WotC Artwork in books

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I was looking at the artwork in the first post and I was trying to figure out what bugged me about them. It took me a minute but then it suddenly dawned on me. Just about all of them appear to me as figure studies with no context. There's no real background to speak of, no setting in which the characters are placed. The real exception to this, the one with the elf and the sky-ships, looks like it's not even finished. To me, art of this style should be able to tell a story without any words being added. I should be able to look at the picture, take the character in its surrounding, and come up with some context, some reason why this is occuring. The art that is shown left me going, "eh," instead of "wow!"

For the record, I am not always a fan of the "old school" artists either. I am more of a Renaissance masters fan myself. It's an acquired taste, I know.

Ironically, about all the images J-Dawg posted in this thread HAVE backgrounds and setting to them. In fact, most all the WotC art has at least something to show a background, even if its just ground at the feet or something like that...but there are usually some kind of background with the pictures instead of just single standing figures.

 

[Pants]

Ayup.

Thanks.

Cool, that would look much better as a full page illustration.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I can perhaps shed some light on the reason for the art being very hit-or-miss. Other than differences in taste, of course.

I have a friend who in newspaper lingo would be "a highly-placed source with connections to the WotC art department." This friend has worked on both Magic: the Gathering and D&D. Per my friend, it is very difficult for the art director to get enough art to fill all the projects WotC has going.

"But Joshua," you cry, "with so many geeks out there longing to get their artwork into a D&D book, surely WotC must be drowning in submissions?" Ah, but WotC can't just use random artwork sent in by random fans. It needs specific art to show a particular monster, character, magic item, location, or whatnot. It needs artists who can work to deadline and who can make changes (sometimes wholesale changes -- again per my friend) in a timely fashion. It needs artists who aren't going to flake out in the middle of a project and leave the art director high and dry.

So once you apply all these filters...

* reasonably talented artists
* who do fantasy art
* who are interested in working for WotC
* who are willing to accept WotC's payment and terms
* who can stay on deadline
* who don't mind having their art changed by fiat
* who are reliable

... you are left with not that many people.

I do not want to make it seem that WotC is just settling for the dregs of humanity. Clearly, the art department works very hard and I personally believe the level of artistry evident in the most recent books is light-years beyond anything from 30 years ago. But the next time you roll your eyes and think to yourself that getting fantasy art for a specific D&D book is easy -- think again.

 

[palleomortis]

It's good stuff, I'll tell ya that. Las time I tried to draw a PC, It came out as a joke picture. That's How they all come out tho, so no worries. If I could bring myself to draw somthing realistic (Or at leas in the right proportions) then maybe it would be good. I don't really know. Never bee as good as that stuff up there tho.

 

[sjmiller]

Ironically, about all the images J-Dawg posted in this thread HAVE backgrounds and setting to them. In fact, most all the WotC art has at least something to show a background, even if its just ground at the feet or something like that...but there are usually some kind of background with the pictures instead of just single standing figures.

Before I comment on your statement, let me first say that the artwork shown is all well executed. They are good samples of the artists and their work. To me none of them is really a complete picture. They appear to all be a preliminary piece or cut out from a finished piece. I would have to disagree with you that they all have backgrounds and settings in them. Going picture by picture we have:

1. The shifter with a small amount of photoshopped trees and bushes in the background, but I cannot tell if it is a wall or something else behind that.
2. The Natural Weapons picture with a bit of smoke and flaming garbage(?) behind it. To me, at least, it appears that the artist is either just implying something in the background or the piece is unfinished.
3. The soulknife picture with a door against a white canvas. There's not even the wall that the door would obviously be attached to. It's like the artist painted one of those sculpture pieces/diaramas you see for sale at comic shops.
4. Now we get to one that at least appears to have a background. The sky-ship picture would be better if, again in my opinion, the artist actually finished it. Look at the bottom of the picture and the lower right corner in particular. It's like the artist just got tired of doing it.
5. The aerenel elf and baboon picture looks like the artist just applied a dark wash over the canvas for the "background." No detail, no hints as to the setting, nothing.
6. The quori nightmare has no background at all. The nimbus surrounding the central figure is part of the figure's manifestation (I guess). There's no context to the picture at all.
7. The Primal Fear picture really looks unfinished to me. Again, no background, just the manifestation of the power and, I guess, it's victim. Inside? Outside? Who can tell?
8. The oriental looking half-orc fending off the crocodile again looks like a concept piece for a much larger scene. I am not sure what that is supposed to be behind the half-orc. It almost looks like dried grassland.
9. The orcs rescuing the gnome appears to come from a larger piece. I would like to see the whole thing, to see the whole story. This one has the beginnings of a background, but it just looks like something is missing.
10. The final shifter picture again looks like a preliminary character sketch for a painting. You concentrate on the main figure to get the details you want in it and do not worry about the background, as that is most likely done already.

As I said at the beginning of this post. All the pieces show remarkable talent. I guess, for me, the lack of context means that they do not grab me like they obviously do for others. That's simply a matter of personal taste. Just mark my comments as coming from a cranky old man.

 

[Bobitron]

Whoa! Let's not forget one of my favorite artists, Joe Mad!, who drew this awesome shifter. He is more renowned for his comic art, but in this case he worked with Howard Lyon to create an awesome piece.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The "no backgrounds," while probably iffy when you compare editions, is still a valid criticism of the artwork today. In the core books, to a certain extent, it's nessecary -- compare the WAR Terrasque in the DMGII with the one in the MM. The one in the MM shows me how a Terrasque looks. The DMGII one shows me how a Terrasque looks when it's kicking your ass. But if I didn't already have the MM pic, I'm sure it could be said that the DMGII pic gives you very little real idea of how the thing looks normally.

I have found that, for me, no backgrounds is why a lot of the modern art, while very good and quite evocative of a character, doesn't really stir my nature very often. It's not *inspiring.* And that's partially because a lotof them don't show scenes -- they show creatures, characters, effects, but only in a kind of text-book demonstration, not in situ. And while the textbook is almost essential for some of the creatures so we can tell what they look like, it still doesn't make me want to go out and use a Destrachan, for instance...it's just sitting there in the MM, not inspiring me to do anything with it...not attacking adventurers, not building his underground empire, not destroying castle walls with his harmonics...just kind of chilling there. Lookin' angry. Gr.

As a comparision, the half-elf on the airship platform, or something like the Neogi raid pictures in Lords of Madness, make me want to go out and run that scene RIGHT NOW. I want the PC's to arrive on an air dock, I want them to see the destruction of eel-spiders and umber hulks...I don't want them to face a Destrachan...

I guess there are two kinds of art: for the DM and for the Players. Players' art is characters, figures, etc. DM's art is encounters, events, dramatic happenings, etc...

 

[Mista Collins]

I really enjoy Steve Prescott's artwork. All of his artwork is what got me drawn into the new Eberron campaign setting. Then you add Wayne Reynolds to the mix and you have a very stylish looking product. Everytime I see the original peices, I start to drool.

 

[Desdichado]

The "no backgrounds," while probably iffy when you compare editions, is still a valid criticism of the artwork today.

It is a valid criticism, but as you imply, I don't think it's a valid criticism relative to edition. I don't recall much of the 1e or 2e having no backgrounds either, and there are works in modern books that do include them.

I didn't include any in this case, but I could have if that had been my intention.

 

[Desdichado]

As an aside, I'm been poking around James Ryman's website for a little while now, and in his links section, which only has a dozen or so links tops, ENWorld is mentioned. Pretty cool! I wonder if he ever posts here?