ok, this is the artwork of a friend of mine, i think some of her stuff is pretty good, and i just wanted to see what you peoples thought of it,

http://charliemalfoy.deviantart.com/
but please, be kind.

post your thoughts
on line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill online

hmm, okay. have it your way, i'll edit that bit.

it's just that she's not the most self confident person. I was just doing something i thought would make her happy, giving her a bit more publicity.

thankyou, thankyou very much

she'll like that

TheJediUnit Wrote: Anyway, I personally wouldn't call her work "art", as to me it looks better described as illustration.

well, this coming from a guy who has absolutely no artistic talent, i called it art because in my opinion, it's too good to be called drawing, but not good enough to be a masterpiece. so i chose the word in between the two: art.

on a slightly unrelated note, i think there's a photo in there somewhere of her next to the TARDIS.

and on a completely unrelated note, so unrelated in fact that it is completely random: my glass of pepsi and ice has frozen itself to the table.

Prankster bit Wrote:i called it art because in my opinion, it's too good to be called drawing, but not good enough to be a masterpiece. so i chose the word in between the two: art.

Well, a few things to note.

I used the term illustration and not drawing. In truth, all the thumbnail works are best defined as cartoonings. I'm sorry, but I can't see myself calling anything art which had single-stroked, definate-line, flat boxer underwear with red hearts and rainbow colored "wham"s, no matter how likeable and fun it is.

Also, merely being "extremely good" doesn't render the proper description irrelevant. A Maserati, while highly exceptional, is still a car, and is not an insult to call it such. Michellangelo illustrated, and astonishingly good, but that didn't mean they were no longer "illustrations" simply in so being. It also didn't mean his every great work was a masterpiece either. Masterpiece is far too often used as a general-purpose description of high compliment. However, the term masterpiece has an origin of great specificity, which is the individual work when an artist is proclaimed a master by council of classical masters in a university, when the creator has reached his talent's full flower. Over time, the term has loosened to be vastly less specific, but still refers to no less than the artist's greatest work, but generally what reflects the artist's full potential, his greatest expected level of achievement, which is why the term was seldom ever used to describe a work before an artist died, since it was then clear which work was indeed the masterpieces.

With that, I don't think it's fair to say this work is the best this particular artist will manage to do. I know it's easy to get caught up in "compliment overkill", but let's not subconsciously insult the artist by implying her best work is behind her and there is nothing more to aspire to.

Anyway, I understand what you're trying to convey when creating your own drawing/art/masterpiece hierarchy. But, as a somewhat accomplished illustrator myself, let me state that an artist never grows in the shadow of compliment, and grows even slower under the intoxicating influence of excessive compliment. The truth is, the best gift you can give a true artist, who wishes to grow, is not one ounce more compliment than necessary to be followed by a single healthy criticism.

Most of my early work was heavily complimented, by my peers. However, some members of my family, artistic themselves, were understandably less impressed, and would almost never compliment it but state several things they thought made it terrible. Mind you, they weren't just mindless insults. It would always be spot-on recommendations and critiques, but the strength was in their willingness to express it freely to me. In the end, none of my peers ever helped me one bit, and I owe my growth exclusively to those relatives who never seemed satisfied.

So, just remember that. As long as you tell the artist "wow, that is such a MASTERPIECE", you've basically told the artist nothing at all and participated in their stagnation.

Too many people dish out compliments like they're being asked what is thought of the artist's last haircut. "Oh shoog, it looks darlin'." Don't safeguard the artist's feelings like that. You need not be brutal, but you must be at least honest. And artists who think compliments are best are the ones who need the least.

No matter how special the "she" is, if you know what I mean.



Anyway, sorry if I put you to sleep. Illustration is obviously an interest of mine.

order abortion pill abortion pill buy online where to buy abortion pill

Y'all are kinda mean. I hate how art has all the sudden become this thing that needs to meet everyone else's standards. It's not comparing apples to apples since beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Mean? I think not. This thread was created to discuss this artist's work. Nothing can be discussed if one's true opinions cannot be displayed. It takes far more than simply not praising it to claim we're being mean. There is nothing mean stated here. Not by a long shot.

