When Dreams come Alive!

24 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hi to all, I wondered if these pictures (artwork) are nice for you...

For example:

Green...


Blue...


Black...


Red...


White...



*For me... these pictures are the best in artwork!

This is the link: www.facebook.com/#!/WhenDreamsComeAlive

**Would you like have these artwork in the cards? (similar style)

***Please tell me, What do you think about?

Regards
Lolol I am sorry, but I don't understand what exactly you're asking..?

People don't just post on the forums with random artwork (you posted from five different sources, I'm presuming, and didn't give credit to the original artists...? :T )

The artists at WoTC are hired to make card-specific art work... They don't just paste random Google Image stock photos on their cards :O

Can you explain yourself further? I really don't understand what the purpose of this whole thread is, to be honest :B 
Lolol I am sorry, but I don't understand what exactly you're asking..?

People don't just post on the forums with random artwork (you posted from five different sources, I'm presuming, and didn't give credit to the original artists...? :T )

The artists at WoTC are hired to make card-specific art work... They don't just paste random Google Image stock photos on their cards :O

Can you explain yourself further? I really don't understand what the purpose of this whole thread is, to be honest :B 



Hi... well... obviously (artwork) are of different artists, I put it like examples...

The purpose is to know, if this "style"of artwork (look at the picture 1 vs 2) would be nice in the cards! or maybe in a comic book, or novel or artbook of MTG.

*P.D: Another purpose is to give another tone or retouch (out of the ordinary, like Future Sight) to the cards! (an expansion for example)

Artwork 1... (The style that I propose!)... sorry but I don't know who is the artist Embarassed



Artwork 2... (this is the MTG)



*Both are beautiful... but, Do you see the different between artwork 1 and 2?

The artwork 1, is deep and excellent background, the sea looks very real!!!, the sky is wow!

The artwork 2, is wonderful too, but... the different in style is huge!

That's my point... I hope that some artists the MTG, take in mind!

Sorry for my bad english...
Each card artist has a different style. Compare Rebecca Guay's to Greg Staple's, for example; the same comparations you did apply as well.
IMAGE(http://www.wizards.com/global/images/mtgcom_daily_mc52_picMain_en.jpg)IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/73821e61e013eadf56a8e4e2226d89a3.jpg?v=90000)
Each card artist has a different style. Compare Rebecca Guay's to Greg Staple's, for example; the same comparations you did apply as well.


Hi, I know that each card artist has a different style, but... I have not seen the "style" that I have proposed!

***Or maybe, I can be wrong... Have you ever seen a similar style?

Look carefully the refined "styles" that I refer...






























Regards
I love it...

What on Earth is wrong with that woman's spine in the last picture in the OP? 

Anyway, I don't really like many of those. The one in the post with Hellkite Overlord actually looks pretty good, but the rest have problems (Or don't fit the tone of Magic).
I want to comment on this thread but I can't figure out what it's actually about. >_>

A lot of those pieces share flaws across the board, the most eggregious of which is the way nothing seems to be quite connected to anything else. The figures don't really seem to exist within the same reality as their ground. Aaah, it's difficult to put into words... basically, it looks as though most of the characters have been photoshopped into a background. Which, honestly, is probably how a few of these were created. That's bad, because it means that there's no cohesion between the individual elements of the piece. Most of them aren't particularly well composed, either.

I mean, they're decent pictures, but they're amateur works, not professional. Magic's artwork is just on a higher level than what you've got here.

As far as the subject matter goes... yeah, most of these are also just glamor shots of sexy women. Nooot really something Magic does unless there's a specific thematic reason.

I don't know if that answers your question. I don't really know what your question is. That's my take on the artwork, though. And honestly, I would much rather see an amateur painter than an amateur digital artist, any day. There's something about the physicality of paint that I enjoy more than this slick production. 
Coming Soon to the Magic: Expanded Multiverse: FRAGMENTS: A Shards of Alara Anthology
(Click through to view the cover and announcement page)Want to get your work in the Expanded Multiverse? Come join the project! Oh, and check out my blog, Storming the Ivory Tower: making sense of academia, media, and culture twice weekly.
As far as the subject matter goes... yeah, most of these are also just glamor shots of sexy women. Nooot really something Magic does unless there's a specific thematic reason.

