He's been doing some work for Goodman games recently so I know "he's back". He's been my favorite fantasy artist ever since the beginnings of D&D.
Please please please get him to do some new art for Dragon and Dungeon!
Can I get an "Amen"?
-Darren
I miss Erol Otus. He was the coolest ever. Sorry kids, but Wayne Reynolds just can't hold a candle to him.
I miss Erol Otus. He was the coolest ever. Sorry kids, but Wayne Reynolds just can't hold a candle to him.
No, I'm pretty sure he can. Otus' work is okay. I think most people like it just for the nostalgia value.
However, I now would like to see him do some far realm monsters to see how that would look...now that you mention it.
I miss Erol Otus. He was the coolest ever. Sorry kids, but Wayne Reynolds just can't hold a candle to him.
He and a number of other good artists could, and Erol would go up like kindling; in my opinion anyhow. Nostalgia I think is the main draw and while I like his work I would put folks like Parkinson, Diterlizzi, Elmore, Caldwell, Brom, and Reynolds ahead of him in my personal line up of artists heavily associated with the game (even ones who have to draw formless abberations). Art though is subjective, so to each his own, but there should be little doubt that third edition (like it or not) belongs to Wayne, just as Erol's art still owns the beginnings of D&D.
GGG
He and a number of other good artists could, and Erol would go up like kindling; in my opinion anyhow.
Otus' distinctive style often masks his technical expertise, I think. Let me look again; I misremember where, but I've seem some "realistic" (rather than cartoonish) stuff from him that is impressive.
Reynolds, in my opinion, would benefit greatly from taking anatomy lessons (people's heads and arms are not bigger than their legs, typically); physics (no one can wield a greatsword with a blade 27" wide, unless it's made of aluminum); and most of all, he desperately needs therapy to overcome his obsession with putting spikes on every conceivable piece of clothing, armor, weapon, or exposed hide.
I miss Erol Otus. He was the coolest ever. Sorry kids, but Wayne Reynolds just can't hold a candle to him.He and a number of other good artists could, and Erol would go up like kindling; in my opinion anyhow. Nostalgia I think is the main draw and while I like his work I would put folks like Parkinson, Diterlizzi, Elmore, Caldwell, Brom, and Reynolds ahead of him in my personal line up of artists heavily associated with the game (even ones who have to draw formless abberations). Art though is subjective, so to each his own, but there should be little doubt that third edition (like it or not) belongs to Wayne, just as Erol's art still owns the beginnings of D&D.
GGG
Folks, this isn't about competition. Art is not a competition. It is as GGG said, subjective. There's no "Otus totally PWNS Reynolds, DOODZ!". In my case it is not about nostalgia, it's about STYLE. Erol Otis art given his STYLE is what I want to see more of in Dragon/Dungeon.
Come on Paizo, give us some Erol Otus!
I couldn't agree more. While there are plenty of great new fantasy artists, let's give credit where credit is due. erol Otis rocks and i'd love to see more of his work. I would LOVE to see more Valerie Valusek work as well.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I love Erol Otus art! I have a huge color printout of his "Shadow Elf" picture from an old Dragon hanging on my wall, and the inclusion of Otis's sole Dragon cover ("The Artist's Own Creation") is one of my favorite things about the new "Art of Dragon" book that came out this month.
I have contacted Otus about working on a project for Paizo, though it probably won't be something in the magazines and at any rate things haven't moved past the discussion phase.
--Erik
Reynolds, in my opinion, would benefit greatly from taking anatomy lessons (people's heads and arms are not bigger than their legs, typically); physics (no one can wield a greatsword with a blade 27" wide, unless it's made of aluminum); and most of all, he desperately needs therapy to overcome his obsession with putting spikes on every conceivable piece of clothing, armor, weapon, or exposed hide.
Reynolds doesn't need to take anatomy lessons. What picture shows people with enormous heads or arms? As for the greatsword thing, it's cool, but you're probably right from a physics point-of view. Of course, this is D&D, where a fighter can have enough strength to damage iron with his bare fists.
