OMEGA CORPS STUDIO
par Titan Game In Life
← Back to tools
Method sheet — Artwork analysis

Learn how to analyse one or two artworks

This page is not a form to fill in, but a clear method sheet. It helps you build a commentary on one or two artworks step by step: presentation, question, description, hypotheses, technical and critical analysis, conclusion.

1 Choose 1 or 2 identifiable artworks
Art field

The works must belong to the field of arts (painting, sculpture, photo, installation, design, digital, etc.) and be clearly identifiable.

  • Choose 2 works that “talk” to each other: same theme or strong contrast.
  • Avoid works that are too obscure or impossible to date.
  • Check you can find basic info (artist, date, location).
Goal: have a coherent duo to compare (or a single rich artwork).
2 Present artist, artwork and date
Key facts

This is the factual introduction: WHO? WHAT? WHEN? WHERE?

  • Artist’s name (+ dates if you know them).
  • Exact title of the artwork (with correct spelling).
  • Date or period of creation.
  • Medium and technique (oil, video, installation, VR…).
  • Quick context: movement, era, place where it is kept.
These facts can be memorised: it’s your exam “label”.
3 Formulate a question (problematic)
Central question

The problematic connects your 2 works (or strongly questions the single work).

  • Common point: theme, form, technique, message?
  • Opposition: different way of treating the same subject?
  • Issue: historical, political, social, aesthetic?
A good question is not just “why is it beautiful?” but about real issues.
4 Describe visually (formal description)
Without interpreting

Explain what we see, not yet what it means.

  • Composition: organisation, center, lines of force.
  • Colours: dominant, contrasts, harmony, monochrome…
  • Light: dark/bright zones, light source.
  • Materials: textures, volume, relief.
  • Scale and viewpoint: size, high/low angle, proximity.
The more precise your description, the more credible your interpretations.
5 Hypotheses + technical analysis
Giving meaning

Hypotheses:

  • What does the artist try to say? Criticism? Tribute? Experimentation?
  • How is the subject treated: violence, humour, distance, immersion?
  • Use other works, movements, texts studied in class.

Technical analysis:

  • Materials: paint, metal, video, sound, code…
  • Process: collage, editing, 3D print, VR, interactivity…
  • How does the technique enhance the message?
Don’t list techniques for their own sake: always link gesture + meaning.
6 Critical analysis, comparison and conclusion
Taking a stand

Critical analysis:

  • Answer clearly to the problematic.
  • Compare the two works: contributions, limits, impact.
  • Base your opinion on precise elements (visual, technical, historical).

Conclusion:

  • Briefly recall the question.
  • Give a short, synthetic answer (2–4 sentences).
  • Optionally open to another work or a current question.
To revise first: question + general structure + main idea of the conclusion.
Typical plan for a comparative commentary
I. Introduction
  • Presentation of works (artist, title, date, medium).
  • Quick context.
  • Announce the question.
II. Formal & technical analysis
  • Compared visual description.
  • Analysis of techniques and plastic choices.
  • Link with meaning hypotheses.
III. Interpretation & critical view
  • Interpretation (messages, issues).
  • Comparison, strengths and limits of each work.
  • Opening and conclusion.
You can print this sheet as PDF and highlight the parts your teacher insists on.