I think the quality of art in Magic has consistently improved over the years. I wish there was a little more variety and a little more of the abstract look, but in terms of quality, MTG has come a long way since Stasis.
Probably the most disturbing trend in magic art over the years was the idiotic "cast of characters approach" that meant that every other card from Mirage through Urza's block had to feature a picture of Dumb Ass Gerrard, Gilligan, Ginger, The professor, Mr and Mrs Howell, and let us not forget Mary Ann. Or maybe that was Mirri, Tefari, Urza, Crovax, etc etc.
If Cranford put an end to that, then that alone is reason enough to praise him, even though I am a fan of Guay. I think Pride of Clouds is the sort of thing we ought to see more of. She's no RKF, but a little more variety and even some abstraction would liven up the look a lot.
Say what you want about any other land, but I have almost every special edition land there is (original Arena, APAC, Unglued, Unhinged, etc.), and I *never* get any questions about any of them except for that one (actually, there's one swamp I rarely get questions on).
it's no wonder the art and the amazing talents that are behind it have taken a back seat or even in the trunk.
Has there been a time in the history of Magic when they have given out more "alternate art promos" then in the last 2 years? This tells me that your statement of art taking a back seat is clearly incorrect. They know the demand, which is why they have gone away from the token promos to instead the alternate art promos.
If Cranford put an end to that, then that alone is reason enough to praise him, even though I am a fan of Guay.
A-men. There were very few arts which depicted the really, really stupid and really art-restricted Weatherlight crew that well.
MTG has come a long way since Stasis.
For what it is, I actually ENJOY that art. It's not something that I think should ever be done again, but it certain is abstract enough that when I saw it for the first time it actually stood out from a lot of the early artwork.
good riddance Cranford. You never had any class the way you treated most artists.
As for Mr. Miracolas post, i mostly agree with him except on one crucial point...when you are in a management positon or are a superior who have people working under you, treat them with respect and that they matter and you will see how much harder they will work for you. I have talked to a handful of artists (who will not be named here) who crave for the days of sue ann harkey, dana knutsen or matt wilson as AD as they treated people fair and with respect.
With the Cranford regieme that did not happen and many artists or a few left disgruntled and many talked behind his back about his management style and how impossible he could be.
Additionally as a fan, i dont want to see my favorite artists fazed out of a block and have like 20 pieces by one artist (Hildebrant, walker, ect)
I am very happy if Cranford goes and i hope at his next job he has to answer to someone who is as unreasonable as he was, or throws darts at his ideas like he did to the art of ed beard.
see ya cranford...............:D
That respect you talk about goes both ways, don't forget that.
hmmmm, I've also talked with MANY artists and they all sing praise of Jeremy.
I would love to see 20 pieces by Kev Walker. I say make a whole Kev Walker set! he rocks!
There is a clue to all this somewhere in what you have said. You want Jeremy to "answer to someone who is as unreasonable as he was". Jeremy isn't some lone gunman at WOTC. He DOES answer to someone and therefore is not the only one making decisions, so my question is why all the hatred and bashing of Jeremy? Believe it or not, he is actually a very nice guy.
-Jeff
Quote from Flamebuster »
If you make a product that is not appealing to the eyes of your customers, you're not going to sell as much or none at all.
I totally agree! And I think the current visuals of Magic are appealing. Packaging art by Kev Walker, Carl Critchlow, Scott Fischer, Adam Rex, Zolton Boros and Gabor Szikszai, etc. is all amazing work and does exactly what it is supposed to do and grab your attention to get you to look closer at the product.
-Jeff
Just cleaning up a double post
If you want to quote two separate posts, please edit the second quote into the original post.
hmmmm, I've also talked with MANY artists and they all sing praise of Jeremy.
I'd suggest that that's a part of speaking with other people employed by a company about your boss, especially when the employment isn't exactly stable. Whereas with a fan, who is the fan going to talk to?
I'd suggest that that's a part of speaking with other people employed by a company about your boss, especially when the employment isn't exactly stable. Whereas with a fan, who is the fan going to talk to?
Fans aren't in contact with Jeremy at all though.
So it is the 'independent contractor' artists that are to speak for how Jeremy is doing, IMO.
If artists don't like him, as Miracola says, they have other routes to go.
Magic artists aren't solely Magic artists...afaik, almost none are.
I would like people to keep their attitudes in check a little bit here.
Jeff knows a bit more about this situation than almost all the people who have posted on this thread, and some of the people attacking him are being rather unfair. (Even though he is holding his own ground extremely well)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
i think that many of the opinions expressed on this board - save mr. miracola's - of mr. cranford are based on the first "impression" you have received based on whose story you heard and colored by your opinion of that artist's work. cranford may have been a little less-than-professional in dealing with mr. beard and ms. guay; he likely got a swift talking-to from the people above him soon after. on the other hand, the artists may not have taken him as he intended and felt slighted; i'm sure that here, too, he'd hear from the people above him, if only to make sure that everything was on the up-and-up. we don't know, because we were not there for any of it. we can speculate all we want, but it's kind of hard to call someone names when there has to be doubt as to the validity of your interpretation of events likely heard from a biased source.
mr. miracola, i believe you when you say that cranford is a good guy. everyone is a good guy until they stick a knife in your back, right? as i surmised above, though, i'm sure he was talked to at some point regarding this, and he will make it his point to communicate professionally from this point on wherever he goes.
besides, everyone, who plays the game to look at pretty pictures? we play to compete based on the lower half of the card. i am absolutely NOT saying that art doesn't matter, because it does... but do we need to be nitpicky over the difference between good and great art?
(as a final note, my favorite artists are rebecca guay, donato giancola, and puddnhead :jam:)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Now playing Transformers: Legends. 27-time top tier finisher and admin of the TFL Wikia site.
besides, everyone, who plays the game to look at pretty pictures? we play to compete based on the lower half of the card. i am absolutely NOT saying that art doesn't matter, because it does... but do we need to be nitpicky over the difference between good and great art?
