I prefer it looks like crap and a waste of good wood to the platatude "nice wood, nice form" that I have given out myself just to be safe and not offend or discourage someone.

Deane

[Brian Kent]

I
What I personally like to see in critiques is if you like something, be specific with what you like. If you dislike something, be specific. This allows the maker and the other observers something to contemplate about the piece.
Alan

Good point, Alan. That gives group coaching on specific ideas to do and not to do next time.

Also, I remember a jazz concert I saw as a kid. A creative sax player tried something that did not work at all. It was awful. When he was done, he came to the microphone and said, "Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. That time it didn't." And he smiled and started in on the next piece. I give him credit for playing something different even though that time it didn't stretch the boundaries, it went way past them and fell flat. And then I give him credit for backing off a bit and starting back in to try something else.

[Roger Chandler]

An example is appropriate here.......let us say, there are people who do not like finials on a hollow form......to them hollow forms should not have a finial because in their mind, a finial detracts from the form itself, or at least competes with it........

Now, because they have this view.......when someone posts a hollow form with a finial........even though that was the full intent of the turner, then the work is viewed, at the start, with a negative.....which can reflect the view of the one commenting rather than the intent and accomplished work the turner poured himself/herself into.

My point is that when a person says......I like a finial, and that was my design element,done on purpose, or lets say, I like a foot on a vessel [like I do] then that ought to be factored into the critique as the intent of the turner. Now the one commenting can say "I think it would look better without a finial or a foot, or here is what I would do differently on that finial.......[such as changing the curve and making elements smaller as you go to the tip, etc] those would be most helpful, and not just some blanket dismissal of the work because it has a finial or a foot, or whatever..........

Does that make sense to anyone?

[Brian Kent]

Totally. A statement about my preferences does not insult your preferences or the resulting work of art.

[David DeCristoforo]

Why should there be a "line" at all? I'm not referring to the line between being rude or obnoxious and being considerate on a basic human level. I'm referring to the line between offering an honest opinion and simply making a useless perfunctory comment.


For one thing, we need to realize that one does not need to be a "good artist" to be a good critic. This is a common misconception. In fact, one can be a good critic without being an artist at all. But one cannot be a good critic without being honest.


A "thick skin" has been suggested. But a "thick skin" is just another way to suggest keeping one's ego out of the equation. Most times, this is not possible because we are human. We tend to take pride in what we make and can't wait for others to see and praise it. But the praise must be deserved to be of any use. Perhaps, in some situations, encouragement would be of greater value.


It has been suggested many times that if one wants a real critique, one asks for it. If one does not ask, we can assume that the poster simply wants "strokes". Then it's up to each individual to decide how to respond or of to respond at all.


Finally, one must never fail to understand that everything we offer will be received subjectively. The old saying applies… "One man's (you know what) is another man's shoe polish".

[Mark Levitski]

Bravo, Roger, for the thread. When I see the "edit" trailer below you post, I know the subject was well thought out by you and deserved the careful edit/layout to get the delicate point across.

I for one am not of the ilk of "show-and-tell-and oh-that's swell". I do comment on things that strike me as very good, but I shy away from negative critique, even though later it might turn out to be positive.

I like the comraderie here, but I am not a clubbie or a joiner--I'm a bit of a hermit. I have gained enormously from the start-up knowledge for woodturning here, and at other forums. I continue to do so. But I am not convinced that those who post a trailer that says something like "comments and criticism welcome" truly mean it. You want critique but then don't like what I say? Sorry I hurt your feelings, but you DID ask. It's like when my wife asks if I liked the dinner she cooked. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. Does she want me to lie? Maybe. Does she want to keep making something that I don't really like then? I don't think so.

My wife is a writer, and as such meets with the issue of accepting criticism in her work from her peers and mentors. It can be, and perhaps should be, brutally honest. It is sometimes downright discouraging. Encouragement simply for its own sake though is not always the best way. When one asks and then doesn't like what they hear, then that's when the process of critique fails in its purpose. The purpose is, I think, to open one up to look at themselves and their work. To look only for less that honest input, or to want only positive praise, is to close down the looking.

