A little disturbed

@JennyJones
I didn't think that you were negative at all, and I can say that I agree with not only everything you said here, but also the way you said it.

This format doesn't suit me either, and I think that's ok. I've made it a point since the poll you mention (as part of the minuscule disapproval percentage) to go back to the old critiques more often than even concerning myself with attending the current live critiques, because those are so helpful to me even to rewatch. We all have to acknowledge our needs to move forward. I would prefer if they chose the two winners and talked about them in depth, a half hour for each. In one of the old critiques, Lee White said that at first when he looked at the image (a really well done image of one of the three little pigs in a living room with the shadow of a wolf encroaching) it seemed like it was fine, but as he really dug in and studied it, it became clear what wasn't working. He had so many interesting changes that made the image function better! so it wasn't about this split-second impression of the image that the contest is now. I am all for the arbitrary choice for a winner, and no hints at what made them win! I mean, I can definitely see the value in producing an image that immediately gets noticed and showing which ones have that effect and which don't, but as a student I am trying to figure out the functional aspect of images for picture books specifically, so when I produce an image for the contest it's usually meant to be part of a series. I can't just make images that catch an AD's eye and then not be able to produce functional images.

I know I can't neglect doing classwork to get the contest entry done so if i'm going to continue entering I have to make sure it's not taking over. But I know I need to participate in something regularly, so most of the time it will probably be the svs contest.

As far as other contests, I am not aware of them so much yet, but if I really wanted to get into this contest or any contest more to really try to win, I think I would try acting as a judge and choose 16 to see what it's like. My initial criteria would probably be that split second answer to whether I 'like' the image. And I was always taught that that is no basis whatsoever for a critique. In the graphic design program, if you said you liked someone's work in a critique you had to back up and really think it through better. So yeah my conclusion about this contest has been like yours, where i'm not worried so much about winning or losing, but just how it fits into my education, something I'm in complete control of right now and need to direct on my own.

JennyJones

@carolinebautista Well said. I agree with your views 100%. I have often gone back to those older critiques and rewatched. I particularly loved the one you mentioned with the 3 Little Pigs for the same reasons you mentioned. Sending encouragement as you are leveling up. Keep up the good efforts.

Heather Boyd

Hey -so lots of people have replied so I'll keep mine short (I hope). Disturbing is a strong word- I would have used concerned or puzzled -because sometimes I am puzzled. Like recently for the robot contest skill got in because, it was amazing! but I didn't read the concept quickly or at all until it was explained. And there is definitely a super focus on concept and it gets repeated constantly as it should so I was puzzled why it got in when even the judges didn't know what was happening. Other times I don't read concepts well or even quickly but the judges do, so then I am puzzled again.

For this past isolation I was surprised Lee wasn't taking part because it was his baby lols and that positive perspective he encouraged would have helped bring some balance. But having a new face judge was cool.

I appreciated getting feedback but it was a bit hard to take because I felt the rest of my parts got overlooked and the "water" element which I agree was not clear (ha ha in my head it was) distracted away from the rest (which I worked really hard to work out). I tried to rework it after the feedback -but it didn't work out and I ended messing it up. So feedback was still good but I would have also liked a positive -but totally understand lack of time and so many contestants.

Ryan Ehr

I agree that I miss the draw-overs from earlier contests. I wasn't a member, but watching those critiques were more useful and they become a more helpful curriculum to future students. Maybe the judges pick 2 top pieces each month to go deeper. Then pick 2 pieces from folks much earlier on the journey (a ways away from professional work) with a lot more that could be improved. Even if they critique someone with a disimilar skill set, you learn a lot that way.

@Ryan-Ehr I admit that although I don't mind the idea of voting, the experience of that format got me thinking that for later students the discussion of voting during the critiques would end up a little bit distracting. I'd already been listing to so many of the old critiques by then that I couldn't help thinking of it that way.

One thing I want to say is that if you think about this contest and the way it was set up for May 2020, it was a prompt that made a bunch of artists mostly in isolation themselves collectively think about an important idea everyone in the world was and still is grappling with. So for me, most of its value is as a visible and collective effort. I am still in isolation and putting my work up in the thread with so many different takes on the word has been one of my favorite parts of the quarantine. So as long as we can show each other our entries, I am happy to participate whenever I can and really hope they continue, regardless of the format of the live sessions.

xin li

@Ryan-Ehr you defintely got the audience award. Your piece is my favorite too. It describe what we just been through all together for the last 3 months so well - social distancing (in the country I live now, the rule was 2 meters distance in public, so the socializing scene is pretty much what your pengiuns do, and it made me feel pretty isolated emotionally). Perhaps if the prompt was "social distancing", you would be the winner of the month . But again, for the last 3 months, I think of "social distancing" "and isolation" as more or less synonyms.