I think you'll find that there's a whole niche of players who ARE in fact attracted to the pretty pictures, rather than whatever is found on the bottom half of the card.
I think you'll find that there's a whole niche of players who ARE in fact attracted to the pretty pictures, rather than whatever is found on the bottom half of the card.
you misread my point. yes, the art is important, and it is nice, but without the stuff on the bottom half of the card, the game doesn't quite work so well...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Now playing Transformers: Legends. 27-time top tier finisher and admin of the TFL Wikia site.
Fans aren't in contact with Jeremy at all though.
So it is the 'independent contractor' artists that are to speak for how Jeremy is doing, IMO.
Which was kind of what I said. Would you trash-talk your boss in front of people who talk to that boss when your employment there isn't exactly stable? I'd expect more honest comments when the artists are talking with fans, because the fans have no contact with Mr. Cranford.
I'd suggest that that's a part of speaking with other people employed by a company about your boss, especially when the employment isn't exactly stable. Whereas with a fan, who is the fan going to talk to?
I see what you are saying and I agree to a point. Talking ill of your boss, should it get around, could be bad for you, yes. But artists, just like anyone, complain about their jobs when they get together in relaxed, social situations and there is a special, understood trust among people of the same profession. So, I feel safe in saying that if a fellow artist had a gripe with Jeremy, they would have shared it with me. But just the opposite is true. Everyone speaks highly of both him and others at WOTC. As an artist, I would share my truthful feelings about my "boss" with another artist before I did so with a fan of the game.
At some point, you just have to have faith that the person you are speaking with is being truthful. Like this thread for example. Some have suggested I am biased and "kissing up" to Jeremy for some reason. You have to have faith when I tell you that kinda stuff never enters my mind and I could care less about it. I don't need ANY job bad enough that I compromise my values.
-Jeff
Quote from god of cyanide »
i think that many of the opinions expressed on this board - save mr. miracola's - of mr. cranford are based on the first "impression" you have received based on whose story you heard and colored by your opinion of that artist's work. cranford may have been a little less-than-professional in dealing with mr. beard and ms. guay; he likely got a swift talking-to from the people above him soon after. on the other hand, the artists may not have taken him as he intended and felt slighted; i'm sure that here, too, he'd hear from the people above him, if only to make sure that everything was on the up-and-up. we don't know, because we were not there for any of it. we can speculate all we want, but it's kind of hard to call someone names when there has to be doubt as to the validity of your interpretation of events likely heard from a biased source.
mr. miracola, i believe you when you say that cranford is a good guy. everyone is a good guy until they stick a knife in your back, right? as i surmised above, though, i'm sure he was talked to at some point regarding this, and he will make it his point to communicate professionally from this point on wherever he goes.
besides, everyone, who plays the game to look at pretty pictures? we play to compete based on the lower half of the card. i am absolutely NOT saying that art doesn't matter, because it does... but do we need to be nitpicky over the difference between good and great art?
(as a final note, my favorite artists are rebecca guay, donato giancola, and puddnhead :jam:)
Very, very well said. Now there is a level-headed answer!
I am seriously not talking about any specific artist, but creative professionals can have very delicate egos. Art directors have all kinds of styles and techniques for dealing with these kinds of situations. Jeremy is a professional all the way and doesn't seem to waste valuable time pandering to a delicate ego. Granted, I'm not there when he deals with other artists, but I can tell you that both Jeremy and the R&D team have given me what some may take as harsh criticism at times. I have had sketches rejected and final paintings rejected, ALWAYS because those paintings sucked and they always made the right decision rejecting them. How can I sit here talking so highly of Jeremy when he has rejected my work or said the hard things no artist wants to hear? Well, because I realize more than anything that they have a certain level of quality to maintain and I have learned over the years not to take it personally.
Let me be clear though, Jeremy has never said anything mean or hurtful to me. Jeremy pushes the artists to bring their best effort to the table and I can't tell you how valuable that is.
If you are an aspiring artist and all you ever surround yourself with are the praises of your family and friends, then you are probably not hearing the truth about your skills. An art director should be the kind of person that will tell it to you the way it is, for better or worse. You can either run and cry in a corner when someone says your anatomy sucks or you can use that as fuel to go study harder and make it a goal to show that person up or whatever. But the true nature of your character will be revealed in those dark moments. You can't blame Jeremy for giving harsh criticism. He has a job to do and can't waste valuable time holding the hand of the profesional artists under his guidance.
-Jeff
Quote from Mistwalker »
Which was kind of what I said. Would you trash-talk your boss in front of people who talk to that boss when your employment there isn't exactly stable? I'd expect more honest comments when the artists are talking with fans, because the fans have no contact with Mr. Cranford.
Artists talk to fans, fans talk to judges, judges talk to retailers and organizers, organizers talk to headquarters. The industry is sooooo small that anything said about someone at WOTC will eventually get back to them. My point is that any artist that has a bad experience with their art director and is fired up enough to talk about it will probably share it with fan or artist alike if they don't care that it gets back to the art director. But If they want to vent a little and have a higher probability of confidentiality, then they would speak with another artist/friend.
If some other artist told me something in confidence about my art director, I would not share that with the art director or anyone. But my experience is that noone has ever said anything bad about Jeremy to me.
Jeff
Quote from dbuel »
The art's been amazing lately.
On behalf of the other artists, art director and R&D team, thank you! I agree with you and think the AD and R&D team has assembled some very serious talent. The game looks better for it.
-Jeff
Quote from votan »
I'd like to make a quick comment. When it comes to art, I am a complete n00b. I don't know anything about card art, I can't draw and I didn't even know who crawford was a few years back. However, I am a huge Guay fan. Why? Simply because I can see a card across a room and go "that's a Guay, right?". Her style is so different from everything else and so berautiful, that even someone as clueless about art as me enjoys it. I think that's why ppl love her art so much, it's simply beautiful.
