What does "High Quality" mean to you?

Posted 4 years, 12 days ago by direful

I've been seeing the term "High Quality" on a lot of characters/art requests and stuff, and I never really understood exactly what it meant. Admittedly, this is the first proper art community-focused site I've been on, so I'm relatively new to the term despite being an artist myself. Maybe it's got an established definition somewhere that I just haven't seen.

To me, HQ indicates the art of someone who could be selling their stuff as professional commissions (good anatomy, composition, lighting, etc), but I see it used more often to refer to really complicated character designs, specifically adopts drawn in an anime-esque style. What makes something HQ? Is it the super-thin lined style I see most often? Is it, like I've been thinking, the artist's ability to draw something "sell-able"? Is it simply the level of completion (ie, lines, colors, shading, background/atmosphere)? Is it something else? I don't get it!

Plus, seeing art divided into LQ/MQ/HQ (although I admit I don't see much art advertised as "medium quality") seems like it could be really discouraging, especially for artists who might just be getting started or who have a nontraditional style.

What do you think of when you see the term "High Quality," and why? And if you're an artist, how does it make you feel?

Preemptively; if you end up discussing this, please be civil!

zoryanny

For me, quality depends on how polished something looks. It's all about execution and not necessarily details, style, or even cleanliness in regards to certain areas...

Cartoon or simplistic styles can be fantastic and have amazing stylised anatomy. I honestly love cartoon styles as the expressions and movement can break rules of reality. Detail isn't a deciding factor and can make certain styles muddy. I prefer something created with flow and purpose rather than a lot of unnecessary parts.

Messy paint strokes can be a wonderful addition and lines that aren't super crisp can be good sometimes. A good basis of lighting does help a lot, as does colour theory. Lighting doesn't have to be crazy, and sometimes flat colour work too. Lines don't have to be thin or crisp - bold lines can work for certain styles. Sketches can be high quality. I consider the upper left part of the following piece to be the highest quality I've ever commissioned.

I will say even the quicker sketches are very good quality because the anatomy works, the lines are purposeful, and the flow/balance is understood. And I must say, this isn't even her best work. She managed an older character fantastically despite drawing young adults most often. Slight tangent, but I wanted to share...

10700427_JHyw9xyqDarbcZ7.jpg

Alternatively, here's a style that is neither semi-realistic nor anime that I adore and consider HQ as well.

11548934_MCgYnFY7KFU8IKO.png

btw I recommend both of these artists with my full enthusiasm. Wonderful people.

Basically, any style can be HQ! I think it's about time, execution, effort, and practice. I don't think someone has to work as a professional artist to have HQ skills.

I put myself in the medium-quality range. There are people out there who have much stronger line work, flow, and have lighting on point. And man...when an artist can do hands well - I'm in awe. I definitely study pieces with qualities that I'd like to improve upon. That being said, I can see high quality being disheartening, especially for artists who are still developing and would like to sell. I can also see it being tough on artists who don't do anime or realistic styles since those are the most praised styles.

Stelio

High Quality SHOULD mean nothing more than "Maximum effort." Like, the artist put their all into the piece, they made sure the lines and color were clean, they added detail, that kind of thing.

If you use "High Quality" and "Low Quality" to mean styles you like/dislike, however, you are an ass.

I also have a huge problem with people demanding "HQ" art for free, like on the freebies section or art games. Artists don't owe you anything, especially for free, so don't be a dick and say that only the most professional free art is worthy to you. You should appreciate any free art someone makes for you, not whine when it's not "good enough."

4LeafRose

Better than me lol


Honestly though... my idea of "HQ" art has changed as I've gotten better. 5 years ago I would've thought that my art now is HQ.

Really it's a very loosely interpreted term that people take too seriously. Art is subjective, bruh. My idea of "HQ" isn't going to be the same as someone else's. 

PenTem

I kinda hate labels like "high quality"? I understand why they exist but I don't really like them.

Obvi, quality is purely subjective, there's always someone who thinks A is high-quality, but B isn't, and just as easily another person could say B is high quality, A isnt, someone who thinks both are high quality and someone else who thinks neither are, and all their opinions are valid.

High Quality can also change depending on different contexts, like most of the art/designs I would've thought was "HQ" 3 years ago I no longer consider it to b high quality. Also, I think you can have high quality designs without having high-quality art, and high-quality art with mid/low quality designs

But overall I think "high quality" comes down to experience an artist has. A lot of ppl I see r also saying something like it depends on how long a piece/design takes, but I don't completely agree with that. Something an artist makes that they maybe spent 20 minutes can be considered "high quality" whereas another artist spends 2 hours on a piece/design and it's not typically considered "high quality".

So I think it really comes down to skill level and training, but even then finding where the line between mid-tier to high-tier is really hard to define and incredibly fuzzy, as if the picture of "quality" wasn't hard enough to define as it is. But I think there are def common traits that a lot of artists who are "High quality" have in common:

- Understanding of fundamentals, including anatomy, composition, contrast/lighting and shading, color theory and other stuff - good understanding of program they're using/materials they're using - Tho even this can b a bit more subjective, but I find that's its at least pretty common - defined and well-developed art style (Also kind of subjective, but basically, drawing comes pretty natural to them) - Fluidity and motion - Kind of opt too, but something I considered HQ

There's no one way ticket to becoming a "high quality artist" and honestly I think when the label's used, it comes off to me at least that the artist is incredibly full of themselves, but usually I see "HQ" In character purges, usually referring to designers whose designers are super popular and in high demand,, tho I also think its bc a lot of ppl see good art and its like "oh! Good design" but I strongly disagree with that, but that's a rant for another post lol. but tbh I don't like using terms, if you like your art, then it's good!! It's high quality!!