Criticism

[Don Burt]

I really like what I see so far, and what you are planning. I like the precision and symmetry of the radial design, coupled with the randomness of the gold foil. At first I thought I'd like the peacock ovals to be randomly placed, but as I look at it I agree they should be symmetrical.

clip

I agree with Steve. One of my favorite techniques from the good 'drawers' and printmakers is to change the same value (in this case, black) from being a positive form (on the right) to a negative form (on the left). And I agree with all those who like to see randomness in counterpoint with radial symmetry.

[Don Burt]

I really like what I see so far, and what you are planning. I like the precision and symmetry of the radial design, coupled with the randomness of the gold foil. At first I thought I'd like the peacock ovals to be randomly placed, but as I look at it I agree they should be symmetrical.

clip

I agree with Steve. One of my favorite techniques from the good 'drawers' and printmakers is to change the same value (in this case, black (on the left, irrid on the right)) from being a positive form (on the right) to a negative form (on the left). And I agree with all those who like to see randomness in counterpoint with radial symmetry.

[Jackie Beckman]

OK Brock - I take back my previous suggestions. I was trying to figure out a way to soften the edges when I said try pinstripes and make them "float out" around the border. Now, keep in mind, all I have to do this with is a red-eye correction tool, and I've never done it before, but I tried it anyway and it takes away the entire look you were going for. It's no longer a formal piece at all. Just thought I'd give it a try, and it doesn't work:

http://dell.shutterfly.com/osi.jsp?i=67 ... 4d448b0514

It's interesting, but it's not me. I think I'm going with Steve's suggestiuon to leave the spacers empty. It will emphasize the gold, and . . .

, , , it's less work! Thanks Steve.

Actually, it's not even interesting. But it proves something I already know about myself - I have a very difficult time working outside my own "comfort zone" or style. It's a good exersize to try though. It just is horribly unsatisfying to me. In the past, whenever I've had to make something according to someone else's design, I've been unhappy with the results. That's why I refuse to do "made-to-order" pieces. But I'm glad I tried it in this fashion - it was fun because I didn't have to open the kiln to something I didn't like.

[Brock]

t's interesting, but it's not me. I think I'm going with Steve's suggestiuon to leave the spacers empty. It will emphasize the gold, and . . .

, , , it's less work! Thanks Steve.[/quote]

Actually, it's not even interesting. But it proves something I already know about myself - I have a very difficult time working outside my own "comfort zone" or style. It's a good exersize to try though. It just is horribly unsatisfying to me. In the past, whenever I've had to make something according to someone else's design, I've been unhappy with the results. That's why I refuse to do "made-to-order" pieces. But I'm glad I tried it in this fashion - it was fun because I didn't have to open the kiln to something I didn't like.

Hey, quick feedback, and no electrical use. What more could you want?

Getting back to the Man/Map conundrum, I am clever. I always ensure I have beautiful, witty, female navigators, (or drivers). Brock

[camaro]

After reading everyones post, I am curious--It seems that alot of people on this board seem to know each other personally from attending various events, or classes. For someone like me, that would love to attend such events and participate in various classes or shows, however will probably never be able to due to finances and a family, my question is:
If I were to submit work to be critiqued, how would I know who has the most experience working in glass, or the most knowlege in this area just from reading posts?
I would love to be critiqued yet I don't know who to ask? I would rather know someone who goes to various shows and events that could critique
and mentor me, than to have various random people say " great job" and it truly sucks, yet it falsely gets my hopes up, that yeah I can or I am as good as everyone else.
I want show quality critism from people that know their glass. Excellent topic. I totally agree.
If any of you do shows or have judged email me, we'll talk.
Just wanted to put my views in.
thanks
camaro

[Bert Weiss]

Camaro

While many of us have met at one of both of the conferences, I think what we "know" about each other is essentially from our writings. You will have a pretty good idea as to whose ideas you give the most credence.

The conferences are big fun with some serious partying and long winded talks about our favorite subjects. Much like being on the board, only you can see the people and don't have to wait for a response.

Don't forget to look at the gallery to see work by the various critiquers. You can bring your work up to new levels.