Check out these works of beauty! It's almost as if Wizards knows how to commission good art, and actively chooses not to except for in the case of special promos like this.
If they actually understand the concept of making evocative images, why do they constantly choose to make boring fantasy-realism? The pack versions of these same cards look like total crap by comparison! It doesn't cost them more to commission better art, so why don't they do it?
I've been on this soap box for a long time, but this suggests they actually know what style looks like and actively avoid it. The lattice frames are pretty, but that's not what I'm talking about.
I never get to have the promos, and I'm not going to get these either, but usually they don't have the same kind of stylistic flair as this. THIS is what I've been asking for for years. Put it in normal booster packs!
Would you be willing to pay $7 for normal set booster packs? It wouldn't surprise me to learn that each of these arts cost about as much as 2-3 'regular' arts to commission.
Then there's also the thing about different tastes. There probably exist people that like the 'boring fantasy-realism' arts more than these stylized works, so by making both styles they make sure to have something for everyone.
Some of the art is good, but its also abstract, it looks less like a "world" and more like some pictures of self contained art.
The entire design with the "roots" borders i REALLY dislike, as i strongly feel its just completely overloading the card with "crap" that doesnt contribute to the card itself.
This kind of "root" stuff can be done with some sleeves, which add motive art around the borders.
Again, I don't care about the frames. I only care about the art, and the fact that they constantly water it down for the sake of consistency over aesthetic quality.
But it seems like I'm more or less alone by the responses (and lack thereof). In the early days, they used different aesthetic styles depending on the setting they were in. That's why Mirage block looks so great. I would absolutely love to see a return to that, and this shows that they have every ability to do so, they just choose not to. Sure some people love fantasy realism, but it's not like they can't use that too, and it's not like those people are everyone.
As myself a visual artist, I have always been flummoxed by the fact that the game I love is so utterly braindead when it comes to artistic style. You aren't allowed to do anything remotely interesting unless your name is Seb. The fact that they actually allowed their artists to do something more aesthetically exciting here only shows how completely they quash that instinct in normal cards.
And no, it definitely doesn't cost more to commission art which I would deem to be better. Artists are artists. Great artists are a dime a dozen nowadays, and they are begging for work like this.
The long and short of the entire argument is who decides what is good and what isn't? Because I guarentee that at least the art director believes they have consistantly good art. The fact that you don't only means you prefer a style that they don't.
WotC was about a thing they called "World building" , so the entire art of a set should clearly look like that set.
That often leads to cards of a set to have a distinct "same-ish" look.
Artists get instructions what to point that is often very detailed, which leaves less room to make something special ; especially as they provided a art-style guide for specific planes on how stuff should look like , which also takes away any artistic freedom, as the artist itself matters less and less if the person that wants the art defines in detail what art they want.
To some degree this entire art-tyle worldbuilding lead to a problem that the art of a set could look like "screenshots" of a video game.
Art that has some unique features is interesting.
If you see the same style done over and over again, or just too generic, then its just boring.
----
Art style wise i really like the special art of Lovestruck Beast and Animating Faerie ; the normal cards from the set are much much less flashy and look even forgettable bland by color scheme alone ; the special art visually reflect what the card does and do so in a more colorful pleasing way, but they are also much more abstract art, which is fundamentally not what the world-building artstyle guide of WotC would be about.
The frames are part of the art. Its called "graphic design" the mixture of images / text / artwork.
But, what is "good" art and what is "bad" art is subjective.
Having said that, modern magic art illustration is TOP NOTCH, you will not find better illustration in this much abundance in any single location anywhere.
I was a professional illustrator most of my life until a car accident made it very hard for me, MTG art is AWESOME.
Bonus: Some don't "get it" but I LOVE the fact that the art tends to follow a per-set theme. So the world which the art takes its cues from has some similarity and we get to explore that world via images.
If it wasn't for the "theme" aspect of mtg, many of us wold be playing other games. People crap on the lore, but the lore is what makes magic unique from other VERY similar games.
