So here’s a topic I don’t recall seeing in all my many days clogging up various Forums with my inane babbling. And it’s nice and straight forward, as per the thread title.
What I want to see is the artwork that got you completely sold on 40K. Or indeed even a specific army.
Here’s mine, from when it was a White Dwarf cover (think I’ve got both that WD and the Compendium. Defo got the Compendium.
First, that’s Tycho before he was Tycho. I think. I know Tycho was first named in a Battle Report, and got his in-background scarred visage when a Weirdboy blasted him with Waaaaaagh! energy/
Second? Just. Look. At. It. Now, I’m no student of art, so I won’t waffle about composition in that way. But this art tells you so much about 40K. The vibrant colours of the Blood Angels. The darker tones of the Genestealers. And still the stark darkness of space and the architecture.
The massed yet disciplined ranks of Marines, Bolters blazing. Terminators looking hench. I swear Terminators have never looked this good.
The banners. The heraldry. The odd alien goop in places. Casualties on both sides.
It’s just.......
Needless to say it’s stuck with me, and I absolutely love it. A cracking, beautifully painted, evocative piece. If I could get it on a print, I would, regardless of cost.
I don't have a image of it, but what sold me on 40k was a picture of a Baneblade in side profile in the 5e Rulebook. My friend brought it into middle school when he got it, and we spent lunch break going through it.
I saw it and was like "Katherine wants!" [Actually what I said was "That looks like a big Panzer IV." followed by "How much does it cost?" and then "Oh."]
Nowadays, I don't actually have a Baneblade [yet], but I do have a Shadowsword, because "big Stug III" is awesome as well.
Fun fact: I already played Fantasy and I had (don't know why honestly) the second edition (? I think ?) with Blanche illustration that I loved, especially for the Imperium vision.
But the single set was the BT one. And funnily I never collected them... Take my time, read a Capitolum Adprobavit (don't know the name in English, the fluff publication with a handful of chapters detailed) and was sold on the DA (so, still Black, still Robes, still Knight)
Most of the artowk by John Blanche, but in particular his Adepta Sororita image.
The glossy black armour against the ruddy oranges of the backgrounds. How the bright, yellow hazards and the glowing white hair seem to pop out amongst all the murky browns. And the whole thing sells that comically, over-the-top aesthetic of warhammer 40k.
Plus, I'm a sucker for woman wearing fire spitting heels.
I think my first exposure to 40k in any form was the Space Crusade box cover.
I didn't think anything of it after I got it until I walked passed the hobby shop down the road and saw things very similar to it in the store. I picked up my first white dwarf (182) partly because of the amazing cover.
I was hooked at space crusade, but not necessarily due to it being 40k.
What absolutely cemented it was the art in the 2nd ed rulebooks. John Blanche has always been the soul of 40k, an artist that puts emotion into his art. While the other illustrators at GW are fantastic, I've always found JB's work to have an atmosphere nothing else can really match.
That sold me! Titan Legions boxed set, its a walking castle with insanely big guns! There are troops running down the toes of its feet; vast rockets; huge machines. That the core game on the back also generally showed titans, knights and tanks was a big sell for me.
And that was it, that was my gateway into Warhammer, into miniature wargames; into all this madness for years and years to come.
Since then I think painted models have sold me on more models than anything, but art is certainly always there too, just nothing stands out in my mind as being that influencing all on its own than that Titan Legions box art.
Other art that has inspired me to collect armies
Spoiler:
WHY can't we get updated Eldar that look that good why!!
Other art that inspires me every time I see it but has yet to fully sink its claws in.
I never saw that Blanche SoB piece when I first got into the hobby, but now I have the 900x600mm print up on my wall. It's a gorgeous piece.
Anyways, it was probably the cover of the 3rd Ed Tyranid codex that got me invested (yeah I know this is the 3.5 reprint/update):
...Shortly followed by Gitdakka's submission of the Black Templars from the 3rd Ed rulebook. I didn't even like Marines and still thought that was an awesome piece.
