I recommend you Dragon´s Crown

[Hammerskjold]

I look at that sorceress piece, and I say: What teenager drew that pile of trash!? Because, that is what it is. It's trash. It's junk. It's garbage. And I'm speaking from an artistic standpoint.

Shoju, since you have a background in graphics (so do I by the way, hello fellow brother of the arts). Ever seen\remember the early works of Pablo Picasso?



^
|
|

Pablo Picasso's earlier work. This guy can handle representational style, at a fairly young age if I remember my art history right.


Now here's one of his later pieces.



^
|
|

"Girls of Avignon". Same artist. Later period.


There's other examples of artists using\developing different styles. Sometimes it doesn't go from abstracted, to a representational 'realism' as the end goal. To me the path is not a pre-scribed road, where the end goal is a complete replication of our 3d reality in 2d space.

Picasso is a famous example of one, but he wasn't\isnt the only one. It still continues today.

As a viewer, I don't always want artists to be the human equivalent of a camera. I absolutely agree with you that it's very important for artists to study and understand the foundations.

However sometimes I don't want them to give me a trompe l'oeil, with the highest compliment being it looks so 'real', it looks just like a photograph.

Sometimes, I want artists to give me what no camera can. And that can only be done with bending, sometimes breaking certain rules, while keeping other rules intact.


Doing that isn't a 100% hard science, which is why it's art, and requires artists. Artists who understands the foundations so well, they know when and where to break certain rules to get a desired effect, such as caricature or pantomime.

And since this is an art form, I understand there are no guarantees of successful communication, and there is always the subjective element of personal taste etc.

I mean I like Tex Avery cartoons. But there is no real life, 3d wolf that can do wolf whistles while wearing a tuxedo or drive a car, do cartoony wild takes that stretches or even breaks cartoon anatomy.

And that's fine with me. Since I don't want a perfectly rotoscoped, perfectly motion captured, I can't tell if it's a real wolf footage or animation, when I'm watching a Tex Avery 'Red Hot Riding Hood'.

I want to see Tex Avery's imaginative, caricatured ideas and animation and artwork. Not a frame by frame recreation of National Geographic: Wolves of Alaska.

Myself, I usually put aside my requirement for our 3d world logic and rules, when I enter Tex Avery's (or many others, including DCrown) 2d world.