The aethetics? Who cares. Well, actually, everyone cares. No one cares in the same way though. If you're selling work, then the customer tells you what's good. Otherwise, please yourself even if what pleases you is to hear praise from anywhere you can find it. If you look in the right places, you will find someone who will praise you.

The technical expertise by those here on the Creek might have grown in the past years. Has the ability for self-reflection and to truly listen grown with it?

[Fred Perreault]

I have been a Creeker for almost 4 years. The first couple of years I posted items and the comments and offerings caused me to become a better turner (my opinion) and look at my work and effort more objectively. There is a wealth of information and experience here, but it is not easy when we are reading printed words without any personal contact or voice inflection. I don't believe that I have ever offered more than an "attaboy" regarding other's work. I don't consider myself qualified to say any more than that, and having thinish skin myself, I sometimes might see a comment that seemed brusque, but was probably more how it was "heard" rather than how it was said. I also have visited other woodworking sites, but seldom visit them any more. I check in at the Creek every day, and spend .... never mind how much time....:) reading and absorbing the content. I even visit many of the other forums to see what I can pick up. I don't believe that there is a woodworking resource anywhere at any price that can compete with Sawmill Creek. With human nature being what it is, I think that the Creek is as pleasant and friendly as could be.

Point: this week my PM 3520 started making a clicking sound. Now, where would one go to get the answer to that issue? I had seen it broached in the past, so I searched... another great feature.... and found a couple possibilities. From deciding to solve my clicking sound to final resolution and quiet running was 35 minutes.

Some folks are blunt but don't mean to be offensive. Some folks are tactfull and come across tenderly, even over cyberwaves. Some folks are opinionated by nature. Some folks are quietly lurking, learning and prospering from it. I am sure that we have all of those kinds of folks, and more, just like the real world. I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion thus far, and look for more comments. Thanks, Roger.

[Michael Stafford]

I visit and occasionally participate on a number of forums. My frequency of participation is governed by how much time I want to spend on the computer rather than in the shop. The following are my observations regarding "critiques".

1. Good work receives lots of positive comments from lots of people. Good work is a relative term and as someone once said art is in the eye of the beholder.
2. Bad work receives few or no comments. Poorly conceived, ill proportioned, badly turned, poorly sanded and finished work will usually be ignored by people unless comments are requested. I see work meeting this description routinely posted by the same individuals on multiple forums. Most of us have posted bad work while we were learning. A sure sign that your work is not what it should be is that few comments are made about it. Not a sin or a problem. The goal is to get better.
3. Every forum has a few people who will "Attaboy" every single piece that is posted. Their comments are not useful in improving your work.
4. If you are not receiving as many comments as you would like you need to improve your work.
5. To improve your work ask for comments and critiques. Sincerely ask for help. It is important that if you ask for comments that you receive them in a positive manner. If you are thin skinned and unable to assess the quality of your own work objectively it might be best that you not ask. You might get upset by what you read. It has been my experience that there are many people willing to offer helpful and constructive criticism. It will be necessary to work through the comments and determine their meaning but generally more experienced turners are more than willing to help with with technique, design, form, execution, finishing and photography.
6. Apply those suggestions to your work and see if your work improves. If your work is improving folks will tell you and favorable responses will increase. I have observed the improvement of countless number of turners who followed this process over the years. The real advantage to posting one's work is to receive suggestions for improvement.

I don't know how any viewer of a piece of work is going to know the "intent of the artist". If someone "intends" to paint a painting like the Mona Lisa and upon completion it looks like Groucho Marx in drag are we supposed to say "Attaboy" because of the intent? Are we suppose to pass out gold stars like in kindergarten? Sometimes it is possible to understand or interpret the motivation for a piece but understanding the intent of the artist is not likely. Just because a piece of work posted does not receive many comments does not mean there is a "clique" conspiring to ignore the poster. It could be that folks are sparing the feelings of the poster because the work is not good. Sometimes it is hard to accept that reality. To improve everyone must first recognize that their work needs improvement.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

First, everybody has a right to an opinion about a turned piece regardless of their skill level if any. I see a lot of art that I can't distinctly point out what I like about it but I like it.

