Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login


Is quality in art subjective?

66,919 deviants said Yes
21,903 deviants said No
5,473 deviants said Other (please comment)

Devious Comments

SpireEx Featured By Owner May 10, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
All in this world is subjective or arbitrary, even the established things that we call "conventional".
aflickr Featured By Owner Sep 27, 2014
I believe if the quality of art is otional then I will link it to the nocturne podcast for obvious critique, just look at... ugh... breadwinners... breadwinners has no characterization, the characters look too rounded to the point if somone didn't tell you they were ducks you'd have no clue they are, and they act absolutely insane.

also bread = angelwing, I wonder what message cn is trying to give kids?!

This is why I believe quality of art is up for debate.
Irina4 Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
It depends how you define art.
Is it the emotion you feel in front of a piece? Then, it's subjective.
Is it its message? Subjective, again, because it depends on your values. Some will understand the message, some won't.
Is it the degree to which the artist completes his goal, what he wanted to provoke with the piece? Then, it's not subjective. But its the artist's judgment. It's the most important thing for me, when I create smthg.
Is it its level of technical mastering? Then it's not subjective. Its my criteria for "quality" but the criterias I cite here are interdependent. I can judge a piece very positively on its quality, but say I don't like it, because it doesn't makes me feel anything. The contrary exists, but it's more rare.
CerealChaser Featured By Owner Sep 13, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I think it doesn't. I HATE the "Well art can be anything excuse". I've met a person who literally just got the paint bucket tool and just use the brush tool to color over the base color.

Art should have a story and should have something the artist should say, granted we can make out own interpretations, but it really boils down to the artist. If it has no meaning or passion then it's not art. 
You're art STYLE can be subjective, but not he actual quality of what you made.
MightBeWind Featured By Owner Sep 4, 2014
I would say, as many others have, it depends.

First of all, it depends on how one defines quality: is a work with a great and meaningful concept/idea demonstrated through a very simple style better than a a common subject executed perfectly? The exact opposite? Perhaps a combination of both?

The second thing is while everyone has their own view of quality, there is always some kind of standard in one's head, especially regarding skill: you could have the best concept in the universe, but if it is drawn, let's say, in stick figures, few would really appreciate it, I believe. On the other hand, you can also have a Master's Degree in Art and Design and draw a cent. Sure, it might look real, but where's the fun/creativity in that?

If I had to choose, I would say I prefer an emotive concept over incredible skill. Why? Well, while you can learn new skills, you can't learn creativity.
mikepowers1987 Featured By Owner Sep 1, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
I said other because i feel like quality depends on the eye of the person looking at the art and the person creating it. Peoples' opinions on art vary. To me, art is created and you can either create something or not and to put some kind of rating on "quality" on something like art is not acceptable in my opinion. 
Phantom-Fade Featured By Owner Sep 1, 2014
To some extent it is, but if someone says that art like Da Vinci's is terrible...I'm ready to here a solid argument.
ea300215 Featured By Owner Aug 31, 2014
In general, yes. However, certain media do have expectations to fulfill. If, for instance, you write a story that alienates the reader or fails to capture their interest, then your story has failed as a piece of storytelling. It might not have failed as a piece of art (although I'm not sure what the artistic merit would be unless you consider trolling an art), but it fails to fit into that specific category effectively.
Kagamine-Len-kyun Featured By Owner Aug 30, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
i believe quality of art is subjective to the viewer... it can look crappy to one and then great to another so it really all depends...
brushPuppie Featured By Owner Aug 27, 2014
I´d say: both!, and pretty much agree with Pitufox on it. The first question is: Is it good enough to communicate something ( a meaning, a feeling, the dedication of the maker,...)? There is some objectivity in that. From then on, it´s perhaps more an "eye of the Beholder"-thing
MidnightRiver2000 Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
It is both, It can be subjective and set and stone if something is good or bad. Most of the time, people enjoy art pleasing to the eye. Others, can be beautiful if you consider the person creating them. For example, at zoo I've been to there was and orangutan painting. It had surprised me that I found their art to be enjoyable. Then again, the art of a teen such as myself is obviously not comparable to those of more expertize.
Rhiabell Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I'd say that art is a way of expressing yourself. Every artists puts a bit of himself or herself into her/his work. In my case, it is all about emotions. I put the emotions I have once received into my work. I try my best to make my art the best I can make it. Qualifying art is not correct, because you will never get a solid opinion if you ask various people. You can, however, qualify it the way most of people asked did, but it will be incorrect towards the people with another opinion. Art is like taste. You mind find it too sorrow, but another person would say it is just sorrow enough. 
Arcane2398 Featured By Owner Edited Aug 10, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
It's sad to say, but most people prefer more detailed drawings. Yet there are times when they will like a drawing based on the theme or setting 
MikeYeager Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Quality comes in all shapes and sizes. If something is worked hard on, it shows no matter how abstract it is.
Dragons0song Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
it depends in the art because in realism yes but abstract no
batmannutellaoreos Featured By Owner Aug 5, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
I believe that quality does not matter. Abstract art is great, and so is-for lack of better words-non-abstact art. I believe that as long as you are able to express yourself or do what you want then that's all that matters.
Book-Box Featured By Owner Aug 5, 2014  Student Digital Artist
When people look at some of my random doodles in my notebook, they don't admire the skill or quality. They admire how well my picture depicts emotion. 
coolk77 Featured By Owner Jul 30, 2014
As long as the final piece is recognizable and people like it then quality does not count
Buff55 Featured By Owner Jul 26, 2014
I personaly feel that art should show what's inside of your soul. Have events from your life reflect through it. As long as you work hard on it... *Lost thought*
Book-Box Featured By Owner Aug 5, 2014  Student Digital Artist
I agree
Pitufox27 Featured By Owner Jul 25, 2014
I voted for the option "Other" because I think there is a minimum quality threshold that is more or less objective. We could all agree on that, below a certain level, this is not a work of art, while above that level, yes it is. So when we try to differentiate between works of art themselves that exceed this minimum level of quality is when our personal preferences come into play and enter into the subjective world.
Here's an example:
My little girl draws a house with some trees ... As much as I'm his father and that, to me, that picture has great sentimental value, objectively speaking it is not a work of art quality. Everyone would agree.
However, if we look at a Picasso or Rembrandt, all will agree that it is high art, but some of us do not like anything Picasso and others we do not like Rembrandt.
In short, my opinion is that:
There is a minimum level of quality that would be more or less objective. Everything that rises above this level falls within the review of each, ie becomes subjetive.
TimidNo3 Featured By Owner Jul 22, 2014  Student General Artist
I think style is but not quality
WildArcher Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2014
 You could be an extremely talented artist that has practiced constantly or simply born with a tremendous gift that creates with interesting and beautiful styles bursting with colour and unique techniques, but with less intricate, emotional concepts.