And since when does he overuse spikes?
Reynolds doesn't need to take anatomy lessons. What picture shows people with enormous heads or arms? As for the greatsword thing, it's cool, but you're probably right from a physics point-of view. Of course, this is D&D, where a fighter can have enough strength to damage iron with his bare fists. And since when does he overuse spikes?
NOTE: The following items are examples by request; I don't stand on them, and don't intend them as "evidence" of anything except to indicate where I might have gotten my impressions. My previous post was overly strongly-worded (a failure common to New Yorkers), which I certainly regret. Having had more art lessons than I would have liked when I was younger, I merely noted the following:
An overlarge head and weapon spikes feature in his minotaur in "Weapons of Legacy" (also the source of the pic of Regdar with the 17,000-pound sword against the lizard man whose torso makes Mr. Universe look quite puny in comparison); the woman in the Valorous Three art for "Champions of Valor" appears to have a 6" diameter waist; there's also Dalthyria in the same book: still more spikes. The gauntlets of the blood lord for "Complete Divine" aren't his fault, but Tiamat in that book is positively festooned!
Anyway, I know the ridiculously large weapons, spikes, and wildly malproportioned torsos and waists (not, as I misspoke earlier, heads) are meant to be dramatic, in a Japanimation sort of way. A bit of restraint would be nice, but you can't win 'em all. But it wasn't my intention to start any sort of "flame war" here, and I'll even apologize if my previous remarks offended any fans (or even Mr. Reynolds himself, who is by the way quite talented in that cartoon-like style. MaxSlasher: I withdraw; the field is yours, sir.
It would be a good and filling meal if he did some art to go with that 3-adventure miniarc the werecabbages have in the chamber for a few months hence...
Indeed it would! Cabbages and Otus? A match made in gardening heaven! In reality, the art has probably already been ordered for those issues. :( Ah, well, under the fine art direction from Mr. Glenn (who's an artist as well, from what I understand), we will no doubt be thrilled and amazed with what is served to us in Dungeon. :)
MaxSlasher: I withdraw; the field is yours, sir.
Then let me end by saying that we agree that both of the artists we like have some strong points and some weak points, just as most artists do.
Didn't want to start a flamewar either. Just wanted to defend my favorite D&D artist. :)
I have contacted Otus about working on a project for Paizo, though it probably won't be something in the magazines and at any rate things haven't moved past the discussion phase.--Erik
You are a fantastic human being, Mr Mona.
I knew I couldn't be alone in my Erol Otus fanboyism. I look forward to something from him from Paizo! I hope it is for D&D.
-Darren
MaxSlasher: I withdraw; the field is yours, sir.Then let me end by saying that we agree that both of the artists we like have some strong points and some weak points, just as most artists do.
Didn't want to start a flamewar either. Just wanted to defend my favorite D&D artist. :)
I thought it was funny how a thread about a request for Erol Otus art drifted ( at least in part) into artist vs. artist. It ain't a competition, folks.
Reynolds doesn't need to take anatomy lessons. What picture shows people with enormous heads or arms? As for the greatsword thing, it's cool, but you're probably right from a physics point-of view. Of course, this is D&D, where a fighter can have enough strength to damage iron with his bare fists.
Reynolds did the cover for Dungeon 143, right? It's the female wizard w/ familiar? That's a GREAT looking cover. No complaints here!
I thought it was funny how a thread about a request for Erol Otus art drifted ( at least in part) into artist vs. artist. It ain't a competition, folks.MaxSlasher: I withdraw; the field is yours, sir.Then let me end by saying that we agree that both of the artists we like have some strong points and some weak points, just as most artists do.
Didn't want to start a flamewar either. Just wanted to defend my favorite D&D artist. :)
That is fantastic. We gamers here in RI have an Erol Otus fanclub devoted to everything Erol does...well not everything but man, we sure like his artwork! I think a lot of it is in fact nostalgic but he would do some great Far Realms or strange bubbling monster art for sure.