If you're making it to please others, then yes -- you do have to worry whether or not they like it. But not if you're just creating art for creativity sake.

To twist the expression about the tree alone in the forest, if a beautiful painting stood alone on an easel on the surface of Pluto, would it still be art? Art doesn't exist in a vacuum. It can only exist in a social habitat free to respond in it's own way.

I understand what you're saying about how an artist should follow their heart and carefully measure popular reaction. However, popular reaction is still not only important, but so is the artist's chosen way of reacting to it.

Don't forget, this artist displayed her work on a website. If she isn't prepared to receive opinions, she needs to either get prepared, or take it down. Period. Public display is the begging for public feedback.

Besides, I don't know that a single comment made here is coming to her awareness. I've been talking to the creator of this thread, not the creator of that artwork.

At any rate, suggesting that anyone here is mean in anything stated is, well, goofy. My entire academic life had at least one art classroom involved, from age 5 to age 25. Trust me, there was no room for deflecting opinons on the basis they were "just mean." Any artist who subscribed to such nonsense didn't make it anywhere. Perhaps their work is confined to their closet, free from open critisizm, but in such a case, it may as well not exist at all... or be on Pluto.

Another thing. I view an artist's reaction to critisizm as almost an extention of their work. How an artist reacts to "mean comments" is almost like a metaphorical frame around their talent. Let me tell you a quick story of what I mean, a story I think is great!

An artist was displaying a large, bold, work of modern art, consisting of, as you can imagine, lots of seemingly random splashes of color on a canvas. A father and young son wandered into the exhibit from a different part of the museum, and was clearly unimpressed with the work. The father, apparently wishing to make himself noticed to the artist, stood in front of the piece, and said to his son, knowing the artist could hear, "your dad could have made that." The artist, unphased, turned to the boy and said, "yes, he could have.


...but he didn't.."

Uhm, I'm not an admin or anything, but could we please not go too crazy arguing with this topic? Pranks just wanted to show us some work by a friend. Art does have a very broad spectrum, and people may have differnt criteria and terminology. I'm probably going to get flamed like crazy for htis post, but...there you have it. Please don't take it personally.

i could go and paste the definitions of art and illustration [which i would associate with pictures in a book] but i'm not going to for 2 reasons:

1) I really can't be bothered right now. i know it's just a click away but i'm not feeling well and i'm going to go to bed soon.

2) as FreedomForever said i didn't intend to catalyse another argument./"heated discussion" if you want to argue, please do it in another thread! all i wanted to do was to show you some of the pictures that one of my friends has drawn.from what i've heard, some of you don't seem to have bothered to actually look at the gallery. the comic on the main page isn't the best thing she's done.she hasn't got much self respect. if you ,look closely at her deviantart main page, you'll see she is depressed. we were just hoping that seeing what people other than local friends thought of her work would give her a reason to change that little icon

so, yeah. if all you want to do is discuss what art/illustration means to you, do it somewhere else. this is a place for celebrating/ criticizing Charlotte's drawings [constructively].

That's cool, Prankster Bit ~ I respect your wishes. Just to clarify, though -- I think TheJediUnit and I were just having a nice conversation about our opinions. Not some heated argument (I understand how long posts of thoughts and opinions can be interpreted as such, tho.) I think the bottom line is it does end up with semantics, where we just have different thoughts on the word definitions. Totally understandable. I shall offer my quietness on that issue now.

Prankster Bit - Hope you feel better soon, and I hope Charlotte continues her artistic/illustrative endeavors!

Well, I thought the conversation was just getting interesting, as would be my next replies, but I see I'd better halt my participation in this thread now. After talk of comments getting too mean, then talk about comments derailing the topic, and specific, constraining requests from the original author and what and who we're supposed to talk about, I can see there really isn't anything here for me to participate in. Thanks anyway.

All the best to you and your friend, Prankster.abortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion