 Arsenal Cover, crappy or craptastic? |
  |
 Jan 29 2008, 04:34 PM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence  Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715  |
I like the art in Arsenal, cover and other. Not because it's cartoony. It is cartoony, but that's not really a pro or a con. I like the diverse mix, though, and some cartoony art reminds people that the game can be played as pink mowhawk crowd and that's okay.
What I really like about the cover is that I can immediately recognize almost every gun as being an actual weapon from the game. And the couple that I don't recognize, I can go digging for. That's sweet. And I like the recycled art inside the SR4 books. SR1-3 is an excellent resource for artwork, and I'm glad it's not being neglected. New people get the best of SR1-3's art, and old people get nostalgia. pardon my incoherence, I was up late last night reading Arsenal. |
 |
 
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 04:52 PM
Post
#52
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
The orc is ugly, but actually close to something with the testosterone level of an SR orc. What I do not like (at all) is the face, but that may partly be caused by the cartooney style.
First thing I dislike is the composition. The scene does not even have a place in a cartoon. An image of a weapons vendor would have been better for presenting so much hardware. Trying to fit a vehicle at all cost? Only the guns could be made to stick to the vehicle, the other items would simply fall to the ground. Without them the image would be way better. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 06:29 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
I'm with Cain on this one (ducks to avoid low-flying pig). The ork is drawn like a man in the body. Not beyond all belief, but there are several mannish traits. The hands are very large in addition to the general proportions. The face has female proportions, however. -K. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 07:10 PM
Post
#54
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
It is not a usual orc. See pics of steroid-abusing (read contesting) female bodybuilders. I´m training frequently for five years now, and many of those still have more muscle. Like a man with tiny boobs - about right. Enlarged hands (and nose, chin, feet) are pretty typical side-effects of human growth hormone. Male musculature is a byproduct of testosterone. As long as we do not know why orcs mature faster, such pictures are a valid perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 07:16 PM
Post
#55
|
|||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
Perhaps. But without a note saying "this picture depicts orks according to the theory that female orks are very masculine looking" or "the individual in this picture is atypical due to an abnormal amount of growth hormone", well without such a note it just looks like the artist accidentally drew big hands / other masculine traits. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 29 2008, 07:27 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 633 Joined: 23-February 06 Member No.: 8,301 |
I hardly think notes like that are necessary. Not every drawing of a character type or race should be the archetype of that concept. Some women look masculine, as some men look feminine. The idea of an ork looking somewhat masculine is even less surprising to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 10:02 PM
Post
#57
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,241 Joined: 10-August 02 Member No.: 3,083 |
What do people here think of the ork in the BBB? The Gunslinger Adept? She doesn't have the human-looking quality, yet looks more human than any ork I've seen. Is this how you figure orks ought to look, on average? I mean, she's still noticeably not human.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 10:12 PM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
Yeah. The earthdawn companion has a good one on the cover, very muscular build, close to a human, but tusks.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 29 2008, 10:23 PM
Post
#59
|
|||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
I don't say it has to be. But if I point out that a painting of a woman makes her look like a man in some ways, because proportions are off, and somebody else replies that I should accept it because their are medical conditions or hormone treatments that can result in such proportions, I think I'm okay to say that some supporting evidence would need to be provided to choose that interpretation over weakness in the artwork. Especially when there is supporting evidence for my opinion in other evidently weak areas in the picture such as screwy perspective (look at those two upper right guns, drawn flush against the same wall yet both at different angles) and floating bullets. Put a ruler on the screen and check out whether the hatch cover would actually fit the hatch itself (it doesn't). So what is more likely? That in a picture containing numerous errors of proportion and perspective, the artist decided to deliberately draw an atypical woman with masculine dimensions, or that he just didn't do a too good job of these proportions as well? If you are going to present something that looks off deliberately, you need to reassure people that it's deliberate with higher quality elsewhere. This is not the case with this picture. Besides, can you honestly say, with your bare face hanging out, that you think the artist decided to draw a woman with giant yeti hands because he had decided he wanted to draw someone with an over-active pituitary gland? :D Now all of this makes it sound as though I despise the cover. I don't. It's a passable piece, it just doesn't strike me as very impressive and the artist was either lazy in some of the preparation or pushed for time. I can particularly excuse the latter and without seeing more work by this artist I couldn't say how talented I thought he was. But when I have to keep justifying my mild dislike of something, repetition makes it sound much harsher. It's not an awful picture. I just don't think it's very good, or really good enough for the cover of a book like Arsenal.