Never liked that editions change to how Tyranids looked for the big bugs; but the art I love. Honestly tyranids have had pretty darn good art on their codex every edition from 3rd onward
Mad Doc - simply spreading the artistic inspiration and draining wallets of course
Mr Nobody wrote: Most of the artowk by John Blanche, but in particular his Adepta Sororita image.
The glossy black armour against the ruddy oranges of the backgrounds. How the bright, yellow hazards and the glowing white hair seem to pop out amongst all the murky browns. And the whole thing sells that comically, over-the-top aesthetic of warhammer 40k.
Plus, I'm a sucker for woman wearing fire spitting heels.
Interesting.
That's one of my less liked SoB images. The heels and the hair, among other things, are specific things I don't like about it. Her pose looks like a pinup model, and all the spikes make her look more like a weird sexy art piece than somebody at war.
I'm not actually a fan of old 40k artwork though. It's colorful, weirdly proportioned, and has lots of random "weird" stuff. I actually largely prefer the "more realistic" looking modern art, and most of all the photo-edit art of models in dioramas you find in the IA books and on old model box covers that look really grimy and gritty and well, "grim and dark where there is only war".
The MkIIIc Immolator box art is one of my more favorite ones, because it shows that at least at one time, someone in GW knew how a flamethrower worked better than the Dawn of War people.
Other art that grabbed me as a squeaky little yoof? Comes from 2nd Ed Epic Space Marine, the first proper GW game I got to grips with.
Here’s a selection, because frankly it’s all brilliant. Yes I’ve a heavy nostalgia bias but.....look at it. With your eyes. Because your elbows are poor sensory organs.
My older brother was doing oil painting lessons in his teens. My mum often picked up interesting artbooks for him. One day, she ran into Adrian Smith's artbook at one of those big bookstore chains that is long out of business. She didn't didn't know what warhammer was, but she knew we liked Magic the Gathering, and that this was similar, and the exact thing teenage boys are into.
I came to 40k through the minis - both seen on the tables in the local store & in pics in WD etc - far more so than the art.
If I had to point to art? Then a piece that always comes to mind when I think "40K" is a RT era B&W piece of an eldar farseer in his baroque bug-eyed gasmask like helmet just in front of a veiwport(?). Of course I can't actually find the image....
It wasn't a picture but the game Dawn of War 2 (video games are art many would argue). While the game itself was fun, it's the Orks that really sold me on the setting. Relic really had a way with their portrayal of Orks and imo capture the feel of the Orks better than most other media. They balanced the comical tone of the Orks with the in-universe seriousness that the Orks deserve as a legitimate threat. One of the best examples of the silliness of Ork logic while still being fitting to the setting.
That said whole the Orks can be silly from our perspective, they are also brutal and deadly on the battlefield which for me DoW's Nob squad really hammered home (pun intended). They are a figurative dump trukk without brakes smashing their way through the enemy and the voice work is fantastic at conveying a hulking brute who's meaner, greener, and far deadlier than your average Ork. Being able to control a unit of Nobz that can smash so many things into paste was a real joy to play.
Anyways the game is what got me into liking 40k and set the stage to trade in a load of MtG cards to jump on board to the WAAAGH!
It's a piece that came several years after I first started painting 40K stuff (I started with the Tyranid Attack boardgame in 2nd edition), buit it's one that I have always thought was awesome. Although I could also link to basically everything in the original Necromunda rule- and source-books.
Hellebore wrote: I didn't think anything of it after I got it until I walked passed the hobby shop down the road and saw things very similar to it in the store. I picked up my first white dwarf (182) partly because of the amazing cover.
Hellebore wrote: I didn't think anything of it after I got it until I walked passed the hobby shop down the road and saw things very similar to it in the store. I picked up my first white dwarf (182) partly because of the amazing cover.
Isn't that a Mark Gibbons piece?
Yup, probably still my favourite GW illustrator to this day, especially when he was illustrating from a jes goodwin design sketch, which is why all his 2nd ed eldar stuff looks so phenomenal.
In my mind, John Blanche is the soul and atmosphere of 40k and an 'artist' in that sense of the work.
Mark Gibbons was their best illustrator, which is not to denigrate illustration vs 'art' (in the sense that I am using it) but to say that Blanche's work functions differently to the other artists that worked on 40k.
Irkjoe wrote: The blanche templars on the 3rd edition rulebook left a lasting impression.
This thread will be a good reminder just how bad the current art is.
Really? Its reminding me how terrible nostalgia goggles are. Some of these pieces are legitimately awful- composition, color choices, proportions...
---
That said, my big draw is some of the Chaos art from Realm of Chaos Slaves to Darkness, while there are some clear misses in the book, a lot of it was great. Particularly the Ian Miller chapter pieces- they're legitimately weird and otherworldly.
One of the great things about the book is they gave all the artists little icons on the title page, and snuck them onto each piece so you could find out who did them.
I just wish I could unlink the book from Genesis' Invisible Touch album. I picked up both on the same trip to London, and listened to it over and over again as I read it. Though admittedly 'Domino' fits the book really well, with its talk about seeing terrible things, crazy voices, and a beautiful river of blood.
Waaargh the orks was even more uneven for art, but there are some classic ork illustrations (and stories) in there.
Irkjoe wrote: The blanche templars on the 3rd edition rulebook left a lasting impression.
This thread will be a good reminder just how bad the current art is.
Really? Its reminding me how terrible nostalgia goggles are. Some of these pieces are legitimately awful- composition, color choices, proportions...
I struggle to convey it with words, there's something about how the old art was actually drawn/painted that isn't achieved by digital art. Some of it has a graininess that is completely lost in the new stuff. The old stuff was more stylized as well.
Irkjoe wrote: The blanche templars on the 3rd edition rulebook left a lasting impression.
This thread will be a good reminder just how bad the current art is.
Really? Its reminding me how terrible nostalgia goggles are. Some of these pieces are legitimately awful- composition, color choices, proportions...
I struggle to convey it with words, there's something about how the old art was actually drawn/painted that isn't achieved by digital art. Some of it has a graininess that is completely lost in the new stuff. The old stuff was more stylized as well.
It's that stylized way about it that I'm not a fan of. The new art looks more "realistic" and warlike, and also just doesn't look silly with that sort of hot-for-leather heavy-metal-rocker-from-the-dead look that a lot of older art seems to have, which really doesn't look like it's depicting military forces or operations much at all.
For me, it wasn't the artwork, it was the minis (and the game) themselves. A lot of the artwork was actually off-putting.
That's not to say there isn't 40K art that I like, it just wasn't what "sold me" on 40K.
Out of 40K though, I think some of my favorite is the Imperial Fist artwork for the original Rogue Trader cover (and to a lesser degree, the remake with primaris), and the original Eldar codex.
My all-time favorite has always been the Emperor vs. Horus.
About Blanche (and other old artwork) I think you're missing the point. They're not "good" in terms of realism or composition or whatev. They are good because they really convey the idea that the setting is both historical and futuristic.
They reminded me of the Ortodox iconography, or of medieval miniature. Do you think they draw like they did because they were not good enough?
Illustrations covers a lot of meaning, and make a lot of sense that in the future the exact representation of reality is not the main goal.
So, those were this borderline in-setting out-setting idea going on with illustration.
Compare it to the current publicity poster we have...
About Blanche (and other old artwork) I think you're missing the point. They're not "good" in terms of realism or composition or whatev. They are good because they really convey the idea that the setting is both historical and futuristic.
They reminded me of the Ortodox iconography, or of medieval miniature. Do you think they draw like they did because they were not good enough?
Illustrations covers a lot of meaning, and make a lot of sense that in the future the exact representation of reality is not the main goal.
So, those were this borderline in-setting out-setting idea going on with illustration.
Compare it to the current publicity poster we have...
But they don't seem historical, futuristic, or evocative of the idea of the darkest possible future of man where we live under a fascist theocracy in perpetual war against everything. Just kind of weird and very 80's with big hair, high heels & leather, disco colors on armor and a dose of just weird random body-horror stuff.
Like compare
Spoiler:
to
Spoiler:
The cover of the 2003 witch hunters codex is in my opinion a lot better than the cover of the 1997 one. It conveys a lot more grim darkness where there is a facsist theocracy. The 1997 one has a sexed-up lady in leather with heels. big hair, and a gun. The 2003 one is a man being summarily executed by being burned alive as a group of Sisters and an Inquisitor walk forward stoically with an angel and dark church in the background. It has the least sexy depiction of a repentia ever [and what I wished the new models were instead of a skintight short-shorts catsuit with chains and spikes like a BDSM festival] still providing some kind of body horror weirdness, though it is appropriate because that's actually a unit we have [though the weird robo-tentacle people with misshapen skulls and hunchbacks and rags are far less appropriate in the IG codex, for example]
The current Sisters codex cover is somewhere it between. It's better than the 1997 one, without a doubt, since it's still a lady standing there but she at least looks churchy instead of goth-sexy and has like storm clouds gathering and a halo and a procession, though it's not as good as the 2003 one which feels fantastically totalitarian and grim-dark.
Not to say that the 1997 is of low technical quality. It's of very high technical quality. It's just an aesthetic choice that I don't feel is particularly evocative of the grim darkness of the far future where there is only war, fascist oppression and brutal suppression of independence and will, and a theocracy to guide the masses to their deaths for the gain of distant oligarchs.
Both are good, but the Blanchian style is crazier, which I prefer. It's a better style for letting you know that your imagination can run wild with the setting. It says "F*** it, man. Go ape s***" with your ideas!" It frees up the creative liscense. Two thumbs up.
Because as I've said before, blanche produces art which is as much about what it evokes and makes you feel as it is about drawing a picture.
The other artists at GW generally produce illustrations which are very literal and less evocative. They can be cool and brutal and accurate but they lack that art quality.
I would like photo realistic images even less than the illustrations. The texture of art.media is a unique feature of it and a photo is just a photo no matter how clever it was produced.
I seem to be a fair bit younger than the average person on this thread (I'm currently a college student, or "university" for those over in Europe), but I still remember a couple of pieces of art that made me want to join the hobby back in middle school. Specifically, I saw the cover art for the 7th edition Tyranids codex in about 2014 or 2015, and I absolutely fell in love with both the setting and the army. I've always been a fan of the spiky, angled art style on this piece, and I remember it being one of the first times I saw a monster in fantasy art which looked genuinely intimidating. It helped that I think I saw this during a (the last?) big Tyranid release, as the GW store I was in was absolutely plastered with Hive Crones and Exocrines.
I remember the Orks codex from around this time also having amazing cover art.
The moment I played the Dawn of War tutorial and, zooming in, saw a Space Marine skewer an Ork and then having to use his boot to take the combat knife out. THAT moment sold 40k to me.
There is a picture of an ultramarine of crimsion fist land raider, that looks like a tank attack durning the battle of Somme. First art for w40k I ever saw, and I liked it very much.
Technically it would be DoW, but I remember seeing Dainton's work when walking by the store and when hanging out with a friend. Daemonhunters ended up being my first army.
Oh buddy. I dont know where to start. Theres just so many. Some that stand out though is the one with Tyranids and Daemons fighting. We all know that one, with the Bloodthirster choking a carnifex with its whip.
And this old Wulfen one. https://images.app.goo.gl/M6pajCdVyNStDtz27 This one is so crazy because as a kid I didnt know who the Wulfen were and it confused then feth outta me. I thought it was chaos marines killing Chaos guard but those evil looking werewolves are actually the "good guys". Its so damn 40k!
