WHO are these BAD artists??

  • In the recent podcast episode of Three Point Perspective, Will mentioned that one big reason some art students are unsuccessful is because they admire bad artist, and just have bad tastes.

    And those bad tastes is what will make them never succeed in art.
    Then Jake and Lee agreed.

    I was really shocked by that. WHO's the bad artists? What if I like them?!?? Do I have bad taste??

    I actually Do like terrible things sometimes. Where it's 'so bad it's good'

    I can only find out the answer, if I find out WHO these bad artists are!
    As batman would put it, WHERE ARE THEY!?!?

  • What makes an artist "bad" is broad but objective.

    I think this video helps.


  • @Michael-Angelo-Go
    Yeah Ness's videos are awesome!!

    I keep wondering if what Will Jake and Lee meant by 'bad artists' is based off some vague ethereal reasons.

    Like "This artist doesn't EVEN have SHaPE HarmoNY RyhTHYM in Their PAInt Stroke ShapeS!?!?! aRE YOU KIDDING ME>!?! TERRIBLE!!!!!!!"

  • @Frost-Drive

    Well... let's try to break down what it really means to be a "Bad" artist in the realm of the illustration industry. Bad can mean many things, it can refer to a deficiency or lack thereof a quality that is objectively required to attain and maintain an attribute that which is the ideal goal of that person's occupation. Philosophy, philosophy... this is what I think they could possibly be referring to when referring to what makes an artist "bad".

    1. Skill (Pretty broad topic, refers to basic art rules)

    2. Morality (Hacks, motivated by views, likes, money, not passionate about art)

    3. Misleading (Bad advice, not leading followers towards the right goals for their careers)


    In art school they teach you the pretty basic rules right? Certain colors work together and some do not (color theory); a head is a sphere, the limbs are cylindars (anatomy); Don't pick the darker version of the base color to act as shadows (shading) and etc. Some might agree that to break these conditional rules we are essentially creating "bad art" and to a degree I agree. But it really depends on the medium and style you're going for that we can really judge the quality of one's art. What I've learned about children's book illustrating is that there is a diverse range of styles that a unique from each other and have their own set of rules.

    Take these two books for example. One style is rendered incredibly well while the other leans towards capturing a child's juvenile drawings from childhood. From an art school perspective one is technically "superior" to the other, but in the illustration business context that does not apply.


    Now, what is really bad art for a children's book in terms of skill? Well... while yeah you can have drawings that capture juvenile art from a children's point of view there is an extent where going extreme on one side to another might not be appropriate. d026609b-5f21-434a-a091-17090cceab5b-image.png

    You can fight me about it, but I want to say that this is objectively badly-skilled art for a children's book, because:

    1. The text design is too poor to be justified.
    2. And the fact that this looks like it was just scanned with a printer really turns me off and I think is a detriment to its quality. Even ignoring how simple the protagonist is drawn. 🙂

    Another thing to take note about designing children's books is subject matter and storytelling. Your art skills communicate how good you are at creating appropriate subject matters and telling those subject matters through your art. If you cannot tell a story for children, you aren't exactly the worst but you aren't exactly being the best type of artist for the illustration agency. Let me try to make an example of bad subject matter and storytelling.


    This is a sphere.


    This is a grey sphere.


    Now I am a cube. That is my story.



    A morally-bad artist I would argue is simply someone completely motivated by their own self-gain and has little to no interest in the work they produce or at least favor something else more than the art itself. An artist that starts a KickStarter for a big project and doesn't manage their funds, failing to deliver on their promises is a morally-bad artist. An artist that draws art without passion and meaning, but does so anyway because it makes them money or gets them attention is a morally-bad artist. An artist that traces someone else's work and claims it as "their own" is a morally-bad artist.


    A misleading artist is someone who is giving other artists bad advice and leading them towards the wrong direction in their audience's own career paths. If you say an art is bad or needs improvement but cannot specify or clarify the issue with them, they cannot grow from that advice and may actually get stuck obsessing about what you meant. Advice that does not promote growth or even stunts it is a bad artist telling you to self-sabotage.

  • Being a bad artist is not anything I think Jake and company can comment on. That's an entirely personal taste issue.

    Being a bad commercial illustrator is something they are qualified to comment on. 2 entirely different things.

Log in to reply