Regardless of the orkiness or lack, I think it's first off a great piece of artwork - both the execution and the composition in a limited space. I find her too human looking in some ways, but at least it redresses the balance against all those previous editions where orks were portrayed (despite lack of support in the fluff) as being warty, malformed people. And on the subject, the Gunslinger Adept is both notably muscular and still correctly proportioned for a woman. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 30 2008, 04:57 AM
Post
#60
|
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Knasser said most everything better than I could.
As for the problem I have with the arms, if you look at the left shoulder, you'll see that the musculature indicates that it's both hunched forward and leaning back at the same time-- the front muscle is way forward, while the top one is tilting back. The right arm has a similar problem at the shoulder. I suppose that the arms themselves are okay, but they're badly-connected to the torso. Which is another beginner mistake, made by many comic-book artist wannabes. I expect something more professional for a Shadowrun cover. I don't have any other books handy, but the cover to Cannon Companion is equally cartoony, and more professionally done. That doesn't mean it's a better art piece, just that it's technically better. I might be being something of an anatomy nazi here, but even comic-book muscles aren't supposed to look like Popeye the Sailor Man. (Okay, that's an exaggeration.) But the way the arms are twisted, they look like they were added separately from the main figure. Like Knasser said, there's so many other mistakes made, it's hard to assume that the arms are anything but another beginner mistake. Very unprofessional. I'm not a great art critic; but I can spot some technical details, and explain how this cover fails to achieve much through technique. If you're a really great artist, you can skip past this stuff, but this guy doesn't pull it off. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 30 2008, 10:14 AM
Post
#61
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Actually, there is no evidence in the picture concerning the intention of the artist whatsoever - neither for, nor against it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 11:23 AM
Post
#62
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
That's knasser's point. If it was a case where the subject is supposed to be an abnormal specimen, then evidence should be present to support that fact. Evidence is not needed if this isn't the case, and the subject is supposed to be an example of a basic, normal specimen. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 11:33 AM
Post
#63
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Exactly that 'necessity' is just created to prove the artist 'wrong', one way or another. However, in the given context of the picture the deviation from the norm is perfectly plausible: A female ork bodybuilder posing with guns. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 04:18 PM
Post
#64
|
|
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Except it's missing some female traits that wouldn't be missing on a normal figure, or a He-man style cartoony one either. It's too male for the style and effect of the rest of the cover. Plus the fact that, as knasser said, the perspective elsewhere is too off to assume that the anatomical issues are anything but more errors.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 30 2008, 05:19 PM
Post
#65
|
|
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
The artist himself is certainly able to draw different races:
Mark Zug Webspace The other images I see on his page are way better. This begs the question if the style and composition was specified by CGL as part of a new brand strategy. A cover that is "off" and displays many toys is certainly not completely wrong from a marketing POV. And we buy the book despite the cover (I´m honestly going to hide the dead tree version from non-players. One must not be enforcing the image of roleplayers as childish nerds). |
|
|
|
|
Jan 30 2008, 05:27 PM
Post
#66
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
It could just be a marketing thing. In order to send the message to women that "if you buy guns, you'll be able to compete with men" they had someone pose with the guns that is a female, yet is obviously more "macho" than most men.