That said, I came to know Mr. Crawford a few years back because he decided to drift Magic away from Rebbecca Guay. Honestly, I don't know the guy and I don't know what he has achieved in WotC (I know a bit from this thread, but that's it). To me, he's just thte guy who sacked Rebbecca.
Why am I writting this? because this is all he is to a lot of ppl. Most ppl don't care about the work he's done (whatever it is) or how good he is at what he does... they just care that he sacked their favorite artist. This (IMHO) is why Mr. Crawford is so hated (and this applies to Ed Beard aswell, although I don't actually know who he is :p).
Now, the important information you need to take from this is that we are mostly stupid in this field (hey, I'm not trying to offend anyone, I think I'm the most stupid of the lot when it comes to this...) and so we really can't judge the man behind the image. I like the idea of Mr. Crawford leaving if it gives us more Rebbeca art... but what if it gives us less? what if the new director ruins Magic? I don't think that will happen, because Wizards whould never let that happen, but still, I think we're being harsh on Mr. Crawford. I read Jeff Miracola's posts, and he has a vision that I never thought about: this is indeed a business and thinking of that, I have to have some respect for Mr. Crawford. I ask myself, would I have the courage to cut Rebbeca out of Magic if I believed she was hurting the product? God no. I couldn't stand the uproar. I would never cut one of the most loved artists in Magic.
So, I have to give some credit to Mr. Crawford. No matter how wrong I think his actions were, he sttod by his opinion. He felt that Miss Guay wasn't right for the job and he had the guts to pull her away.
I am glad he reconsidered and that I get to see Guay's work in Magic again, but still... Although I don't agree with Mr Crawford's vision, I can't help but admire a man who stands by his believes, no matter how contreversy they are...
Very well said, big high-five!.:hifive:
I absolutely love the work of Rebecca Guay, so it also bums me out to see less of her work in the sets. But detaching yourself from your personal feelings about a style is necessary at times.
Let's flip this whole thing. What if Magic decided to realease a block where the setting was all bright and cheerful with pixie dust flying everwhere? Some very hard decisions would have to be made about slimming down or cutting the work of people like Carl Critchlow, Greg Staples, Kev Walker, Puddnhead, etc. That is unless they can prove to the art director they can deliver scenes of joyful, rainbow glee!
Imagine the uproar from fans if they had heard an art director told Kev Walker his style was too gritty and dark for the new fruitilicious direction Magic is taking. Sure, it would suck so bad to see less Kev art, but then, assuming he couldn't deliver the new art needs, he would be a bad fit for the game, right?
So it's great to see someone acknowledge the hard work an art director has and that they stick to the goal even at the risk of being unpopular.
While I do like the newer art of most cards,I definately see why people want Gua back, Elvish Piper(9th Ed.) is one of my favorite pieces of art of any magic expansion.
I think individually, the pieces of art in Magic have gotten "better" in a sense. But I always enjoyed the deep variation in artistic style that has been lost over time. Being able to pick out art of Douglas Schuler, Melissa Benson, and Ron Spencer and others with very specific styles was always something incredibly enjoyable.
Now when I look at magic cards, I can deeply appreciate the talent of the artists individually, and maybe - on an artistic standpoint - the more frequent artists are even "better." However, I still miss opening and looking at new cards and seeing a Quinten Hoover and knowing it right off the bat, appreciating the subtle differences in the techniques and styles the artists employed to fill out the world.
Lately, it feels a little flat. There's something missing when I actually dread the idea of a textless card because the art swims together in my brain now adays. I would say any set before mirage - I could play in cards of any (or no) language purely on the pictures. Now only certain iconic or extremely popular cards to play can I do that with. While its not necessarily a downgrade in art quality - that I feel is a downgrade in art direction.
Especially in "contraversial" art like on Stasis, there's something that stands out and pops when you look at that card. Sure you may think you can paint that picture as well or better than that artist. But there is color and depth in that picture, there is an immense amount of what the card DOES in that picture even in the picture's simplicity its an excellent example of a sucessful card image - one that won't get confused with another card.
I do want to see the exceptional new art in all its glory and detail - like the new Serra Angel But I don't like to be innundated with that style of art. I prefer a myriad of styles. Until reading this thread I never realized it before - but it was the distinctive styles that drew me to even card about the art in the first place. The gothic M of Melissa Benson's Work, the outlined amazing watercolor(?) of Quinton Hoover, the sharp tight strinking detail of Ron Spencer, the intense feeling and abstract of Drew Tucker, the subtle and soft art of Rebecca Guay - and Terese Nielson, even the more wacky stuff like the Foglio's is what draws me to the art.
I have nothing against the current director - I've never met him. But I haven't like the art direction of Magic in more recent years because of the unification of style. My only hope is that who ever replaces him will be a bit more eclectic like me - and of course someone that the great artists that do the cards like working with.
I think individually, the pieces of art in Magic have gotten "better" in a sense. But I always enjoyed the deep variation in artistic style that has been lost over time.
This is pretty much my opinion as well. A lot of excellent artists who I'd love to keep around have joined the Magic "team" recently, and I'm impressed by the effort Cranford put into acquiring them. On the other hand, I'd like to see the ranks filled out by people with more distinct styles, to make cards more surprising and interesting; almost everyone paints either in a realistic or hyperrealistic style, with even some of my older favorites (Adam Rex and Carl Critchlow, to name two names from the pile in front of me) producing less distinct work. I'd like more abstract art, more stylized work, more heavy lined stuff, and even some classic D&D style fantastical art.
The art of MTG has been the reason why I have joined this addiction in Alpha. While the new art styles greatly differs from the old I still like them both. It is also nice to see, over the years, WotC bringing in all sorts of artists with all sorts of styles from all over the world (russia, japan to name a couple places)
Yet it would be an interesting thing to bring ONLY the artists that worked on Alpha back for the 10th edition. Sorry to all the new artists but it would be fun to see what the old artists would do with MTG cards now that 13 years have past.
The art of MTG has been the reason why I have joined this addiction in Alpha. While the new art styles greatly differs from the old I still like them both. It is also nice to see, over the years, WotC bringing in all sorts of artists with all sorts of styles from all over the world (russia, japan to name a couple places)
Yet it would be an interesting thing to bring ONLY the artists that worked on Alpha back for the 10th edition. Sorry to all the new artists but it would be fun to see what the old artists would do with MTG cards now that 13 years have past.
That would be something.
I am glad I'm not the only one who would prefer more variation in styles among Magic's artists. Even some variation of media would be nice. I like traditional media, so I'm biased, but bringing back watercolorists who have demonstrated ability for fantasy illustration would be the smart move. Not only Guay, but Richard Kane-Ferguson, Quinton Hoover, Ian Miller, and Daniel Gelon. The thick, bold strokes and colors of Mike Kerr and Scott Kirschner. Even if the original artists have moved on to other types of projects, find promising new watercolorists, pastel users, traditional oil and acrylic on panel types, and other styles conducive to fantasy illustration.
This is only one example of what seems to be lacking these days. If we can trust scholars to tell the difference among the nameless faceless protege's of medieval book illuminators who wrote script and painted miniatures in bibles over 600 years ago, we can only surmise that the average person can tell the difference between artists and that each one has a distinctive style.
I respect you when you honestly say that some of your art was rejected, because "it sucked".
My problem with Cranford is not that, as AD he has to make those decisons, but...you would agree with me, that there is a big difference re: what you say and HOW you say it.
Most of what i have heard iand believe is that Cranford is quite diveresive and disrespectful in his communications with artists, which is MUCH different than how Sue Ann, Matt and Dana treated the artists. That is why i am glad Cranford is leaving. I have heard quite a few talk out againat him off the record, but artists who are in good sted always sing his praises. Interesting? No?
If Jeremy Jarvis is indeed hired, i think this will be very good for WOTC, as 1) he is an artist, which Cranford is not and 2) he is a nice person who seems respectful, which Cranford..., well-you get the drift.
i dont know Mr. Cranford enough to judge him and like others in this thread have already stated, the only thing that he did do that i disliked was the treatment of Beard. Now with that i do not know the whole story behind it so i will not comment because i was not there. The recent artwork has indeed been awesome, and yes i miss a lot of the old school too, RKF was and still is my favorite Magic artist, when they kept his art for Rootbreaker Wurm i was happy beacause i was waiting to see a foil version of one of his arts.
And to Jeff M. My favorite peice of yours is the Horn of Greed, and to a lesser extent Auratog awesome stuff man
The main thing here is that ok, maybe not *all* pieces lately have been bad, and there have been some decent ones, but overall the quality as a whole hasnt been that great and I think that's the issue here. Also, the way an employer treats their employees also tells their customers how they themselves are going to be treated by those same people. If you treat the artists like seagull poo then chances are they are going to reverberate that onto the custies.
Many times I've worked at my part-time job in a grocery store where the manager of the department would downtalk to an employee, and the customers nearby would file a complaint because they don't wnat to see the staff get yelled at like that, under any circumstances. That's the issue here. Us, as magic players, are customers to the game and seeing a member or members of the staff (yes, artists are staff members, temporary or contract) get reprimanded over silly means says to us that they don't care nor are they going to treat their custies with respect they should have. It gives a negative impression of the company as a whole, refardless of how "amazing" the product is. Half the time it's the service and levels of internal respect that differentiate whether a customer would deal business with that organization over their competitors. And the way Cranford has treated his "employees" is putting a smear on WotC in negative ways more than a person can comprehend.
I have to say though that I really like your painting, Mr. Miracola, of Ignorant Bliss. That's the kind of art that I like. Abstract, thought-invoking, and makes you ponder. That's the kind of art that's grand for this.
Kev Walker, Greg Staples and Jeff Miracola are three artists that started with a fairly similar style (of acrylics, I believe, though I'm no expert, where the lightings and shadings are somehow both flat and three dimensional at the same time, and I love that style beyond reason), and gradually shifted to other styles that are somehow always rather similar. I don't think this is entirely Cranford's doing - after all, their styles were changing before he became art director - but I think these three artists are quite versatile and not so much "artists" as "really good painters". I'm extrapolating, but I'd say with a fairly high level of confidence that they don't care much about the art and creative freedom, doing commissioned art exactly as commissioned without worrying about their distinctive style.
So yeah, Miracola not having any problems with Cranford is hardly surprising to me.
Of the true artists though, those with the most distinctive styles, very few remain. Quinton Hoover, Jeff Laubenstein, Richard Kane Ferguson, Drew Tucker - they all went the way of the dodo. Obviously, that can't be all Cranford's doing, but certainly there hasn't been much of an effort to find or keep distinctive artists in a good while. It makes sense in a way - certainly Branding would rather have people looking at a Magic artwork think "This is a Magic card" rather than "This is a Foglio painting". Keep that in mind, too - whomever replaces Cranford will still answer to Branding, and that fact is unlikely to change. The style guides will change a bit, Miracola, Staples and Walker will still be on good terms with the art director and crap high quality pieces that are entirely within the style guides, Guay will still get a piece or two every block to keep her fans quiet, and Ron Spencer will still make his insane artworks because he's Ron fricking Spencer.
I'd say so. Even though I think that the art today is better than art in the early days of Magic, there was more variety back then. The only artists who have truly distinct styles that make you say, "That's a so-and-so picture!" are Ron Spencer, Rebecca Guay, and Paolo Parente. Otherwise, there's not much of a difference. You're absolutely right, Effovex (clever name, BTW): guys with truly unique styles have been weeded out, not just Foglio, Ferguson, and Hoover but also DiTerlizzi. If a new art director means getting more variety, then I'm all for his leaving.
The main thing here is that ok, maybe not *all* pieces lately have been bad, and there have been some decent ones, but overall the quality as a whole hasnt been that great and I think that's the issue here. Also, the way an employer treats their employees also tells their customers how they themselves are going to be treated by those same people. If you treat the artists like seagull poo then chances are they are going to reverberate that onto the custies.
Many times I've worked at my part-time job in a grocery store where the manager of the department would downtalk to an employee, and the customers nearby would file a complaint because they don't wnat to see the staff get yelled at like that, under any circumstances. That's the issue here. Us, as magic players, are customers to the game and seeing a member or members of the staff (yes, artists are staff members, temporary or contract) get reprimanded over silly means says to us that they don't care nor are they going to treat their custies with respect they should have. It gives a negative impression of the company as a whole, refardless of how "amazing" the product is. Half the time it's the service and levels of internal respect that differentiate whether a customer would deal business with that organization over their competitors. And the way Cranford has treated his "employees" is putting a smear on WotC in negative ways more than a person can comprehend.
I have to say though that I really like your painting, Mr. Miracola, of Ignorant Bliss. That's the kind of art that I like. Abstract, thought-invoking, and makes you ponder. That's the kind of art that's grand for this.
'buster
I agree with you that employers should not publicly humiliate or confront an employee and vice versa. And again I will defend Jeremy because if I recall correctly it was Ed Beard who went public with his fight or complaints or whatever. As best I can recall, he had a letter available to fans at a show and then there was some article in Inquest and some petition going around. I don't recall EVER seeing a press release from WOTC publicly bashing Ed Beard. Some have said they saw emails where Jeremy was bashing some artists, I don't recall ever seeing that so I doubt the authenticity of that.
Let's also not forget that we are talking about two artists here, Ed Beard Jr. and Rebecca Guay. This seems to be the issue most people have with Jeremy. That's an alleged dispute with two artists out of hundreds. I can easily find two people I don't get along with in any company. That's not to say Jeremy dislikes these artists. But judging Jeremy on a supposed relationship with two artists out of so many that he works with isn't fair.
-Jeff
Quote from Effovex »
Of the true artists though, those with the most distinctive styles, very few remain. Quinton Hoover, Jeff Laubenstein, Richard Kane Ferguson, Drew Tucker - they all went the way of the dodo. Obviously, that can't be all Cranford's doing, but certainly there hasn't been much of an effort to find or keep distinctive artists in a good while. It makes sense in a way - certainly Branding would rather have people looking at a Magic artwork think "This is a Magic card" rather than "This is a Foglio painting". Keep that in mind, too - whomever replaces Cranford will still answer to Branding, and that fact is unlikely to change. The style guides will change a bit, Miracola, Staples and Walker will still be on good terms with the art director and crap high quality pieces that are entirely within the style guides, Guay will still get a piece or two every block to keep her fans quiet, and Ron Spencer will still make his insane artworks because he's Ron fricking Spencer.
Your point about branding is a very good point that most people miss. Branding in today's market is very, very important. Magic has grown to be sold outside of the usual gaming and comic shops and can now be found in book stores, supermarkets and malls. And it is no longer just available in the USA. It's a global market growing all the time. MTG has to have a strong brand to stand out on US shelves and Chinese shelves alike. Take other products that have developed a brand through art such as Warhammer, World of Warcraft, Battletech, etc. and you see why WOTC wanting MTG to have a "look" may be very important. There are many, many people out there that take comfort in knowing what to expect from their favorite product, so it's important to keep that in mind. Very glad you brought that up.
LMAO!!! Dude, I wish I could crap out quality art, that would be awesome. I'd be on the can all day. And yes, Ron is a frickin amazing artist and a really, really great person.
-Jeff
Quote from Mortal Wombat »
I'd say so. Even though I think that the art today is better than art in the early days of Magic, there was more variety back then. The only artists who have truly distinct styles that make you say, "That's a so-and-so picture!" are Ron Spencer, Rebecca Guay, and Paolo Parente. Otherwise, there's not much of a difference. You're absolutely right, Effovex (clever name, BTW): guys with truly unique styles have been weeded out, not just Foglio, Ferguson, and Hoover but also DiTerlizzi. If a new art director means getting more variety, then I'm all for his leaving.
Again, I am only speculating, but the branding issue mentioned by Effovex may be the reason for this. Also, realize that some of these great artists you mention are not doing Magic art because they have moved onto other things.
LMAO!!! Dude, I wish I could crap out quality art, that would be awesome. I'd be on the can all day. And yes, Ron is a frickin amazing artist and a really, really great person.
I think Kev Walker actually does - his art is present on 210 different cards according to Gatherer. The only artist I can find with more cards is Pete Venters (236, crazy!) but he's been around since what? Legends?. Greg Staples is a bit above average for a regular artist with 155, and you're a bit below average with 92 - but as you said earlier, you're only doing Magic art as a sideline. To me, being able to produce quality material at such a speed (while also probably working on half a dozen other games#project) implies metaphorically modified artistic bowels.
I don't know what all that "magepunk" bs was about, but he did start to get things right in the end. I remember when we found out guay was fired I got his phone number in the Wizards office and got a bunch of people to call him and leave complaints on his voicemail. heh. good times.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Evil is boring. The universe is friendly. Life is on your side. Joy is your birthright. Cynicism is idiotic. Fear is a bad habit. Despair is lazy. In fact, all of creation wants you to succeed. Act as if the universe is a prodigious miracle created for your amusement and illumination. Assume that secret helpers are working behind the scenes to assist you in turning into the gorgeous masterpiece you were born to be. . . Life always gives you exactly what you need, exactly when you need it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Probably the most disturbing trend in magic art over the years was the idiotic "cast of characters approach" that meant that every other card from Mirage through Urza's block had to feature a picture of Dumb Ass Gerrard, Gilligan, Ginger, The professor, Mr and Mrs Howell, and let us not forget Mary Ann. Or maybe that was Mirri, Tefari, Urza, Crovax, etc etc.
If Cranford put an end to that, then that alone is reason enough to praise him, even though I am a fan of Guay. I think Pride of Clouds is the sort of thing we ought to see more of. She's no RKF, but a little more variety and even some abstraction would liven up the look a lot.
The best drawn land in the game (yes, I dared say it, I realize how many Avon fanboys there are) would like to have a word with you outside:
http://sales.starcitygames.com/carddisplay.php?product=34949
Say what you want about any other land, but I have almost every special edition land there is (original Arena, APAC, Unglued, Unhinged, etc.), and I *never* get any questions about any of them except for that one (actually, there's one swamp I rarely get questions on).
Has there been a time in the history of Magic when they have given out more "alternate art promos" then in the last 2 years? This tells me that your statement of art taking a back seat is clearly incorrect. They know the demand, which is why they have gone away from the token promos to instead the alternate art promos.
A-men. There were very few arts which depicted the really, really stupid and really art-restricted Weatherlight crew that well.
For what it is, I actually ENJOY that art. It's not something that I think should ever be done again, but it certain is abstract enough that when I saw it for the first time it actually stood out from a lot of the early artwork.
Northern Ohio Gamers Forums
That respect you talk about goes both ways, don't forget that.
hmmmm, I've also talked with MANY artists and they all sing praise of Jeremy.
I would love to see 20 pieces by Kev Walker. I say make a whole Kev Walker set! he rocks!
There is a clue to all this somewhere in what you have said. You want Jeremy to "answer to someone who is as unreasonable as he was". Jeremy isn't some lone gunman at WOTC. He DOES answer to someone and therefore is not the only one making decisions, so my question is why all the hatred and bashing of Jeremy? Believe it or not, he is actually a very nice guy.
-Jeff
I totally agree! And I think the current visuals of Magic are appealing. Packaging art by Kev Walker, Carl Critchlow, Scott Fischer, Adam Rex, Zolton Boros and Gabor Szikszai, etc. is all amazing work and does exactly what it is supposed to do and grab your attention to get you to look closer at the product.
-Jeff
Just cleaning up a double post
If you want to quote two separate posts, please edit the second quote into the original post.
I'd suggest that that's a part of speaking with other people employed by a company about your boss, especially when the employment isn't exactly stable. Whereas with a fan, who is the fan going to talk to?
Fans aren't in contact with Jeremy at all though.
So it is the 'independent contractor' artists that are to speak for how Jeremy is doing, IMO.
If artists don't like him, as Miracola says, they have other routes to go.
Magic artists aren't solely Magic artists...afaik, almost none are.
I would like people to keep their attitudes in check a little bit here.
Jeff knows a bit more about this situation than almost all the people who have posted on this thread, and some of the people attacking him are being rather unfair. (Even though he is holding his own ground extremely well)
Twitter
mr. miracola, i believe you when you say that cranford is a good guy. everyone is a good guy until they stick a knife in your back, right? as i surmised above, though, i'm sure he was talked to at some point regarding this, and he will make it his point to communicate professionally from this point on wherever he goes.
besides, everyone, who plays the game to look at pretty pictures? we play to compete based on the lower half of the card. i am absolutely NOT saying that art doesn't matter, because it does... but do we need to be nitpicky over the difference between good and great art?
(as a final note, my favorite artists are rebecca guay, donato giancola, and puddnhead :jam:)
The MirroCube - 420 card Mirrodin themed cube
And if I've offended you, I'm sorry, but maybe you need to be offended. But here's my apology and one more thing...
I think you'll find that there's a whole niche of players who ARE in fact attracted to the pretty pictures, rather than whatever is found on the bottom half of the card.
you misread my point. yes, the art is important, and it is nice, but without the stuff on the bottom half of the card, the game doesn't quite work so well...
The MirroCube - 420 card Mirrodin themed cube
And if I've offended you, I'm sorry, but maybe you need to be offended. But here's my apology and one more thing...
Which was kind of what I said. Would you trash-talk your boss in front of people who talk to that boss when your employment there isn't exactly stable? I'd expect more honest comments when the artists are talking with fans, because the fans have no contact with Mr. Cranford.
I see what you are saying and I agree to a point. Talking ill of your boss, should it get around, could be bad for you, yes. But artists, just like anyone, complain about their jobs when they get together in relaxed, social situations and there is a special, understood trust among people of the same profession. So, I feel safe in saying that if a fellow artist had a gripe with Jeremy, they would have shared it with me. But just the opposite is true. Everyone speaks highly of both him and others at WOTC. As an artist, I would share my truthful feelings about my "boss" with another artist before I did so with a fan of the game.
At some point, you just have to have faith that the person you are speaking with is being truthful. Like this thread for example. Some have suggested I am biased and "kissing up" to Jeremy for some reason. You have to have faith when I tell you that kinda stuff never enters my mind and I could care less about it. I don't need ANY job bad enough that I compromise my values.
-Jeff
Very, very well said. Now there is a level-headed answer!
I am seriously not talking about any specific artist, but creative professionals can have very delicate egos. Art directors have all kinds of styles and techniques for dealing with these kinds of situations. Jeremy is a professional all the way and doesn't seem to waste valuable time pandering to a delicate ego. Granted, I'm not there when he deals with other artists, but I can tell you that both Jeremy and the R&D team have given me what some may take as harsh criticism at times. I have had sketches rejected and final paintings rejected, ALWAYS because those paintings sucked and they always made the right decision rejecting them. How can I sit here talking so highly of Jeremy when he has rejected my work or said the hard things no artist wants to hear? Well, because I realize more than anything that they have a certain level of quality to maintain and I have learned over the years not to take it personally.
