The trouble is that Rebecca Guay is almost always given white or green cards that generally seem like they have an art description of "show a woman with long flowing hair...". The Mercadian Masques Dark Ritual is probably my favorite art for the card, and generally speaking her darker cards (or White Wolf's "Revelations of the Dark Mother," if you can find a copy) show more of what shes capable of than the "all is softness and light" feel of a lot of her work. Even then, her work on even the softest of he cards is a more than welcome change from the usual hard-lined, lets blow things up, charged with energy art that magic usually has. Dragons and demons and whatnot are awesome, but its nice to see evidence of some peace and beauty existing in whatever plane we happen to be visiting this year.
Great to hear that Guay's getting some new art into TS. I agree with the poster some posts back that, having a bit of Guay art around is good, but too much of it is badbadbad. Her art is like the icing on the cake, sure the cake would taste as well without the icing, but the icing makes the cake all the more enjoyable. (May be substituted with cream/fruit etc.) Also, I like how Guay's art brings balance to the the overall-hypercharged-power feel of Magic art that's around these days, kinda like a sour/bitter tang of lemon/lime in a sweet dessert.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from jonnyjonski (on Legends" names in Ravnica) »
I'm jazzed!! No more "Wankushookam, the Fist that Opens Only This Much"!
Quote from Shindig_Ascension (on Religion in Magic) »
Wrath of God couldn't be more religious if the picture was Jesus smacking demons with a jug of Holy Water.
Nice! I hope her pieces will be better than the Dissension ones, though, as they weren't her best. There still is a lot to be done, but this news and Coldsnap give me good hope that magic art can be pulled out of its downward spiral.
Quote from Hodoku »
That piece has no place in that frame. ever.
I agree, but that's the fault of the frame, not the art. IMO, even the most beautiful pieces are turned to crap when framed with the 'scourge after Scourge'. Though I have to give some credit to your buddy Cra(n/p)ford, with his 'art direction' the majority of modern art actually fits the frames. Not that that's a good thing though...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thou shalt not have others of the same Legendary before me Thou shalt not frame images with the modern card face Thou shalt not change rules in vain Remember the Reserved List to keep it holy Honor thy Slivers and the symmetry of their abilities Thou shalt not kill mana burn Thou shalt not sacrifice depth for accessibility Thou shalt not steal combat damage from the stack Thou shalt tell a story through thy cards All must be one
I must say het Kamigawa block art was much better than her Ravnica block art, let's hope het Time Spiral work is on par with her older work. I must say it's nice to have someone like Guay around, I like her soft touch a lot better than the hard edges of Spencer's art for example.
My favority artists used to be RKF, Quinton Hoover and Drew Tucker.
Oh man, yes. Three of my favorite old Magic artists. I am really hoping that with Jeremy Jarvis at the helm, we'll see more diversity of style start to creep back into Magic illustration. I mean, I like Kev Walker pretty good and all, but I get really irritated at how many people want every single card to be all done up in the same hyperrealistic style and leave all the other styles behind.
This is vaguely off topic, but I feel the need to post this whenever discussion of artists pops up in the rumor mill. People seem to have a lot of misconceptions about how Magic art works. Perhaps the first and greatest misconception is that Magic artists are essentially employed by Wizards and the company sort of owes it to them to continue to use a given artist set after set regardless of any other factors. The second bogus underlying assumption, and one that's addressed far less often, is the assumption that it's basically every fantasy artist's dream to spend their entire careers producing as much art as possible for Wizards. If an artist's work doesn't appear in a set, one of the most likely reasons is that the artist was working on something else during that time. (As a recent Magic Arcana also showed, something as mundane and apolitical as injury can interfere with an artist's ability to produce art.) In addition, artists sometimes retire or move onto other things. And finally, yes, Wizards does sometimes cease contracting a particular artist for work; they only print so many cards each year, and I think most of us have artists that we like a lot who were only introduced recently; it'd be a shame if there wasn't room for them.
How would we know if a collapsed plane wouldn'tbe the correct place for her art if we've never even seen her draw anything like it?
