Sweet Cover Art?

Ghostwind said:

Looking through this thread has made me realize that the cover art for the first and second edition books is better than 3rd edition books.

Click to expand...

Knightfall1972 said:

Dragon #147
This one was also in one of the 2nd Edition books, but I can't remember which one. I based the WoK character known as Crystal Tigerstorm off this picture.

Click to expand...

Erik Mona said:

I'm currently putting together "The Art of Dragon: 30 Years of the World's Best Fantasy Art" for Paizo

Click to expand...

Finster said:

There is a definite difference.

It seems to me that the earlier cover illustrations had a similarity or connection to Neoclassicism(sp?) that is not present in the current stable of illustrations. The post 2e fantasy art environment is different than the atmosphere of the 80s and 90s in that it is heavily influenced by the comic book genre style illustration. This really makes sense when one takes into account the environment in which a great many rpg books are sold (ie the comic/game shop). Also, many of the current edition artists are former and current comic book artists and creators.

I remember taking my Grandmother to a local con in Columbus Ohio called MarCon. I was there to meet Larry Elmore. After leaving the convention my Grandmother commented that Mr. Elmore's paintings were "like painting used to be". After a short Q&A session with her (my Grandmother is an artist too) it turns out that she felt Elmore's work had a lot in common with Norman Rockwell's (using similar techniques).

Fast forward a decade and I see fantasy illustration moving away from the look and feel of a "classic" illustration to an "action" illustration. The difference is subtle but none-the-less present. Where 1st and 2nd edition art directors requested works that illustrated a feel of fantasy, current requests are often (though not always) for a scene. This scene usually involes action and dynamic foreshortening of a figure, or dramatic perspective. They want the figures to jump out of the page at the viewer. I personally have encountered requests for illustrations that can only be fully completed through the use of tools created specifically for sequential art (like multiple time frames). Look at some of the Eberron chapter headers for examples of stuff strait out of a work of sequential art.

These changes (as well as whole new stable of artists) have resulted in a different look for the current edition. The changes are also supported mainly through the requests made by art directors (who get their orders from on high), not the individual illustrators. "Better" or worse is ultimatley a judgement call on the part of the viewer. Personally I would prefer a combination of both old and new editions' art. We could then have the best of both worlds, combining classic creation methods with dynamic figure and scene creation. Wayne Alan Reynolds' work comes very close to this as of right now, and he's getting "better" all the time.

Click to expand...

There is a definite difference.

It seems to me that the earlier cover illustrations had a similarity or connection to Neoclassicism(sp?) that is not present in the current stable of illustrations. The post 2e fantasy art environment is different than the atmosphere of the 80s and 90s in that it is heavily influenced by the comic book genre style illustration. This really makes sense when one takes into account the environment in which a great many rpg books are sold (ie the comic/game shop). Also, many of the current edition artists are former and current comic book artists and creators.

I remember taking my Grandmother to a local con in Columbus Ohio called MarCon. I was there to meet Larry Elmore. After leaving the convention my Grandmother commented that Mr. Elmore's paintings were "like painting used to be". After a short Q&A session with her (my Grandmother is an artist too) it turns out that she felt Elmore's work had a lot in common with Norman Rockwell's (using similar techniques).

Fast forward a decade and I see fantasy illustration moving away from the look and feel of a "classic" illustration to an "action" illustration. The difference is subtle but none-the-less present. Where 1st and 2nd edition art directors requested works that illustrated a feel of fantasy, current requests are often (though not always) for a scene. This scene usually involes action and dynamic foreshortening of a figure, or dramatic perspective. They want the figures to jump out of the page at the viewer. I personally have encountered requests for illustrations that can only be fully completed through the use of tools created specifically for sequential art (like multiple time frames). Look at some of the Eberron chapter headers for examples of stuff strait out of a work of sequential art.

These changes (as well as whole new stable of artists) have resulted in a different look for the current edition. The changes are also supported mainly through the requests made by art directors (who get their orders from on high), not the individual illustrators. "Better" or worse is ultimatley a judgement call on the part of the viewer. Personally I would prefer a combination of both old and new editions' art. We could then have the best of both worlds, combining classic creation methods with dynamic figure and scene creation. Wayne Alan Reynolds' work comes very close to this as of right now, and he's getting "better" all the time.

Click to expand...