Let me be clear though, Jeremy has never said anything mean or hurtful to me. Jeremy pushes the artists to bring their best effort to the table and I can't tell you how valuable that is.
If you are an aspiring artist and all you ever surround yourself with are the praises of your family and friends, then you are probably not hearing the truth about your skills. An art director should be the kind of person that will tell it to you the way it is, for better or worse. You can either run and cry in a corner when someone says your anatomy sucks or you can use that as fuel to go study harder and make it a goal to show that person up or whatever. But the true nature of your character will be revealed in those dark moments. You can't blame Jeremy for giving harsh criticism. He has a job to do and can't waste valuable time holding the hand of the profesional artists under his guidance.
-Jeff
Artists talk to fans, fans talk to judges, judges talk to retailers and organizers, organizers talk to headquarters. The industry is sooooo small that anything said about someone at WOTC will eventually get back to them. My point is that any artist that has a bad experience with their art director and is fired up enough to talk about it will probably share it with fan or artist alike if they don't care that it gets back to the art director. But If they want to vent a little and have a higher probability of confidentiality, then they would speak with another artist/friend.
If some other artist told me something in confidence about my art director, I would not share that with the art director or anyone. But my experience is that noone has ever said anything bad about Jeremy to me.
Jeff
On behalf of the other artists, art director and R&D team, thank you! I agree with you and think the AD and R&D team has assembled some very serious talent. The game looks better for it.
-Jeff
Very well said, big high-five!.:hifive:
I absolutely love the work of Rebecca Guay, so it also bums me out to see less of her work in the sets. But detaching yourself from your personal feelings about a style is necessary at times.
Let's flip this whole thing. What if Magic decided to realease a block where the setting was all bright and cheerful with pixie dust flying everwhere? Some very hard decisions would have to be made about slimming down or cutting the work of people like Carl Critchlow, Greg Staples, Kev Walker, Puddnhead, etc. That is unless they can prove to the art director they can deliver scenes of joyful, rainbow glee!
Imagine the uproar from fans if they had heard an art director told Kev Walker his style was too gritty and dark for the new fruitilicious direction Magic is taking. Sure, it would suck so bad to see less Kev art, but then, assuming he couldn't deliver the new art needs, he would be a bad fit for the game, right?
So it's great to see someone acknowledge the hard work an art director has and that they stick to the goal even at the risk of being unpopular.
-Jeff
Just cleaning up the double posts again.
"The means justify the ends."
- Vince McMahon
I support R_E
Signature by Topher
Now when I look at magic cards, I can deeply appreciate the talent of the artists individually, and maybe - on an artistic standpoint - the more frequent artists are even "better." However, I still miss opening and looking at new cards and seeing a Quinten Hoover and knowing it right off the bat, appreciating the subtle differences in the techniques and styles the artists employed to fill out the world.
Lately, it feels a little flat. There's something missing when I actually dread the idea of a textless card because the art swims together in my brain now adays. I would say any set before mirage - I could play in cards of any (or no) language purely on the pictures. Now only certain iconic or extremely popular cards to play can I do that with. While its not necessarily a downgrade in art quality - that I feel is a downgrade in art direction.
Especially in "contraversial" art like on Stasis, there's something that stands out and pops when you look at that card. Sure you may think you can paint that picture as well or better than that artist. But there is color and depth in that picture, there is an immense amount of what the card DOES in that picture even in the picture's simplicity its an excellent example of a sucessful card image - one that won't get confused with another card.
I do want to see the exceptional new art in all its glory and detail - like the new Serra Angel But I don't like to be innundated with that style of art. I prefer a myriad of styles. Until reading this thread I never realized it before - but it was the distinctive styles that drew me to even card about the art in the first place. The gothic M of Melissa Benson's Work, the outlined amazing watercolor(?) of Quinton Hoover, the sharp tight strinking detail of Ron Spencer, the intense feeling and abstract of Drew Tucker, the subtle and soft art of Rebecca Guay - and Terese Nielson, even the more wacky stuff like the Foglio's is what draws me to the art.
I have nothing against the current director - I've never met him. But I haven't like the art direction of Magic in more recent years because of the unification of style. My only hope is that who ever replaces him will be a bit more eclectic like me - and of course someone that the great artists that do the cards like working with.
I'd love input and advice!
This is pretty much my opinion as well. A lot of excellent artists who I'd love to keep around have joined the Magic "team" recently, and I'm impressed by the effort Cranford put into acquiring them. On the other hand, I'd like to see the ranks filled out by people with more distinct styles, to make cards more surprising and interesting; almost everyone paints either in a realistic or hyperrealistic style, with even some of my older favorites (Adam Rex and Carl Critchlow, to name two names from the pile in front of me) producing less distinct work. I'd like more abstract art, more stylized work, more heavy lined stuff, and even some classic D&D style fantastical art.
Yet it would be an interesting thing to bring ONLY the artists that worked on Alpha back for the 10th edition. Sorry to all the new artists but it would be fun to see what the old artists would do with MTG cards now that 13 years have past.
I am glad I'm not the only one who would prefer more variation in styles among Magic's artists. Even some variation of media would be nice. I like traditional media, so I'm biased, but bringing back watercolorists who have demonstrated ability for fantasy illustration would be the smart move. Not only Guay, but Richard Kane-Ferguson, Quinton Hoover, Ian Miller, and Daniel Gelon. The thick, bold strokes and colors of Mike Kerr and Scott Kirschner. Even if the original artists have moved on to other types of projects, find promising new watercolorists, pastel users, traditional oil and acrylic on panel types, and other styles conducive to fantasy illustration.