Ah yes. That picture. Sadly the only thing it evokes for me is a bit of spite about 'this is why Dark Angels are green now, so GW could shoe-horn in yet another close combat marine chapter?'
I loved the old black and white drawings, there was so much detail and they were a bit wonky which added to the dystopian effect. It’s still how I think of the 40K universes.
Most of the late Rogue Trader era and 2nd edition artwork published in White Dwarf got me into the game, and White Dwarf was really my only insight into the hobby at the time, no interwebz back then! Yes I've been in it for that long...
Some of my favourites from around that time or 2nd edition era, that people haven't already posted, are below.
Dark Angels Interrogator Chaplain by Mark Gibbons
Space Hulk Deathwing and Genestealer box cover artwork
Box art for Space Hulk the video game (1993)
Cover of White Dwarf 155, actually taken from the Vehicle Manual cover.
And the original Emperor vs Horus and Mike McVey's diorama based on it -
There was also a black and white piece of artwork depicting a few Imperial Guardsmen, Catachan Jungle Fighters iirc, and you'd swear that one of them was a spitting image of Arnold Schwarzenegger, but I can't find it at this time. Strangely it's not in the 2nd edition IG codex.
It was never just about the art for me. It was the stories that went along with them. This art/fluff bit here though is what took ownership of my soul for some reason as a kid. So much other good art posted on this thread.
No doubt that the rogue trader cover was what first drew me in,. Collected a lot of bits and pieces, mostly space elf raiders as they were then.
Then I saw the aspect warriors concept art by jes Goodwin and the rest was history!
https://images.app.goo.gl/6e5qwhjT1u86SQ8i9
A lot of the initial stuff that drew me in has already been posted (especially Space Crusade and 2nd ed box art, the former was my entry way into GW) but dotted throughout the source books were little vignettes of the 40K universe that were so evocative that my mind couldn't help but build them into whole stories.
Way back in the day (after my middle school art teacher showed me his Space Marine army) when I was first getting interested in 40k, I looked at all the codices to see which ones looked the coolest. Right away, I was captivated by the art on the 4th edition T'au codex. While I may not be working on a T'au army, it's still one of my favorite pieces of artwork.
Spoiler for size, it's a big 'un.
About Blanche (and other old artwork) I think you're missing the point. They're not "good" in terms of realism or composition or whatev. They are good because they really convey the idea that the setting is both historical and futuristic.
They reminded me of the Ortodox iconography, or of medieval miniature. Do you think they draw like they did because they were not good enough?
Illustrations covers a lot of meaning, and make a lot of sense that in the future the exact representation of reality is not the main goal.
So, those were this borderline in-setting out-setting idea going on with illustration.
Compare it to the current publicity poster we have...
But they don't seem historical, futuristic, or evocative of the idea of the darkest possible future of man where we live under a fascist theocracy in perpetual war against everything. Just kind of weird and very 80's with big hair, high heels & leather, disco colors on armor and a dose of just weird random body-horror stuff.
Like compare
Spoiler:
to
Spoiler:
It's just an aesthetic choice that I don't feel is particularly evocative of the grim darkness of the far future where there is only war, fascist oppression and brutal suppression of independence and will, and a theocracy to guide the masses to their deaths for the gain of distant oligarchs.
John Blanche's style was the guiding hand for all of the tighter, more realistic, more "technically accurate" illustrations that would come afterward. There was a very good reason why HE was the guy in charge of directing the art department and why HE was the one responsible for building and managing the team of illustrators that have brought us all of this incredible artwork over the years. It's because his work is essentially a concentrated dose of pure expression. His work arrives at the tradeoff between traditional, technical "accuracy" and visual expressiveness, and it chooses expressiveness, every, single, time.
