Yes, there are criteria for evaluation of abstract painting and they are not to many of the criteria otltchayutsya painting realisticheskoy.Esli child draw abracadabra, it is her, and will remain, and no one would never call it "creation" искусством.Профессиональный abstract painter, even in abstraction will solve the problem really is quite realistic if we are talking about kartine.Vo first this will be the layout, that is the location on the sheet. It is also bringing in a harmonious state of the elements of painting: an array of color (combinations), the line ugly.Navernyaka would be some dominant, the center of the composition, will be subordinate elementy.Vse something that relates to kompozitsii.Budet solved kloristicheskaya zadacha.Dlya better implementation ideas will be selected by a certain technique, all as in realism. According to this criterion (rather objective) can already do some otsenki.Drugie criteria are for the area of the lens, namely, how big are the problems that poses an artist, how to impact on the viewer and the associative system. And about the realism, you can also skazat.No not forget that after all, many artists being determines consciousness, and therefore (regardless of our desire) to nhudozhnikov somehow affect "everyday figurative and periodically asking for their abstract paintings <! - ~ 1 ~ ->)

If this is the case, as you say, it turns out that it is stylized to abstraction, so his non-figurative Marafet the sake of our everyday perception system. And the complete lack of spontaneity, whose role, in my opinion, in abstract art is paramount. It seems to me that abstract art - an attempt to overcome the limitations of our tools of perception, to go beyond it. It was here, in my opinion, should seek evaluation criteria of abstract art.

Stanislavsky, yet does not catch up, where are you getting at?

Thank you all for an interesting topic, interesting links and comments. Read with great pleasure.
Ingarden wrote, of course, nudnovato, but in essence he's right. ".. In any structure depicting the picture as it contains some neizobrazhayuschaya picture ... as its essential component and that the value of this component depends strongly on the aesthetic value of the whole picture. "
I would say easier. Any picture - it's just a combination of tsvetoform. It is this combination determines the aesthetic value of the painting. Artists by their very nature, a warehouse and external factors at work with tsvetoformami leaning more toward either the form or in the direction of color. In this case, simply put, the priority of color "kills" the shape and form of priority "kills" the color. Or: the maximum shape - at least in color, and vice versa, the maximum color - at least form. That is why Ingres said that the shape and color - antagonists. Deviation in any of the parties is not infinite and has a limit. For clarity, an example. "Mona Lisa" example at the point of priority forms. By color - it's actually grisaille, nobody discusses the advantages of this colorful picture. All the enthusiasm concerning the mysterious smile, eyes, position of hands, etc., that is, form. Contemporaries also very skeptical of Leonardo as an artist, because in those days, the balance in the painting is clearly leaning toward colors and Leonardo knocked out of the total number.
"Black Square" - an example of an extreme point of priority of color. Form of elementary and .. like is secondary, respective utility with respect to color properties, and is the only organizing factor. Important here - the color spot color masses without any interference, because color is the most profitable local spot. It is a flat local spot has the greatest impact on perceptions.
(Abstract painting can be called a kind of "toy harmony", but as Pushkin said: "The mind can not be satisfied with some toys harmony, imagination requires pictures and stories." Picasso knew it, so came away from pure abstraction. Therefore, the same age of abstraction, will not be long. )
All the space of painting lies between these extremes, as here told to "slide rule". Each artist chooses his place on the closed interval. In this regard, the abstractionist painter does not differ from the artist's classicist, gently issuing the sepia fingers at the foot of Jupiter. They just have different priorities, but they are both in the space of painting. "So, for example, works by Rembrandt will be fine in a different way than the paintings of Raphael or Leonardo da Vinci. And almost impossible to say that the product of one higher than another, for example, self-portrait by Rembrandt in the fez beautiful a portrait of Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa, or his. "
Harmonious combination of form and color, in my opinion, the biggest challenge for the artist. It is only by great talent. Our century - the century of the weak, so we have to choose what to "kill" - the shape or color to make your life easier. Most choose the "death" form, it is easier, no need to spend years training.

Lord, well, what did you blunt! :) "Abstraction (in the extreme, the absolute, the totality of its form) as opposed to other" methods "do not shows, but only and exclusively is deep, unconscious intention of the human person. This is evidenced by Pollock: Painter of the" creator "voluntarily turns it into a weapon of unknown elements, giving themselves to their will in the name of" breakthrough "in reality, standing outside world, comprehends our senses. Abstraction is "to do", a stylized, focused on our cultural paradigm that looks like a secondary and artificial.
And the last. On the criteria. Total abstraction which annihilates whatever principles of interpretation, which means that all interpretations take on the same ontological status, that is, each of which will be valid and no less important than the interpretation of the artist.

DSF, great! Write often, your posts are very few! :)

This characteristic figure of the child under the age of five years and one way to tell about the art of abstraction hapless adult buyer.

Posted 48 minutes
However mnee we consider an abstraction in the visual arts (this is not music), but here we see the image, so the criteria we apply the appropriate, but that does not beg that the "stream of unconsciousness" which throws buckets of the artist on canvas (Pollack did it literally). But he makes the harmonization of the chaotic potoka.U artist all the laws of composition, rhythm and cromatics sit deep inside through many years of study, theory and praktiki.Emu ESPECIALLY do not think about it (as some think, but it is not visible) . By issuing another batch of unconsciousness artist immediately, reactive, spontaneous, if you want to convert, leads her to finish and harmonious synthesis, as a result of that we can confidently say that we face is abstract paintings, and not something else ... .

"Harmonization" and "laws of composition, rhythm and cromatics" as you put it, happens in our head, not on the canvas. This is our interpretation, and this also is a great projective role of abstraction as a tool for our understanding of ourselves as individuals, as a species and as idea.

"Harmonization" and "laws of composition, rhythm and cromatics" as you put it, happens in our head, not on the canvas. This is our interpretation, and this also is a great projective role of abstraction as a tool for our understanding of ourselves as individuals, as a species and as idea.

Art-lover, such work can not be considered "a masterpiece of abstract painting." Not in the sense that it can not be a masterpiece, but that can not be abstract. You posted an excerpt should, rather, to open an anthology devoted to Impressionism, but no it does not abstract art. Pay attention to selected parts of my text. This question is fundamental for the understanding of abstract art (here is an entire issue devoted to it).