How do you measure up as an artist?

From reading the posts at OPF it's clear that most of the posters are trying to improve the quality of their artistic/photographic output. So, what is the most important measure that you use in determining the overall quality of your art; positive feedback on posted images, awards, images published or something else - etcetera, etcetera, etcetera?

I am not an artist.
I don't consider my work (the one that feeds me) as an artist's work (though it may need some artistic "sensibility", i can't reply directly to your question.
On a general manner, I measure the quality of my work by the "easiness" to be hired by clients. Me, instead of my competitors… and to the upper level average of the market pricing within my niche.

Nicolas Claris said:

I am not an artist.
I don't consider my work (the one that feeds me) as an artist's work (though it may need some artistic "sensibility", i can't reply directly to your question.
On a general manner, I measure the quality of my work by the "easiness" to be hired by clients. Me, instead of my competitors… and to the upper level average of the market pricing within my niche.

Click to expand...

I think this brings out the problem with the question that puts work output and art together. We all want feedback. Some seriously want and need guidance and a helping hand. So let's look at why people show their photographs, beyond technical issues with cameras and lenses.

• We all entertain ourselves, if the photographs interest others, fine, that's a good pat on the back!
  
• Some have no pretensions to art, just enjoy people, nature, travel and sharing interesting photographs.
  
• Many want to improve their photography to earn a living by it.
  
• Others are dedicated to express creative ideas, technical prowess or both. It's a challenge they set for themselves to make outstanding pictures.
  
• Some want to be emulate the apparent success of others online to sell photographs as "Art".
  
• A few want to be a helpful resource and the same time let it be known they offer services.
  

Everyone wants their photographs to work for their own diverse purposes. We do give much feedback in relation to art, but really the goal is often just to get a pleasing picture we can enjoy together. I spend much more time studying other peoples images than my own!

For me, my own pictures share joy at what I've seen come from my camera: the pictures I knew were there and the pictures within a picture that surprised me. I show work that will stimulate a thread as much as showcase my "art". If I get on balance, a good feedback, I find that's enjoyable and encouraging.

Asher

Rod Witten said:

From reading the posts at OPF it's clear that most of the posters are trying to improve the quality of their artistic/photographic output. So, what is the most important measure that you use in determining the overall quality of your art; positive feedback on posted images, awards, images published or something else - etcetera, etcetera, etcetera?

Click to expand...

For me how successful one of my photographs is lies in how well it matches my goals and my standards for quality. I find awards and publications to say more about one's business skills than about one's artistic abilities. They are the outcome for the work, not the motivation for the work.

The motivation is expressing myself and creating images that are exciting to me. Eventually, how exciting the photograph is, is the measure of all things.

The turning point for me was when I found my work more exciting than the work I was trying to emulate, the work of other photographers I admired. At that time I slowly went from looking at other photographers work to find inspiration to looking at my own work as the source of inspiration for future work.

Also how well a photograph expresses my feelings about a specific place is something I use as a measuring device. It's always challenging to create images that convey my emotional response to a scene. Eventually that is the goal, but the goal is elusive. It's also a lot of work. The more you work at this, the more you become good at it.

And luck plays a role because it is about trying many different things and letting things fall where they may. Happenstance plays a role in the artistic process. You have to know what to control and what not to control. What to keep a tight grip on and what to let loose and fall where it may. Very often the technical aspects have to be controlled precisely while the artistic aspects can be let more to inspiration and happenstance. How the technical and artistic aspects work together, how well they mesh in the work of art, is a key determining factor in assessing the success of a piece.

To me its about how artistic the photograph is because I approach this as an artist. How beautiful the image is is also important.

It's about how well the artistic and the technical aspects of the photograph work together. It has to be a combination of both, not just one or the other.

This link describes my approach very well also:

http://doenges.com/blog/2008/12/02/book-review-mastering-landscape-photography

Asher mentioned goals. Me, my driving ambition is to become as good as I possibly can, driven by my own vision. Artist? Not now. In the future? I think so. Will I know when I've become an "artist?" I doubt it. I will always be looking to improve. I enjoy what I do and many of the images that I produce. But the real pleasure is in getting better...and better...and better..............

I can't honestly say how I measure up- does measure have an end- does it have a criteria-does it judge- I wouldn't know a measure if I were a true artist-

Charlotte-

charlotte thompson said:

I can't honestly say how I measure up- does measure have an end- does it have a criteria-does it judge- I wouldn't know a measure if I were a true artist-

Charlotte-

Click to expand...

Hi Charlotte,

My wife says you're an artist.. sometimes! Then, when you have some obscure title and I don't get any energy from the picture, I despair but once more you show pictures that give me joy and I'm happy again. So how does the commentary work with you? Does it impact your feeling of the picture's possible artistic value?