If her art IS as dark as previously mentioned,this might justbe the correct place to convert the non-Guayers
And it isn't entirely her fault that she only gets the long-haired maidens and elves...design probably thinks shes best-suited to drawing them
So blame design
I'm sorry, if I didn't fix it, that post would give me nightmares for months. This isn't an online chat room, this is a place for (semi-)intellegant conversations.
Any way I don't know why people don't like Guay. Her art can be, and usually is, amazing. Yes, she's done some crappy pieces *cough*Silkwing Scout*cough* Ahem, excuse me. But all in all she is the artist that brings piece to Magic's normally action-packed art. Too much of her would, indeed, kill Magic, but giving her just a few more pices each set wouldn't be too much to ask would it?
*snips sensible comments about artists working and moving on*
And finally, yes, Wizards does sometimes cease contracting a particular artist for work; they only print so many cards each year, and I think most of us have artists that we like a lot who were only introduced recently; it'd be a shame if there wasn't room for them.
I dont think people's main concern is new artists coming in, it's that the new artists coming in all seem to have very close styles and tend to vary a great deal. Until recently alot of magic art seemed to have very close styles for the longest time, starting with the "weatherlight saga" it got out of hand and is now at maddening proportions.
Guay is one of the few "old school" artists left that has a unique style. I see a few of my old favs floating around as well but it would be nice to see more artists with their own unique styles, that from across the table you can go "that was done by *whoever*" If you see a piece by, Rebecca Guay, Quinton Hoover, or Di Terlizzi, or Phil Foglio you know the artist for the card instantly even if you havn't seen the card before. I prefer that far more than the "magic style" any day. I loved Kamigawa because it sparked off alot of unique art, and hopefully its developing further, it started cracking with Mirrodin (despite that set being 99% identicle) and it seems to be getting more and more diverse now with Ravinca and Coldsnap.
Any way I don't know why people don't like Guay. Her art can be, and usually is, amazing. Yes, she's done some crappy pieces *cough*Silkwing Scout*cough* Ahem, excuse me. But all in all she is the artist that brings piece to Magic's normally action-packed art. Too much of her would, indeed, kill Magic, but giving her just a few more pices each set wouldn't be too much to ask would it?
Now this I can get behind. Personally, I'm a fan of the hyperrealist art style (go go Donato Giancola), but I am more than willing to admit that Magic is a canvas for a great many styles, Rebecca Guay's among them (especially when she does cards like Words of Worship and Fiddlehead Kami). My beef is with "old school fanboys" who like Guay, or my favorite punching bag Melissa Benson, simply because it was the first piece of art that they saw when they started playing Magic in Alpha, or whatever.
That said, I'd like to see what Guay can do with a big red or blue fatty (I believe someone mentioned a Leviathan).
That, and the return of Richard Kane Ferguson. Good times.
-MM
@ bristol - im majoring in design, and ive been a design fanatic since 9th grade That piece has no place in that frame. ever.
Huh.. well, I'd like to see some of your work to know where you're coming from because I can't agree with your statement at all. You have offered no reasoning on why it's bad design, and I'd be surprised if you came up with any legitimate arguments.
Quote from mr feeny »
Giant winged creatures drawn in the same style, with the same facial expressions and the same background, wether you choose to discount that or not.
Freewind Equenaut and Pride of the Clouds having the same facial expression? Are you serious?
Whether you pay attention to art or not has absolutely nothing to do with the importance or lack thereof of art. I would like to point out that Magic is, after all, a game that was (at least originally) intended to be more fantasy than mechanical. And how is the art only for recognition? Is that why R&D spends months creating coherant and interesting settings rather than different colored stick figures? I'll be sure to let the guys in Development that half of their job is pointless.
i didnt say it was pointless, being able to differentiate cards at a glance is very important to the game, but my original point was, this is hardly a rumor about time spiral, as we gain nothing about the set, literally nothing
I think its ironic that people want 'Realism' in a fantasy game. If we had Realist art in Magic it would be of two guys breaking rocks into smaller rocks.
As for Pride of the Clouds, I think the purples in the artwork compliment the gold frame nicely. I like the subtle bits of green in the clouds. I'd actually go as far as to say that its a nice piece.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GENERATION 3.78: The first time you see this, add it into your sig and add 1 to the number after generation
I'd like to see you put your money where your mouth is there, and provide a better artwork to fit the card.
