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 .

[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.

[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?

[Игорь Гурьев]

Сообщение от iosif; 1935091"

why two standard art -educated estimate of the same opposite the famous artist ?

Because every work - a reflection of the human world .
And not just with his world gotovv perceive a different world.

And it's not just painting.
For example, I do not like Tchaikovsky , but someone else likes.

There are also purely formal elements that describe a long time .
For example, virtually all the critics do not recognize the work of Ilya Glazunov.

Artists appreciate creativity Krymov higher than the collectors.

Collectors appreciate creativity Konstantin Makovsky higher than art .

Well tagdalie .

[iosif]

Guriev, Igor, so it's informative.
Thank you.
While still remained the question of the opposite opinion of two professionals.
Like-dislike, everything is clear.
But the assessment of professionals on the subject of monetary value, in theory, should not differ fundamentally.

[artcol]

Сообщение от iosif

theoretically should not differ fundamentally.

Why not?