Likewise you could have an extremely simple or unusual art style, that on its own, my come across as uninteresting, weird or even dull. But it could stick out in the art community because of the Creativity behind it, whether it may be centered around playing with the heart and soul, or a simple design redone and revised over and over again to the point it becomes a maze of complexity.

You could be a beautiful combination of both, an artist that mastered Quality, Content, and Creativity.

You could be an artist that has none of these qualities but simply the will to keep trying and working hard to achieve the goals you wish to acquire. A lack of qualities another has should never downgrade yourself.

You could be not the artist themself, but a viewer, a bystander. you may never have picked up a paint brush yourself, never touched real paint before, but if you love to look at someone elses art then you are nothing less then the artist themself because YOU are the reason they are where they are today. YOU encouraged them to keep doing what they love, strive to the top, and/or sharpen their skills.

YOU should be proud :)
Black-Sun-Frau Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Yes and no. It depends what you're going for, for one. Realism requires a degree of perfection and accuracy. Abstract art doesn't have to look like anything in particular. Even if someone still has much improvement to be made, you can tell if they've worked hard on their art or not. I think the more an artist cares the better things they will create.
LunaofSkyfold Featured By Owner Jul 6, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Largely i think it is subjective, but when someone is not practiced (like me) it shows even in there (my) better works.  You (and by you i mean me) have to know the basics before you can start producing "quality" works.  That being said, some people will still see certain art styles as junky or not very high quality.  I know ppl who think the anime soul eater is very poorly drawn because of the odd art style, for instance.
mistnoire Featured By Owner Jul 6, 2014  Hobbyist Photographer
I don't know what subjective means
Cynadyde Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I was about to select "yes, quality in art is subjective". But then I thought... why can't "quality in art" mean something most of us agree on instead of having a completely dynamic definition? And now I'm thinking I should have put "yes" because I don't think it really matters that it's definition is based on subjective ideas, after all, lol. Plenty of words are like that and language isn't breaking down and causing mass catastrophe just yet, not that I foresee xD
michelle123454 Featured By Owner Jun 29, 2014  Hobbyist
i think it depends on the overall theme and purpose of the piece, how the artist wants the piece to express how he/she might feel, or just generally the amount of effort the piece needs to show whatever they want to say.
AskRedSpy Featured By Owner Jun 27, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
depends on how that person wanted that art
AnonymousONIagent Featured By Owner Edited Jun 26, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
Depends on the type of art, mostly. Some things are matters of personal taste, while others can in fact be objectively good or bad (particularly technical flaws). You can write the best poem in the world, but it won't mean a thing if you can't spell well enough for anyone to understand it (albeit that's a rather extreme example).
moocow456 Featured By Owner Jun 18, 2014  Student Traditional Artist
I said other because some people don't need quality in their art. Maybe their job of career doesn't need any kind of art.
ThealmightyArceus Featured By Owner Jun 14, 2014
MY response was other because People have twisted minds, and screwed-up meanings of things. I actually enjoy "antromorphic"   (Furry) art, but, thanks to people these days, it has turned into C.R.A.P. and the problem is that CRAP I was referring to, just a second ago, is not "furry" it is "yiff" %100 Screwed-up!  and nobody can search "furry art" without finding freakin' CRAP!   the "yiff" is practicaly freaking "porn" this pisses me off to no end! and THE TYPE OFF ART DOES NOT MATTER, IF IT IS NOT SUBJECTIVE!
Butcherl10 Featured By Owner Jun 5, 2014
Regardless of taste and whether someone thinks a piece is good they should respect the effort and time put into the process of art. This being said, is easier if you are an artist yourself 
vesuvius00 Featured By Owner Jun 4, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
