40k Artwork

[Logan]

All the gamers that I know seem to have very similar views on what is good and what is bad when it comes to the artwork in 40k books.
Some artists are loved by all while others are hated by all.
I want to know if this trend is a universal thing?
Basically does everyone hate the art of John Blanche or is it just everyone I have ever met?
(This isn't meant as a personal attack on Mr Blanche, I'm sure he is lovely, charitable and fresh smelling)

[Aldramelech]

I dont know much about art, but I know what I like! lol

[The AKH]

Personally, I rather like John Blanche's artwork :D

[bob]

I really like john blanche's stuff,

[ggg]

I like the Blanche stuff. I used to really love the Mark Gibbon's pieces- dark, detailed and intense drawings. The 40k artwork I prefer is the more mature and evocative stuff, like the HR Giger like back drop for the 4th and 5th ed rules books taken from a rogue trader piece called Dark Mechanicus.

I hate are the more childlike, cartoonie pieces. Take the dreadful Black Reach cover- compare that rendition of ultra Marines against the Ultra Marines images in the previous marines codex.

[Logan]

Wow some Blanche fans, never encountered any before, and that includes the staff and customers of GW during the time that I worked there and everyone who has voiced an oppinion in the 27 years since I first went to a GW store and became part of the hobby.
I am shocked it really doesn't work for me
I agree about the Mark Gibbons stuff though
As a side note I also find most of Clint Langley's stuff a bit busy

[BuFFo]

I love Blanche's work. Original and very stylistic.

Shame GW doesn't use him anymore.

[Denzark]

John Blanche and the second edition art pieces - nasty. Some of his older/newer stuff? fine. Check out Ratspike art book think this is some of his and is quality.

[Melissia]

I want to slap Blanche for this particular piece of Sisters art. Damn fetishist.

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Other/Sororitas-Blanche.jpg

It's disgusting. If she's wearing power armor, then she's rail thin and a swift wind will break her bones. Power armor is thick, metallic, and durable. I don't know what kind of crap that thing in front is wearing...


There's some awesome Sisters art out there. None of it was made by Blanche.

[Commander Vimes]

I can't stand his style. I'm glad they've moved away from it with subsequent books.

[person person]

I hate are the more childlike, cartoonie pieces. Take the dreadful Black Reach cover- compare that rendition of ultra Marines against the Ultra Marines images in the previous marines codex.

Agreed. I like some of Blanches stuff esp. his Primarch sketches, others like what Melissia was talking about I don't like. Blanche tends to use some Ridiculously over-the-top Grimdark stuff, but without it 40k would lose its Grimdarkness.

[eldargal]

Agreed. I mean if I wanted to look like that I could pull it off with leather or latex, but if you look at Space Marines then the armour must be at least an inch thick, no way its going to work. Not how I'd envisage the Imperiums militant nuns.
Apart from that I can't think of any 40k art I have taken an instant antipathy to. I actually quite like the Black Reach cover.


I want to slap Blanche for this particular piece of Sisters art. Damn fetishist.

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Other/Sororitas-Blanche.jpg

It's disgusting. If she's wearing power armor, then she's rail thin and a swift wind will break her bones. Power armor is thick, metallic, and durable. I don't know what kind of crap that thing in front is wearing...


There's some awesome Sisters art out there. None of it was made by Blanche.

[BuFFo]

I want to slap Blanche for this particular piece of Sisters art. Damn fetishist.

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Other/Sororitas-Blanche.jpg

It's disgusting. If she's wearing power armor, then she's rail thin and a swift wind will break her bones. Power armor is thick, metallic, and durable. I don't know what kind of crap that thing in front is wearing...


There's some awesome Sisters art out there. None of it was made by Blanche.

That is a beautiful piece of art. This has always been one of my favorites.

I love Blanche's work. Always have.

[jahred]

I also like John Blanches artwork, he conveys one aspect of the 'feeling' of 40k. Furthermore, I spoke to him at this years GW for about 15minutes with a friend of mine and he is a really nice bloke!

[Mudkip]

I want to slap Blanche for this particular piece of Sisters art. Damn fetishist.

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Other/Sororitas-Blanche.jpg

It's disgusting. If she's wearing power armor, then she's rail thin and a swift wind will break her bones. Power armor is thick, metallic, and durable. I don't know what kind of crap that thing in front is wearing...