There is a distinct difference between a comment and a critique. Accept that which is given as the intent of the person giving it.

Understand, that though you might deem changes would make a piece more desirable, others may feel it is just fine as it is and therefore a comment suffices to express their opinion.

There is no excuse for people being brash, blunt, cruel, unkind, calloused, cold or caustic with their critiques except that the person providing it prefers to be a self-anointed arrogant jerk. Period. While some may argue that providing that blunt critique was meant to improve the artist, I would suggest that not only does it not help that artist but if any less skilled, shy budding artist reads the critique, they will be hesitant to ever post one of their pieces for review at that site for fear of similar treatment. There is no excuse for unkind, uncivil remarks. You can be critical in a positive, civil, kind manner and reach more people.

You cannot compare critiques given by employers or co-workers in private to being brash, cold or blunt with a review in public. Whether by accident or intent, there is no excuse to embarrass someone publicly.

Be critical? Yes....but be civil and kind in the process.

Again....for reference: http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?56171-Critique-Documents-Sticky

[Nate Davey]

This is a discussion I had on another forum with similar results. I agree with Mike Staffords points 1&2. One of the first bowls I posted when I started turning was pretty bad. Sanding scratches left everywhere, poor finish...typical beginning turner mistakes. Everyone crowed how nice it was except for one gent who gave me an honest critique. I went back and fixed it and what a difference it made. It has helped me more than any of the pats on the back for work I knew was substandard. John Keeton and Steve Schlumpf are both masters of offering spot on critique with out bruising egos. I ask for honest critique and I hope to get it...but I know if a piece isn't well done when I post it. I'll stop rambling now.

[robert baccus]

All good ideas and points. I think we need to be more tolerant to new trial pieces out in left field. these should not bt critized for their form or taste but perhaps ecceptability. Also certain specifications such as "thin" become holy---------glossy becomes a sign of proper workmanship. These are qualities but not necessarilyjudgement points as much as taste or design ingredent. I like to do bowls with totally different shape inside and outside and a thin criticism here is rediculous. Let us be tolerant. Inovation is seldom conventational by nature

[Mike Cruz]

Roger, here are my thoughts:

First of all, if a poster does not ask for C&C, I almost never give it. They might get an attaboy from me, but that is all I'll give. IF they do ask for C&C, I'll tell it like it is. Bottom line. You asked, I'll give you my opinion. That said, my opinion is what it is worth. But I won't hold back. And it doesn't matter if you are a first time turner or as seasoned pro. Am I one of the seasoned pros? Nope. Do I understand what makes a good turning? Yeah, pretty much.

What makes a good form? Well, it has to look pleasing. What is pleasing? Well, there are "rules". Generally speaking the 1/3 - 2/3 rule makes for an eye pleasing piece. Does a form HAVE to comply with that rule? Absolutely not! But IF you are going to play with that rule, you've gotta be careful. Sometimes there is a fine line between your initial reaction to a piece being "Veeeeeeery Intersting..." and "AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!"

Generally speaking that fine line is consistent flowing curves, and smooth transitions. When either or both of those are not "happening", you tend to get the latter response.

Now, art is subjective. What one person likes, the other hates. This is where the crux of your topic comes in. The society of which you speak will undoubtedly have as different view of what is "pretty" in 10-20 years. Not that they will think that early 21 century turning are ugly. Just that they are so...yesterday. And we don't do "that" anymore. But that has happened for 1000 years, and it'll happen for 1000 more.

What is not arbitrary or subjective is attention to detail. Fit and finish are key. You can make a piece with the best form, the most beautiful wood, and use the best (if there is such a thing) finish available. But if you have tool marks, sanding marks, or finishing marks (drips, runs, lap marks, etc), the piece, in my opinion, is ruined. Likewise, a piece that is so-so formwise and even maybe with not so stellar or even plain wood with impeccable finish (no marks and a crisp finish) is then simply a piece that can either be appreciated or not based on preference.

