At 12/17/18 05:11 PM, Cyberdevil wrote:
Saying most artists don't title their drawings... curious what source you have on this? Is that in regard to Tumblr and Twitter specifically? Could it be that it's simply a social norm there to not title your work, and so people have started to avoid doing so? I think a lot of practices like this change depending on what communities allow, and not necessarily for the better, but the less you need to do the less you do.
As an artist with many accounts, including twitter and tumblr (the latter is gone though), I want to put my two cents. Of course it's not "most" by any means. Yeah, a large amount of artists do not use titles and/or tags and do not provide any commentary on their works, and yet there's a decent amount of artists doing the opposite. Twitter and tumblr pretty much force you to post works without titles - if you want one, you have to write in the post itself. (and twitter is not suited for showcasing artworks to begin with, really)
Seconding @TheReviewTrickster, it affects findability greatly. It's not exciting to stumble upon an untitled/untagged piece of art, it's frustrating because you realise your finding was absolutely random and it's buried somewhere among countless other nameless works. And it's just as disappointing to see some works here on Newgrounds having no clear title and no tags.
But I'd like to to respectfully disagree on this. The reviews.
Taking the review example again, we actually have reviews here, whereas most communities have adopted a comment culture instead, which usually isn't half as beneficial for the artist. Not adding a title: is this really the right way to go, or is this just the easiest way to go?
First of all, I know I'm new here, and you have your own culture on Newgrounds. The last thing I want to do is sound demanding. After all, I'm used to work with multiple platforms, exploiting their advantages and finding a workaround for the weak spots, but since there's already some discussion on changes and improvements taking place here and there, this feedback might be of use... maybe.
The review feature might be cool, but I'd like to point out a lot of users do not use it as intended. Yeah, many people try to actually give some kind of constructive feedback, which is very nice. However, there's still a plenty of people treating review section as a comment section and using it to express their excitement, or confusion, or disgust, whatever (speaking of Shadman, god forbid, eh). It is a feedback on its own, but is it a review?
Also, even if we ignore "reviews" like "Cool" or "Looks nice" or anything like this, there's still another problem.
Newgrounds has forums, and it's awesome compared to some other websites. However, sometimes you want to discuss the artwork itself, and the most convenient place for a conversation is right beside this exact artwork (or any other type of content, basically). So far I've seen people sometimes edit their reviews to add something if the author replies them, but you can't go far with that. Comments threads are cool for works discussions and anything that might feel awkward (for example) to ask via PM or in a personal post (if an authors happens to have one). Perhaps Deviantart might be a good example of how this can be handled.
Yet again, that's how I percept it right now. Probably I don't quite grasp the very concept how the whole thing is supposed to work.