all art is different, and different people like different things, quality is biased no mater who is judging. yes, most people see a painting by an older artist (Like, Picasso or Da Vinci) as quality work, but only because it has withstood the tests of time. Newer work, like stuff on DA, there will be some people who hate it, and some who love it. 
mideila Featured By Owner May 19, 2014  Student Artist
Well, I hate some people, but I can love some of their drawings, and vice versa.
IronMammoth42 Featured By Owner May 16, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
it really depends. a 5 year olds drawing is gona be like the Monalisa to there mom..
but to others it does'nt even compare.
Maddison-Starstruck Featured By Owner May 13, 2014
It depends. Although I believe that some things about the quality in art are subjective, others aren't.
INH4LE Featured By Owner May 3, 2014  Student General Artist
Depends on the style you are trying to make.
CastlesOfCards Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
In a lot of ways, yes, it is subjective.

In a lot of ways, someone can be a very good artist regardless of who's looking at it. :) (Smile) 
theamazinjoshuablake Featured By Owner Apr 16, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
there is no good and there is no bad, art can be whatever you want it to be.
WorldWar-Tori Featured By Owner Apr 10, 2014   General Artist
It depends on what aspects you're looking at.
There are some rules that are important [for example: noise/grain in a photo... I'm going to say a good 98.3% of the time it shouldn't be there] but there are always exceptions.

Or when there's blur in a photo, a good majority of the time something should be focused, but there are times where it's the lack of focus that makes the image :shrug:

So yes; it's subjective to an extent, but at doesn't mean you can just run around doing little to no work without much effort into it and claim "IT'S SUBJECTIVE!"
Ragecomics100 Featured By Owner Apr 10, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
it depends of the artist`s style
Division42Designs Featured By Owner Apr 8, 2014  Professional Interface Designer
Quality is not subjective. While Art is. Quality is how likely something is to last over time. If you take traditional are and have a pencil drawing on a piece of loose copy paper. It has low quality even if the work is amazing. IF in my case I there is a beautiful chainmaille sculpture but made out of very weak and poorly formed rings, it is low quality. 

In summary Art is subjective. Beauty is subjective. Quality is not.
ChungKeePanda Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2014
Everything is subjective. 
embarrassingfanart Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2014  Student Digital Artist
Fine art is subjective, commercial arts (like illustration, filmmaking, animation, etc.) are usually not.

In my opinion, though I greatly prefer commercial arts to fine arts in general, what really makes something good is the effort put in. When something is laughably bad or cheesy, but it still has a charm to it, it's usually because someone poured their soul into it, and thus it's still enjoyable. When a little kid or untrained person spends hours and hours on a picture, it might be completely wrong from an art perspective, but it's usually still pretty cool to look at.
Scardy Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
While style preferences are subjective, according to my professors quality also means turning in your work unwrinkled, un-smudged and in a proper, clean display is part of the quality and NOT subjective.
Chasing-Jackson17 Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Art is all about perception. It's the job of the viewer to interpret it any way they want. If they don't like the "quality" they don't have to look at it. Art is ART. Art is our child. You can't change the way it looks, you can only appreciate it for what it is and love it anyways. Embrace it!
Rainbows4367 Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Exactly what I was gonna say.
celebrating-nothing Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2014  Student General Artist
I applaud you!!! Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me as long as the art says something to me, it doesn't matter how good or bad it is, it stirred something in me that makes me love it
Chasing-Jackson17 Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
It depends. Art is only what you make it, and it's the job of others to interpret it the way they want to. If they don't like a certain quality about it they don't have to look at it. Either way, for me, art is beautiful with both detail and without. Art it ART and everything is art. Even the dust on a dusty ledge and the sunlight  reflecting off the surface is art. Embrace it.
Add a Comment: