In the very beginning the art were much more crude, lacking detail. Then if I pick up cards from Ice Age all the way to Invasion, the art gains much more detail. Then, at some point that I don't know because I've not followed mtg anymore for years, they started to do photoreal illustration. There weren't transparencies, glow, shiny metal, reflections, before.
Yeah its seemed a lot more photo shoppy for a while now. Personally i miss the old art. As impressive as most of it is, there isn't an artist working on magic these days that i wouldn't trade for Harold McNeil, Rebecca guay, or Phil and Kaja foglio.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The answer is purple because ice cream has no bones.
Stasis and other abstract art pieces were TERRIBLE I much prefer the cohesive block art styles. I DO hate the cartooniness of jeskai ascendancy but overall I'm happier.
I liked those cool "scroll" like text backgrounds too. Were the best
I think they do a good job though. Look at an older card like smite from Stronghold vs the new KTK smite the monstrous. Feels real similar. But we also get some RAD improvements too like the Eldrazi cards. Also I feel like there are some decent "retro" feeling cards in KTK like snowhorn rider and that one pinkish mardu guy.
I think there's a balance they have to keep. I mean it's obvious they wanted more photorealistic art before, just look at the original kird ape.
I've played off and on since the beginning, and to me the older artwork had a more mysterious feel to it. A lot of it looked to me as more a depiction of spells or whatnot, perhaps from a book or scroll (drawn from your library). I'm not denying that the art of today is tighter and more intricate, but to me between the often symbolic and abstract art and the more mysterious and obscure flavor text, versus today's intricate hand holding storylines and over representation of characters in artwork, a lot of the old feel to it is gone.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The answer is purple because ice cream has no bones.
In the very beginning the art were much more crude, lacking detail. Then if I pick up cards from Ice Age all the way to Invasion, the art gains much more detail. Then, at some point that I don't know because I've not followed mtg anymore for years, they started to do photoreal illustration. There weren't transparencies, glow, shiny metal, reflections, before.
Around after 4th.
Before 5th, artists were given a desription and free reign, which caused some problems (feldon's cane, for example, was supposed to be "feldon's cone"). The artists retained copyright and was paid royalries.
By the time 5th rolled around, wizards directed and owned all art.
Yeah its seemed a lot more photo shoppy for a while now. Personally i miss the old art. As impressive as most of it is, there isn't an artist working on magic these days that i wouldn't trade for Harold McNeil, Rebecca guay, or Phil and Kaja foglio.
Absolutely agree. Some of the new art is great and some of the old art was awful BUT overall, arts like Arcanis the Omnipotent are gone forever and it sucks.
I liked those cool "scroll" like text backgrounds too. Were the best
I think they do a good job though. Look at an older card like smite from Stronghold vs the new KTK smite the monstrous. Feels real similar. But we also get some RAD improvements too like the Eldrazi cards. Also I feel like there are some decent "retro" feeling cards in KTK like snowhorn rider and that one pinkish mardu guy.
I think there's a balance they have to keep. I mean it's obvious they wanted more photorealistic art before, just look at the original kird ape.
The Shade has amazing art. I bought one just for the art and want to turn him into an EDH deck. Some new art is mind bogglingly epic. Like Keranos (I NEED A FOIL!) or, as you show, Snowhorn Rider.
I love the old art. I love the old card designs too. The new art from khans looks yes photoshoppy and looks like not alot of originality whent into the images. I like the old art better, imean like urza and beyond, it was hand drawn usually, hand painted, gritty, realistic, etc.
Yeah its seemed a lot more photo shoppy for a while now. Personally i miss the old art. As impressive as most of it is, there isn't an artist working on magic these days that i wouldn't trade for Harold McNeil, Rebecca guay, or Phil and Kaja foglio.
Many of folgios' art is really flat and McNeill could be summed up as "random whirly lines". Compare these to something like enter the infinite or nyx-fleece ram
I think the best art is from Mirrodin/Kamigawa/Ravnica/Time Spiral.
It is modern but still manages to make a great image of the plane, while feeling unique. A few of the modern art is a tad bit generic, like it came from a Korean MMO or something (discpile of the old way, rubblebelt raiders). While some is just outright bad (Aerial predaation). The art isn't really that focused anymore, especially on the commons. It can be quite poor or unfitting of the theme.