There's some awesome Sisters art out there. None of it was made by Blanche.


I've always liked that piece. The artwork doesn't have to make sense in a realistic way, I mean, look at the bones! They aren't realistic in the slightest. Your criticism seems completely irrelevant to me (misplaced feminism?).

Now you might not like John Blanches style but the more popular art that goes in the books as well as the general aesthetic of 40k leads directly back to him. Think of him as the ideas guy that the other artists who made the "awesome sisters art" derive some of their influence from. You don't have to like his work but you can appreciate his influence on 40k. He doesn't care about being popular.

Oh, and hi gais!

[Melissia]

I've always liked that piece. The artwork doesn't have to make sense in a realistic way, I mean, look at the bones! They aren't realistic in the slightest. Your criticism seems completely irrelevant to me (misplaced feminism?).

No. I want my army to look like an ARMY, not a bunch of leather-clad dominatrix sluts.

[Mudkip]

Then play Imperial Guard or a WW2 game or something. This is 40k. I've never thought they looks like dominatrix sluts. They look like sci-fi, grimdark, gothic, fundamentalist nutcases, which is what they are. They are a hateful religious mob, not an army, and Blanches work captures their character perfectly.

[Melissia]

Then play Imperial Guard or a WW2 game or something. This is 40k. I've never thought they looks like dominatrix sluts. They look like sci-fi, grimdark, gothic, fundamentalist nutcases, which is what they are. They are a hateful religious mob, not an army, and Blanches work captures their character perfectly.

I don't have to play Guard to have an army that doesn't look like leather-clad dominatrix sluts. I just have to ignore Blanche's craptacular artwork. Imagine if he drew Marines to look like they were wearing spandex, would you say "well that's what they look like, stop playing Marines if you don't like it".

Here's an example of a better piece of art, for example:

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Sisters-Single.jpg

This looks like she's actually wearing armor. This looks like a Sister of Battle.

I don't know what the hell Blanche drew in that picture, but they weren't Sisters of Battle.

[Mudkip]

The thing is that picture you just linked to owes a lot to John Blanche, it wouldn't exist without him. Blanche's artwork is not meant to be realistic or canon, it's not about showing what a Battle Sister "actually looks like". It is meant to evoke an atmosphere and sense of character for the subject in question and it does that very well.

For an analogy, look at this work by Picasso:
[img=http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/2500/picassoweeping1937.th.jpg] (http://img203.imageshack.us/i/picassoweeping1937.jpg/)
It barely looks like a human being at all and yet it's a masterpiece because of how it says things about the woman in the painting.

The artists with more conventional painting styles may be more popular, but Blanche is more influential.

[Melissia]

Did you just compare a half-arsed sci-fi artist to Picasso? *mind is blown*


No. Just no. Blanche's work on the Sisters is crap. It doesn't set the theme of the army, it dosen't set the attitude of the army. He's going on sex appeal and that alone. His art on this army is mediocre at best, and the picture I posted looks almost nothing like the one Blanche drew.

[Mudkip]

I compared Blanche and Picasso in the sense they are both artists who don't paint things realistically and yet still manage to convey atmosphere and emotion, I'm not saying they have the same stature. If you can't recognize Blanche's talent then you probably wouldn't have recognized Picasso's in his time either.


I don't know what the hell Blanche drew in that picture, but they weren't Sisters of Battle.

Early 20th century Mellissa:
"I don't know what the hell Picasso painted in that picture, but it wasn't a woman!"

Oh well, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

[Duke]

I personally like the old school pic of Mephiston in black and white where he is wipping his mouth, it is 100% Blood Angels. (I would provide a pic but I can't at the moment.)

I also like the 'centerfold,' in the 5th ed rulebook with the Ultramarine, inquisitor et. al. in power armour, walking all tough. (Here is your opportunity to insert your "GW has a man crush on Astartes," comment Melissa. wink!)

Duke

[Melissia]

I compared Blanche and Picasso in the sense they are both artists who don't paint things realistically and yet still manage to convey atmosphere and emotion

Picasso's work is surrealism, INTENDED to be like that. Blanche's work is just crap. It does not convey the atmosphere and emotion of the Sisters at all. It makes them seem like leatherbound dominatrices. I'm not particularly fond of Picasso's work either, but the artist's original INTENT was to be surreal. And he succeeded. If Blanche's attempt was to capture the essence of the Sororitas in that image, he failed.