Like many others here, I do have a possitive assication with the word "isolation" personally as well, and the top 16 pieces this time was very different from what I would have picked. But I also understand how people have very different association with words.

@dafoota I understand your frustration. For me the monthly contest has been a way of creating new portfolio pieces, or even just generate ideas for portfolio pieces. I have a piece I made from one of the last year's contest, I loved the illustration when I made it, and it was not picked to be the top 16 (I was dissapointed of course). I still love the concept of the piece this year, so I did a re-paint (same concept, better tehnique, and better character design), and used it in my portfolio. I think one super difficult thing for us artists in our earliy career is to filter out what critique is relavant to me, and what is not. If there is something in your piece you love, hold on to it.

Rachel Horne

@dafoota well said

gavpartridge

@StudioLooong Very well said! I thought there were several pieces this month that if you had to choose one word to sum them up, it would have been 'content' or 'peaceful' or even 'fun', but definately not isolation. Isolation can have positive outcomes, but on face value it is not a positive thing.

frankiiij

@xin-li Respect! Thank you for your perspective. I will work on changing my perspective for my ideas in critiques. I will try my best. I would feel bad if the judges are discouraged because of my communication as that is not my intention. Ultimately, I think I am just asking for more stability and consistency for the community in the context of live-critiques. This was never a shot to question anyone’s credibility or biases. Thank you for sharing your wisdom.

Much Love. ONE!

frankiiij

@Heather-Boyd RESPECT! thank you for sharing your thoughts and your perspective. I think I am still a little more, with emotion, over puzzled and into the disturbed/troubled point. I have a hard time with the inconsistency of using a point to promote a piece and using the same point to not promote it. Or even disregard the a point of inspection because the artwork is awesome. Especially, if it the disregarded point of inspection in “sticking to the prompt.”

Maybe it is because I am still puzzled at what the judges expect and I’m voicing my opinion to better understand. I’m still not quite sure what the outcome I am hoping for is. I don’t want anyone discouraged or feeling hated on. After all these wonderful and positive people communicated, I can see that I prolly should just let it be and chill some.

Thank you again for your time and patience. Much love. ONE!

carlianne

@dafoota okay so, I came here late and had a lot of reading to do lol but I read through every single post, I'm hoping this is a slightly different answer for you. So first of all I also miss the old method, I joined a bit after they changed, but I also go back to watch the old crits because I really value paint overs and the critique and we don't really get that anymore. I also sometimes worry that this format feels more like a popularity contest than an art contest which feels awkward. It would be interesting to see a new vote now that they've been doing it this way for some time

Regarding the concept vs artistry It's a hard thing to tackle, but I'm going to try.

What you're asking is really, "what makes good art?" Obviously there is subjectivity but there must be something you can hold onto. IMO there are two routes to an amazing piece of art. There is an amazing concept but not much technical skill in the art. Or an amazing technical skill, with less of an interesting concept. Or the magic balance in the middle that has both. Sometimes a piece can be drawn with stick figures but resonate so well that it is loved (think like some web comics). Or be so masterfully painted that even if there is no story it impacts you emotionally, or with awe and wonder. (Like magical girl paintings on Instagram)

Now with illustration as a field I do think NORMALLY that concept is more important than technical skill. However the piece you refer to last month was MASTERFUL in regards to technical skill. So I do understand why it made it to the sweet sixteen. But the reason it didn't win imo is due to concept. But there is not going to be a line in the sand to follow here. As a student I think we should do our best to have great concepts while refining our technical skill.

Regarding the "positive isolation" statement. What I believe Will was trying to say is. If you do a negative emotion with Isolation you can get away with a person alone in a space. But if you make it positive with a person alone, it doesn't read as isolation unless you put more story telling into it, you have to work harder is what I think he said. For example, Braden showing a group of people in the bg, with the main character all alone. The child was clearly isolated, but not negatively so.

The two pieces that won both hard darker less "happy" lighting to them which I think helped. When I look at them I get an emotional reaction that is a little more quiet and moody which I associate more with Isolation than I do bright and happy.

I also loved the penguin piece but I could see how the penguins felt a bit like a community rather than isolated but it was in my top 16 as well.

I participate in the monthly contests to get portfolio pieces. If I get into the top 16 awesome, but that's not why I'm doing it. I decide what my portfolio needs and use the prompt to help me make a piece that will fill that hole. The deadline helps motivate me to finish. The competition pushes me to push myself out of my comfort zone and try things I wouldn't have before.

