Crucible Year Peter Yuill
Archive · full record

T_379

The work as shown. Every value below comes from vae.db, the master database of the Crucible Year.

Recorded

Date
2026.09.23, day 269
Size
97 × 180 cm
Paper
S14, Half-Cooked Red Star Mo She 6-Foot Bark Xuan Paper
Inks
MB6, MB8, MB9, MC
Phase
P4 S14
Shown on the site
yes (V23 rating of 5.0 or higher)

Measured · V23 (v23.8)

V23 rating
6.7
Form
2
Tonal depth
2
Layering
3
Composition
2
Material and surface
2
Ink cover
88%
Dark share
59%
Tonal steps
5
Flaws named by the reads
other 4, dead ink 3, water stain 3
The V23 rating runs from 1 to 9, with 5 the middle of this body of work. It is the engine's reading, and the reference the archive is measured against.

How the number was made

Read by the Visual Analysis Engine, version 23.8, on 2026.10.06: measured by code, then read 5 times by Claude Opus 5.5 against three reference paintings (R1 to R3), each read independent of the others. How the engine works.

WHAT THE CODE SEES

Three views of one sheet.

Left, the photograph. Centre, the tone stretch the model is shown beside it: the darkest 45% of tones spread over the whole range, so flat black, banding and stains show. Right, every pixel as the measuring code classes it: cyan black ink, deep teal translucent grey, stone the palest ink, near black bare paper.

T_379T_379, tone-stretchedT_379, classed by brightness
88%of the sheet carries ink
Black 59%Grey 30%Light 11% SHARE OF THE INK, NOT OF THE SHEET
TONAL STEPS

5 families of tone.

Every inked pixel's brightness in 64 bins, smoothed; each circled peak holds at least 4% of the ink. Life inside the black: 0.042 (under 0.045 reads as flat).

0.300.7512345 BLACK INK TRANSLUCENT GREYS PALEST INK, 0.88 LUMINANCE OF EVERY INKED PIXEL, 64 BINS. PAPER (ABOVE 0.88) IS LEFT OUT.
FIVE READS

Five reads, one answer.

Each quality placed on its ladder by each read, and the mean the engine keeps.

READ 1READ 2READ 3READ 4READ 5MEAN
Form2BUILT2BUILT2BUILT2BUILT2BUILT2.0
Tonal depth2MODELLED2MODELLED2MODELLED2MODELLED2MODELLED2.0
Layering3ORDERED3ORDERED3ORDERED3ORDERED3ORDERED3.0
Composition2WORKING2WORKING2WORKING2WORKING2WORKING2.0
Material and surface2SOUND2SOUND2SOUND2SOUND2SOUND2.0

READ 1, IN ITS OWN WORDS

“A stepped-arc sheet in R3's family with legible translucent layering. It is crowded and heavy, the black core is flat, and the arcs end in blunt slabs, so it sits nearer R2 than R3.”

Form · BUILT

Arc bands hold their walls and follow the curve of the brush, but the right-centre black block is broad and slab-like, with blunt squared ends.

WEAKEST Bulky blackest arc band at right centre

STRONGEST Stepped arc bands sweeping from left to right

Tonal depth · MODELLED

Five tonal steps and graded grey bands, but the dark interior modulation of 0.042 is flat; the core black mass right of centre reads as uniform surface.

WEAKEST Flat black interior right of centre

STRONGEST Graded grey bands in upper right arc

Layering · ORDERED

Several translucent arc passes overlap in a readable order from pale outer bands to dark inner ones, like R3; the lower right blacks merge somewhat.

WEAKEST Dense overlaps in lower right blacks

STRONGEST Translucent stepped passes across the upper arcs

Composition · WORKING

The arc gives a clear direction, but 88% ink coverage crowds the frame, the bottom right is a heavy block and the top paper is leftover.

WEAKEST Crowded heavy lower right, little breathing room

STRONGEST Sweeping arc movement left to right

Material and surface · SOUND

Ink is controlled and the paper crinkle shows in the greys; a small grey blot sits on bare paper at top centre, away from the masses; the left drops look deliberate.

WEAKEST Grey blot splatter at top centre

STRONGEST Crinkle texture in the translucent greys

FLAWS

3 distinct places, 0 major.

Each read must name every flaw and where it is, in a ninth of the sheet. Here the reads named flaws in 3 distinct places, 10 mentions in all across 5 reads; the number in each ninth is how many times a flaw was named there. Reads agreeing on a place strengthen the evidence for one flaw; they do not multiply it.

5 × OTHER, WATER STAIN“grey spatter blot on bare paper at top centre”2 × OTHER“cluster of round drops beside left band ends”3 × DEAD INK“flat black interior of the central-right mass”WATER STAINDEAD INKOTHER
RULE 1Two tonal steps or fewer

Tonal depth held at rung 1.

5 steps: not applied
RULE 2A major flaw

Material held at rung 1. Mild waves in the unmounted paper are never a flaw.

none named
RULE 3Any quality below 0.5

The rating cannot exceed 4.

lowest 2.0
RULE 4At least two valid reads

A read that breaks the reply format is discarded.

5 of 5 valid
THE ARITHMETIC

V23 rating 6.7.

Engine v23.8, 5 reads. Fixed arithmetic, the same for every painting; the constants were set on 24 randomly chosen paintings so the median sheet scores 5. The scale is relative to this archive, not to painting in general, and a difference of less than half a point between two paintings is noise.

MEAN RUNG2.20(2.0 + 2.0 + 3.0 + 2.0 + 2.0) ÷ 5
→
RAW5.401 + 2 × 2.20
→
RATING6.75 + 2.086 × (5.40 − 4.60)