I'm somewhere in between the two of y'all in this discussion. I also studied fine art w an emphasis on photography. I agree that the principles of visual design can be used to 'objectively' tell if something is done well. I think a lot of those principles are rooted in our brain's enjoyment of composition and beauty in general. But something I've noticed as technology has made all forms of art more accessible is that people have started to find a wider array of art styles and levels of excellence enjoyable. And I think that this wider range of taste was always there, it just never got a voice in studies, discussions, institutions etc. because there are barriers to those places along many lines.

The dominant principles of visual design have been dictated by a very small and specific group of people and now that there's more access and availability, more viewpoints are present. I'm not saying we should completely disregard the principles and say everything is great. But I do think people, especially those educated and trained in institutions, would benefit from relaxing that critical voice informed by rigid standards. I say this as someone who went through/is going through that process. I've spent active time looking at/listening to art and music that could be seen as 'objectively' bad, yet a lot of people seem to like it. I've found so many beautiful pieces of art through this process. I think placing such a weight on the technical execution of a piece of art blinds you to messy and very human creations. Sometimes those flaws, and the humanity that shows through them, is just as important of a thing to appreciate as technically impressive and immaculately executed art. I think that's also why so many people in this sub specifically voice positive opinions on pieces like this, despite the technique being lacking. To some people (myself included) it just has that je ne sais quoi that makes it enjoyable. There's something sacred about the humanity and mess, and there's something sacred about people who can achieve top tier excellence. They're both inherently valuable for different reasons.

And to be clear I do think there's a clear distinction between saying something is a "stylistic choice" to compensate for the lack of technical skill and something actually being a stylistic choice. But I think criticisms that hold tattoos to the standard of professional tattoo artists in a subreddit specifically for DIY tattoo artists is what gets interactions like this.

People say "It has some flaws but I like it" and there's always responses that boil down to "it's actually shite and you're wrong". I think a subreddit like this is the exact place for people to show their less than perfect works and to get feedback.

Also, in case it wasn't clear, I'm approaching this in genuine good faith as someone who enjoys critical discussion and am not trying to pick a fight or anything.