Dragon Cover Art

[Olgar Shiverstone]

So my copy of Dragon 355 arrives today. I flip it open, and on th einside cover is a nice illo of a party around a campfire (part of an Origins ad). My response: "Great art! Now this is what they need to have on the cover!" Then I notice the picture is dated ... 1989. Apparently, my taste for fantasy art is just stuck in the past.

For the record, this month's cover is OK in my opinion ... much better than the latest Dungeon. The face of the woman on the front of the Dungeon issue just looks wrong -- out of proportion, or something. There have been some great covers, but on the average, Dragon cover art doesn't grab me like it used too. The style seems to have shifted from (excuse my poor art descriptions) a realistic painting style to more comic-bookish.

 

[JustKim]

I've never been able to stand those kind of covers, the Jeff Easleys depicting a posed, statuesque world where action is neither suggested nor seemingly possible. I remember an Easley painting with a dragon breathing fire on adventurers, not one of whom were vexed or even looking at the dragon.

What you describe as comic bookish, I see as evocative. An Easley painting doesn't evoke anything more for me than "that's what a big lizard might look like". A piece with tension, where something is happening and more is implied, is perfect for magazine covers where you need to capture the eye quickly.

But I didn't care for this month's Dragon cover, and you're right about the face on the Dungeon cover. The angle of her face conflicts with the angle of her chin.

 

[Jdvn1]

This one?

I don't think that's a woman.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

That's a woman?

The woman on Dungeon this month.

Her.

JustKim & I will have to agree to disagree. I prefer Easley & Larry Elmore to Wayne Reynolds. Though I do like Todd Lockwood.

 

[Jdvn1]

The woman on Dungeon this month.

Oooooh, gotcha.

Yeah, that looks a bit off kilter. To me, it looks like you're looking at the canvas at an angle.