This is only one example of what seems to be lacking these days. If we can trust scholars to tell the difference among the nameless faceless protege's of medieval book illuminators who wrote script and painted miniatures in bibles over 600 years ago, we can only surmise that the average person can tell the difference between artists and that each one has a distinctive style.
My problem with Cranford is not that, as AD he has to make those decisons, but...you would agree with me, that there is a big difference re: what you say and HOW you say it.
Most of what i have heard iand believe is that Cranford is quite diveresive and disrespectful in his communications with artists, which is MUCH different than how Sue Ann, Matt and Dana treated the artists. That is why i am glad Cranford is leaving. I have heard quite a few talk out againat him off the record, but artists who are in good sted always sing his praises. Interesting? No?
If Jeremy Jarvis is indeed hired, i think this will be very good for WOTC, as 1) he is an artist, which Cranford is not and 2) he is a nice person who seems respectful, which Cranford..., well-you get the drift.
And to Jeff M. My favorite peice of yours is the Horn of Greed, and to a lesser extent Auratog awesome stuff man
Thanks to Avatar for the Banner
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=13742 ----- my trade thread
Blaine is a pain.... and that is the truth....
choo, choo, choo, choo....... and i am afraid that... is the truth.
Many times I've worked at my part-time job in a grocery store where the manager of the department would downtalk to an employee, and the customers nearby would file a complaint because they don't wnat to see the staff get yelled at like that, under any circumstances. That's the issue here. Us, as magic players, are customers to the game and seeing a member or members of the staff (yes, artists are staff members, temporary or contract) get reprimanded over silly means says to us that they don't care nor are they going to treat their custies with respect they should have. It gives a negative impression of the company as a whole, refardless of how "amazing" the product is. Half the time it's the service and levels of internal respect that differentiate whether a customer would deal business with that organization over their competitors. And the way Cranford has treated his "employees" is putting a smear on WotC in negative ways more than a person can comprehend.
I have to say though that I really like your painting, Mr. Miracola, of Ignorant Bliss. That's the kind of art that I like. Abstract, thought-invoking, and makes you ponder. That's the kind of art that's grand for this.
'buster
HR Analyst. Gamer. Activist | Fearless, and forthright | Aggro-control is a mindset.
Elspeth and Jhoira rock my world.
So yeah, Miracola not having any problems with Cranford is hardly surprising to me.
Of the true artists though, those with the most distinctive styles, very few remain. Quinton Hoover, Jeff Laubenstein, Richard Kane Ferguson, Drew Tucker - they all went the way of the dodo. Obviously, that can't be all Cranford's doing, but certainly there hasn't been much of an effort to find or keep distinctive artists in a good while. It makes sense in a way - certainly Branding would rather have people looking at a Magic artwork think "This is a Magic card" rather than "This is a Foglio painting". Keep that in mind, too - whomever replaces Cranford will still answer to Branding, and that fact is unlikely to change. The style guides will change a bit, Miracola, Staples and Walker will still be on good terms with the art director and crap high quality pieces that are entirely within the style guides, Guay will still get a piece or two every block to keep her fans quiet, and Ron Spencer will still make his insane artworks because he's Ron fricking Spencer.
Edit: do I win the thread?
I'd say so. Even though I think that the art today is better than art in the early days of Magic, there was more variety back then. The only artists who have truly distinct styles that make you say, "That's a so-and-so picture!" are Ron Spencer, Rebecca Guay, and Paolo Parente. Otherwise, there's not much of a difference. You're absolutely right, Effovex (clever name, BTW): guys with truly unique styles have been weeded out, not just Foglio, Ferguson, and Hoover but also DiTerlizzi. If a new art director means getting more variety, then I'm all for his leaving.
I agree with you that employers should not publicly humiliate or confront an employee and vice versa. And again I will defend Jeremy because if I recall correctly it was Ed Beard who went public with his fight or complaints or whatever. As best I can recall, he had a letter available to fans at a show and then there was some article in Inquest and some petition going around. I don't recall EVER seeing a press release from WOTC publicly bashing Ed Beard. Some have said they saw emails where Jeremy was bashing some artists, I don't recall ever seeing that so I doubt the authenticity of that.
Let's also not forget that we are talking about two artists here, Ed Beard Jr. and Rebecca Guay. This seems to be the issue most people have with Jeremy. That's an alleged dispute with two artists out of hundreds. I can easily find two people I don't get along with in any company. That's not to say Jeremy dislikes these artists. But judging Jeremy on a supposed relationship with two artists out of so many that he works with isn't fair.
-Jeff
Your point about branding is a very good point that most people miss. Branding in today's market is very, very important. Magic has grown to be sold outside of the usual gaming and comic shops and can now be found in book stores, supermarkets and malls. And it is no longer just available in the USA. It's a global market growing all the time. MTG has to have a strong brand to stand out on US shelves and Chinese shelves alike. Take other products that have developed a brand through art such as Warhammer, World of Warcraft, Battletech, etc. and you see why WOTC wanting MTG to have a "look" may be very important. There are many, many people out there that take comfort in knowing what to expect from their favorite product, so it's important to keep that in mind. Very glad you brought that up.
LMAO!!! Dude, I wish I could crap out quality art, that would be awesome. I'd be on the can all day. And yes, Ron is a frickin amazing artist and a really, really great person.
-Jeff
Again, I am only speculating, but the branding issue mentioned by Effovex may be the reason for this. Also, realize that some of these great artists you mention are not doing Magic art because they have moved onto other things.
-Jeff
I think Kev Walker actually does - his art is present on 210 different cards according to Gatherer. The only artist I can find with more cards is Pete Venters (236, crazy!) but he's been around since what? Legends?. Greg Staples is a bit above average for a regular artist with 155, and you're a bit below average with 92 - but as you said earlier, you're only doing Magic art as a sideline. To me, being able to produce quality material at such a speed (while also probably working on half a dozen other games#project) implies metaphorically modified artistic bowels.