On HFs, some like a tuck, some don't. Some go the opposite route and curve back out on the bottom! Some like HFs that are end grained turned. Others, bowl grain orientation. Some like small openings, others don't care. Some like thin walls...as thin as can be possibly made. Others like thick walls because it shows "heft and solidness". All of THESE things are preferences that you may be addressing that a certain "few" are honing in on that is "proper form".

But, again, what is not debatable is the attention to detail AFTER the turning is done. Sanding and finishing. I don't care if you take a Mike and Cynthia piece, a Keller, a Schlumph, Hackler, or a Keeton... If I can see tool marks, sanding marks, or any kind of "finish" mark on them, they are simply sub par. That said, I can preeeeeeeety much guarantee you that you won't find any of those things on their pieces. ;) Why? Because they all have pay attention to the fine details that set their pieces apart.

I have personally seen Keller whip up a "bell" that was to be a Christmas ornament. There were some bumps along the way, and he discarded it as a POS, and was about to throw it away. I (luckily for me) stopped him from that. A coat or two of oil was thrown on that POS. It may not have perfect proportions. It may not be "valuable art". But I'll tell you this: What he saw as trash STILL didn't have a mark on it that my eagle eyes could detect. And that, in my opinion, lifts it up to a higher standard.

So, if you (and throughout this entire post, I don't mean "you" as in you, Roger...just the general public "you") are going to ask for C&C, you SHOULD be prepared to hear what people really think. Not that everyone will give it to you. Most don't want to come across as mean, rude, or hurtful. My thought? Either if you can't handle the truth about what another turner thinks of your turning, don't ask! Or, more importantly, use what you hear as feedback as a way to learn and grow. Do you have to listen to what everyone says? Nope. But take it in. Experiment. See what YOU like after "playing" with your shapes and details.

Attaboys are nice to get. But they don't help you grow as a turner. They just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. If that is all you want/need, just post your stuff and collect "Nice! Great! Fine job! I like it!"s all day long.

[David Walser]

Roger,

I wish we had before us the critiques that, in your view, went over the line. I'm confident that we would learn as much from what the writers wrote into the critiques as from what the readers reads into them. What is meant by: "I think the finial detracts from the piece." Does that mean a particular hollow form would look better without a particular finial? Or, does that mean that the writer wouldn't like any finials on any hollow forms? The first meaning flows directly from what was written. The second meaning had a lot of baggage added to it by the reader.

[Roger Chandler]

Okay.......I have provoked the thoughts of a number of folks in this turning community........again, lest I be misunderstood......I am not referring to myself! I stated that in the beginning post in this thread, and the fact that I have not been slighted in the least.......folks have generally been kind and helpful, and in a few cases over the years blunt and to the point......that is all great by me!

My point about artist intent.....although it has been asked how can you measure intent?.......well, when someone posting a work states they made a finial because they felt a finial would bring the finishing touches to a form that looked plain without one........that ought to be considered, in my opinion by those critiquing.

Perhaps those posting their work for review should do a better job of not only showing a pic, but explaining what they were going for, so others may be able to take that into consideration. There are I think communication problems at times between the poster and the reviewers.......and whether anyone wants to admit it or not, there is the occasional, [and it is generally the exception, not the rule,] person who just pooh poohs anything that does not suit their tastes.

I am not referring to tool marks, poor finishes, and such, but rather design elements.......my wish is that the comments would focus on how to make the design element flow better......for example, the finial......something to the effect of "the onion would have better proportion to the rest of the piece if it was smaller in diameter" ...or the cove coming up from the top of the form needs to be thinner at the transition back to the bead above it."

My observation in 3 years of interacting on forums in woodturning is that there are those "cliques" which as observed by Sean in his post, are part of human nature, and to their credit, there are moderators who I have witnessed who seem to go out of their way to make the newbie or the struggling turner feel welcome and at times offer pointers in a gentle way.......that is a classy individual who does that, in my opinion!

