critique

>>3035095
Character - (how much do you believe the person cares and has invested in their artwork?)
1) obviously doesn't care 2)could care more 3)talented hobbyist 4)future master

Lapse - (if you forsee the potential in this person, what is the first step they should take to achieve it?)
1)do a 180, abandon all ye have learned 2) take a hint 3) you are aware of your mistakes, just implement them 4) your self judgement is sharp

Super - (what is objectively good about the artworks?)
1) there isn't anything objectively good about this artists works
2) there are some areas that are objectively good.
3) most of it is good, but it's lacking that last bit.
4) objectively perfect, (in terms of skillfulness x representation)

Tear - (emotion, does the work make you feel ?)
1) no attempt was made to capture humanity
2) some attempt was made, but failed.
3) an attempt was made, but is sophomoric.
4) shows maturity in choice of subject matter and executes it tastefully.

Response (who is the artist influenced by? is it obvious?)
1) the artist clearly is an "originale" and does not care about the art scene in general/other artists and does not comment on it.
2) the artist cares about art history, but does not successfully respond to it.
3)the artist is responding somewhat and succeeds at some level.
4)the artist is well aware of art tropes, the do's and don'ts and doesn't fall into cliches.

>>3035095

12221

And really, your best work is third one. You don't even understand at the basic level why, thinking that a turd in the middle is best because it is made with mud and looks "most realistic", like the idea a n00b would have about proper academic figure study.

You don't care about your art because you aren't analytical about it, you are obviously lazy and retarded but focus all the wrong ideas /ic/ feed you with about studying and improvement.

Go jump on a dick.

>>3035116

oddly enough, thank you