Miserably.

[Mudkip]

You still don't get it. John Blanche created the essence of the sororitas. He was Games Workshops art director for years. His art for the Sisters of Battle was the basis for most of the art that followed, the tabletop models are based on his work. He was in control of the Battle Sisters thematic style, making sure that other artists and sculptors stuck to their theme and personality. You are so, so wrong it's comical.

[Melissia]

You still don't get it. John Blanche created the essence of the sororitas.
This does not redeem his craptacular art. He may have had some input into the flavor of the Sisters, but his art itself is horrible and almost every artist after him has done better.

Judge art on its own merits, not because you like the person behind it.

[zed]

I'm a big fan of Karl Kopinski.

[Sangre]

This does not redeem his craptacular art. He may have had some input into the flavor of the Sisters, but his art itself is horrible and almost every artist after him has done better.

Judge art on its own merits, not because you like the person behind it.

Having never known the names of any of the GW artists, I'm not in any position to say which particular artist's work is better in my opinion than any other. However, I have to say that that particular picture of the Sisters of Battle is one of my favourites. Personally I don't think it looks particularly sexualised - so your mileage may vary - and in fact I personally feel the prominent breasts on the breastplate of the second linked image, complete with a very phallic icon inbetween them, go further to promoting a sexual undertone than the assertiveness of the pose in Blanche's image.

The general style of the chaos of the scene - burning backgrounds, lightning, assorted terrible warriors, this is the stuff that got me into the scene in the first place. I first got into 40k in 3rd edition and if I'm honest a lot of the art in that rulebook was what sold me - I still think it's got some of the finest 40k art I've ever seen.

[Melissia]

I never said it was perfect. But if you want to talk about sexual imagery... look at the way her leg is positioned, which has more similarities to an "exotic" dancer. To be honest, I wouldn't mind that picture if the woman in the front was just taken out entirely, but since she's the focal point of the picture it ruins the entire picture as she was done very poorly and in very poor taste.

Compare it to, say, this:
http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Other/45f181ba6f70xb8.jpg

The background is simplistic and cathedral-esque, the armor looks like, well, armor, the soldiers are in ready poses-- two of them are watching the flanks (far center, front right), while the leader (center) and multimelta carrier are looking forwards, making them look at least somewhat professional, as even in this obviously holy place they are ready for combat. It just generally has better taste, and is simple and elegant (don't mistake complexity for quality). It captures the feel of the army far better than Blanche's picture, even if it isn't perfect (but then, no art is).

______________________________
http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Battle_Sister_by_IronShrineMaiden.jpg

Another example, albeit by an artist that has done some questionable material, but still one of the better pieces. A simple portrait, fire still burning in the background. A sense of loss and loneliness in the face, in her eyes, and one can tell an entire story based off of just this simple picture-- the flamelike background behind her certainly helps this as well, without really giving you too much information.

______________________________
http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/1230052783344-1.png

And on a less serious note, this one's just fun.

[Marshal2Crusaders]

Why can one so rarely find SoB artwork that isn't slightly or totally anime-ified? It is worse than Tau for crying out loud.


I too would like to see Karl Kopinski do a drawing like he does for FW of every army out there. Frankly he is the most realistic of the artists. The Raptor and Red Scorpions are the best depictions of SMs out there, and the DKoK Guardsmen fits 40K perfectly.

[Mudkip]

By your standards that artwork is just as sexualized the John Blanches. The Battle Sister has wide hips and a slim waist with unecessary breast armour, and most of them don't wear helmets so we can see their pretty faces. Real body armour probably wouldn't accentuate the female form and the lipstick is not strictly necessary in combat either. Personally however I don't think either of them are very sexual images at all, how you make a distinction between them is ridiculous.



Another example, albeit by an artist that has done some questionable material...

You are starting to sound like some small-town moralizer. Your ideas of what makes a woman look like a "leather-clad slut" are by no means universal.

[Melissia]

I ask the same question, myself. I don't mind the style, but it gets monotonous finding the same general style time after time after time. Most of the Sisters images I have on my compute are anime-like in style.

