Why Black and White?!

[igotsmeakabob!!]

Credit where credit's due: I saw these links initially on Warseer.

 

Anyway, there's a DeviantArt page from the artist who did some of our awesome new art (including those with our awesome Ultramine-esque alternate chapter badge).

This guy knows his way around color, and it's a bit depressing that we got black and white versions.

Ah well. Here are the full-color pics:

 

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/153...sticChicken.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2010/151...sticChicken.jpg

http://th09.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2010...sticChicken.jpg

http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/150...sticChicken.jpg

 

My *only* disappointment is that he did red eye lenses, not green.

[SamaNagol]

These look like they have been tinted afterwards, not coloured originally. They are all 2 tone of red and yellow

 

The flying Captain/SG is red and Tycho looks particularly red also. Would make up for the eyes being red too.

[Michaelus]

HOLY SMOKE OF THE HOLY EMPEROR!! I want that sword from the wing-flying-guy!!

 

NOW I know why you guys like Blood Angels. It is amazing. (but i still love my Wolves! No way changing THAT!)

 

Too bad he don't do Space Wolves.. Now I'm depressed too.. ;)

 

EDIT: Oh crap. Just saw that link. Pure Awesome. Should give this guy a credit!

[SnorriSnorrison]

1st picture: desktop background. That´s some nice stuff, especially in colour.

 

Snorri

[SamaNagol]

Just looked at the link properly, yeh whoever this person is just coloured someone else's artwork afterwards. They did not do the originals.

[igotsmeakabob!!]

He has some Wolf stuff too, Michaelus.

 

Missed an earlier one:

http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/142...sticChicken.jpg

[Terrahawk]

Whoa, awesome stuff!

 

Total nerdgasm!

[Morticon]

wow.

amazing, amazing, amazing stuff.

[Walter Payton]

He didn't paint it, just coloured it in.

 

The Ultramarines in the Breach of Corinth one is my new desktop.

[Spagunk]

So OT but I am seeing some sisters/Black Templar stuff on his site...were these in the 3rd ed dexes?

[DV8]

This post is my personal opinion as a professional artist. It is harsh, and it (to me) is the truth. I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.

 

I'll be honest, I don't understand what the "zee oh em gee" is all about. The guy has simply imported scanned artwork from the various books/codices, and has applied filter layers with some simple blending/color transitions on top. While in his favor he does acknowledge and attempts to credit the original artist, who he assumes to be Adrian Smith (I don't think so, since the originals were clearly digital and Adrian strikes me as more a traditional media kind of guy), this kind of work takes no more skill than being able to scan the original artwork themselves.

 

He doesn't have to worry about form, volume, shape, positioning/posing, or telling the story with the various elements. Stuff like anatomy, compositional balance, flow, lighting, detail, expression; all the hard work is done for him. If you really want to hand out kudos and congratulations for that artwork, give credit where credit is due, find out who the original artist is, and give the respect where it's deserved.

 

All I can really give this guy congrats for is the ability to play with color layers in Photoshop.

 

So 'grats.

 

 

DV8

[igotsmeakabob!!]

I think most people are all "zee oh em gee" because the result of that guy's work is some very nice looking stuff... I guess to those that don't know anything about art.

[Cpt. Salvatore]

The question might be stupid, but how the hell do I resize the pic to fit my screen?:evil: When i simply use it as a desktop,only a small part of it shows...Windows XP it is...

[igotsmeakabob!!]

I 'Centered' it, rather than tile. Try that. You don't get the whole thing but you get the best parts.

[Vash113]

Ok so they're not Picasso paintings... still not something I can do and the end result is... fantastic. The artwork looks way better and more vibrant with color than it did as black and white, seeing the difference is awesome and I now wish more of the Codex artwork was colored. I don't care how he did it or how difficult it was, it looks good.

[Pigeons]

yeah and really, a few of those pictures looked BETTER in black and white.

 

 

like the chosen pic from the 4th ed chaos codex, and the iconic picture of the black templar standing over two dead battle brothers

 

 

 

 

 

 

some of them are amazing though, gotta say.