My thoughts exactly, articulated better than I was about to.

Wingex, the pieces you've selected here are almost all glamor shots, but glamor shots in Magic art are the rare exception. Most card art has a completely different focus--it's not about the figure, it's about what they are or what they're doing. It involves action shots or power poses, showing spells in use or creatures in action. It's all about the awesome, not the sexy. The image here that's closest to fitting Magic's style is the last one.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

I want to comment on this thread but I can't figure out what it's actually about. >_>

A lot of those pieces share flaws across the board, the most eggregious of which is the way nothing seems to be quite connected to anything else. The figures don't really seem to exist within the same reality as their ground. Aaah, it's difficult to put into words... basically, it looks as though most of the characters have been photoshopped into a background. Which, honestly, is probably how a few of these were created. That's bad, because it means that there's no cohesion between the individual elements of the piece. Most of them aren't particularly well composed, either.

I mean, they're decent pictures, but they're amateur works, not professional. Magic's artwork is just on a higher level than what you've got here.

As far as the subject matter goes... yeah, most of these are also just glamor shots of sexy women. Nooot really something Magic does unless there's a specific thematic reason.

I don't know if that answers your question. I don't really know what your question is. That's my take on the artwork, though. And honestly, I would much rather see an amateur painter than an amateur digital artist, any day. There's something about the physicality of paint that I enjoy more than this slick production. 



Hi, well... You are right! My question was about sexy women pictures with the "style" mentioned...


***For example... I found in "MTG" an awesome picture that I loved it!!! (and, this is precisely what I mean )




**For other hand... Not would be bad idea to launch an expansion (with thematic) with sexy women like "Deadly allure"... maybe amazons, vampires, angels, demons, warriors, fairies, witches, etc... (like in the novels and legends)

*It really would be great that "MTG" give an huge touch of flavor to the game with seductive women! Wink

And finally, you are right again about professional pictures vs amateurs...

Thanks you for you answer!


My thoughts exactly, articulated better than I was about to.

Wingex, the pieces you've selected here are almost all glamor shots, but glamor shots in Magic art are the rare exception. Most card art has a completely different focus--it's not about the figure, it's about what they are or what they're doing. It involves action shots or power poses, showing spells in use or creatures in action. It's all about the awesome, not the sexy.


Hi, thank you for you answer... Now, I understand the point of the art in "MTG" ...

The image here that's closest to fitting Magic's style is the last one.


Do you refer to this image?... because also wonderful!... and hot girl Tongue Out



Regards

Heh. There's Magic art, and there's Steve Argyle Magic art ;)

Magic isn't really into gratuitous pin-up pieces though - a whole expansion of them would just be, well, horrible. I'd just enjoy the fact that the occasional sexy woman shows up when it's relevant or there's an angel in town. If anything, Magic is allegedly toning down the fanservice more these days (although some would still debate that too).
Heh. There's Magic art, and there's Steve Argyle Magic art ;)

Magic isn't really into gratuitous pin-up pieces though - a whole expansion of them would just be, well, horrible. I'd just enjoy the fact that the occasional sexy woman shows up when it's relevant or there's an angel in town. If anything, Magic is allegedly toning down the fanservice more these days (although some would still debate that too).



Hi, well ... I meant to a whole expansion "with thematic" about the Amazons, vampires, angels, demons, warriors, fairies, witches, etc. .. BUT, with some sexy women (attacking, defending , power poses, showing spells, etc), and "not all" of expansion!
 

Hi... well... obviously (artwork) are of different artists, I put it like examples...

The purpose is to know, if this "style"of artwork (look at the picture 1 vs 2) would be nice in the cards! or maybe in a comic book, or novel or artbook of MTG.

*P.D: Another purpose is to give another tone or retouch (out of the ordinary, like Future Sight) to the cards! (an expansion for example)

Artwork 1... (The style that I propose!)... sorry but I don't know who is the artist

(snip awesome scene)

Artwork 2... (this is the MTG)

(snip Hellkite Overlord)

*Both are beautiful... but, Do you see the different between artwork 1 and 2?