I suppose the main reason is because anime style art i easier to draw.

Although they can still be good drawings.

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/1239103246584.jpg

This one's fairly decent despite the anime style.

[Melissia]

You are starting to sound like some small-town moralizer. Your ideas of what makes a woman look like a "leather-clad slut" are by no means universal.I don't think you quite understand what I mean by "questionable" in this particular case. Let's just say that I cannot host it on my Photobucket account without getting my account suspended :P

*shrug* Doesn't make them a worse artist, nor does it effect the value of that particular piece of work as a work of art, was just a side note. Pornography itself tends to be in rather bad taste, due to the nature of the genre (I doubt it's taste they are going for... unless, well... nevermind :P)

[Sangre]

With all due respect, all the pictures you've linked so far, seem... dry. Lifeless, drab. None of them quite grab the anger and hatred that is, to me, core to 40k. It doesn't help that one of them is clearly smiling.

[Melissia]

With all due respect, all the pictures you've linked so far, seem... dry. Lifeless, drab. None of them quite grab the anger and hatred that is, to me, core to 40k. It doesn't help that one of them is clearly smiling.

Because you're confusing complexity for quality. There is beauty in simplicity. The image by ironshrinemaiden I posted I think rather shows that-- does she look lifeless? Maybe that's the point. To me, she looks numb, like she has had her entire order wiped out in front of her and she is the only survivor of the battle. Walking the loneliness of an empty battlefield with only corpses to surround you and comfort you, fires still burning from the holy flames of purgation. There's a deepness, a sadness to it that is far beyond anything Blanche has produced. The emotion of the image is more than skin deep.

40K is more than just anger and hatred. In the aftermath of battle, humans feel loss and pain. In the build up to battle, humans feel fear and trepidation. Space Marines might not, but then they're boring anyway.

[Sangre]

I disagree. There is nothing simple about the galaxy of 40k - it is a constantly swirling melée with no respite, no time for sorrow. It is frenetic.

Furthermore, to be a human warrior against the horrors of the galaxy is to have already sufficiently detached yourself from any feelings of fear, trepidation or sorrow. Guard have it drilled out of them, the Sisters by their religious fervour.

[BuFFo]

With all due respect, all the pictures you've linked so far, seem... dry. Lifeless, drab. None of them quite grab the anger and hatred that is, to me, core to 40k. It doesn't help that one of them is clearly smiling.

Yeah, Blanche's art are masterpieces in this regard.

His art captures the mood of 40k at the time like no other artist since.

I like Karl's more realistic work, but his art is trying to make 40k seem more 'human', more relevant. I don't play 40k to remind myself of world war II. I play 40k to see dark, nightmarish aliens and leather clad holy women beat the crap out of each other form planet to planet with disregard to reality in any sense of the word.

Blanche's works are the zenith of 40k's art as far as capturing the feel of 40k. Also, the artist that does the scribbly demon art in the Demon Codex. He's also the cats meow!

[Melissia]

40K can be as complex or simple as you want it to be. I never made a claim either way, however-- perhaps you should read my post again. What I said was that there is beauty in simplicity. Besides, you're a bit of a hypocrite there, you know? You're oversimplifying human emotions and so on even as you say 40K isn't simple. Well, is it simple, or is it not?

[mountaincycle661]

I've seen a lot of people post with some interesting replies on this post. I was going to refrain from doing so myself, but the last page or so pushed me into it.

Having graduated with a Bachelors degree in Fine Arts (Visual Art), I've learned a thing or two on critiquing works from various artists in various mediums. Now, before anyone calls me an art snob, let me say this: Im in no way trying to throw my weight around, or say that Im better than you. I just approach this subject from a very different view point...one other than "this is cool and/or man that sucks".

John Blanche, to be very frank, lacks artistic talent. There, I said it. He gets a lot of credit where the credit is not due. It is true, however, that he has had an enormous impact on the art work we see today. It is true that he has influenced the overall look, feel, atmosphere of the 40K universe. Im glad that the 40K universe turned out the way it did, and Blanche had a hand in it. But thats it. Thats all he should get credit for, because after all is said and done he is only a concept artist. He sketches out something that resembles a 40K character or scene, then he passes it over the the talented folks who flush the idea out, put in the painstaking details, breathe life into a scene and make the characters depicted "real".