Please, spare me your logical fallacies. That's like defending a surgeon who murders a patient on the table through incompetence by saying "Well, I'd like to see you do better! I bet you've never even operated on a person." When I hire a surgeon, I expect him to know how to operate on me. When I hire a plumber, I expect him to know how to fix a leaky pipe. When I hire a professional artist, I expect her to know how to paint what I ask of her. Which leads us to this:
Quote from Obakemono »
And secondly...how do you know what they asked her to paint? For all you know, they said "Paint lions...in clouds!" and she simply fulfilled her job. Artists often have no idea of what their actual card does (at least from what I've heard) so she could not have painted an "elemental lions that were made out of clouds that grew bigger with the number of creatures with flying in play" if she had no idea they would get bigger with fliers, and possibly that they were elementals at all.
It's called Pride of the Clouds. It's an elemental. I doubt Wizards told her, "Paint plain old lions, only flying!"
Oh, but how would she know what the card does mechanically? It's not like Wizards ever tells their artists. Hideaki Takamura must have just been psychic when he knew Thunderheads would have replicate.:rolleyes:
First of all, Magic is not a game of realism and sharp detail. It is a game of fantasy, where fictitious creatures fight in fictitious places. The only problem I ever had with the Lord of the Rings movies is that there were parts there they felt too real.
Magic has developed an epic style that includes such things as shading and perspective, both of which Guay's art generally lacks, but that's not the point. The point is that Guay often fails to capture the mechanics of the card, which is her job.
It's called Pride of the Clouds. It's an elemental. I doubt Wizards told her, "Paint plain old lions, only flying!"
Oh, but how would she know what the card does mechanically? It's not like Wizards ever tells their artists. Hideaki Takamura must have just been psychic when he knew Thunderheads would have replicate.:rolleyes:
The point is, you have no way of knowing what it is they told her to paint, you can only conjecture. It's entirely possible that when they commissioned the painting, it was not an elemental at all, or that it did not grow with fliers.
I know there are a few magic artists around these boards, and at the very least people who have talked with them in tha past, so let's just get this straight. Artists, does R&D always tell you what the card is and does when they commission a painting, or is this all just misguided and unproven assumptions?
Quote from Hercwarrior »
Magic has developed an epic style that includes such things as shading and perspective, both of which Guay's art generally lacks, but that's not the point. The point is that Guay often fails to capture the mechanics of the card, which is her job.
Actually, capturing the mechanics is not her job. Painting what they tell her to is her job. While Wizards sometimes clues their artists in on the mechanics their cards are related to, R&D has said, multiple times, on magicthegathering.com that mechanics can change, long after art has been commissioned.
11 pieces of art that all look alike is depressing enough for two years.
Like practically every artist that works for Magic has a distinctive style? About the only ones who I think have distinctive styles are Guay, Parente, Ron Spencer, and Terese Neilsen. The rest seem very similar, which is a far cry from the original days of Magic.
I'm personally a Guay fan, and I'm glad she's coming back in Time Spiral. Hopefully she'll make something other than elvish green stuff (I particularly liked Persecute Artist, since it seems darker than usual for her). Though I do agree that Silkwing Scout looks like something out of a children's book, she's done some great stuff.
Giant winged creatures drawn in the same style, with the same facial expressions and the same background, wether you choose to discount that or not.
The fact that you didn't bother to click on the cards, and thus confused Oboro Breezecaller with Freewind Equenaut doesn't do a whole lot for your argument. (If you look at the large version of the Breezecaller, you can see there's some nice detail in the background there, too....)
Anyway, I find the whole debate about whether Pride of the Clouds represents the mechanics of the card to be exactly what's so often wrong with Magic art these days. I'd much prefer a nice and evocative painting (which Pride absolutely is) over some of the ludicrously over-specific and ugly things that have shown up on cards in the past. I do appreciate certain nods to the cards' mechanics, and I don't like it when the art actively disagrees (winged creatures without flying, that sort of thing) but I don't see any need to slavishly depict every little bit of the card's functioning. Pride of the Clouds is a cloud elemental shaped like a cat; that's what's in the picture. Good job, artist.