LONG LIVE EROL!!!
-Gigantor
I thought it was funny how a thread about a request for Erol Otus art drifted ( at least in part) into artist vs. artist. It ain't a competition, folks.MaxSlasher: I withdraw; the field is yours, sir.Then let me end by saying that we agree that both of the artists we like have some strong points and some weak points, just as most artists do.
Didn't want to start a flamewar either. Just wanted to defend my favorite D&D artist. :)
That is fantastic. We gamers here in RI have an Erol Otus fanclub devoted to everything Erol does...well not everything but man, we sure like his artwork! I think a lot of it is in fact nostalgic but he would do some great Far Realms or strange bubbling monster art for sure.
LONG LIVE EROL!!!
-Gigantor
I wonder if he does sketches/etc on commission. I love his Cthulhu Mythos work in 1st Ed Dieties and Demigods.
Amen. Absolutely my favorite D&D artist.
His gift is one of having a very specific style, marked by an simple emphasis on curving dimensions like the finest Italian parade armor. I could care less about realism for realism's sake. I have Chinese friends who could draw you the Santa Maria crashing into the moon and it would look like a photo (Man, now I want to see that drawn up... call it, "America at last!")... but realism and a good concept are not enough to leave a lasting impact. Otus tops my list because of the way his art compelled me. So long as art really speaks to me (I hear voices), it's doing what it's supposed to do.
I was young when first seeing it, sure, but I can't imagine how such a distinction would diminish or discredit my deep appreciation of it. I loved pasta as a kid too and a billion fiddy years later it still rocks my world.
Mr Mona I hope you are successful in getting Erol Otis to do some art for either Dungeon or dragon. My favorite pieces com from D1-2 and D3 as well as the old red basic D&D book.
Thanks a bunch!
I wonder if he does sketches/etc on commission. I love his Cthulhu Mythos work in 1st Ed Dieties and Demigods.
Is there anywhere that I can find this art? I've always wanted to see how the Cthulhu deities were rendered in the 1e D&DGs.
EDIT: Found the Cthulhu pics, and I must say: Otus has won my respect. I still like Wayne Reynolds better, but after seeing the way he drew Shub-Niggurath, I'm hooked.
EDIT: Found the Cthulhu pics, and I must say: Otus has won my respect. I still like Wayne Reynolds better, but after seeing the way he drew Shub-Niggurath, I'm hooked.
Just amazing stuff. Same book, look at the Melnibonean stuff. I wouldn't mind seeing his style applied to animation. Wouldn't that be a hoot?
Amen, I love the old school art. Erol Otis rocked.
Ha! I am vindicated!
EO's style = D&D nostalgia art
EO's style = D&D nostalgia art
Very provocative comment. Although I doubt you're aiming it at anyone in particular I do feel a bit of an uncalled for rebuke has been issued to fans of Otus.
I'm sure you didn't mean to bruise anyone, Pete... I just have to express my view here.
At the risk of sounding pretentious, your casual snipe dismisses my rather studied appreciation and particular taste in art and sums it up as nostalgia. I've been to every art museum and broom closet gallery in NYC and Paris, and though that doesn't really mean anything in the scheme of things it must at the very least ensure that I am clearly the expert of what a particular artist's rendered visions mean to me. I've devoted time to really thinking about art. A good deal of time.
Is staring at a Dali painting nostalgia? Sure, that's fine art, but should illustration somehow suffer an expiry date? Some of what I perceive to be the arrogant presumption of the anti-Otus crowd is sitting heavily in my stomach. To dislike something and say so is fine and dandy by me, alright? But to, in effect, sum up the motivation behind the fan's appreciation of the thing is, in my opinion, a bit insulting and short-sighted.
Art is subjective to the viewer. There is no right and wrong about it. It can be a very personal and important experience.