Take for example, blanches early work in the Lost and the Damned books, or rouge trader rulebook. Depictions of the evil in the 40k universe, chaos, the dread legions, etc. They are cartoonish, outlines, obviously unfinished works. They could be SO much more! Example:

http://media.photobucket.com/image/John%20Blanche/NickBjorn/AmazoniaGothique.jpg

Note the usual trademark ridiculous high heels...and ever present, boring, fall-back signature Blanche move. Very unoriginal. Ive seen that same style of his on at least 3 other works of his and im sure thats just the tip of the iceberg.

Now, compare that to Mr. Adrian Smith:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3004/3020501367_c2987a767a_b.jpg

There is simply NOTHING i have EVER seen from Blanche that even beings to APPROACH Smiths level of INTENSE detail, incredible grasp on texture, lighting, composition....

Blanches artwork (at least nowadays, his older work had a bit more effort in it) is a compilation of scattered sketches, hastily drawn "details", and an almost ever-present palette of colors. His subject matter is interesting, i guess...But he lacks the talent to take the work to the next level...and there are a lot of levels he needs to go through before he can be even CLOSE to Kapinski and Smith. Dont believe me? Check out The Horus Heresy: Collected Visions. Every other page is scattered with Blanches scribbles and "concepts". Meanwhile, dozens of other artists dont get nearly enough credit for the long hours and incredible skill integrated into their work.

In closing, blanche is an IDEA man. Not an artist. To put it bluntly, Mr. Blanche: put down your crayons and ink washes and let the real artists shape the universe.

P.S. - I agree with just about everything melissa has posted to this point. im not a fan of the anime look by any means, and i dont think it belongs in the 40k genre. however, she is right in her hatred of john blanche for his outlandish, ridiculous, overly stylized, unrealistic, cartoonish, detached portrayal of the sisters of battle (and just about everything else he "draws").

[fuzzbuket]

just me but I love all the blanche + grimdark stuff.

I have a friend who HATES the flying creubs and scaryness, arfter a game with him and the happy BA dex I have to read the 4th ed rulebook to remind myself that 40k isnt a lovley happy game.
LOVE this
http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/mediawiki/images/3/30/Palace.JPG

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/mediawiki/images/6/6d/Techpriest.jpg

HATE
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m500057a_Tyranid_CoverXL.jpg
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=cat1350002&aId=9600009

thanks

Fuzzbuket:D

[BuFFo]

Besides, you're a bit of a hypocrite there, you know?

Nope, didn't notice.


You're oversimplifying human emotions and so on even as you say 40K isn't simple.

Never said anything of the sort.


Well, is it simple, or is it not?

You only value your opinion, so you should decide what I must be saying. ;)


Take for example, blanches early work in the Lost and the Damned books, or rouge trader rulebook. Depictions of the evil in the 40k universe, chaos, the dread legions, etc. They are cartoonish, outlines, obviously unfinished works. They could be SO much more! Example:

http://media.photobucket.com/image/John%20Blanche/NickBjorn/AmazoniaGothique.jpg

Note the usual trademark ridiculous high heels...and ever present, boring, fall-back signature Blanche move. Very unoriginal. Ive seen that same style of his on at least 3 other works of his and im sure thats just the tip of the iceberg.

Now, compare that to Mr. Adrian Smith:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3004/3020501367_c2987a767a_b.jpg

There is simply NOTHING i have EVER seen from Blanche that even beings to APPROACH Smiths level of INTENSE detail, incredible grasp on texture, lighting, composition....



Two different artists with two different styles working in two different periods of 40k when the established look and feel has changed.

I am sure your 'degree' would have revealed that much.




I much prefer the claustrophobic, nightmarish and sometimes cartoony art of the mid 90's for how I picture Grimdark over the modern "Hollywood' look as to what 'glamergrimdark' currently is.

[Nabterayl]

You know, I can't speak for Mel, but I'm actually with her on that particular piece of Blanche work. I have no problem with Sororitas being sexy. They're women in power armor; that can't not be sexy. I just want them to be sexy while also looking like soldiers. It isn't a question of gear - neither Astartes nor Sororitas kit looks like something a fighting man or woman would willingly entrust with his life, in my opinion - it's a question of presentation.

