YMTC 3 - art vote

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc (More info?)

hell-low!

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/ymtc31 - first voting
of the third ymtc is already on!
pretty please, let's vote for something that won't end up as a
creature... i considered pieces 4, 5, 7 & 8 and finally voted 8, as it
may well be white, red, black and blue... 4 is the best imo when it
comes to creativity, but has the flaw of being 99% red ;]

watman
--
Mateusz "Watman" Wata | http://poggadali.blox.pl
watman<at>interia.pl | watman<at>gmail.com
gg#:312709 | j-id:watman@jabber.cz | tlen-id: watman
High-quality booze is for pansies. I am TOUGH!

 

[Dave]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc (More info?)

"Mateusz "Watman" Wata" <watman@SPAMFIGHTERinteria.pl> wrote in message
news:ssd8nd93mw9f$.a9oykva6s600.dlg@40tude.net...
> hell-low!
>
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/ymtc31 - first voting
> of the third ymtc is already on!
> pretty please, let's vote for something that won't end up as a
> creature... i considered pieces 4, 5, 7 & 8 and finally voted 8, as it
> may well be white, red, black and blue... 4 is the best imo when it
> comes to creativity, but has the flaw of being 99% red ;]
>

I voted for #5 because I thought the art was the most professional
of the lot. It could also be more than a creature as well, so it
seems a plus.

- Dave
Magic: The Gathering card singles
http://www.destinationmtg.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc (More info?)

Gareth Pye wrote:

> yeah i went with 5 as well, it just looked so good, and didn't pidgeon
> hole us into anything.

5 was the only one I'd consider hanging a print of in my game room.
Made it a no brainer.
A few others suggested interesting effects, but yeah, this was
also likely the one with the broadest possibilities.
Any dissent?
Be interesting to see if the vote agrees with us...

 

[Dave]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc (More info?)

"Ophidian" <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote in message
news:HE7Kd.11213$rw.6916@fed1read04...
> Gareth Pye wrote:
>
>> yeah i went with 5 as well, it just looked so good, and didn't pidgeon
>> hole us into anything.
>
> 5 was the only one I'd consider hanging a print of in my game room.
> Made it a no brainer.
> A few others suggested interesting effects, but yeah, this was
> also likely the one with the broadest possibilities.
> Any dissent?
> Be interesting to see if the vote agrees with us...

Seems like on mtgsalvation.com there's a wide variety of opinions.
But I agree, the bulk of them really weren't that good, and either
Wizards is just trying to push the one art they want by putting
other lame ones in with it, or they got a ton of bad arts
submitted. To me #5 was the only choice. I've got a number of
Magic prints in my game room, and while I might not put #5 in
there, it's at least worthy of it while most of the others just
couldn't make the cut.

As an aside, how many people like the art on cards to be more
realistic, or more cartoonish? I really don't care for the
cartoonish art personally. For example, I'm not too big on
Ron Spencer's work, while Donato Giancola's stuff is generally my
favorite.

- Dave
Magic: The Gathering card singles
http://www.destinationmtg.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.misc (More info?)

"Dave" <im@not.telling> escribió en el mensaje
news:Moydnc4mEs6flmTcRVn-tg@giganews.com...
> "Ophidian" <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:HE7Kd.11213$rw.6916@fed1read04...
> > Gareth Pye wrote:
> >
> >> yeah i went with 5 as well, it just looked so good, and didn't pidgeon
> >> hole us into anything.
> >
> > 5 was the only one I'd consider hanging a print of in my game room.
> > Made it a no brainer.
> > A few others suggested interesting effects, but yeah, this was
> > also likely the one with the broadest possibilities.
> > Any dissent?
> > Be interesting to see if the vote agrees with us...
>
> Seems like on mtgsalvation.com there's a wide variety of opinions.
> But I agree, the bulk of them really weren't that good, and either
> Wizards is just trying to push the one art they want by putting
> other lame ones in with it, or they got a ton of bad arts
> submitted. To me #5 was the only choice. I've got a number of
> Magic prints in my game room, and while I might not put #5 in
> there, it's at least worthy of it while most of the others just
> couldn't make the cut.
>
> As an aside, how many people like the art on cards to be more
> realistic, or more cartoonish? I really don't care for the
> cartoonish art personally. For example, I'm not too big on
> Ron Spencer's work, while Donato Giancola's stuff is generally my
> favorite.

Sometimes it can be fun to see some cartoonish art. Did you see the goat on
Ishi-Ishi, Akki Crackshot (if that´s his name) ??

But mostly I like the more "serious" art, although sometimes it´s lost on
the small frame. Also, some artists skip some detail, while others make some
awesome art. I should start looking at their names more, to keep a favorite
list.

Someday I might want to start to collect prints too 🙂

------

Gustavo Fischer