Quote from Magpie »
Guay is one of the few "old school" artists left that has a unique style. I see a few of my old favs floating around as well but it would be nice to see more artists with their own unique styles, that from across the table you can go "that was done by *whoever*" If you see a piece by, Rebecca Guay, Quinton Hoover, or Di Terlizzi, or Phil Foglio you know the artist for the card instantly even if you havn't seen the card before.
This is really what I miss. There were a number of old artists who unambiguously illustrated in a fantasy style but were distinct from each other and from the huge swathes of indistinguishable wannabe-Kev Walkers. Some of these guys even do really nice pieces, but it's way too hard to tell who illustrated a given card these days -- who can really pick out the difference between (say) Greg Staples, Ron Spears, Tony Szczudlo, Danny Orizio, etc. on a consistent basis?
I have some faith this is going to get better -- Jeremy Jarvis is one of the people who's brought some new style to the game lately, and he's gonna be the new art director -- but I'd really like to see it accelerate back to something much closer to, say, the Ice Age era of diversity (but with a modern level of quality control.)
The fact that you didn't bother to click on the cards, and thus confused Oboro Breezecaller with Freewind Equenaut doesn't do a whole lot for your argument. (If you look at the large version of the Breezecaller, you can see there's some nice detail in the background there, too....)
I see, and what lead you to believe I mistaked the two? Did I refference the art of the Breezecaller once? I believe I was talking about PotC and Freewind Equenaut. The fact that you seem to put both words in my mouth and thoughts in my head doesn't do a whole lot for my impression of you.
o.o Yo Myke... How's XC doing? Um anyways I love Rebbecca's art! It makes me all tingly in my pants and it gives that good old DnD fantasy style to the cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When the finger points to the yonder moon,
The fool will not look at the fingertip.
The Whole cannot be changed.
We've already lost that chance.
Because the time left to us was short.
We were mistaken in our path.
But now do we realize,
We should not change the whole,
But the parts.
I see, and what lead you to believe I mistaked the two? Did I refference the art of the Breezecaller once?
The fact that Pride of the Clouds and Breezecaller really are similar pieces (low-detail, cloudy background; similar palettes) while Freewind Equenaut looks drastically different from both, having (among other things) an extremely detailed background including a mini-cityscape with multiple buildings and a waterfall. (Not to mention the huge splash of deep black in the middle of Equenaut's illustration that has no parallel in the other two.) It seems obvious that when you said the bottom row looked similar, you were thinking of the two pieces that were next to each other and do look similar (especially at that size), but you got confused (or just didn't click on the links) when someone asked about Pride and the third, very dissimilar picture in the line.
If you really did mean the Equenaut this whole time and you honestly think that its completely different composition, background, and even basic style are similar to the Pride of the Clouds, then I guess you weren't mistaken in which card you referred to, but you might want to reconsider commenting in threads about illustration in the future.
I believe I was talking about PotC and Freewind Equenaut. The fact that you seem to put both words in my mouth and thoughts in my head doesn't do a whole lot for my impression of you.
I'm definitely a Guay fan. I agree with some others' sentiments that Magic art is too focused, resulting in pieces that look really similar. Her art is a completely different style and really captures the fantastical element of the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Winner of week 43
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Banner and avatar by the one and only Craven at Epic graphics. Check them out.
Offical High Priest of Reign of Blood
I agree, but that's the fault of the frame, not the art. IMO, even the most beautiful pieces are turned to crap when framed with the 'scourge after Scourge'. Though I have to give some credit to your buddy Cra(n/p)ford, with his 'art direction' the majority of modern art actually fits the frames. Not that that's a good thing though...
Thou shalt not frame images with the modern card face
Thou shalt not change rules in vain
Remember the Reserved List to keep it holy
Honor thy Slivers and the symmetry of their abilities
Thou shalt not kill mana burn
Thou shalt not sacrifice depth for accessibility
Thou shalt not steal combat damage from the stack
Thou shalt tell a story through thy cards
All must be one
if her art IS as dark as previousli mentioned,this might juz b the correct place to convert the non-Guayers
n it isnt entirely her fault she that she onli gets the long-haired maidens n elves...design probably thinks shes best-suited to drawing 'em
so blame design lol
Oh man, yes. Three of my favorite old Magic artists. I am really hoping that with Jeremy Jarvis at the helm, we'll see more diversity of style start to creep back into Magic illustration. I mean, I like Kev Walker pretty good and all, but I get really irritated at how many people want every single card to be all done up in the same hyperrealistic style and leave all the other styles behind.