They want a default, "real" look that's a good point of reference between worlds. More stylized art usually goes to the wayside for this reason; it's very clear that the alt arts in question are not part of the same universe as Ravnica. Remember, they have direct experience with bad art direction, such as early Magic goblins that were a cesspool of styles with no consistency; then the onlooker will feel very detached from understanding it as a cohesive world. OTOH differences can be deliberate but still definitely part of the same world such as in Lorwyn. However, coherence is also the argument they used to use for consistent frames I believe (although a larger problem then was the cost of alternate frames), and the increased use of more abstract framing in works such as Seb McKinnon means that they may be going to experiment more with more abstract or stylized framings. After all, early Magic frames were designed to look like spellbook pages. Later frames became stylized for information and more of a border to serve an in-world image and inform the player of the card's properties. As such, the alt art frame is definitely connected to a possible change in style. Their recent experiments in Ixalan, Amonkhet and now Eldraine should make more experiments possible.
Personally I'm not sure what I want. I prefer a spellbook style (which the Eldraine alts fall under) but I also want to be able to read my cards.
If they actually understand the concept of making evocative images, why do they constantly choose to make boring fantasy-realism? The pack versions of these same cards look like total crap by comparison! It doesn't cost them more to commission better art, so why don't they do it?
I've been on this soap box for a long time, but this suggests they actually know what style looks like and actively avoid it. The lattice frames are pretty, but that's not what I'm talking about.
I never get to have the promos, and I'm not going to get these either, but usually they don't have the same kind of stylistic flair as this. THIS is what I've been asking for for years. Put it in normal booster packs!
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
Then there's also the thing about different tastes. There probably exist people that like the 'boring fantasy-realism' arts more than these stylized works, so by making both styles they make sure to have something for everyone.
They simply charge more for them.
Some of the art is good, but its also abstract, it looks less like a "world" and more like some pictures of self contained art.
The entire design with the "roots" borders i REALLY dislike, as i strongly feel its just completely overloading the card with "crap" that doesnt contribute to the card itself.
This kind of "root" stuff can be done with some sleeves, which add motive art around the borders.
These things:
https://www.amazon.com/Sized-Sleeves-Character-Guard-Standard/dp/B00BFLY7XY
So i know it and its cool to have, but even better to be able to REMOVE it when it annoys you.
----
The artwork itself is decent enough, its a "style" that you either like or dislike and fits this style of set which is about faerie tales and such.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ
But it seems like I'm more or less alone by the responses (and lack thereof). In the early days, they used different aesthetic styles depending on the setting they were in. That's why Mirage block looks so great. I would absolutely love to see a return to that, and this shows that they have every ability to do so, they just choose not to. Sure some people love fantasy realism, but it's not like they can't use that too, and it's not like those people are everyone.
As myself a visual artist, I have always been flummoxed by the fact that the game I love is so utterly braindead when it comes to artistic style. You aren't allowed to do anything remotely interesting unless your name is Seb. The fact that they actually allowed their artists to do something more aesthetically exciting here only shows how completely they quash that instinct in normal cards.
And no, it definitely doesn't cost more to commission art which I would deem to be better. Artists are artists. Great artists are a dime a dozen nowadays, and they are begging for work like this.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
That often leads to cards of a set to have a distinct "same-ish" look.
Artists get instructions what to point that is often very detailed, which leaves less room to make something special ; especially as they provided a art-style guide for specific planes on how stuff should look like , which also takes away any artistic freedom, as the artist itself matters less and less if the person that wants the art defines in detail what art they want.
To some degree this entire art-tyle worldbuilding lead to a problem that the art of a set could look like "screenshots" of a video game.
Art that has some unique features is interesting.
If you see the same style done over and over again, or just too generic, then its just boring.
----
Art style wise i really like the special art of Lovestruck Beast and Animating Faerie ; the normal cards from the set are much much less flashy and look even forgettable bland by color scheme alone ; the special art visually reflect what the card does and do so in a more colorful pleasing way, but they are also much more abstract art, which is fundamentally not what the world-building artstyle guide of WotC would be about.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ #BlueLivesMatter ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ฎ
But, what is "good" art and what is "bad" art is subjective.
Having said that, modern magic art illustration is TOP NOTCH, you will not find better illustration in this much abundance in any single location anywhere.
I was a professional illustrator most of my life until a car accident made it very hard for me, MTG art is AWESOME.
Bonus: Some don't "get it" but I LOVE the fact that the art tends to follow a per-set theme. So the world which the art takes its cues from has some similarity and we get to explore that world via images.
If it wasn't for the "theme" aspect of mtg, many of us wold be playing other games. People crap on the lore, but the lore is what makes magic unique from other VERY similar games.
Personally I'm not sure what I want. I prefer a spellbook style (which the Eldraine alts fall under) but I also want to be able to read my cards.