Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Adding on to Tims comment, you call these childish scribblings as well?

It's a matter of taste. I would not call Priestly Breastplate, Poison of Dragons, or Sword of the Spirit "childish scribblings." Someone being helpful to the progress of the game has no relation to how they should view their artwork - see David Easterling for proof about that. There's a difference between Ittai and Book of the Wars though.

Incidentally, I looked through the REG's TP pictures, and I noticed there's some new Michael Ulrich art! I didn't expect that, but I hope the trend continues; along with the reused artwork from cards from the first three sets, I'm glad to see some return to the older style.

to me, drawing inanimate objects (which he does 100% of the time) has never struck me as being above average. no movement or flow in motion results in very lackluster artwork. you can gloss it up all you want with photoshop...but its like putting perfume on poop. i'll pass.

lambo: maybe 'childish scribblings' was a bit of hyperbole (except for carcasses, of course), but there is nothing epic in those pictures. very simple designs, hardly any detail, nothing aesthetically pleasing about it. congratulations, hes been upgraded to 'middle school art: 101'. its meh, at best.

I'll agree those arent the best pictures in the game, but I'll say its better than what you're describing it as.

However, I also take some offense to that. I fail at drawing people, but I'm pretty good at doing still life sketches in black and white pencil... does that mean my art fails as well?

i havent seen your artwork so i cant judge it at this point. your artwork doesnt automatically fail if you do sketches in black and white, or whatever your medium may be. but if you put your artwork in a public forum and open yourself up to critque and your artwork sucked, sure, i'd let you know if it was fail.

i havent seen your artwork so i cant judge it at this point. your artwork doesnt automatically fail if you do sketches in black and white, or whatever your medium may be. but if you put your artwork in a public forum and open yourself up to critque and your artwork sucked, sure, i'd let you know if it was fail.

Bring it on. 

Here is the one that I consider my best as far as shading and such goes. Its pretty simple because it was a simple assignment. Draw an object inside a crumbled paper bag. Also, it was a fairly large drawing and its graphite, so getting a drawing/scan of it is really tricky. It looks better in person, but this looks good enough imo:

Did you LOOK at the cards lambo posted? I do see detail...how about the water in the background of Angel Sword, the leaves flowing in the water? Or how about the men posted on top of the Wall on WoP? Quite a bit of detail in the shading (which isn't easy to do accurately and realistically). And those are only two cards, just give the guys art some more respect...its not something anyone can do.

water = object
leaves = object
men = object
shading = ...is shading. can be used to bring out detail, but is a pretty simple practice to employ nonetheless.

this also has absolutely nothing to do with respect, or the things other people can do (well, it does, and those other people in redemption do it far better than doug gray). im just not a big fan on doug grays artwork and never will be. i understand you're a huge progenitor behind the 'doug gray awesome artwork fan club', but please refrain from forcefully trying to implant your own ideals and values into other peoples heads. his artwork isnt that hot, and thats my opinion. 'nuff said.

Didn't he do Chariot of Fire? I think if nothing else that one has pretty good art. Although I may just be thinking he did the art since I have a Warriors CoF signed by him.

I will sorta agree that objects themselves carry the details, but still, WoP does have a fair amount of detail in it. Sure its largely bricks, but they have texture to them that actualy makes them LOOK like bricks, rather than shaded blocks. Many of his other pieces have similarly good levels of detail.

However, I will agree that carcasses is pretty bad. That doesnt make all his work epic fails though.

Oh, and I'm still waiting on if my artwork I posted is fail.

I will say this about the levels of shading in Doug's work.

Shading in black and white and shading in color are actually pretty different. Shading in color is notably harder, because you not only have to deal with the lightness/darkness, but the color value as well.

Example:

A blue metal ball has a slightly yellow light on it, and there is a green object next to it. You first have to consider the shades of blue on the ball, then the yellow lighting, and THEN the green object being reflected off the metal. If that was to be done in black and white, then all you need to use is varying shades of grey. It really is harder than it looks.

All that being said, I do also have to agree that some of doug's pieces can look sorta flat in terms of contrast of shading.

In case you havent noticed... I am currently an art major.

I love the art on alot of cards.  Some of my favorites include Guardian of Your Souls and Evil Fire.  I love the Mayhem art as well.

Kirk

Oh I know. Mayhem's art is incredible. Evil Fire was one of my favorite arts for a while as well. While I'm usually not much for anime/cartoon style stuff, that style artwork fits CCGs very well.

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 14, 2009, 12:30:38 AM

Didn't he do Chariot of Fire? I think if nothing else that one has pretty good art. Although I may just be thinking he did the art since I have a Warriors CoF signed by him.

Yeah chariot of fire is done by Doug.  I like the art on a bunch of the cards he has done.

I just looked at the TxP images for the first time and WOW. Sure there's still Salome and Magic Charms, but for the most part the art is absolutely superb! Mayhem and Gates of Hell are beast, all the old-style cards are cool, but definitely Ahaz is my favorite.

i like the the kings art esply micheal.