I believe he meant that he hoped her art would be better in TS, because he doesn't want to see more Silkwing Scouts.
And please at least put a little effort into spelling and punctuation?
I'm sorry, if I didn't fix it, that post would give me nightmares for months. This isn't an online chat room, this is a place for (semi-)intellegant conversations.
Any way I don't know why people don't like Guay. Her art can be, and usually is, amazing. Yes, she's done some crappy pieces *cough*Silkwing Scout*cough* Ahem, excuse me. But all in all she is the artist that brings piece to Magic's normally action-packed art. Too much of her would, indeed, kill Magic, but giving her just a few more pices each set wouldn't be too much to ask would it?
Giant winged creatures drawn in the same style, with the same facial expressions and the same background, wether you choose to discount that or not.
Also, I apologize for the typo in that post, I didn't notice it until I read my post through your quote.
"The means justify the ends."
- Vince McMahon
I dont think people's main concern is new artists coming in, it's that the new artists coming in all seem to have very close styles and tend to vary a great deal. Until recently alot of magic art seemed to have very close styles for the longest time, starting with the "weatherlight saga" it got out of hand and is now at maddening proportions.
Guay is one of the few "old school" artists left that has a unique style. I see a few of my old favs floating around as well but it would be nice to see more artists with their own unique styles, that from across the table you can go "that was done by *whoever*" If you see a piece by, Rebecca Guay, Quinton Hoover, or Di Terlizzi, or Phil Foglio you know the artist for the card instantly even if you havn't seen the card before. I prefer that far more than the "magic style" any day. I loved Kamigawa because it sparked off alot of unique art, and hopefully its developing further, it started cracking with Mirrodin (despite that set being 99% identicle) and it seems to be getting more and more diverse now with Ravinca and Coldsnap.
Now this I can get behind. Personally, I'm a fan of the hyperrealist art style (go go Donato Giancola), but I am more than willing to admit that Magic is a canvas for a great many styles, Rebecca Guay's among them (especially when she does cards like Words of Worship and Fiddlehead Kami). My beef is with "old school fanboys" who like Guay, or my favorite punching bag Melissa Benson, simply because it was the first piece of art that they saw when they started playing Magic in Alpha, or whatever.
That said, I'd like to see what Guay can do with a big red or blue fatty (I believe someone mentioned a Leviathan).
That, and the return of Richard Kane Ferguson. Good times.
-MM
Huh.. well, I'd like to see some of your work to know where you're coming from because I can't agree with your statement at all. You have offered no reasoning on why it's bad design, and I'd be surprised if you came up with any legitimate arguments.
Freewind Equenaut and Pride of the Clouds having the same facial expression? Are you serious?
RRR Buy some of my art! Prints! RRR
i didnt say it was pointless, being able to differentiate cards at a glance is very important to the game, but my original point was, this is hardly a rumor about time spiral, as we gain nothing about the set, literally nothing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpgjnU7C3Aw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe7kkZixasc
As for Pride of the Clouds, I think the purples in the artwork compliment the gold frame nicely. I like the subtle bits of green in the clouds. I'd actually go as far as to say that its a nice piece.
There is an imposter among us...
No I just wrote it down and hit the submit button in an attempt to waste everyone's time, and now you've foiled me!
Any way, yeah, their faces look really similar.
"The means justify the ends."
- Vince McMahon
Please, spare me your logical fallacies. That's like defending a surgeon who murders a patient on the table through incompetence by saying "Well, I'd like to see you do better! I bet you've never even operated on a person." When I hire a surgeon, I expect him to know how to operate on me. When I hire a plumber, I expect him to know how to fix a leaky pipe. When I hire a professional artist, I expect her to know how to paint what I ask of her. Which leads us to this:
It's called Pride of the Clouds. It's an elemental. I doubt Wizards told her, "Paint plain old lions, only flying!"
Oh, but how would she know what the card does mechanically? It's not like Wizards ever tells their artists. Hideaki Takamura must have just been psychic when he knew Thunderheads would have replicate.:rolleyes:
Magic has developed an epic style that includes such things as shading and perspective, both of which Guay's art generally lacks, but that's not the point. The point is that Guay often fails to capture the mechanics of the card, which is her job.