Or it could actually be cover art. Maybe the artist is saying something about gender roles by depicting the scary, gun-wielding monster as having the face of a woman and the body of a man. Or it could just be crappy art. But after Augmentation, I'd nominate this for a place in the L'ouvre. I guess SR requires more imagination these days, because now if you want pretty pictures, you have to paint them with your mind. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 30 2008, 05:44 PM
Post
#67
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,328 Joined: 28-November 05 From: Zuerich Member No.: 8,014 |
Or make them yourself - DAZ is not too difficult to use. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 06:17 PM
Post
#68
|
|||||||
|
Shadow Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 3,737 Joined: 2-June 06 From: Secret Tunnels under the UK (South West) Member No.: 8,636 |
You are maligning me. I did not set about to prove that the cover was imperfect and thus there be a necessity to prove the artist wrong. I looked at a picture with numerous errors of perspective and proportion which cannot be deliberate and concluded that it is most likely the strange proportions of the central figure were not deliberate either. If either of us is going to extra lengths to prove that the artist is something, it is you trying to prove the artist intended the effect. All I've said is that it seems a lot more likely given the evidence that it was simply badly drawn. And ultimately, intention matters for nothing to we, the audience. If you're going to draw something that runs contrary to what people think something should look like, you need to compensate by making it look as realistic in other ways as you can. I know that. Professional artists know that. Looking at the other work on the artist's website that Ryu linked to, the artist is undoubtedly capable of far superior work so I'm sure he knows that, too. Having seen the rest of this artist's work, I'm going to put the entire thing hands and all, down to being either rushed / bored with the subject / pissed off with tight specifications or underpaid. He's clearly a talented artist when he applies himself.
Heh! That would be the worst piece of marketing in a decade: Catalyst: "Hey girls - you could actually be as good as a guy." Girls: "..." |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Jan 30 2008, 06:22 PM
Post
#69
|
|||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
There's too many technical errors for it to be artistic. And while I believe Mark Zug can do much better than this, that only serves to heighten the fact that it's likely a set of beginner's mistakes. Sure, you can break the rules of the art form, and get away with it if you're good; but this piece isn't good enough for that. I can see that it's supposed to be cartoony, but it's supposed to be He-Man style, not Tiny Toons: "We're tiny, we're toony, we're all a little loony; and with this cartoonie, we'll invade your RPG!" 8) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 06:27 PM
Post
#70
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
I doubt it would be the first time a company's used misogynistic lines of thought in their marketing. And as a disclaimer, yes, I was going out of my way to try to prove the artist wasn't messing up. I have been hypnotized by Shadowrun's charms and want to believe whenever possible that it is infallible; I readily admit to that. Of course, "whenever possible" leaves a lot of holes... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 06:38 PM
Post
#71
|
|||||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...right on. @Cain...well at least it isn't like the crap I see on the Cartoon Channel these days. What happened, have animators forgotten how to draw all of a sudden? Even the Hanna-Barbera stuff in the 60s was better. OK, end of mini-rant [/Derail] |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 30 2008, 06:52 PM
Post
#72
|
|||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
...They outsourced overseas. Which was my original theory on most of the SR4 cover art. :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 30 2008, 07:14 PM
Post
#73
|
|
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...yeah like so much of our other manufacturing these days. I come from the old "Rust Belt" & cities there were almost turned into ghost towns when much of our the heavy industry was farmed out overseas because of cheaper labour. We went from a primarily manufacturing economy with decent wages and job security to a low paying service based "at will" one.
I still have my old UAW card in a desk drawer somewhere. ...but I digress... ...end of mini rant #2. [/Derail] |
|
|
|
|
Jan 30 2008, 08:45 PM
Post
#74
|
|||
|
Awakened Asset Group: Members Posts: 4,464 Joined: 9-April 05 From: AGS, North German League Member No.: 7,309 |
:rotfl: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 31 2008, 02:14 PM
Post
#75
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 944 Joined: 19-February 03 Member No.: 4,128 |
I cannot cite the post, but I agree 100% percent that the full-page pic on page 4-5 or so would have made a _much_ better cover.
The only downside is that it is just a fixer and his guns, no drones or vehicles visible. The powers that be may have wanted a cover with guns, drones & vehicles on a book _about_ guns, drones & vehicles |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th January 2025 - 09:37 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.