I want to draw a distinction between three different approaches to fantasy art: what I will refer to as "expressionism", "realism", and "hyper-realism". In reality, of course, everything is on a spectrum between those three points of the triangle, I know, but any taxonomy of anything will elide very fine differences and that's the nature of categorisation, so fuck you.
Let's begin with
expressionism. I use this term not like an art critic but like a lay person interested in art. Expressionism is an approach to art which does not attempt to reflect any sort of seen reality directly in the photorealistic sense, but to express mood and emotion visually. In the context of fantasy art, it means art which does not seek to produce an image which would persuade you it is really
real or could be a real thing in some fantasy world. Rather it means art which evokes the quality of a fantastical thing in pictoral form.
Hence, some examples:
 |
| "Crossing the Vimur River", by Hellanim (https://hellanim.deviantart.com/art/Crossing-the-Vimur-river-348494026) |
 |
| "The Old Saints, VIII" by Valin Mattheis (http://strange-gods.tumblr.com/) |
 |
| "The Ichthyosaur's Pool", an illo Matthew Adams did for Issue #1 of The Peridot |
Next comes
realism, or the attempt to create actual pictoral representations of fantastical things in such a way that you could imagine them appearing to the naked eye if you were to actually see them. ("Realism" is a slightly unsatisfactory label because, of course, we are not talking about "real" things; maybe a better term would be "Unnaturalism"?) It does not have to be photorealist; it may be impressionistic in its brush strokes.
Some examples:
 |
| "Lancelot", by John Howe |
 |
| "Scythe" by Jakub Rozalski (https://www.artstation.com/artwork/L3RPP) |
 |
| "The North Watch" by Keith Parkinson |
Finally, there is, I would suggest, a third category, which I refer to as "hyper-realism" (or, perhaps more appropriately for reasons alluded to above, "hyper-unrealism"). This is fantasy art which attempts to produce a version of a fantastical reality which is more vivid and exaggerated than the more prosaic "realism" of the second category, while being faithful enough to an imagined visual reality that it cannot be described as being "expressionistic" (unless by "expressionistic" you mean "evokes a sense of vividness and dynamism").
Some examples:
 |
| "Mirror Men's Judgement" by Rhineville |
 |
| You know where this comes from. |
 |
| And this. |
I have nothing against hyper-realist art particularly, but I would suggest that there is a preponderance of it in RPG products and this trend has become more pronounced over time rather than less so. I can think of two reasons for this: 1) RPG art is strongly influenced by comic and, nowadays, video game art; 2) RPGs are about action and imagination and hyper-realist art is the natural bi-product of the interaction between those two impulses.
Challenge me and prove me wrong, or agree with me and praise me and my taxonomy to the heavens.
I agree with your taxonomy, but if I were diagramming it I'd probably stick hyper-realism somewhere on the arbitrary line between expressionism and realism, rather than as the point of a triangle. Seems like it has more in common with the spirit of the former, too.
ReplyDeleteP.S. 'By-product', if you're the kind of person who likes their typing corrected.
Jesus. I'd had about 4 hours sleep that night so that is my excuse.
DeleteI think you may be overlooking the powerful influence that Games Workshop's Warhammer miniatures game, especially the look it adopted through the '90s, has had on computer-game, comic, and RPG art, and how that look was influenced by the realities of mass producing miniatures at that time.
ReplyDeleteWhich is not in any way to poke holes in your taxonomy, but rather to suggest that the current victor in that three-way struggle owes it dominance to forces far outside the usual realms of taste and philosophy.
DeleteOr does the influence not flow the other way round?
DeleteAs the creeper that girdles the tree trunk, the law runneth forward and back...
DeleteThat said, I think there's a pretty clear line from late-'80s/early-90's Warhammer to Diablo and Warcraft, to World of Warcraft, to the look of 4e D&D.
Also, the feedback from pen-and-paper to computer is disrupted by the limitations of computer graphics. Even when those limitations are not so strong (like the headshots of characters in the original Balder's Gate) the necessity of pointing out racial differences in a thumbnail-sized pic push towards your hyper-realism. When you take into account the massive popularity difference between computer and pen-and-paper, I think it's clear that those limitations are the dog, and what we get in our (more mainstream) pen-and-paper books is the tail.
In short, if the entire field of pen-and-paper RPGs went to realism, computer games could not follow. There is some bubbling expressionism in the field (I'd argue Banner Saga and Darkest Dungeons at the very least lean in that direction), but again, the limits of the tech and the necessity of instinctive interaction with the art limits how far computer games can go in that direction, too.
I largely agree with the taxonomy and agree hyper realism is far too dominant in rpg art. But the main reason I am posting is because I wanted to say how much I love that North Watch picture.
ReplyDeleteThere should also be more Russ Nicholson art in modern RPGs
DeleteThere should also be more Russ Nicholson art in modern RPGs
DeleteThere should also be more Russ Nicholson art in modern RPGs. Agreed.
DeleteI agree with the dichotomy, but oddly I'd disagree with your characterisation of most of your hyper-realist examples. The Paizo Elf pic looks basically Realist style to me, the Death Dealer pic is impressionist. Hyper-Realist art is ubiquitous in Science Fiction - eg Jim Burns, Fred Gambino just from my own bookshelf - but less dominant in the fantasy genre. Larry Elmore's art has hyper-realist tendency, whereas Clyde Caldwell's frequently soft-porn art looks more realist to me - those look like actual people, no matter how silly their outfits - while most fantasy artists are impressionists like Erol Otus, Jack Dee et al.
ReplyDelete"Impressionism" is a species of realism, really. The impressionists were creating a sort of subjective realism which looked like representations of what people actually see rather than neutral depictions of reality.
DeleteI see a different dynamic there, all the later examples you pick for the thing that interests you less are demonstrably emotional, they are dramatic in a way that would appeal strongly to someone who wants to project themselves. (Teenagers particularly)
ReplyDeleteThe pictures you choose as the two extremes, share a sense of reserve and considered place, they aren't quite introverted, but they give an impression of space and downplay the sense of events occurring within them. The perfect sort of thing for someone who respects reserve.
Also, no line of attention in your preferred images projects out of the frame, to where notional observers would be. Attention is directed into the frame, or there is stylistic flatness such that drawing lines of sight outwards seems implausible.
I think I alluded to a lot of that, but yes, definitely the different poles appeal to different people at different times in their lives. The reason I think hyper-realism is a distinct category is that it is attempting to produce a sense of drama - you might even call it melodrama, because it is very stagey at times (and I don't mean that pejoratively) - that goes beyond faithful depiction of a fantasy reality but clearly isn't symbolic of anything in the way expressionist art is.
Delete