I really, really didn't like most of the art in Kamigawa block - it seemed like it was mostly just a random collection of "things" that some child put together randomly. Some of it was pretty cool, like Kokusho, the Evening Star, but it just wasn't to my taste at all. I find the art from the Urza block the most iconic and interesting in the entirety of the game, but Invasion (as a set) was also fantastic. Alas, those days are gone forever.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"To make peace with the forest, make peace with me." -Multani, to Urza
Ant Queen's text is a bit easier to read than the Ice Age version of Aurochs (this one: http://magiccards.info/ia/en/113.html ), but the 5th ed Aurochs (the one shown by autocard) seems just fine. Two important differences between the two: Text is larger and better spaced in 5th ed than in IA, and between IA and 5th ed in general, it seems like they lightened the color of and reduced the contrast within the scroll backing, improving its contrast with the text and mitigating outline disruption between them. It looks to me like those differences are more important than the scroll vs. flat backing.
Urza's block is always the period of time I think of when I think of great art in Magic. Boy do I miss those days. It's a shame we likely won't see anything like that again.
I do like a lot of the art on the lands though. That's one area that has improved for the better. They did a bang up job with the Islands in Ravnica and the Mountains in KTK...WOAH. That one with the fire veins that you can see?!?! My favorite mountain art by far in all of MTG.
Do we at least have a consensus on this, that the art has improved? Now, Serra Sanctuary and Tolarian Academy...those guys are pretty iconic and maybe that's why I really like them. But the Lifelands in KTK are pretty stellar too (I'm lookin at you scoured barrens)
I really like the art used by Foglio, but it's just not appropriate for Magic when you have a cartoon aesthetic mixed with a more realistic one. I think the greatest advantage to having this photorealistic art on cards is that there's no chance of divergences in art style.
The Theros enchantment creatures, I think, are an example of a new art style done right. They're cohesive and fit with the rest of the cards just fine, while retaining that otherworldly aspect that makes them seem out of the ordinary.
It's about a more uniform style, I guess. I mean, if you look at Phil Foglio, Rebecca Guay, and Anson Maddocks, you can't even believe it's the same multiverse.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
I prefer sets with older art as well. You could recognize a stasis or a Shivan dragon from miles away. Currently the art is almost interchangeable. One photorealistic drawing for another. There are hardly any cards anymore instantly recognizable for years to come with perhaps the exception of cards like Commander's authority which is just a limited fodder card.
The art on that card is just...weird. It looks like someone took a picture with their child "down by the lake". It seems inappropriate for a trading card game about killing your opponent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"To make peace with the forest, make peace with me." -Multani, to Urza
I prefer sets with older art as well. You could recognize a stasis or a Shivan dragon from miles away. Currently the art is almost interchangeable. One photorealistic drawing for another. There are hardly any cards anymore instantly recognizable for years to come with perhaps the exception of cards like Commander's authority which is just a limited fodder card.
Shivan dragon would be pretty interchangable with every other red dragon if it wasn't the first.
I prefer sets with older art as well. You could recognize a stasis or a Shivan dragon from miles away. Currently the art is almost interchangeable. One photorealistic drawing for another. There are hardly any cards anymore instantly recognizable for years to come with perhaps the exception of cards like Commander's authority which is just a limited fodder card.
Any time art comes up someone talks about how great stasis is. I just don't get it. I think it's in the running for worst in magic history. Some abstraction is neat here and there but that pushes it way too far. It's the card that really convinces me that the general new direction of art is for the best, so we never EVER see anything like that again.
Stasis and other abstract art pieces were TERRIBLE I much prefer the cohesive block art styles. I DO hate the cartooniness of jeskai ascendancy but overall I'm happier.
I like the stasis art It's very distinct, and I can always recognize that card.
---
That said, my favorite set, art-wise, is ice age. For some reason, the cards from that era just have really pleasing to look at art.
Stasis and other abstract art pieces were TERRIBLE I much prefer the cohesive block art styles. I DO hate the cartooniness of jeskai ascendancy but overall I'm happier.
