After a note from a follower of ours and some internal thinking by yours truly, I think we need to go a little further with our Guide to Commenting. Rather than just offering up guidelines on good etiquette and structure, we should really explore the possibility of giving deviants a set of guidelines for art interpretation depending on what type of art they're commenting on.

For example:

If unknown deviant goes to look at a photograph in `olya's gallery and has read our guide, then that deviant will at least know how to structure the comment and know that he or she should be really diving into the art before writing anything. However, perhaps that deviant doesn't know much about photography and won't really know how to explore the piece to give good feedback except for that based on feelings (which by the way is just fine too).

Personally, I'd like to be able to at least sound like I know what I'm talking about and give the artist a little bit of technical interpretation, rather than a complete "emotional" response.

To do this, we'd need to get interested parties involved in this process to create these "Art Interpretation Guides" and help us out. We'd need deviants who are skilled in these areas (such as photography, pixel art, fractals, etc.) to do this sort of writing. Experts in each area so to speak.

What are everyone's thoughts on this? Begin discussion.

--
`splat
Patrick Haney, not a sausage
Designer, developer, deviant

You mean, a comment geared towards the characteristics of the particular medium?

If so, here's a list of what I can think of:
_{if not, i've made a fool of myself.}

Overall
+ Originality
+ Deviation dimensions (too large, too small?)
+ Color harmony

Photography
+ Composition (rule of thirds, etc)
+ Contrast (not washed out or too strong)
+ Focus (sharp on the subjects)


Photo Manipulation
+ Composition
+ Sizing of elements (fake perspective)
+ Consistent lighting (same lightsource on elements)
+ Color grading (same level of contrast)

(Digital) Painting
+ Brushstrokes and coloring
+ textures (in painting, must be well done)

(Digital) Drawing
+ Lineart, coloring, and shading are different aspects and should be regarded as such. Lineart could be marvelous but the coloring botched up.

Pixel Art
+ Aliasing if any
+ Lines clear?

Web Layouts
+ Good division of different sections
+ Recognizable main navigation

There's more of course, but this is all I could think of now.

--
"Enough about me, let's talk about you. What do you think of me?"

That is pretty much what I thought. Good structuring.

--
Good fortune is the aphrodisiac of the hopeless.

I really think that `blackzer0 has the ideal.... Then use members of the community.. Respected ones.... perhaps even the gallery directors (should they be willing to help) create these guides.

I think that would be the best way to go rather then one or two folks attempting to create an entire comprehensive guide.

--
Good fortune is the aphrodisiac of the hopeless.

`justthorne said, in a note, the following:

Now, ironically, HERE is where my previously established (but never fired up) account might be useful: ~criticism101 I don't care, either way, but I definitely offer it up if it would be a useful station for this kind of project.

I've never felt like it could be a good fit for the Revolution itself, but it might fit this new proposal like a glove.

Also worth noting: the prospect of requiring 100 entries to achieve legitimacy seems counter-productive to me. Better, start with more broad overviews per general categories, THEN flesh out with more specific/targeted essays.

Also worth noting: there are kinds of commenting guidance that would be useful regardless of genre, so whatever system-to-be should be "loose" enough to allow for those. "Lack of rigidity" = "encouragement to submit"?

I think the idea of the entries being submit as deviations is the right way to go, rather than as journal entries or journal forum posts. Perhaps anyone could submit, and the contributions would just have to be approved by a small editorial board for submission as a deviation. (Certain parties, of course, could be deliberately/overtly invited to submit.)

Shoot, there could even be two tiers of contribution, divided between the main gallery and the scrapbook. (I.e., the Scrapbook could become a "middle ground" between primary inclusion and flat-out rejection.)

And, of course, the forums section of the journal page could become a lively field for discussions as well, some of which might ultimately get "ironed out" into submissable material.

All just food for thought, of course.

--
`splat
Patrick Haney, not a sausage
Designer, developer, deviant

This is a step in the right direction, with much more information to be added of course. But yes, this is where I was going with it.

Each "Art Interpretation Guide" would go over the important terms for that type (ex. Photography should mention composition, the rule of thirds, etc.) as well as give some tips on how to interpret things within that piece.

The whole thing obviously still needs some planning, but you have to start somewhere.

--
`splat
Patrick Haney, not a sausage
Designer, developer, deviant

Sounds good, this could very well become an endeavour as large as the Revolution itself.

What's that about 100 entries? I don't recall that.

--
"Enough about me, let's talk about you. What do you think of me?"

That sounds like a grand idea, perhaps having "inviting" esteemed deviants from each tier to give a short review. Gallery Directors and/or important artists.

--
"Enough about me, let's talk about you. What do you think of me?"

Of course, this was a rough skeleton off the top of my head.

*ivyc replied in the forum (and I really agree) that it would be best to invite renowned artists from the community to give their input.

(And we really should get notifications in our message centers for journal forum replies.)

--
"Enough about me, let's talk about you. What do you think of me?"