Anyway hope that makes sense and helps.

nadyart

@Ryan-Ehr I must admit that I also thought your piece was a very strong contender!

I understand that the concept of my own piece was not portraying the prompt very clear. I do love to have it in my portfolio though :).

I really appreciate the challenges and the time the instructors invest each time.

Personally, I have been less fond of the voting. I liked it much better when the judges decided who’d win. Not because I don’t value the opinions of the voters - I do. But when looking through the monthly contest topic, there are always pieces that are very popular. Not all of these pieces get selected by the professional judges - which is totally fine. But then when the voting starts, the roles are turned again, and the voters decide. The outcomes seem a tad doubtful to me, because it depends so much on who can be available at the Live session, can someone remain online for the complete voting session or has he/she voted a handful of times before they need to go offline, is the voting working for everyone consistently, etc.

In the end it is of course about having the chance to practice creating pieces around a prompt and creating valuable portfolio pieces, that is the most important.
However the current voting structure makes less sense to me than the judges making their selection and narrowing it down to 2 winners. Just my two cents

Jeremy Ross

Hi @nadyart and @carlianne, perhaps we put a poll on the forum to see if people prefer the original way of judging versus the current student voting method?

LauraA

Hi everyone! I too am late to this conversation. But a couple of things: One is that I really liked your explanations, @carlianne, especially about the prompt. It makes a lot of sense, even though I really do wonder what Lee would have said since he came up with it! Mine wasn't even one of the pieces that took this positive approach to isolation, but I'm still curious.

I also think you explained the subtleties of concept vs. rendering very well, Carlianne. I would also argue that there is a sort of third category, that is, those which have a "primitive" style yet are quite aesthetically beautiful. Maybe some would argue that that is technical skill, and I would accept that.

The other thing I would like to add is that I too prefer a more critique-heavy format. I have to admit that "Sweet 16" format means that my favorites are often pitted against one another early on, while the adjacent bracket doesn't interest me as much. Also I confess my decision-making skills are not so sharp late at night and I have coin toss moments! I'm not so sure the participants benefit from either of these things, because they don't even know. So in general I prefer the more critique-heavy formats because we don't learn as much from the voting process. Some could argue that in real life the selection process is arbitrary and we should get used to it, but we can confront that once we get so far. And of course, critiquing 120 pieces is close to impossible and I applaud Will and Aaron for even trying! But somewhere in between there must be a happy medium that we could all benefit from, even if our piece doesn't make the cut.

This time I got lucky, because even though my piece wasn't chosen, I understood from the critique what the problem was in a way that will help me improve. The last time I entered, I honestly had no clue what was wrong. Naturally I would like to make it in, though, because then I would get more critique!

In any case, it's good to have prompts and deadlines, and I really appreciate the effort the guys put into this every month just so that we can have them. And regardless of formats or winners, the energy we are all putting into this, and the way we are all spurring one another on, is a very positive thing. I don't think I could work in "isolation" without it!

@Jeremy-Ross I think I would agree with this, but at this point, the contest gets so many entries that I'm thinking a bit of stasis in the format will help it continue to be monthly. The poll before this voting format was pretty clear in how popular the format was, and if it helps svs promote subscriptions to classes, then weighting the popular preference seems logical.

They finally found a format that works, people have said how much they enjoy it (even though I didn't attend the live critique i would of course watch it since there are always helpful things discussed and it can be very motivating), and I'm guessing it will be beneficial to stick with it for a little bit. Maybe those that don't mind it now can ease into it even more with time. Bringing in guest judges and changing the format again means more work making it happen and they have put so much work into arranging for artists to come and share their process that it also makes sense for the contest to have a different spin. With Jump Into the Studio, I think it was by suggestions offered here on the forum (I did not notice too much diversity there because i am a little behind on what's going on in the industry), and it is dependent on

If it seems like a popularity contest sometimes, that's just an emphasis on the inherent unfairness in the industry like @NessIllustration talks about, so it isn't out of place. I have had a really hard time voting sometimes, especially if it's between two of my favorites. In that situation it becomes painfully clear how arbitrary it all is, and that's just one vote! So it has been an interesting thing, to experience how bad I am at being objective about art. My bias is toward work I happen to connect with and I really can't shake it. So I certainly won't mind seeing this in the choices of other judges. The podcast episode on the Caldecott makes it really clear that this happens on every level, even at the top; the sheer number of books to read for the Caldecott makes it impossible for fairness to prevail! I cannot imagine absorbing so much material, let alone having a coherent opinion on anything after reading so many picture books. An entrant to any contest has work to do to understand the context of decisions made.