In some ways you can think of John's work vs his team's work like the difference between the late 19th century realist painters and avant-garde painters of the 20th century. By the end of the 19th century, realism as a painting style was already extremely well understood and well documented. You had virtuosos like Bougereau and John Singer Sargent running around demonstrating complete mastery of the technique, mastery of perspective, of value control, of composition, of the rendering of light and shadow. Realism was a "solved problem" at that point. As far as expressive possibility there wasn't much left you could do with it. We had already mastered the ability to render exactly what our eyes can see, onto a canvas. That's why the avant-garde stuff afterwards was such a big deal. It started to explore methods of expression that were not bound by traditional thinking, by hundreds of years of classical painting techniques and venerable institutions. The 20th century painters basically thought to themselves, "Is painting a photorealistic, technically-accurate rendering of "fire" the best way to express "fire"? Is it the most powerful way of expressing "fire"? Or are there other ways of expressing that same idea using paint on canvas? Ways that are more evocative or more emotionally engaging? Can we express other ideas that are not merely visual, but instead social, cultural, intellectual, or psychological?"
John Blanche's work essentially pursues this same line of thought. Expression is the name of the game, not just literal representation. Once you understand this it becomes obvious that there is no other artist at GW that does what John does. Where the works of Bonner, Dainton, Smith, and Kopinski were the flesh and bones of warhammer, John's work was the soul. It was the DNA that would decide how everything else was shaped around it.
About Blanche (and other old artwork) I think you're missing the point. They're not "good" in terms of realism or composition or whatev. They are good because they really convey the idea that the setting is both historical and futuristic.
They reminded me of the Ortodox iconography, or of medieval miniature. Do you think they draw like they did because they were not good enough?
Illustrations covers a lot of meaning, and make a lot of sense that in the future the exact representation of reality is not the main goal.
So, those were this borderline in-setting out-setting idea going on with illustration.
Compare it to the current publicity poster we have...
But they don't seem historical, futuristic, or evocative of the idea of the darkest possible future of man where we live under a fascist theocracy in perpetual war against everything. Just kind of weird and very 80's with big hair, high heels & leather, disco colors on armor and a dose of just weird random body-horror stuff.
Like compare
Spoiler:
to
Spoiler:
It's just an aesthetic choice that I don't feel is particularly evocative of the grim darkness of the far future where there is only war, fascist oppression and brutal suppression of independence and will, and a theocracy to guide the masses to their deaths for the gain of distant oligarchs.
John Blanche's style was the guiding hand for all of the tighter, more realistic, more "technically accurate" illustrations that would come afterward. There was a very good reason why HE was the guy in charge of directing the art department and why HE was the one responsible for building and managing the team of illustrators that have brought us all of this incredible artwork over the years. It's because his work is essentially a concentrated dose of pure expression. His work arrives at the tradeoff between traditional, technical "accuracy" and visual expressiveness, and it chooses expressiveness, every, single, time.
In some ways you can think of John's work vs his team's work like the difference between the late 19th century realist painters and avant-garde painters of the 20th century. By the end of the 19th century, realism as a painting style was already extremely well understood and well documented. You had virtuosos like Bougereau and John Singer Sargent running around demonstrating complete mastery of the technique, mastery of perspective, of value control, of composition, of the rendering of light and shadow. Realism was a "solved problem" at that point. As far as expressive possibility there wasn't much left you could do with it. We had already mastered the ability to render exactly what our eyes can see, onto a canvas. That's why the avant-garde stuff afterwards was such a big deal. It started to explore methods of expression that were not bound by traditional thinking, by hundreds of years of classical painting techniques and venerable institutions. The 20th century painters basically thought to themselves, "Is painting a photorealistic, technically-accurate rendering of "fire" the best way to express "fire"? Is it the most powerful way of expressing "fire"? Or are there other ways of expressing that same idea using paint on canvas? Ways that are more evocative or more emotionally engaging? Can we express other ideas that are not merely visual, but instead social, cultural, intellectual, or psychological?"
