Crucible Year Peter Yuill
Archive · full record

T_384

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

Recorded

Date
2026.09.20, day 266
Size
50 × 100 cm
Paper
S14, Half-Cooked Red Star Mo She 6-Foot Bark Xuan Paper
Inks
MB6, MB8, MB9
Phase
P4 S14
Shown on the site
yes (V23 rating of 5.0 or higher)

Measured · V23 (v23.8)

V23 rating
6.5
Form
2.2
Tonal depth
2
Layering
2.6
Composition
2
Material and surface
2
Ink cover
77%
Dark share
71%
Tonal steps
5
Flaws named by the reads
other 17
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_384T_384, tone-stretchedT_384, classed by brightness
77%of the sheet carries ink
Black 71%Grey 21% 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: 0.052 (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, agreeing on 3 of 5 qualities.

Each quality placed on its ladder by each read, and the mean the engine keeps. Where reads differ, they differ by one rung; close calls resolve down.

READ 1READ 2READ 3READ 4READ 5MEAN
Form2BUILT3FLUENT2BUILT2BUILT2BUILT2.2
Tonal depth2MODELLED2MODELLED2MODELLED2MODELLED2MODELLED2.0
Layering2LEGIBLE3ORDERED2LEGIBLE3ORDERED3ORDERED2.6
Composition2WORKING2WORKING2WORKING2WORKING2WORKING2.0
Material and surface2SOUND2SOUND2SOUND2SOUND2SOUND2.0

READ 1, IN ITS OWN WORDS

“A concentric-arc sheet like R3 but heavier: a large, mostly flat black centre swallows the layered passes. Grey fans and the arc's sweep work, though slab blocks and crowding on the right hold it to ordinary.”

Form · BUILT

Concentric arc bands hold their walls and follow the sweep; the top-centre black block and the upper-right wedges read as filled slabs rather than travelled strokes.

WEAKEST Rectangular dark slab at top centre, blunt and stiff

STRONGEST Inner concentric arcs bottom centre follow brush travel

Tonal depth · MODELLED

Grey arcs on left and outer right show stepped densities; the dominant central black (71% dark share) is mostly flat, with only grain visible when tone-stretched.

WEAKEST Central black mass, near-uniform in colour view

STRONGEST Left grey fan bands with stepped translucent density

Layering · LEGIBLE

Pale fans upper left and outer right rings stack in readable order; in the centre the dark passes merge so the sequence is lost.

WEAKEST Centre passes fused into one black

STRONGEST Translucent grey fans at upper left overlap legibly

Composition · WORKING

The arc gives clear rotational movement and shapes the white bottom-left void; the right half is jammed with dark, leaving little air there.

WEAKEST Heavy black mass crowding the right half

STRONGEST Sweeping quarter-circle carrying the eye down-right

Material and surface · SOUND

Ink is controlled and edges crisp; small spatter specks at left edge and lower left, drips top right, and crease lines in bottom-left paper sit away from principal masses.

WEAKEST Stray specks and paper creases bottom left

STRONGEST Dry-brush grain at edges of top-centre block

FLAWS

4 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 4 distinct places, 17 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.

3 × OTHER“small drip spatters in upper right paper”5 × OTHER“drip running below the left arc”8 × OTHER“scattered ink specks along left edge and lowe…”1 × OTHER“small ink blots near bottom centre”OTHER
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 6.5.

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 RUNG2.16(2.2 + 2.0 + 2.6 + 2.0 + 2.0) ÷ 5
→
RAW5.321 + 2 × 2.16
→
RATING6.55 + 2.086 × (5.32 − 4.60)