I like the stasis art It's very distinct, and I can always recognize that card.
---
That said, my favorite set, art-wise, is ice age. For some reason, the cards from that era just have really pleasing to look at art.
It is very distinct, but people just remember it fondly cause the card itself is iconic due to its effect. I'm convinced that's where 90% of the love comes from.
In the very beginning the art were much more crude, lacking detail. Then if I pick up cards from Ice Age all the way to Invasion, the art gains much more detail. Then, at some point that I don't know because I've not followed mtg anymore for years, they started to do photoreal illustration. There weren't transparencies, glow, shiny metal, reflections, before.
I liked those cool "scroll" like text backgrounds too. Were the best
I think they do a good job though. Look at an older card like smite from Stronghold vs the new KTK smite the monstrous. Feels real similar. But we also get some RAD improvements too like the Eldrazi cards. Also I feel like there are some decent "retro" feeling cards in KTK like snowhorn rider and that one pinkish mardu guy.
I think there's a balance they have to keep. I mean it's obvious they wanted more photorealistic art before, just look at the original kird ape.
Around after 4th.
Before 5th, artists were given a desription and free reign, which caused some problems (feldon's cane, for example, was supposed to be "feldon's cone"). The artists retained copyright and was paid royalries.
By the time 5th rolled around, wizards directed and owned all art.
Also, relevant, because I'm sure it will come up:
http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mc22
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Absolutely agree. Some of the new art is great and some of the old art was awful BUT overall, arts like Arcanis the Omnipotent are gone forever and it sucks.
The Shade has amazing art. I bought one just for the art and want to turn him into an EDH deck. Some new art is mind bogglingly epic. Like Keranos (I NEED A FOIL!) or, as you show, Snowhorn Rider.
-Made By PortalWish Studios-
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&artist= [%22Harold%20McNeill%22]
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&artist=|[%22Phil%20Foglio%22]|[%22Kaja%20Foglio%22]|[%22Kaja%20%26%20Phil%20Foglio%22]
Really?
Many of folgios' art is really flat and McNeill could be summed up as "random whirly lines". Compare these to something like enter the infinite or nyx-fleece ram
I hate the old "scroll" backgrounds. It makes reading the rules text really hard.
vs
Ant queen
Which one is easier to read?
Um, what? I can read both without any issue at all. Maybe you need glasses or something?
It is modern but still manages to make a great image of the plane, while feeling unique. A few of the modern art is a tad bit generic, like it came from a Korean MMO or something (discpile of the old way, rubblebelt raiders). While some is just outright bad (Aerial predaation). The art isn't really that focused anymore, especially on the commons. It can be quite poor or unfitting of the theme.
Powered BUG Cube BUG (Thread)
Powered WUR Cube RWU
Powered RUG Cube URG
480 Unpowered shenanigans
EDH:
Prossh, Skyraider of Kher
Gahiji, Honored One
Daretti, Scrap Savant
For Autocarding: Æ û (Lim-Dûl's Vault)
Do we at least have a consensus on this, that the art has improved? Now, Serra Sanctuary and Tolarian Academy...those guys are pretty iconic and maybe that's why I really like them. But the Lifelands in KTK are pretty stellar too (I'm lookin at you scoured barrens)
The Theros enchantment creatures, I think, are an example of a new art style done right. They're cohesive and fit with the rest of the cards just fine, while retaining that otherworldly aspect that makes them seem out of the ordinary.
On phasing:
The art on that card is just...weird. It looks like someone took a picture with their child "down by the lake". It seems inappropriate for a trading card game about killing your opponent.
Shivan dragon would be pretty interchangable with every other red dragon if it wasn't the first.
Any time art comes up someone talks about how great stasis is. I just don't get it. I think it's in the running for worst in magic history. Some abstraction is neat here and there but that pushes it way too far. It's the card that really convinces me that the general new direction of art is for the best, so we never EVER see anything like that again.
I like the stasis art It's very distinct, and I can always recognize that card.
---
That said, my favorite set, art-wise, is ice age. For some reason, the cards from that era just have really pleasing to look at art.
It is very distinct, but people just remember it fondly cause the card itself is iconic due to its effect. I'm convinced that's where 90% of the love comes from.