I have also observed that some posters, even though their work is done very well, seem not to get much response........it seems that if it is round and brown only, and not embellished with piercing or paint or pyrography, or bows, bells and whistles, that round and brown are viewed as common........at times, it is the lack of comments generally, that discourages those who are looking for feedback but maybe do not communicate it well. That is part of what I termed the communication problems between posters and responders.......that can be worked on from both sides!

The last thing I want to happen with this thread......is for misunderstandings to take place....what I hoped to accomplish by it is to create awareness that without it being said, there is an impression left on some forums that If it is not "artsy-fartsy" we are not interested!

Whether or not you personally may agree or disagree with that statement, I can tell you that I am not the only one that has observed such being the case, so there is definite validity to that observation........although I will say this, there are dynamics that play out in interactions between people that are not always even realized by those involved and nothing is intended to be hurtful or discouraging.

Last of all........I just want everyone to know this........I truly appreciate the turning community! Most of the individuals who I have met, either personally or online are fine folks! My sincerest appreciation for all the times guidance and encouragement was offered to me as I took up this wonderful craft of turning wood!

Awareness.......that was my goal!

[Richard Jones]

My $.02........

When someone asks for C & C, I tend to give it, depending. When I ask for it, I want it. "I don't like finials" is OK to say, but you can't leave it at that. "I don't like finials, but yours is 1. perfect, 2. too short, 3. a bit fat at the bottom 4. etc. ........ Learning how to critique a piece is important for all of us, not just about others' work, but our own as well. What you don't like about a piece is usually easy. Why you don't like it makes you think harder. What is it you don't like about it? Sometimes I see pieces that I think are hideous. Others think they are the best thing since air conditioning. That's just human nature. And honestly, sometimes I can't get past what I perceive to be butt ugly, no matter how technically perfect it may be. I guess that's a shortcoming of mine. And I agree that the name of the poster can lead to wonderful reviews, even it the piece is horrid. "I left the sanding marks on this to represent Man's daily interaction with life's pitfalls...." Really?

Bottom line, I'm very equivocal. If you ask me a question, I answer it, no hidden agenda, etc. I appreciate the same from others. Sometimes it's not what I wanted to hear, but it does make me a better turner. Keep those C&C's coming!

[Mike Cruz]

Richard, not enough people "tell it like it is". If I can't see anything wrong, anything I'd change, or anything I'd have done differently (or tried, at least...), I'll give a big attaboy. But I don't care who it is that is posting, and it could be one of the big names, if I see something that doesn't look "right", I'll say so. The odd thing is, there have been a couple of threads (maybe here, maybe somewhere else...I don't remember) that every single responder to a thread by a "name" (and I think you know what I mean by that), gushed over the piece. I was the only one that pointed details out and/or asked questions about the form. Oddly enough, my questions went unaddressed.

Unfortunately, people bandwagon on the attaboys to certain peoples' turnings. Even when they ask for C&C. None is given. Just "beautiful" "gorgeous" and the likes. We perpetuate the forms and ideas of what the proper form is by simply bandwagoning...

[Richard Jones]

Mike,

Agree fully, and that sure doesn't help our craft, does it?

[Michael Stafford]

You know what I don't see is the communication of what makes a piece eye appealing. In some of the books this is communicated very well (The Art of Turned Bowls by Richard Raffan for instance). If some of the more highly skilled and recognized turners would participate in the various forums and voice their opinions all of the turning community would benefit.

[Steve Schlumpf]

This subject comes up every couple of years or so, so I haven't weighed in until this point as it just rehashes the same info.

The subject of this thread is where to draw the line when offering a critique. In my mind, it is simple. As long as the person offering the critique is doing so to help and assist the turner requesting the critique, fine. If you have knowledge of that particular style of form or turning, share your experience. If you do not, you can still offer your viewpoint but state that it is your opinion. Everyone has likes and dislikes, sharing those only assist the requester if you explain the 'why' that goes with that viewpoint.

