Artwork - the old and the new

[bla]

After the many updates to manalink the differences in artwork started to make themselves noticed in a corner of my mind.
I find myself enjoying the old demonic tutor more than the new for example.

The new artwork is flashier, with great colours and usually a more complex composition, but still the old one posesses an unavoidable charm.
It seems less presumptous for the lack of a better word, less in your face. I can't quite put my finger on it.
And it's not even nostalgia, as I am a late magic player.

What do the rest of you think about the pictures that bring magic to life?

[Sonic]

Having compiled the artwork for the most recent updates. The main thing that struck me whilst I was in the process of editing the artwork, was the more iconic nature of the card images in earlier sets.

The earlier artwork tends to be a more iconic representation of the colour/function/ability of the card - a simple image of the cards name and what it does.

In the later sets, the reverse is generally true. The artwork represents a scenario/character within the world of the set - the colour/function/ability of the card is now reflective of the scenario/character within the sets world.
This has tended to make the artwork more complex - as it now has to portray the card in the larger context of the sets story/world.

I think this is the charm you speak of - reading a cards name and ability, and then being presented with an image you would most probably associate with that card.
With the later cards, unless you are also aware of story associated with the set, many of the cards artwork have a less obvious relationship to the colour/function/ability of the cards.

[aww1979]

I like the old artwork, but for a different reason. I find I don't like the style of a lot of the newer artists. That, and being an old fogey in magic, I don't recognize any of the newer art on older cards. I can't tell you how many times I've gone wtf card is that... and it turns out to be a Sengir Vampire or something.

Also, is it just me, or is it totally impossible these days to tell what a basic land is by the picture? Not that I use them anyway, whenever possible, but still...

[Sonic]

Also, is it just me, or is it totally impossible these days to tell what a basic land is by the picture? Not that I use them anyway, whenever possible, but still...

Like I said:

With the later cards, unless you are also aware of story associated with the set, many of the cards artwork have a less obvious relationship to the colour/function/ability of the cards.

So no, you're not alone.

[Nicdanger]

Generally speaking I agree, but there are a few reprints that I feel the art is greatly improved. For example . .

Counterspell - Mercadian Masques

A Swamp from Onslaught (I collected 20+ of this version to fill out a MonoBlack Control deck at the time, just because the flower looks cool)!

7th/8th Edition Birds of Paradise

[bla]

The iconic nature of the cards is indeed what charms me. Unholy Strength means more attack, Holy Strength more defense. Esper Charm or Cadaverous Bloom are less intuitive for example. I guess it can't be helped with the growing complexity of the game.

On the other hand there are some new cards and motifs where I think the art really shines, like the Master Transmuter.

[gabeiq]

Sorry for my bad english first.... and sorry for the long post

I whrote a mutch better post, but I closed my browser for accident but basicaly was that!

Something that I like to add to the topic is that I think wizards care about different aspects that flavor a TCG.

Mahamoti for example, IMO he didnt need another art, you can see in the original art that he is a djin, he flies, he isnt happy and he is huge(look at the size of his arm), but when 7th edition come, it was like 5-6 years from 4th edition and that clash of arts brings some feelings....

1.Players that had old versions of mahamoti will be proud of using his better looking old days mahamoti.... the proud that players have of their collection is a huge flavor in a TCG, how many times you go after a version of a card that you already have becose you want it black bordered or becose the new/old art is better looking?

2.When a new player discover in the middle of a game that there was a different art from a card that he owns, prettier or uglier, it gives to that player the will to explore and go deep into the game.

3.Some players care about collection, some players collect some cards in special.... like: - Mahamoti is my favorite creature, I want 4 copies of every mahamoti art. Some players collect full sets and the change of art makes these kind of collection better looking when you look through different sets(mahamoti is a bad example here, since it only came in core sets, but imagine a single art counterspell).

4.In a game that involves lucky some people do strange things.... A frined of mine always used to have 3 different coppies of adarkar wastes in his 2k replenish deck(also in his nether-go deck in 2k1), and he always said that the IA one is the one that saves his ass when he is in mana trouble! lol(dont know y he didint use 3 IA coppies)

5.Different people had different tastes, all around the world for sure there is a maniac that think the 7th edition mahamoti art is the prettier!

[gabeiq]

6.Magic is around for like 15 years and the art have to be atractive to new players.
6.1- How the old art of royal assassin can be atractive to a 15 yo guy that played assassin's creed I and/or II on his xbox360?
6.2- About the new live colors, when I start at magic I had a VCR and a monochromatic monitor on my computer with MS-Dos, now new players probably had LCD monitors and HD-3D tvs
6.3- New generation is more visual, less imaginative, the mutch action art can give to the card is better, in my age we had more books/magazines less youtube, we can stare at giant growth art and think, ok its a rat and then... OMG look at his size in pomparassion to that human skulls! The new art shows the moment the mage is making the bear bigger!

7.Some cards original art didnt express the feeling around the card: When you look at alpha counterspell you can feel the frustration around the art, you can see that mana leak art was fixed to bring that feeling, same for Un/Holy Strength and to be honest I feel that way about royal assassin too, how that ugly, old, with tuberculosis guy will kill someone?

8.Some cards are so good that they need a new awesome art: Swords to plowshares and yes, DEMONIC TUTOR.... I think when a card apears in a set most times the art isnt good as it could be becose they are on a rush or the art needs to contextualize with the set.... and sometimes wizards gives us that as a gift.

These new tutor art is so flavored that you cant like it, a yet non-corrupted liliana beign tutored by a demon and look at the flavor text: "Liliana learned the secrets she sought, but at a price that was etched on her fate." its the same as you look at the little Bruce crying over his parents dead bodies, you know that is the moment where the beast was unleashed!


Well sorry again for the size of the text....

[stassy]

There is also a copyright issue with the artist.

I think I read it on a magic article, the artist make a contract for a card illustration for x month/year, when time is done you have to find another artist or it would be illegal to print again the same card with the same art.

[0rion79]

I also agree that old card art were usually better... with some big exception, as many card art from the Dark or Legends. Murk Dwellers art is really ugly, for me, as well as Mold Demon, lol!
But I generally think that the original Magic the gathering was overall better in its starting days with 3 main flaws:
1 - there were too many overpowered cards
2 - creatures had an unblanced cost/effectiveness ratio
3 - green was missing some "ultimate" big creature as Serra Angel or Shivan Dragon.
I claim so because I remember how funny it was to play with simlple cards, when the game was much less complicated than now. It was more "genuine" but it was also the price to pay for NOT having all the deepness that characterizes nowdays game.

[bla]

Gabeiq touched an interesting point. The flash of the new cards has indeed, in my opinion, to do with atracting new players. I guess I'm just a sucker for old fashioned style. However I mention again that some of the new artwork is unquestionably excelent, and in the end the evolution and changing of art is unavoidable, be it in magic or anywhere else. I also was unaware of the copyright issue.
My nostalgia is only paying homage to the old days, but bring on the new nevertheless.

It's also interesting to see the evolution of cards reprinted several times. Counterspell was a nice example mentioned here.
I've already seen the many incarnations of Dark Ritual.
Maybe we can post some more examples?

By the way

.In a game that involves lucky some people do strange things.... A frined of mine always used to have 3 different coppies of adarkar wastes in his 2k replenish deck(also in his nether-go deck in 2k1), and he always said that the IA one is the one that saves his ass when he is in mana trouble! lol(dont know y he didint use 3 IA coppies)

That is a lot of superstion

At Orion: I also ocasionally jump back to an old version of magic were I don't have to think about flashbacks or dredge or whatever and my pachyderm-themed deck does indeed contain elephants