The artwork 1, is deep and excellent background, the sea looks very real!!!, the sky is wow!

The artwork 2, is wonderful too, but... the different in style is huge!

That's my point... I hope that some artists the MTG, take in mind!

Sorry for my bad english...


Tiny fiddly details?  Gorgeous Backgrounds?  Let's take a look at Liliana of the Veil, by Steve Argyle.



Looks real good, doesn't it?  The design of the dress, all those chains, the ornamental trim of her dress and the detail in the background -- gorgeous!  But, here's the version (same image, same artist) that was used for the card:



Time to play spot the difference:
1) She no longer has the chain adornments off her necklace and belt she had in image one
2) The textures are a lot smoother (This is especially telling in her gloves, to a lesser extent on her boot.)
3) Her dress, gloves, boots, and garter have lost their gold adornments
4) The dress' style is even simplified: it still has the lace-up center, but the missing panels at her hips have been filled in.
5) The background is MASSIVLEY simpler.  No more hanging meathook chains, no more skulls of doom, no more firey sidesteps, just a somewhat blurry, purple-lit stairway

All of these changes boil down to one thing: The second image is simpler and cleaner.  This is done because (And Mr. Argyle recognized it): the details that are so good-looking in the first image on your monitor would probably look pretty bad when the image was compressed to a couple inches square and printed on cardstock.


Of all the (nonmagic) images posted here, the one of Korra is probably the closest to something that would work on a card -- in fact, it's a little reminiscent of Brave the Elements, and with the "Red tendril one direction, blue the other" would probably be well-fitted to a spell that converts or redirects.  The figure is there, but has a similar color scheme to the background, so in small size and at a distance you'd see "Swirly line of blue magic" and "Swirly line of red magic.  she COULD be a creature with some sort of spell-interaction ability, I'd wager.  (Of course, discounting the fact it's Korra)

"Enjoy your screams, Sarpadia - they will soon be muffled beneath snow and ice."
On Worldbuilding - On Crafting Aliens - Pillars of Art and Flavor - Simulationism, Narritivism, and Gamism - Shub-Niggurath in D&D
THE COALITION WAR GAME -Phyrexian Chief Praetor
Round 1: (4-1-2, 1 kill)
Round 2: (16-8-2, 4 kills)
Round 3: (18-9-2, 1 kill)
Round 4: (22-10-0, 2 kills)
Round 5: (56-16-3, 9 kills)
Round 6: (8-7-1)

Last Edited by Ralph on blank, 1920


Hi... well... obviously (artwork) are of different artists, I put it like examples...

The purpose is to know, if this "style"of artwork (look at the picture 1 vs 2) would be nice in the cards! or maybe in a comic book, or novel or artbook of MTG.

*P.D: Another purpose is to give another tone or retouch (out of the ordinary, like Future Sight) to the cards! (an expansion for example)

Artwork 1... (The style that I propose!)... sorry but I don't know who is the artist

(snip awesome scene)

Artwork 2... (this is the MTG)

(snip Hellkite Overlord)

*Both are beautiful... but, Do you see the different between artwork 1 and 2?

The artwork 1, is deep and excellent background, the sea looks very real!!!, the sky is wow!

The artwork 2, is wonderful too, but... the different in style is huge!

That's my point... I hope that some artists the MTG, take in mind!

Sorry for my bad english...


Tiny fiddly details?  Gorgeous Backgrounds?  Let's take a look at Liliana of the Veil, by Steve Argyle.



