How can you critique digital sculptures for film or television?

I sadly would not critique it. The genius is in the invention (AI) and at this point talent is lost. The perfection of AI is after all a process of elimination not creation. Harsh words but genius existed before AI and humans will eventually see its (AI’s) demise

I don't know what kind of criticism you are referring to. But I consider digital sculpture a very important tool, because it gives the interested party complete control over the character they want to create. First, a sketch, or a 2D layout, was generated. Then the artist in charge of the digital sculpture is in charge of converting the 2D concept to 3D. In this part, the artist has complete control over what things he wants to add or not.

I would not use my time and energy to do this. Real creation in art/sculpture is being lost by the ease of copying and analysing etc. The 'end product' could never be the same. It's like comparing a real breathing human being with a man made robot! Sorry it is not something to be compared!

To make the analysis more comprehensive, consider adding the more elements: Include a discussion of the technical aspects of the digital sculpture, such as the software and tools used in its creation, the level of detail, and the overall craftsmanship. Examine the artistic choices made by the sculptor (e.g. color, texture, lighting, and composition), and how these choices contribute to the overall impact. Consider how the digital sculpture relates to the cultural and historical context of the film or television show. Does it incorporate symbolism or references that are relevant to the storyline or themes? If the digital sculpture is part of an interactive project, discuss how it engages the audience and influences their experience.

Great! Also think about adding this: Analyze the color choices and palette used in the sculpture. How do the colors contribute to the overall aesthetic and mood of the piece? Are they consistent with the reference or concept art? Examine the composition of the sculpture within its environment. Does it have a balanced and visually pleasing arrangement? How does the composition guide the viewer's eye?

All this is analytically dead stuff! Maybe a new word needs to enhance our vocabulary in order not to confuse creative art with man made digitory exploration.?

I find this step 3 helpful because it encourages a more holistic evaluation of the digital sculpture by comparing it to various alternatives and contexts. This kind of evaluation is essential for artists and designers seeking to create high-quality, versatile, and impactful digital sculptures.

Step 4 is comprehensive and offers valuable guidance on providing feedback effectively and professionally. However, if you'd like to make it even more comprehensive, you could consider adding empathy to this list, too. Encouraging the acknowledgement of the effort and creativity put into the sculpture can make the feedback more empathetic. Recognizing the hard work and passion of the artist can make the critique more constructive and less discouraging.

I would never intend any comment or remark I have made, to be disrespectful in any way to those who think of things in a different (digital!/IT) way. It's just that this is not part of the same creative involvement in my language, as I think of 'sculpture'.

Step 5 is good as it outlines essential principles for effective two-way communication during the feedback process. It encourages important aspects of constructive dialogue. I particularly like the advice against arguing, interrupting, or dismissing responses as it helps ensure that the conversation remains constructive and respectful.

The suggestion in step 6 is quite comprehensive. However, you might consider adding one more element: collaboration. Encourage a collaborative approach in the follow-up. Emphasize that you and the artist or team are working together to achieve the best possible outcome. This reinforces the idea that feedback is a part of a shared effort to improve and create a better final product. Including this additional point highlights the importance of working together toward common goals and reinforces a sense of teamwork in the feedback process.

I work as a 'loner' and could not understand collaboration or verbal discussion/analysis etc. when I am working. My love is to just get on with it! - and be in a peaceful oblivium! (I know this is not helpful in answering the questions but I hope it will explain why I just...can't!?)

Generally all art is appreciated subjectively, critique is valuable, all points above valid, but as a maker and consumer of art - sculpture being one, AI misses the subjective - the form or feel resonating to touch, association with lived experience. I make and teach art, the liminal - construction, dimensions, form, palette, concept and context are all valid points to consider, however the human experience is too great for simple technical dismissal of the sublinimal effect and affect of the viewer / consumer of the work. Interesting read!

The suggestion in step 6 is quite comprehensive. However, you might consider adding one more element: collaboration. Encourage a collaborative approach in the follow-up. Emphasize that you and the artist or team are working together to achieve the best possible outcome. This reinforces the idea that feedback is a part of a shared effort to improve and create a better final product. Including this additional point highlights the importance of working together toward common goals and reinforces a sense of teamwork in the feedback process.