To me, it is the responsibility of the one offering the critique to word things such that the requester can build on their experience and move forward. If it is the intent of the critiquer to be blunt/brutally honest, fine, but they should use all of their words and phrase it so the requester can learn something. If they cannot post their critique in a positive manner, then they should not post because it provides no benefit to the requester and doesn't help the critiquer's rep either.

[David C. Roseman]

Haven’t spent enough time yet on this board to have much of a feel for patterns in comments based on name/novice/pro/amateur distinctions. I’ve noticed that some posters tend to get more responses, but my impression so far is that this forum stands out as especially thoughtful, kind and supportive to most everyone who posts. It also seems pleasantly spare of some of the pedantic, “know-it-all” commentary I see from time to time elsewhere. So when I saw Roger’s initial post, my first reaction was puzzlement. As more comments followed, I think I see the subtlety of the points he and others are making. My take-aways:



When a member posts a photo of a piece, the effect of any response or lack of it depends in part on what he/she intends to communicate. Intent might range from, “This is what I did, don’t let this happen to you,” to “Thought I’d try this; curious if you think it worked,” to “Here’s my entry into the juried art show next week; I was pleased with how it turned out.” So it really does help to signal what is intended, and, depending on that, perhaps why something was done a particular way.
If comment and criticism is expressly invited, then it seems appropriate for at least someone to reply. Radio silence may mean approval, or disapproval, or nothing at all. But I see how it could easily be taken as crushing indifference.
Regardless of whether the comment is on technical execution or something more subjective, like use of color, texture or form, it should be honest. But that doesn’t mean it need not be tactful. How something is said makes a world of difference, even when the literal message is the same. I am reminded of something a lecturer in communication skills once pointed out. I can say to someone, “When I look into your eyes, time stands still!” Or I can say, “Your face could stop a clock!” Same literal message, but almost certainly different responses.

David

[Curt Fuller]

I haven't read all the responses on this subject this time around but when I saw Steve Schlumpf's response I decided to read it. I usually agree with most everything Steve has to say. But in this situation I think I differ a little. I'm not sure that it's the responsibility of the person providing a critique to also be a teacher. A critique should tell the maker what you do or don't like about their work. But telling them what to change or how to change it is stepping on their toes in an artistic license sort of way.
I'm also a collector of other people's words of wisdom and have some pretty huge files on my computer where I've saved things that struck home for me. There's a guy by the name of Randy Pausch, he passed away a few years ago, but he was a pretty amazing thinker. I'm not sure in what context he said this but it seems to apply on this subject.....
"When you see yourself doing something badly and nobody's bothering to tell you anymore, that's a very bad place to be. Your critics are the ones telling you they still love you and care."
I don't see any need to rudely or meanly criticize another persons work. But I feel that first and foremost you have to remember they asked for criticism. They want to know what other people think of what they've done. If the person giving the critique doesn't like it, well that's just the way it is. Don't ask the question if you don't want to hear the answer. An honest, forthright opinion is priceless. But that's also all it is, just one opinion. When you receive a negative response you should read it several times, digest it, make your own decision whether it's something that will benefit you or something you should just let go. There's no need to respond back to it, after all there really aren't any wrong critiques, just different opinions. You'll never please everyone with your work and trying to do so will only discourage you.

[Mike Cruz]

Curt, you bring up some good points. One of them reminded me of a HF that I posted (may have been on WTA, not sure...). It was a walnut HF with maple inlay. During the turning process, I got this GREAT idea for a finial! "How about a maple finial with walnut inlay...in just the opposite way that the maple was inlaid into the walnut!!!!" Well, I was really happy with how it came out. Yeah, the finial was a bit chunky. It was only the second I had ever done. But I really liked it. And what I really liked was how I brought the piece and the finial together. Well, I asked for C&C, and generally speaking it wasn't met with the warmest welcome. I had to sort through the "whys". And by the "whys", I mean, why people didn't like it. Some just didn't think the piece needed a finial. Some didn't like the shape of the finial. Some didn't like the pattern of the finial and thought it distracted from the HF. I took those critiques in and grew. I learned what I might do better in the future. BUT I also, oddly enough, got a couple of really nice comments about the finial. And one person even said that the finial "made" the turning for him.