The point is, you have no way of knowing what it is they told her to paint, you can only conjecture. It's entirely possible that when they commissioned the painting, it was not an elemental at all, or that it did not grow with fliers.
I know there are a few magic artists around these boards, and at the very least people who have talked with them in tha past, so let's just get this straight. Artists, does R&D always tell you what the card is and does when they commission a painting, or is this all just misguided and unproven assumptions?
Actually, capturing the mechanics is not her job. Painting what they tell her to is her job. While Wizards sometimes clues their artists in on the mechanics their cards are related to, R&D has said, multiple times, on magicthegathering.com that mechanics can change, long after art has been commissioned.
Like practically every artist that works for Magic has a distinctive style? About the only ones who I think have distinctive styles are Guay, Parente, Ron Spencer, and Terese Neilsen. The rest seem very similar, which is a far cry from the original days of Magic.
I'm personally a Guay fan, and I'm glad she's coming back in Time Spiral. Hopefully she'll make something other than elvish green stuff (I particularly liked Persecute Artist, since it seems darker than usual for her). Though I do agree that Silkwing Scout looks like something out of a children's book, she's done some great stuff.
The fact that you didn't bother to click on the cards, and thus confused Oboro Breezecaller with Freewind Equenaut doesn't do a whole lot for your argument. (If you look at the large version of the Breezecaller, you can see there's some nice detail in the background there, too....)
Anyway, I find the whole debate about whether Pride of the Clouds represents the mechanics of the card to be exactly what's so often wrong with Magic art these days. I'd much prefer a nice and evocative painting (which Pride absolutely is) over some of the ludicrously over-specific and ugly things that have shown up on cards in the past. I do appreciate certain nods to the cards' mechanics, and I don't like it when the art actively disagrees (winged creatures without flying, that sort of thing) but I don't see any need to slavishly depict every little bit of the card's functioning. Pride of the Clouds is a cloud elemental shaped like a cat; that's what's in the picture. Good job, artist.
This is really what I miss. There were a number of old artists who unambiguously illustrated in a fantasy style but were distinct from each other and from the huge swathes of indistinguishable wannabe-Kev Walkers. Some of these guys even do really nice pieces, but it's way too hard to tell who illustrated a given card these days -- who can really pick out the difference between (say) Greg Staples, Ron Spears, Tony Szczudlo, Danny Orizio, etc. on a consistent basis?
I have some faith this is going to get better -- Jeremy Jarvis is one of the people who's brought some new style to the game lately, and he's gonna be the new art director -- but I'd really like to see it accelerate back to something much closer to, say, the Ice Age era of diversity (but with a modern level of quality control.)
I see, and what lead you to believe I mistaked the two? Did I refference the art of the Breezecaller once? I believe I was talking about PotC and Freewind Equenaut. The fact that you seem to put both words in my mouth and thoughts in my head doesn't do a whole lot for my impression of you.
"The means justify the ends."
- Vince McMahon
When the finger points to the yonder moon,
The fool will not look at the fingertip.
The Whole cannot be changed.
We've already lost that chance.
Because the time left to us was short.
We were mistaken in our path.
But now do we realize,
We should not change the whole,
But the parts.
-Epitaph 01-02
The fact that Pride of the Clouds and Breezecaller really are similar pieces (low-detail, cloudy background; similar palettes) while Freewind Equenaut looks drastically different from both, having (among other things) an extremely detailed background including a mini-cityscape with multiple buildings and a waterfall. (Not to mention the huge splash of deep black in the middle of Equenaut's illustration that has no parallel in the other two.) It seems obvious that when you said the bottom row looked similar, you were thinking of the two pieces that were next to each other and do look similar (especially at that size), but you got confused (or just didn't click on the links) when someone asked about Pride and the third, very dissimilar picture in the line.
If you really did mean the Equenaut this whole time and you honestly think that its completely different composition, background, and even basic style are similar to the Pride of the Clouds, then I guess you weren't mistaken in which card you referred to, but you might want to reconsider commenting in threads about illustration in the future.
I invite you to reconsider your impression!