I have to admit, though, that unlike Sangre, I don't find anger or hatred to be a core part of 40K. For me, the core of 40K is the cognitive dissonance that comes from considering the actions of the inhabitants when judged by the facts of their own universe as compared to the facts of ours. The Inquisition will kill a hundred innocents to punish a single guilty person. Space marines will desert a hundred fighting men who depend upon them in order to save one of their own. Tau offer membership in their empire through negotiation, but if you tell them no, will impose it by force of arms. Eldar will damn an entire race to save themselves. All of these, and dozens of other similar examples, would be acts of appalling evil if committed in our own universe. In the 40K universe, there's always the niggling fear that they aren't.

That is 40K to me.

[Archon]

My most favorite 40K Artist ist Adrian Smith http://www.adriansmith.co.uk/

His work IS fantastic. Especially the chaos-warriors with the iconography of their gods are awesome.

I like more artists, but i don´t know them all by name.

@soro and blanche diskussion

For Mr. Blanche i like his style very much. I like the mechanicus assassina in the HH illustrated book and i like as well the cover of the first Adeptus Sororitas Codex (the image melissa has posted). The picture covers the
ecclesiarchy in many aspects and focuses on the military fighting arm of ecclesiarchy - the Sororitas.

The pose of the soro in the center of the pic is very strong an i don´t see a "leather clad slut there" instead i see a power- and faithful leader(ess) of the Adeptus Sororitas. The fact, that her armour seems a little tight on her legs for example is due to the fact that Mr. Blanche ist not one of the artist that goes the "realistic way". For me this is one of his best pieces.

Soroart with animie-faces is nice and fun to look at - but, in a realistic view this is a no go;) But can´t help i like them a bit.

The best pic of soro-art (imho) is in the current codex und look like this http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/1/10459/840914-sister_of_battle_color_large.jpg I´m realy loving this image, cause this soro looks very realistic, and her pose is relaxed. Different artists, different looks and different ways to show the same army in a fantastic sci-fi universe.

[Melissia]

Never said anything of the sort.
Probably because I wasn't responding to you.

[Denzark]

That is a beautiful piece of art. This has always been one of my favorites.

I love Blanche's work. Always have.

I must agree strongly Buffo - sorry Melly but this is quality - I have this as a poster in a frame in my garage where I play...

[Mudkip]

Having graduated with a Bachelors degree in Fine Arts (Visual Art), I've learned a thing or two on critiquing works from various artists in various mediums. Now, before anyone calls me an art snob, let me say this: Im in no way trying to throw my weight around, or say that Im better than you. I just approach this subject from a very different view point...one other than "this is cool and/or man that sucks".

Claiming to be an expert over the Internet tends to invite derision rather than respect. If you don't want to throw your weight around then just let your arguement speak for itself, you aren't the only person here with an art education (illustration student myself) so your viewpoint is not as special as you seem to think. Amazingly obnoxious.


John Blanche, to be very frank, lacks artistic talent. There, I said it. He gets a lot of credit where the credit is not due. It is true, however, that he has had an enormous impact on the art work we see today.

I had to do a double take here. He lacks artistic talent and yet his art is influential? You state his impact and then casually disregard it in order to portray him as a second-rate artist, it's nonsensical.

I'd agree that his work peaked a long time ago and his recent stuff is less interesting, but then his role changed over the years within the company so it's natural that his output would change.

Your main criticism of John Blanche seems to be that his work is not technically proficient enough, but that's not the criteria that good art is often judged on. I find his works very moody and atmospheric, it's in-keeping with a lot of fantasy art of the time but taken in a more interesting direction than the common fantasy tropes they often portrayed. Comparing a 30-40 year old work to a 5-10 year old piece is silly because the scene has changed. GW was lucky to take Blanche on at the time because he was a perfect fit for 40k and I'd happily hang many of his works on my wall (I don't :p).

[Sangre]

40K can be as complex or simple as you want it to be. I never made a claim either way, however-- perhaps you should read my post again. What I said was that there is beauty in simplicity. Besides, you're a bit of a hypocrite there, you know? You're oversimplifying human emotions and so on even as you say 40K isn't simple. Well, is it simple, or is it not?

Steady on.