So, what I pulled out of it was that the finial (thought and design) was not all that bad. It simply may not have been some people's choice. What I also pulled out of it was that the execution wasn't top notch. THAT I can improve on. Help, guidance, and suggestions how to improve can all help my next finial be "better". Simply saying "I don't like the finial", while honest, does not "help" me grow...because I don't know "why" you don't like it...

That said, not everyone is good at expressing their ideas, thoughts, and feelings. So, the best someone may be able to critique is "I don't like it". Hey, you asked, he responded. If he can't do better than that, you can chose to dismiss it or cry in a corner with your blankie. When we ask for critique, we can only hope that our critiquers are expressive enough to do a good job telling us "why". Hey, "I like it" is as abiguous as "I don't like it". "WHY" do you like it? That is just as helpful in letting someone in on what he did right.

Keller commented on a piece I did once. He said, from the shoulder up it is perfect. But from the shoulder down, I would have preferred to see X. He ended that with telling me that what I did wasn't bad, just not how he would have like to have seen it. This was helpful to me to look at what I did, and see if I can see what he saw. Maybe he was right and I could say...AHHHH, yes. Or, yeah, I see what he's saying, but I don't like that. Or, no way dude, you're crazy. But at least was he gave me was an honest opinion...not an attaboy, or a no you didn't nail it...with no other input.

[Steve Schlumpf]

Curt - I appreciate your viewpoint on this, but in my mind, when someone in the forum asks for a critique (and by that I am talking about the formal critique that the sticky covers), then the person doing the critique does indeed take on the role of teacher. If the person doing the critique can not offer corrective actions to those areas deemed lacking, then the person did not receive a critique, they received an opinion. Nothing wrong with that, just not the same thing in my book.

[Dale Miner]

I visit and occasionally participate on a number of forums. My frequency of participation is governed by how much time I want to spend on the computer rather than in the shop. The following are my observations regarding "critiques".

1. Good work receives lots of positive comments from lots of people. Good work is a relative term and as someone once said art is in the eye of the beholder.
2. Bad work receives few or no comments. Poorly conceived, ill proportioned, badly turned, poorly sanded and finished work will usually be ignored by people unless comments are requested. I see work meeting this description routinely posted by the same individuals on multiple forums. Most of us have posted bad work while we were learning. A sure sign that your work is not what it should be is that few comments are made about it. Not a sin or a problem. The goal is to get better.
3. Every forum has a few people who will "Attaboy" every single piece that is posted. Their comments are not useful in improving your work.
4. If you are not receiving as many comments as you would like you need to improve your work.
5. To improve your work ask for comments and critiques. Sincerely ask for help. It is important that if you ask for comments that you receive them in a positive manner. If you are thin skinned and unable to assess the quality of your own work objectively it might be best that you not ask. You might get upset by what you read. It has been my experience that there are many people willing to offer helpful and constructive criticism. It will be necessary to work through the comments and determine their meaning but generally more experienced turners are more than willing to help with with technique, design, form, execution, finishing and photography.
6. Apply those suggestions to your work and see if your work improves. If your work is improving folks will tell you and favorable responses will increase. I have observed the improvement of countless number of turners who followed this process over the years. The real advantage to posting one's work is to receive suggestions for improvement.