So then when I consider all the offerings of svs: podcast episodes twice a month fantastically illustrated, the monthly contest, and Jump into the studio, I really think it might be unsustainable! I hope it's not. I also hope they do what they need to do to keep the contest monthly, because it sets up a nice rhythm for my work. if they can't, I might set some kind of monthly thing up for myself.

A contest is like a job in that way, i think, and it's so much more calming for me to think of it from the other side than to pay too much attention to how I would want it to be set up ideally. The Caldecott thing is so big for librarians (I was a librarian, but not a children's librarian) and even though I obv love picture books, being selected for that 15 person committee sounds like a very severe punishment to me

carlianne

@carolinebautista

I would agree that I worry about changing it would be too much work for them. I would rather have the contests monthly in this format than less often or not at all. However, they have been changing how they do the sweet 16 format every month.

When they did the poll months ago, the two winners did get a critique, and the final two were picked by the judges, not by audience vote.

I didn't mind when the audience narrowed it down and the judges picked the final. I was also okay with just the finalists getting a bit more of a detailed critique.

In fact, in the contest details it says "Winner 1: video crit, plus the chance to do a paid illustration gig" I would argue that the winners don't get a video critique anymore.

@carlianne

I definitely agree with each thing you've pointed out here! Especially the last thing. But it seemed like everyone liked it so much, it was like 90% or something in the poll preference for the voting format.

I do think the format has been at least more consistent over the last 6 months than it has been in the past where it depended on whatever suited the entries and situation best. And the opinions of whichever two happened to be the judges. And then whatever extra images they felt it would be useful to talk about. And since I wasn't at this one I am unclear about who the judges were, but my impression is that Will Terry is kind of new to judging the contest and hasn't been as involved in the past, maybe not until December. I could be wrong on that though. So it seems like there is a bit of flexibility they need just to put the contest on! My guess is that they can't always know if there will be a scheduling conflict a month ahead of time, especially if so many things are scheduled for that same time. I doubt Lee White would have missed the critique normally since he decided on the prompt.

While I think changing the format to be simpler could definitely lead to more consistency (I mean, i thought it was dealing with so many finalist images needing critique and administering the voting that led to the inconsistencies in the voting sessions) it seems like they have always needed leeway to change it to what they needed it to be to make it happen.

I don't want anyone to be misled in terms of what they're looking for in the contest entries, or the format of choosing the winners. It's so hard to put your work out there, and it still is for me each month. So these are all thoughts I have after experiencing that sinking feeling six times now. This is definitely not me trying to correct anyone here, so I don't want it to come across that way (please tell me if it does, I do not mind - you can do the first downvote ever on this forum), it's just a collection of thoughts in having worked through each contest unsuccessfully, trying to manage it so that I can continue putting my work out there, trying to find some self-defined success within the process.

And I'm definitely guessing. I just know that they set this up based on the preference shown in the poll, and that it's possible that for the contest to continue the entrants need to be extra flexible in seeing how it plays out as part of entering the contest.

Edited to add: I think this live critique was locked into Thursday because of Jump Into the Studio and using the same time and day of the week, when it wasn't something they used to do. I have found the Jump into the studio sessions really amazing, so that's why i am not too worried that Lee White wasn't there. I'm sure that to many people it felt like completing an assignment for a class, and then walking into a new one? I will watch it as soon as the video is posted.

gavpartridge

Ultimately does it really matter? Its just a bit of fun. Everyone has the opportunity to use this forum to get a ton of feedback, so who really cares who wins the contest? The judges give their opinions, take 'em or leave 'em.

Jeremy Ross

Hi @gavpartridge, it is definitely fun for me! Personally, I enjoy the voting format! This discussion is certainly interesting too in hearing other’s perspectives. Appreciate everyone’s input.

JennyJones

@gavpartridge You mentioned the contests are just fun and it doesn’t really matter. The only reason it does matter is that we are paying participants. There is no one being considered in the judging who is not a paying subscriber. Compared to previous contests, the value is diminished without the critique. It seems to be the general rub from those who responded here that the in-depth teaching via critique is the key missing component. I fully agree that the contests are a blast! I love seeing everyone’s take on the topics and working within a deadline toward a portfolio worthy piece of my own.

Most people (including me) love a lighthearted approach and jokes and fun. Consistency, clarity, and teaching just need a little tightening up especially when the subscriber numbers are higher. I am not leaving or “taking my crayons and going home” as I stated before. I am certainly not trying to spread negativity. I am only making theses statements as I have to consider value and $$ as I am making my choices. SVS is a blast. But I did not join just to have fun. I joined because I am serious about the stated purpose. I want to be better smash those goals to be a working illustrator.