And to the arts BA, I see exactly what you mean - Blanche's actual technique is very sketchy - and I think I really like that about the setting. I think the rough, unpolished, unrealistic look suits the setting - how all reason and rationality is stripped away leaving only this violent impression of reality.

But then I'm only graduating in physics with computer science so what do I know :P

[Old_Paladin]

I've been with the game since it was in early 2nd Edition (so I can't really judge the earliest art styles); but, I have to agree with the people saying it's unbalanced to compare the different "generations" of art. For those that never grow up with it, there was only one the kind of art in the early days. To take a detailed inking and saying its better then a style used 20 years ago, and acting like they were made at the same time, for the same target audience, totally misses the mark.

I personally love both the major styles, but for very different reasons.
The newer stuff is very clean and very highly detailed; but the detail is where most of the essence is.
The old stuff, has a rough dirty feel; but it's the feelings that the art provocted that made it 'greater' then simply a roughly done picture.

As of the Sisters. I love that old piece, love it the first time I saw it.
It screams, 'this is a hellish wasteland' and 'this woman is a powerful individual, a leader and a cold-blooded killer.'
The newer stuff shows that they a likely skilled warriors, but lack the deep fury and outright fearsomeness (that the Sisters obviously should have).
A final note about Sisters art. I find it personally amussing that people claim the older image is sexist, slutty, etc, then show examples of what they should look like. If you look back at most of those 'better images' I've noticed one majot detail; their breasts (or boob-armoured cups) are HUGE. As a rule of thumb, If boob size=head size then generally one of those objects is way off scale.

[And I don't want to hear BS about it being just armour; body armour doesn't work like that. This is a woman in armour:
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01000/woman-soldier-iraq_1000014c.jpg]

[eldargal]

She looks like a Cadian. Sort of.

[mountaincycle661]

Claiming to be an expert over the Internet tends to invite derision rather than respect. If you don't want to throw your weight around then just let your arguement speak for itself, you aren't the only person here with an art education (illustration student myself) so your viewpoint is not as special as you seem to think. Amazingly obnoxious.



I had to do a double take here. He lacks artistic talent and yet his art is influential? You state his impact and then casually disregard it in order to portray him as a second-rate artist, it's nonsensical.

I'd agree that his work peaked a long time ago and his recent stuff is less interesting, but then his role changed over the years within the company so it's natural that his output would change.

Your main criticism of John Blanche seems to be that his work is not technically proficient enough, but that's not the criteria that good art is often judged on. I find his works very moody and atmospheric, it's in-keeping with a lot of fantasy art of the time but taken in a more interesting direction than the common fantasy tropes they often portrayed. Comparing a 30-40 year old work to a 5-10 year old piece is silly because the scene has changed. GW was lucky to take Blanche on at the time because he was a perfect fit for 40k and I'd happily hang many of his works on my wall (I don't :p).

An artist can be quite influential and have an impact and still be regarded as just plain terrible. I suppose you'd also be a fan of abstract expressionism? Please. Ive seen guys in the 70s and 80s cut out peices of toilets and urinals, sign their name on it and have it placed in a museum (no, really. i CANT make this $hit up). Is it nonsensical? Totally. Is it art? *sigh...* unfortunately. Did it have a big impact? Yeah, although i cant see how.

Compare peices of a toliet to the Sistine Chapel! And thats like comparing blanches "art" to the works of kapinski, smith and daiton.

And to follow up on your "it was a different scene back then claim"...There are still guys today who paint and draw in the "old style" of blanche. And there were plenty of comic book artists and illustrators who painted beautiful, masterfully crafted (see what i did there?) works of art...Alex Ross's kingdom come, anyone? I dont care what year it was when Blanche was scrawling out his concepts, I think they have ALWAYS failed to portray any sense of realism or convey any emotion other than a faint chuckle of disbelief. By the way, blanches work isnt 30-40 years old. And best, rouge trader artwork was published in 1987. And Smiths isnt exactly ancient either. To say that they were of two totally different generations of artist....c'mon man. They werent seperated that harshly.

Oh yeah, and i never said my view point was special. I was pretty clear about that. Also never claimed to be an expert. Also, I did let my argument speak for itself. what i wanted to do was lay down a disclaimer that says "im not just going to blab on and on about a topic i dont understand...over the internet". Amazingly obnoxious is when people take what you say out of context.