Asher

Asher

I can't say if I am an artist or not-if I try to measure its definition of my work then in my own self I would feel stopped almost like a suffocation- my work in many mediums has gone through many changes because of this "non measure" I think I need- when you see my work and despair and get happy then it must be in the eyes of the one measuring- of course we all measure to some extent in order to interpet for our own selves a piece of work- but the "challenge" was to measure self" as discussion as self measure-as far as artist ability I see my work like my other mediums I work in as always changing but to self measure I don't to my own self-measure self"
my work is who I am becoming ,evolving in that I feel can't be self measured-

Charlotte-

It's been a long time I wanted to point the following here in OPF… :

It is really amazing the difference of culture between North Americans and Europeans.

You will find very few Europeans talking of themselves as artists and… most of North Americans to pretend they are artists.

Certainly a question of different cultures and education…

Is it a question of being humble or not?

Something to think about… I am curious to see what others think about that…

Nicolas

I as an American do not pretend to be an artist as I told Asher- I cannot measure my self like that
I love art and have been involved in many forms for many years-
my definition of art has always been
"Art is a Seduction"


and I guess any great artist could easily seduce with their art in whatever medium
just like your photos I have seen "you see, they seduce me to look" you are a artist Nicolas and I may call you one
because it is my measure of you and Not Me-

Charlotte-

Charlotte
my post was not directed to you, nor to any othe particular person!
Thank you for your ind words, well I guess it is kind to tell me that I am an artist…

But this is not exactly my point. I was speaking about people talking about themselves, not about someone else's opinion of them…

As a French guy, I feel it would be much pretentious to call myself an artist! And I undrstand that it wouldn't be so in the US… Am I wrong?

Nicolas

as Europeans, we use of the word artist with a different meaning than people in the USA do. The have professions like graphic artist, etc meanwhile we simply say graphiste.

Here, there's still that idea about free artist = non business-artist/no assignements in the heads of many people, which is sometimes a more idealistic than realistic idea.

As I' ve done a "free" academie for 6 years, lived for several years from art, but since a good while now work for artists, sculptors and architects - I'm somehow in between; beeing in that arty field, without looking at the assignements beeing art, therefore not exhibiting them.....while some USfriends visiting me look at it as artist work.

Personaly, I don't care to much about these labels anymore; it's more interesting/important to work on it...
I even can imagine to show in the future some free works within the art context.

Nicolas

I understood you completely- not me, yes of course -
in USA we have many who call themselves artists yes, but I do not believe it is in any way pretencious to say that if they wish to do so- it is understood here-
our culture is different yes-

Charlotte-

To me it describes what I do, who I am. I see no difference in this approach than if was a lawyer, doctor, engineer, etc. and said so. I was saying the same when I lived in France. It is simply stating what I do, what my profession is. Being an artist for me is a full time activity. I studied to be an artist, I have degrees coming from these studies, it is my profession.

Is Education Need for Art if So What might it be?

Alain Briot said:

To me it describes what I do, who I am. I see no difference in this approach than if was a lawyer, doctor, engineer, etc. and said so. I was saying the same when I lived in France. It is simply stating what I do, what my profession is. Being an artist for me is a full time activity. I studied to be an artist, I have degrees coming from these studies, it is my profession.

Click to expand...

Alain,

This may be off-topic but the point you brought up is worth addressing here. Having degrees is not always relevant to actually being an artist although it might be relevant to a particular person's growth, techniques and development as an artist.

I believe that education, in the formal sense, is neither necessary, nor even necessarily desirable. After all, in every city there are great libraries, sculptures and museums as part of our culture and influences. Art can therefore readily exist outside of formal academic influence. There's enough stimulation around us for the gifted anyway! The latter, with very little learning, above what's learned in public schools art classes, might excel whereas many college graduates do not make it! The latter is a fact. With natural talent and self-acquired skills, the art may already be important and I wouldn't want to see that damaged.

As a dedicated professional who runs a business as an artist with sophisticated self-promotion, you are an obvious example of where your higher education, vision, insight and dedication has paid off. Your work is valued, you have a following and your life is supported well as a consequence. It all fits together. However, that was your path. Others may not be helped at all by the corridors of academia or find comfort with that way of life.

Some artists seem to come from no where, have all the business work done by a gallery. They, themselves, may even live a pretty haphazard life and still get a great output somehow to the finest galleries.

Success then, is to do one's art, have a mate, get paid well, drink the best wine and not end up being locked up in a sanitarium like poor Vincent Van Gogh!