[Telliphas]

Wow thanks for sharing that dude, love the 1st picture it really comes alive with the colour in it. Hell I love all of the artworks on display here, just had a look through the link you posted and me thinks there's a bunch of new desktops hiding there.

[noodlenerd]

holy fizl that is awesome. I loved those illustrations in the codex, thanks for the links!

[DV8]

Ok so they're not Picasso paintings... still not something I can do and the end result is... fantastic. The artwork looks way better and more vibrant with color than it did as black and white, seeing the difference is awesome and I now wish more of the Codex artwork was colored. I don't care how he did it or how difficult it was, it looks good.

 

Not trying to pick a fight here, but I think you're missing my point entirely Vash.

 

I don't like abstract/impressionist art (as a personal preference), but I can certainly respect the talent, creativity and imagination of the artists. I can respect the use and application of media and while I may not like the end result, I can appreciate the technical details and the work that went into it.

 

Picasso, as an impressionist painter, is most definitely not one of my favorites, but I absolutely respect him as an artist for the impact he had on the art field, and for the originality of his pieces. He at least put all the work into making his art a reality.

 

I do not contest that the "colorist" of these images certainly made some of the original images more vibrant with his color, but that doesn't change the fact that all he really did was add some color filter layers. And nevermind the fact that he couldn't even be bothered to properly credit the actual original artist bothers me. "Probably Adrian Smith" doesn't cut it, and is a professional discourtesy.

 

 

DV8

[igotsmeakabob!!]

I think putting color to these pictures was a fantastic thing to do, and I don't think this guy is doing it for anything but his own satisfaction. That he's sharing them with us is a bonus.

He makes it clear in every picture that he isn't the original artist, so he isn't taking credit for them. He might just not know who the artist is for a portion of them. I can't fault him for not wanting to spend hours searching for a name for each of them.

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

edit: Brother Tyler, sorry about the hot-links.

[mysteriousmaskedmystery]

the color version of the sanguinary priests should have been our codex cover.

[Isryion]

Ok so they're not Picasso paintings... still not something I can do and the end result is... fantastic. The artwork looks way better and more vibrant with color than it did as black and white, seeing the difference is awesome and I now wish more of the Codex artwork was colored. I don't care how he did it or how difficult it was, it looks good.

 

Not trying to pick a fight here, but I think you're missing my point entirely Vash.

 

I don't like abstract/impressionist art (as a personal preference), but I can certainly respect the talent, creativity and imagination of the artists. I can respect the use and application of media and while I may not like the end result, I can appreciate the technical details and the work that went into it.

 

Picasso, as an impressionist painter, is most definitely not one of my favorites, but I absolutely respect him as an artist for the impact he had on the art field, and for the originality of his pieces. He at least put all the work into making his art a reality.

 

I do not contest that the "colorist" of these images certainly made some of the original images more vibrant with his color, but that doesn't change the fact that all he really did was add some color filter layers. And nevermind the fact that he couldn't even be bothered to properly credit the actual original artist bothers me. "Probably Adrian Smith" doesn't cut it, and is a professional discourtesy.

 

 

DV8

 

The problem is you are critiquing the images (or the coloring of the images) using a standard it didn't in its creation and probably doesn't want to be measured against. Most of us think it looks really cool, and that's enough. Just because you or someone else could have done the same thing doesn't mean we have to stop enjoying it.

 

Also, Adrian Smith's name can be found on those images, ("A.Smith") . EDIT: I found it on all of the Blood Angel images, just after a minute or two of looking at them. Your assumption that he was "guessing" in his credit was just that, and your assumption that it was another artist are actually wrong (you supplied the "probably"-- the "colorist" had correctly credited them in the first place -- he wasn't guessing. You were;) )

 

Please remember, too, that you are playing a hobby wherein most of us (though perhaps not you) purchase premade models and then we apply paint. In essence, exactly what the "colorist" did. Sure we may convert or pose them, but likely not in a completely original manner.

[DV8]

The problem is you are critiquing the images (or the coloring of the images) using a standard it didn't in its creation and probably doesn't want to be measured against. Most of us think it looks really cool, and that's enough. Just because you or someone else could have done the same thing doesn't mean we have to stop enjoying it.

