What was so magical about 1E/OD&D art?

[Aus_Snow]

And there again, I feel like I have something perfectly valid to say, but. . .

What was so magical about 1e/OD&D artwork?

It made me feel that maybe there was a career out there for me as an artist, because even as a kid I could draw better than that.

. . . someone goes and steals it.

 

[Nightfall]

All I can say is I take the advice of others with a grain of salt.

I take the advice of others with an avatar of Vanilla Ice with piles of it and probably a large grin on my face!

I still want more Claudio!

 

[Desdichado]

You've actually GOT IT. Those early guys weren't the best (or maybe they were but purposely used a particular style...not unlike many of the great impressionists. The point being, you could be a fine artist if your able to express the spirit, mood or love of something that moves you. I "get that" from Tramp. I don't get that from 99% of the 3E artwork floating around.

Uh... I don't think so. I didn't post that to praise it as a positive quality. It made the D&D stuff look amateurish and silly, IMO. I had already gotten used to much better stuff from the likes of Frank Frazetta, Darrel K Sweet (not that he's all that incredible either, looking back on it) etc. that were gracing the covers of actual fantasy novels of the 70s and 80s. Given how big D&D was, it felt cheap and chintzy to stick with "lowest bidder" style art. Getting the Larry Elmore covers on the boxed sets that eventually became the RC was an artistic coup that was long overdue.

And actually, I DO get that from 99% of the 3e artwork. What--you don't think those guys choose a career in freelance fantasy art because they don't have an abiding love of fantasy art or something? The top names in current game art really show through a ton of enthusiasm, creativity and genius--they also happen to have some actual technical skill, which is something most of the 1e era artists lacked.

 

[Nightfall]

Love what you do.

That's why I've never kept a mininum wage job for longer than a year and half!

 

[Melan]

Myself, I am partial to Judges Guild's raw, gaudy yet fascinating pulp fiction artwork. It is the height of unprofessionalism (this side of the three OD&D booklets, which are truly atrocious), but it is just so enthusiastic. And that matters a lot more than technique.

 

[Xyanthon]

Melan,

That is some good stuff! I liked most of the Judge's Guild stuff as well (some of it could be a little rough even for me). You know, there was some pretty interesting art in some of the fanzines of the time as well. Heh, I just noticed the artists name on the last pic. I think that one is much better than some of the later stuff he did in Palladium Fantasy.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Ugh.

I even like some oldschool art, but that is some of the worst I have seen.


Thankfully, fantasy art has come a long way since then. And yes, to much avail.

 

[Hussar]

The art in the 3.0 PHB suggests that the PCs are special snowflakes who are rarely in danger (and even then, not real danger), who always come out on top, and who are seperate from the world. The art in the 3.0 DMG suggests that the PCs rarely come out on top and deserve no special treatment. These mixed messages are liable to cause conflict with anyone new to the game.

Umm, pardon. The paladin in the 1e PHB is IN HELL. And he's winning. There's stacks of dead devils all around him. Emrikol isn't exactly hurting either. He's roasting some poor guard on his way out of town. Heck, I played a paladin in 1e specifically because I wanted to be that paladin mowing my way through hordes of devils.

Let's see, in the 3e PHB, we got Lidda getting blowed up, and Jozan and Krusk in a serious problem while climbing. Most of the other pics aren't action pics, simply portraits, so we don't really get any sense of anything from them.

Hey, I did say that the PHB art was crap. But to say things like RC's trying to pedal is just wrong.

 

[Maggan]

Ugh.
Thankfully, fantasy art has come a long way since then. And yes, to much avail.

I'm not so sure about that. It is easy for us to think that fantasy art during the 70's looked like that in the PH, MM and DMG. Or even the covers of the modules.

But then we forget all the atmospheric, cool, technically proficient and totally awesome fantasy art that was produced prior to D&D, such as the covers of the Conan comics.

For example, The Savage Sword of Conan started running from 1974. Covers can be found here:

http://conan.kanefilms.com/SSOC1.html

Vallejo, Whelan and other great artists produced great looking fantasy art before or simultaneous to the creation of D&D, so it's not as if the D&D artists didn't have prior art to consider and be inspired by.

Just a thought.

/M

 

[Ghendar]

QFT.

1e/OD&D art looks amateurish, executed with enthusiasm and occasional talent but very little skill.

So guys like Trampier and Otus had "very little skill?"

I disagree STRONGLY with this.