Looks real good, doesn't it?  The design of the dress, all those chains, the ornamental trim of her dress and the detail in the background -- gorgeous!  But, here's the version (same image, same artist) that was used for the card:



Time to play spot the difference:
1) She no longer has the chain adornments off her necklace and belt she had in image one
2) The textures are a lot smoother (This is especially telling in her gloves, to a lesser extent on her boot.)
3) Her dress, gloves, boots, and garter have lost their gold adornments
4) The dress' style is even simplified: it still has the lace-up center, but the missing panels at her hips have been filled in.
5) The background is MASSIVLEY simpler.  No more hanging meathook chains, no more skulls of doom, no more firey sidesteps, just a somewhat blurry, purple-lit stairway

All of these changes boil down to one thing: The second image is simpler and cleaner.  This is done because (And Mr. Argyle recognized it): the details that are so good-looking in the first image on your monitor would probably look pretty bad when the image was compressed to a couple inches square and printed on cardstock.


Of all the (nonmagic) images posted here, the one of Korra is probably the closest to something that would work on a card -- in fact, it's a little reminiscent of Brave the Elements, and with the "Red tendril one direction, blue the other" would probably be well-fitted to a spell that converts or redirects.  The figure is there, but has a similar color scheme to the background, so in small size and at a distance you'd see "Swirly line of blue magic" and "Swirly line of red magic.  she COULD be a creature with some sort of spell-interaction ability, I'd wager.  (Of course, discounting the fact it's Korra)



Thanks you so much for your answer... really is interesting about the pictures (about details)... and I had forgotten the beauty of Liliana Vess!!! Also is a excellent example Cool

And yes... She's Korra, I love the "style" of the image!

*Finally I understand how works the art in "MTG"

Here... Other image so interesting!



Or maybe... (design and art)

What do you think about these art?...

Siren song
Choose one: Target player cannot play spells this turn or the creatures control target player cannot attack this turn or counter spell target,

With invented abilities "Interlace" (cost: ), Play "two" choices and "Triangular" (cost: ), Play "three" choices... (nice abilities!)



I like the design (semi-transparent)!



Great picture!


Not bad!




Wait, that last art is Bounteous Kirin.

IMAGE(http://steamsignature.com/status/default/76561197995631463.png) No longer a commander as of 7/29/13.

The art for Lucera Ruv is something I recognize GM_Champion posting numerous times. He likes scantily clad ladies. She's actually pretty tame in comparison to some of his other cards.

139359831 wrote:
That is a lovely painting of Richard Garfield. It really brings out his feminine side.
Oh la la...

Look at the amazing picture!



Nice Warrior...

Sweet picture...


Amazing for a white/black deck...

 

After reading this poste I ended up having to create an account on here just to respond.

I don't wish to offend your taste in art but you have an unhealthy obsession with pictures of poorly dressed women painted either gratuitously or simply very poorly.  The styles you have shown here are examples of the very poorest level of digital art. There are a few where the technique is acceptible but the subejct matter is just in poor taste. Even the existing magic cards that you have selected demonstrate some of the worst examples that magic has to offer.

Take a look at the art but Svetlin Velinov or Peter Mohrbacher to see what magic is really about. It's not just tasteless images of sexy women designed to appeal to horny fan-boys.

Sorry for getting a bit irrate in my post, but the reason I love magic is for the high quality and integrity of its art. The art suggested here is such a down-grade on Magic's style that I felt the need to comment.
After reading this poste I ended up having to create an account on here just to respond.

I don't wish to offend your taste in art but you have an unhealthy obsession with pictures of poorly dressed women painted either gratuitously or simply very poorly.  The styles you have shown here are examples of the very poorest level of digital art. There are a few where the technique is acceptible but the subejct matter is just in poor taste. Even the existing magic cards that you have selected demonstrate some of the worst examples that magic has to offer.

Take a look at the art but Svetlin Velinov or Peter Mohrbacher to see what magic is really about. It's not just tasteless images of sexy women designed to appeal to horny fan-boys.

Sorry for getting a bit irrate in my post, but the reason I love magic is for the high quality and integrity of its art. The art suggested here is such a down-grade on Magic's style that I felt the need to comment.



Stick around, Pillock. I like the cut of your jib. 
Coming Soon to the Magic: Expanded Multiverse: FRAGMENTS: A Shards of Alara Anthology
(Click through to view the cover and announcement page)Want to get your work in the Expanded Multiverse? Come join the project! Oh, and check out my blog, Storming the Ivory Tower: making sense of academia, media, and culture twice weekly.