 

Whether the person who colored the images wants them to be measured to a particular standard or not is irrelevant, it doesn't change the way I feel about the pieces in question, nor the opinion(s) I have of them. Art is a field based on objective rules to evoke a subjective response. You can nerdgasm, drool, wow and in general go gaga over these pieces if you so wish. I for one will not.

 

And nobody is infringing or impeding on your right or your ability to enjoy the pieces. I merely stated my personal opinion. If you don't like it, ignore it or don't read it.

 

Also, Adrian Smith's name can be found on those images, ("A.Smith") and on the couple it isn't, I'd argue that it was GW who didn't properly credit him or make it clear that it was his work.

 

Perhaps. I've never known Games Workshop to be sloppy with crediting their artists, and I would imagine (for uniformity and ease) Adrian probably has a digital watermark of his signature he can apply to his work after they have given him the dimensions for a piece and he's cropped it, so if they're not signed by him, chances are they aren't by him. Stylistically the other person I could think of would be MG (did a lot of the Black Templar artwork, as well as concept art for the 4th ed Tyranid book), but I can't really be sure.

 

Please remember, too, that you are playing a hobby wherein most of us (though perhaps not you) purchase premade models and then we apply paint. In essence, exactly what the "colorist" did. Sure we may convert or pose them, but likely not in a completely original manner.

 

And how does that apply to the relevant situation at hand?

 

Yes, for this hobby we use predominantly stock models, where form and volume are as a whole shaped out for us. But the application of medium (in this instance anything from conversions to the paints we use), the establishing of tone, character and meaning (posing), the use of light and shadow, etc etc. to create a piece that is much more than bare grey plastic requires more artistic talent than your argument would suggest.

 

 

DV8

[Isryion]

The problem is you are critiquing the images (or the coloring of the images) using a standard it didn't in its creation and probably doesn't want to be measured against. Most of us think it looks really cool, and that's enough. Just because you or someone else could have done the same thing doesn't mean we have to stop enjoying it.

 

Whether the person who colored the images wants them to be measured to a particular standard or not is irrelevant, it doesn't change the way I feel about the pieces in question, nor the opinion(s) I have of them. Art is a field based on objective rules to evoke a subjective response. You can nerdgasm, drool, wow and in general go gaga over these pieces if you so wish. I for one will not.

 

And nobody is infringing or impeding on your right or your ability to enjoy the pieces. I merely stated my personal opinion. If you don't like it, ignore it or don't read it.

 

Also, Adrian Smith's name can be found on those images, ("A.Smith") and on the couple it isn't, I'd argue that it was GW who didn't properly credit him or make it clear that it was his work.

 

Perhaps. I've never known Games Workshop to be sloppy with crediting their artists, and I would imagine (for uniformity and ease) Adrian probably has a digital watermark of his signature he can apply to his work after they have given him the dimensions for a piece and he's cropped it, so if they're not signed by him, chances are they aren't by him. Stylistically the other person I could think of would be MG (did a lot of the Black Templar artwork, as well as concept art for the 4th ed Tyranid book), but I can't really be sure.

 

Please remember, too, that you are playing a hobby wherein most of us (though perhaps not you) purchase premade models and then we apply paint. In essence, exactly what the "colorist" did. Sure we may convert or pose them, but likely not in a completely original manner.

 

And how does that apply to the relevant situation at hand?

 

Yes, for this hobby we use predominantly stock models, where form and volume are as a whole shaped out for us. But the application of medium (in this instance anything from conversions to the paints we use), the establishing of tone, character and meaning (posing), the use of light and shadow, etc etc. to create a piece that is much more than bare grey plastic requires more artistic talent than your argument would suggest.

 

 

DV8

 

Not to nitpick, but your choice of words in the first paragraph is a bit of hyperbole (nerdgasm, drool, etc) and your use of those words and their connotation does in fact imply that you think less of the opinion of others who do enjoy the color. Some of us like how they look and appreciate that he went to the effort to do it and show it -- it's that simple.

 

As I re-edited in my original post, I took a couple extra minutes and his name is actually on all of the BA artwork. The colorist wasn't simply guessing as you implied. In fact, when you used the word "probably" I thought you were referring to how he credited them. In fact, he didn't.