Asher,

Personally getting the help of experienced teachers to learn what I didn't know has been a rewarding experience. Some may be able to do it all by themselves but personally I could not do it. I needed guidance and training.

I think that in any profession there are self-taught individuals. However the majority go through formal training.

Did you get formal training as an oncologist or did you learn it all on your own?

Alain Briot said:

Asher,

Personally getting the help of experienced teachers to learn what I didn't know has been a rewarding experience. Some may be able to do it all by themselves but personally I could not do it. I needed guidance and training.

I think that in any profession there are self-taught individuals. However the majority go through formal training.

Did you get formal training as an oncologist or did you learn it all on your own?

Click to expand...

Medicine is taught in a way that limits entry into the profession. The courses often have no bearing on the actual requirements for a particular end result. However the very tough and long training does have good value. It keeps the standards high and the numbers limited. Even then a lot of doctors fail to give good care.

I was in Africa, and there was a 15 year old boy who was doing surgery without having gone to medical school! he didn't even understand the physiology but he was very skilled. It went from watching his father, then holding a retractor, then cutting stitches, gradually he did everything. no heart surgeon, he could do substantial work including draining abscesses taking out foreign bodies, sewing complex and difficult lacerations and more.

Two young men I know, had little training at all to be the competent, skilled and talented photographers they are. They're naturals! One refused a paid scholarship to a prestigious art school as he's cellist and the other went to law school! I know since the two just did a major fashion shoot for which I set up the lighting. They simply aced the shoot!

Training is overrated. Some really benefit from it. I'd have enjoyed and been so proud had I gone to Paris for art training. I'd have been in heaven. However, I love to hear from skilled experienced talented folk. Others might not be so appreciative.

The cameras today are so great. All one needs is the vision and for fashion, the look one wants. If one cannot see from all that's about us what is going to be amazing, then maybe there, one can get benefit from someone with experience and vision.

Asher

Rod Witten said:

From reading the posts at OPF it's clear that most of the posters are trying to improve the quality of their artistic/photographic output. So, what is the most important measure that you use in determining the overall quality of your art; positive feedback on posted images, awards, images published or something else - etcetera, etcetera, etcetera?

Click to expand...

Hi Rod,

I want to come back to your direct "in the face" question and one that you might address too! The most important measures of success are for me, at least, feelings I have relating to my work:

• The pictures I have liked and enjoyed to work on make the time vanish. I can find I've spent 6 hours or more on one picture and not see the passage of time. I might go to bed as the sun is rising.
  
• I have a the sustained feeling of accomplishment in these particular pictures I have made.
  
• To me these pictures are important outreach from within me to what I can show to others.
  
• These feelings are reinforced by those close to me and the fortune of being liked by a few accomplished photographers and a photography book printer.

I get improvement by seeing your pictures here, plus the feedback, work in galleries and trying to see how they might each work. I go to galleries with an artistic question on my mind sometimes and come back with all sorts of new ideas.

I then try to use all I have learned to compose in a more imaginative and careful manner, but my way!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Hi Rod,

I want to come back to your direct "in the face" question and one that you might address too! The most important measures of success are for me, at least, feelings I have relating to my work:

• The pictures I have liked and enjoyed to work on make the time vanish. I can find I've spent 6 hours or more on one picture and not see the passage of time. I might go to bed as the sun is rising.
  
• I have a the sustained feeling of accomplishment in these particular pictures I have made.
  
• To me these pictures are important outreach from within me to what I can show to others.
  
• These feelings are reinforced by those close to me and the fortune of being liked by a few accomplished photographers and a photography book printer.

I get improvement by seeing your pictures here, plus the feedback, work in galleries and trying to see how they might each work. I go to galleries with an artistic question on my mind sometimes and come back with all sorts of new ideas.

I then try to use all I have learned to compose in a more imaginative and careful manner, but my way!

Asher

Click to expand...

Asher,

I, like several other responders to this thread, feel uncomfortable calling myself an Artist. Yet, my intent is to produce work that is presented in "art" settings. I'm equally uncomfortable being called a Photographer because I've lost respect for certain behaviors in the profession of photography. However, the creative aspects of photography, from the selection of subject and composition to the final presentation, have always been an passion of mine. I study the master works and try to keep up with the flood of recent creations. The result of these reviews has given me a basis for maintaining an ever evolving, intuitive standard of expectation for my own work.

As to the question of how I measure the quality of my work: I feel that the work demands an outcome. It needs to be completed and signed. To be complete it must meet or exceed my standard of expectation. I rarely look for subjective feedback as a judge of progress, although, I readily submit the work for judging. I respond to the need for recognition, yet realize that it's the ugly center of gravity for the industry. As a result, I execute a measured approach to broadening the magnitude of recognition for my work. I don't want the headaches of celebrity. As the basis of this recognition is subjective, I consider it of minor value in self-determing quality. Along with the "completion" requirements, the primary solution to quality for me is whether, or not, the work winds the mind and/or stirs the soul.

