Criteria for assessing the quality of art works

[iosif]

I have long wanted to ask a question of professional art critics. I apologize if it is someone else find it strange or not the elections be it said, offended.

So, there is a picture. Let it be notorious canvas, oil.
By what criteria should be evaluated to understand that we face - a masterpiece or not? And whether they do, these criteria?
I do not mean "polutehnicheskie" moments: basics of composition, ownership patterns - they even know bildredaktory like me. Especially since that picture, "cobbled together" by all the rules, rarely striking.

I understand that my question is so-so, weird. But let me - Dear forum users are very often the same product is evaluated as opposed to a work of art. And if it was only about herstovyh sharks!
I will not really recall how concerned professionals to Cezanne.

I am a mathematician by training, I can easily understand when they say - like or not like it resonates or not. I understand and statistical evaluation (though time passes and they can change the other way around). But in the current life, I see otherwise. About a respected artist friend of mine and a very educated respected art critic said - genius (with eyes rolled up slightly). Second, no less respected and well-educated, speaks - carrion (verbatim quote).
In short, he wrote a lot, but the idea is still not clearly expressed. But better that than nothing. Still, it comes as we sell the 'product'.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от iosif; 1934891"

Dear forum users are very often the same product is evaluated as opposed to a work of art .

A real masterpiece, not often opponents.
Here in our ipogda someone to shederv snorts, yes, it happens , but it is , believe me, the problem is not a masterpiece, and snorting - he is trying to assert themselves, have this type of people.
 >

Added after 3 minutes

Сообщение от iosif

I'm a mathematician by training

Do you want the formula to bring?

How to Soller?

I believed I harmony with algebra. (c) >

[iosif]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzran

A real masterpiece, not often adversaries.

A good phrase.
But somehow not fully confirmed by the statistics forum.

As for the formula - I would like to >

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от iosif; 1934961"

But somehow not fully confirmed by the statistics forum .

If the " forum statistics " glances , you now find discussion of a universally accepted masterpiece - certainly the undisputed among critics, obvious to a global audience and look at those who criticize him here .

[artcol]

In connection with the exhibition Shibanova had much to say to visitors on this topic ...

They say that properly formulated question often contains the answer. In your question , I see two of them: the question about the "quality" and the criteria for evaluation and followed by the question "what is a masterpiece" and what are its criteria? That is, I would like to know - what do you wonders .

[iosif]

Cyril Syzran, with the standard masterpiece just everything is easier. There 're a good psychological experience, when the black they say 19 front - white. Twentieth century, nepodstavnoy also usually says - white.
But when the masterpiece was not accepted , that said about him ? A masterpiece , it was the same.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от iosif; 1934961"

As for the formula - I would like to >

Yes, such a formula can be derived , actually.
I even heard a couple of times required to transfer the parameters of a masterpiece .
But to be honest, have somehow forgotten as useless and these parameters, although there are not many and they were not "long brood ," not " train of cranes ." >

Added after 1 minutes

Сообщение от iosif

There is in fact a good psychological experience, when the black they say 19 front - white.
Twentieth century, nepodstavnoy also usually says - white.

To me someone else's opinion is not valid.
I nasmotrennost good, I believe my eyes.

[iosif]

artcol, with interest to hear your opinion on both the issues raised.

Added after 1 minutes
Cyril Syzran, I wonder why - no longer needed?
Is there are situations where the structuring of knowledge is produced uselessness?

[Игорь Гурьев]

Comrade Joseph, the main rule of art - a violation of established rules.


But not every narushalovo becomes an art.

There is an art narushalova rules, bestowed only geniuses that create outstanding works.

[iosif]

Guriev, Igor, really well said.
But little information.
My question is: why the two standard-educated art historian evaluate the same opposite the famous artist?