 

I agree with your last statement, that there is little bit more of an element of art to the hobby than I implied, especially golden demon type pieces. But, I think it could be argued that there are also armies that look very good that are essentially paint by number (I'm thinking of someone like Jawaballs armies, who a lot of people consider an army that looks very good). Knowing the colors and mixes can produce similar results with enough effort, and while that may be more effort than what the colorist did, in terms of time, it's essentially a similar process. At least, to my mind, and I clearly wasn't an art major.

 

Finally, I understand your point about the fact that the original artwork should be recognized as impressive and that's really what makes them look so appealing in color. At least, I think that's what you're getting at.

[DV8]

Not to nitpick, but your choice of words in the first paragraph is a bit of hyperbole (nerdgasm, drool, etc) and your use of those words and their connotation does in fact imply that you think less of the opinion of others who do enjoy the color. Some of us like how they look and appreciate that he went to the effort to do it and show it -- it's that simple.

 

Read through the posts in this thread and you'll find that, while the words I use may be hyperbolic in nature, most of the reactions were already exhibited by many of the previous posts (and I meant it in no negative connotation). I certainly nerdgasm/drool over my inspirations (Joe Madimuera, for example, or Todd Mcfarlane, Hyung Tae Kim, etc.) and I would expect nothing less from anybody else in how they react to what they enjoy and appreciate.

 

As I re-edited in my original post, I took a couple extra minutes and his name is actually on all of the BA artwork. The colorist wasn't simply guessing as you implied. In fact, when you used the word "probably" I thought you were referring to how he credited them. In fact, he didn't.

 

Only for the pieces whom he knows are the artists. If you look through his gallery, a fair amount have "probably by Karl Kopinski, maybe by John Blanche, might be Adrian Smith", stuff to that extent, for whatever works he is unsure about or aren't obviously signed. At the very least if unsure, he could have at least sourced where he got the image from.

 

EDIT: I guessed nothing. I simply chose to look not only at the Blood Angels pieces in his gallery, but the other pieces as well. Read through his comments. A fair number of them he simply guesses at the original artist.

 

Original artist is Karl Kopinski I think

Original artist is probably Adrian Smith

Original artist may be Paul Dainton

Original artist may be Paul Dainton

Original artist is probably Paul Dainton

Original artist unknown

Original artist I think is John Blanche

 

Just to list a few (these were out of the first 17). While I acknowledge and accept that necessarily crediting the original artist may or may not be difficult depending on the style of publication, citing the source of the art regardless of whether the original artist is known or not is just good form. It's the same in writing; cite your references.

 

I agree with your last statement, that there is little bit more of an element of art to the hobby than I implied, especially golden demon type pieces. But, I think it could be argued that there are also armies that look very good that are essentially paint by number (I'm thinking of someone like Jawaballs armies, who a lot of people consider an army that looks very good). Knowing the colors and mixes can produce similar results with enough effort, and while that may be more effort than what the colorist did, in terms of time, it's essentially a similar process. At least, to my mind, and I clearly wasn't an art major.

 

They are both art forms. Even knowing how to use color is an art, but at the basic level the process of turning a black and white image into color isn't overly difficult. It's mostly technical process, and because the underlying artwork has all the "hard" stuff figured out, there isn't a whole lot to do.

 

Finally, I understand your point about the fact that the original artwork should be recognized as impressive and that's really what makes them look so appealing in color. At least, I think that's what you're getting at.

 

My only point was to simply state my opinion on the pieces. I gave credit to the original artist (be they Adrian Smith, Paul Dainton, John Blanche, or whoever) for the masterful pieces they wrought, and I applauded (granted somewhat facetiously) MajesticChicken (the "colorist") for his turning the pieces into color. Others simply chose to interpret my posts as attacking the colorist (of whom I simply saw the pieces as a simple step from original to color) or the reactions of other posters (of which I was dazzled and amazed that taking an original piece, and adding color to it, would have garnered such reaction...are not the original pieces worthy of that reaction already?), which had anybody bothered to read my initial post, would have immediately known I was simply expressing my personal opinion.

 

 

DV8