I don't know how any viewer of a piece of work is going to know the "intent of the artist". If someone "intends" to paint a painting like the Mona Lisa and upon completion it looks like Groucho Marx in drag are we supposed to say "Attaboy" because of the intent? Are we suppose to pass out gold stars like in kindergarten? Sometimes it is possible to understand or interpret the motivation for a piece but understanding the intent of the artist is not likely. Just because a piece of work posted does not receive many comments does not mean there is a "clique" conspiring to ignore the poster. It could be that folks are sparing the feelings of the poster because the work is not good. Sometimes it is hard to accept that reality. To improve everyone must first recognize that their work needs improvement.Mike's comments are on the mark. I would add, that in addition to his 6 points, there is perhaps another reason that some work gets many comments/suggestions, and other pieces very few. When a person asks for comments or critiques, and then is argumentative or presents an explanation that the way it was done was the only way it could be done, that person by his rebuke of the comment, indicates an unwillingness to accept/consider comments. The person that left the comment or critique, as well as others reading the comment, will be disinterested in commenting on that person's work in the future.

[Michael Stafford]

Dale, that is a good point and I have seen the argumentative defense and it does turn one off from commenting on the person's work again.

I might point out to those of you who are members of WoW that this website is one of the best for receiving insightful and helpful critiques. WoW and its membership did more than any other site in helping me to improve and to this day I continue to appreciate the constructive comments I receive there. You do have to ask for them.

[Justin Stephen]

I would say that if your critique includes a strong inference that my mother is fat, you have probably gone a little too far. She is, as it happens, but that is beside the point.

In all seriousness, I think Mike Stafford pretty much nailed it.

[Curt Fuller]

Curt - I appreciate your viewpoint on this, but in my mind, when someone in the forum asks for a critique (and by that I am talking about the formal critique that the sticky covers), then the person doing the critique does indeed take on the role of teacher. If the person doing the critique can not offer corrective actions to those areas deemed lacking, then the person did not receive a critique, they received an opinion. Nothing wrong with that, just not the same thing in my book.
Well Steve, that's why I always try to read what you have to say. You know what you're talking about!
I can honestly say that even though the critique guidelines were posted in 2007, today is the first time I've read them. For those interested, here they are.......http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?56171-Critique-Documents-Sticky
And they are an excellent set of guidelines for requesting and offering a mentor/student critique.

[Bob Rotche]

I realize I am a bit late to this party but would like to put a couple things out there. First, I agree completely that supportive but honest critique is essential for our growth as artists. The lack of it has been one of my pet peeves with these forums for years. There are some who do it very well and I always look forward to their postings as they are by far the most beneficial. We have to understand that a critique is an opinion and as such, will differ depending on who's providing it. At times they may even seem contradictory but we have to realize that is how our work is being viewed by the public as well. Some will love it and others not so much. The critique sticky is actually a really well written document and I would encourage everyone here to read it.

I also wanted to mention that I have been involved in the start up of the new turning website "Woodturners Unlimited". This is a site that is half forum and half magazine and we are very focused on the value of supportive critique. As such, we are developing a feature where a panel of 3 very respected turners, well versed in the art of critique, will perform a full, formal critique of submitted works. We are hoping to do 4 or 5 pieces for each session and these will be posted as an article in our magazine section on a recurring basis. Should be very educational for the submitting artists as well as our readers. Will still be a few weeks before we get our first critiques posted but will likely be worth your while to check it out. www.woodturnersunlimited.com

[Thom Sturgill]

Unfortunately, people bandwagon on the attaboys to certain peoples' turnings. Even when they ask for C&C. None is given. Just "beautiful" "gorgeous" and the likes. We perpetuate the forms and ideas of what the proper form is by simply bandwagoning...

I'm late to this discussion as I was at the Florida symposium all weekend. The comment above struck a chord with me.

I don't comment on a lot of postings, I comment when something that really grabs me, or I think I can make a constructive point (occasionally pointed out by grabbing their picture and altering it to show what I am trying to say.) If any point I would make has already been addressed, I am generally silent unless I think it needs re-enforcing as I don't like beating a point to death [or a turner either ;-) ]. I am much more likely to give an opinion on technical issues, as that is my bent.

Though I always ask for C&C on my own turnings, my postings are of the type that generally get a fair number of views, a few attaboys (almost always the same few posters) , and no real critique. They are, IMHO, generally clean forms, good finishes, and no real 'WOW' value, so I guess that is to be expected.