The Jade and Heathansson, as always, bring cogent, well-reasoned commentary to what otherwise devolves into emotionalism. Otus has technical mastery of technique far beyond his "usual" bubbly monsters we know and love. To fliply dismiss the tens of thousands of hours of lessons and practice he's clearly endured shows possibly a lack of study of the subject. If you don't personally like his stuff, that's a legitimate gripe. To dismiss his "throw-away" works as nostalgia is decidedly legit; I'll second you on that. But to dismiss everone who appreciates his better efforts, well, that's a bit silly.
And let me add that Wayne Reynolds is the bomb.
I couldn't argue one over the other any more than I could argue Van Gogh over Rembrandt. Even though...Rembrandt did work on commission alot,...and Van Gogh never made a dime except when his relatives bought a painting out of "pity"...
;)
I'm not entirely sure Rembrandt did much of his own art, but I really like most of the paintings that bear his name.
BTW, Van Gogh's only sale was called The Red Vineyard and I used to use it as metaphor for not having my best work seen.
I also love realism in fantasy art. What can I say? More fantasy art of all persuasions please.
To dismiss his "throw-away" works as nostalgia is decidedly legit; I'll second you on that.How? People like what they like. Yes, there's always a chance of likes being influenced by associated good experiences or youthful impressionability, but to presume that's the whole cause for everyone is... presumptuous. People in the literary and art worlds and commercial illustration don't think that way -- it's a phenomenon of the RPG culture.
Not the artist; not the body of his work; just a few "pot-boilers." Say you're a big Bach fan, and you love all his stuff -- but you haven't REALLY heard ALL his stuff, just the compositions that lasted until now. I'm sure Bach composed some horrid things when he was like 12 that display none of his real talents, and were merely "throw-away," or practice pieces. I have produced some art that I've kept for years, and some that I've destroyed because it was, well, not good. I was an artist before an RPGer; to assume that not all creations of one person can always be worthy of his or her signature is not an RPG culture phenomenon, it's just being realistic.
I have to chime in on this one -- I'd LOVE to see some new work from Erol Otus for Paizo. He is one of the founding fathers of the D&D look, and it would be a real achievement to get him to do some stuff for Paizo.
Some of my favorite artists:
Claude Monet
Edgar Degas
J. W. Waterhouse
Gustav Klimt
Erol Otus
Keith Parkinson
Clyde Caldwell
Larry Elmore
Wayne Reynolds
Luis Royo
Art is very subjective. You either like an artist's work or you don't.
No, I'm pretty sure he can. Otus' work is okay. I think most people like it just for the nostalgia value.
However, I now would like to see him do some far realm monsters to see how that would look...now that you mention it.
Nay my Good sir you are near sighted or under a confusion spell. Erol Otus work rises way above Reynolds work which I find to "POINTY".
Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth I need say no more!
|
No, I'm pretty sure he can. Otus' work is okay. I think most people like it just for the nostalgia value.
However, I now would like to see him do some far realm monsters to see how that would look...now that you mention it.
Nay my Good sir you are near sighted or under a confusion spell. Erol Otus work rises way above Reynolds work which I find to "POINTY".
Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth I need say no more!
I like Wayne Reynolds, but that's funny.
Fandom of Erol Otus goes waaaay beyond nostalgia. If that were true we'd be clamoring for all of the old artists. But in fact Erol Otus is the only one who I strongly remember. It's his unique and very cool STYLE that is the attraction, not the age of the work. His style _speaks_ to me, personally.
If one must submit opinion, I do prefer his art to RAW, who's appeal to me goes up and down; up with excellent stuff like his new ghoul pic, and down when he does more realistic-looking humanoid subjects (like anime-inspired female faces). RAW _speaks_ to some folks and not others. That's okay.
And back to reality: I mention neither artist in the same league as Van Gogh or any of the old masters.
|
I'm a biiiig Erol fan, too. His new stuff for Goodman has been really sweet! I love his look for the aboleth.
Ultimately I think a lot of us love him for his capacity to capture fragmentation of sanity. His renditions of the Cthulhu mythos critters long ago are only part of it. And his version of the gibbering mouther just plain equals the definition of the twisted little beastie.