Rod Witten said:

I'm equally uncomfortable being called a Photographer because I've lost respect for certain behaviors in the profession of photography.

Click to expand...

That's without any problem applicable on the profession of artist, too.

The most interesting question -- to me -- coming out of this thread is what one's goals are in photography (or art). It's made me think. My goal, when you get right down to it, I believe, is really nothing more than self-expression. I have always been extremely verbal. This is a visual form of expression. The better my images, the more completely and clearly I express whatever it is I'm trying to express. One fascinating aspect of "art" as a form of self-expression is that we often don't know what we are saying. If one buys into an unconscious (believes such a thing exists), "art" allows a deeper, less censored level of communication.

Rachel Foster said:

......... One fascinating aspect of "art" as a form of self-expression is that we often don't know what we are saying. If one buys into an unconscious (believes such a thing exists), "art" allows a deeper, less censored level of communication.

Click to expand...

Sorry Rachel for beeing kinda strict:

A good or °real° artist knows, what he is talking about - in a nonverbal speech.

It hasn't to be necessairly "unconscious" or whatever it's name is - but with the means of images, using the language of images.

IMHO. I don't believe in art as a freudian methode, nor as a therapie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Foster
......... One fascinating aspect of "art" as a form of self-expression is that we often don't know what we are saying. If one buys into an unconscious (believes such a thing exists), "art" allows a deeper, less censored level of communication

I love Rachel's view
my self expression to her comment- art allows a deeper level-my photography-my poetry that coincides with such views as this-






It isn't the cold wind of the deep green jungle
or the heart of the bird that asks the question
of forever love
it's me
I demand it

Will the circle thoughts of life
bend enough for humanity
to understand
the cool red pop colors of the eternal feeling
quiet prayers of each tear that hangs
in cathedrals and crucifixions
the moth wings
of forever,
love-

Charlotte R Thompson-

Ah, but Michael, I did not mean that art should be therapy, although it can be. What I meant is that a different form of communicating, if you will, might allow the unconscious free expression; it might allow the "inner voice" to slip past the censors, resulting in a truer, clearer, genuine expression than we typically allow due to impression-management concerns.

Leo Tolstoy (What is Art?) believed art is used to communicate human feelings/emotions.


Thank you, Charlotte. That is lovely.

I'll have to get back to this 50 years after I'm dead. Right now I'm paying little or no attention. I'm like a desert mesquite bush putting out just enough poison that no one gets too close.

Rod Witten said:

From reading the posts at OPF it's clear that most of the posters are trying to improve the quality of their artistic/photographic output. So, what is the most important measure that you use in determining the overall quality of your art; positive feedback on posted images, awards, images published or something else - etcetera, etcetera, etcetera?

Click to expand...

Dear Rdo,

I suppose that I fall into the category described by Asher as:

"Others are dedicated to express creative ideas, technical prowess or both. It's a challenge they set for themselves to make outstanding pictures."

However, it is also interesting to reflect on how others measure my work. Most often when an acquaintance sees my picture, they demand to know why I am not selling them. And this is often the measure applied by other aspiring photographers, as though quality is proportional to dollars. In fact, I sense that many of us posting on these fora assume that you are not serious unless you are actually selling your work.

Jim

oh now- poison!
I guess we have to shield ourselves against this smoke bomb of yours-

Charlotte-


Rachel

this is to show how many different ways art can be seen,displayed,understood, appreciated and compelling-

it is said that " all art is poetry"

Charlotte-

Rod Witten said:

Asher,

............ Along with the "completion" requirements, the primary solution to quality for me is whether, or not, the work winds the mind and/or stirs the soul.

Click to expand...

Hi Rod,

So, for you, is it sufficient for just you to be moved by your own work? How about if you are moved and then start another work? Many artists stop one pieces to start another, because of some inner or practical reason.

So do you measure your own work as "art" only when it's completed to the final idea? That, to me is almost capricious. To me, at least, once a work gets an identity and starts to make demands on the artist as to what will be next, then the art lives. It's still art even though not mature. We'll that's just my own view. A Van Gogh just 3/4 complete would still move us a lot!

Asher

charlotte thompson said:

Jim

oh now- poison!
I guess we have to shield ourselves against this smoke bomb of yours-
Charlotte-

Click to expand...

C'mon Charlotte,
it's a statement from outside of the ivory tower.
Why dou you fear that?