John Blanche's work essentially pursues this same line of thought. Expression is the name of the game, not just literal representation. Once you understand this it becomes obvious that there is no other artist at GW that does what John does. Where the works of Bonner, Dainton, Smith, and Kopinski were the flesh and bones of warhammer, John's work was the soul. It was the DNA that would decide how everything else was shaped around it.
Thanks Artific3r, you've explained what I've always thought of JB's work in relation to 40k, although I've only ever been able to express it as 'art' vs 'illustration'. His stuff is pure evocation and when I was younger I didn't like it as much (it seemed weird) and preferred Mark Gibbons' work.
But when I think of what 40k 'is' or how it 'feels' I am always drawn to JB's work, as it expresses the universe so well.
The first time I saw the original Rogue Trader cover art, I was hooked.
The over the top violence, anarchy and grim hopeless determination of that Crimson fist last stand was, and still is Iconic. To me that one image encapsulates and encompasses everything about 40k.
I don't think there is a better piece of art for the whole series. That cover IS 40k, it's never been bettered even by Blanche.
Karol wrote: There is a picture of an ultramarine of crimsion fist land raider, that looks like a tank attack durning the battle of Somme. First art for w40k I ever saw, and I liked it very much.
This one?
It's a direct homage to the art of the Airfix Mk1 tank box.
As for the art that go me into this, it was several. I remember being in the local toy shop and there being copies of Dark Millennium and various boxes for Space Marine the below one particularly sticks out in my mind:
I had no idea what was going on, but it was in my subconscious for several years. I didn't get into 40k until a few years later via playing a prepainted game by Bluebird toys called Havok, the art of that which also had a dim 40k vibe to it. It wasn't truly until a friend lent me the various 2nd ed books that I was truly hooked with much of the artwork already shown ITT. The one that always stuck out for me in those books being the art of Karazantor the Vile and the accompanying text.
Show the “2000AD didn’t influence 40K” brigade this Judge Mortis fan art.
Only the ignorant can't see 200ADs influence.... I mean, what do they THINK the Adeptus Arbites were inspired by? Hive cities? The Necromunda gangs? SM bikes? Nice hefty eagle sculpts on shoulder pads?
The painting earlier in the thread of the Crimson Fist circled up started me in the hobby. Then the second edition Ork codex sealed the deal. Today's art just doesn't compare.
Hellebore wrote: I think my first exposure to 40k in any form was the Space Crusade box cover.
I didn't think anything of it after I got it until I walked passed the hobby shop down the road and saw things very similar to it in the store. I picked up my first white dwarf (182) partly because of the amazing cover.
I was hooked at space crusade, but not necessarily due to it being 40k.
What absolutely cemented it was the art in the 2nd ed rulebooks. John Blanche has always been the soul of 40k, an artist that puts emotion into his art. While the other illustrators at GW are fantastic, I've always found JB's work to have an atmosphere nothing else can really match.
As someone who started with the release of Rogue Trader, for me it was the old black & white artwork that grabbed me and it's still something that gives the feels when I see it now, in a way which the modern colour art doesn't quite capture.
I can never find a picture of it...
The image that made me say "yes, I shall partake in this warhammer thing" was the first Chaos codex of 3rd edition.
Specifically, the small image of the Obliterator next to their unit entry.
That furious looking Iron Warrior with a vindicator cannon sticking out of his chest captured my imagination like no other picture in all the 2nd ed books.
I love the diorama style that Forgeworld often used in their Imperial Armour books.
It's a style that I've tried to replicate in my own photography, but I confess GW is much better at it!
That furious looking Iron Warrior with a vindicator cannon sticking out of his chest captured my imagination like no other picture in all the 2nd ed books.
That furious looking Iron Warrior with a vindicator cannon sticking out of his chest captured my imagination like no other picture in all the 2nd ed books.
:strip_icc()/pic5711658.jpg)
:strip_icc()/pic5711659.jpg)
:strip_icc()/pic5711672.jpg)
