Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Genestealer cults are still in the canon (they appeared in Henry Zhou's first short story for BL in the Planetkill anthology*), but genestealer chaos cults... well, they haven't gone away, exactly, but they're certainly a lot harder to squeeze in to the canon now that Nid canon has been expanded a lot.

They were removed from the game (genestealer chaos cults, that is) for the simple reasons that they were absolutely and unbelievably broken beyond all reason!!

Man, that was an awesome game...

Anyway, @Ratius - Um... The graphic novel isn't bad per se, but it's much more an advert for Miller's art than it is for Herbert's writing. Let's leave it at that.

@Pacfic - Yes! Gary Harrod! I've been trying to remember his name since this thread started.

R.

Yep you still see the occasional Genestealer cult army, and they haven't been 'squatted', it's just that there is no official rules representation for them any more. I think the last one was Gav Thorpe's set of rules going back to 3rd edition, although I may be wrong with that one.

A few years ago Games Day UK had a massive model display game with hordes of cultist troops (I think loads of GW stores had to convert models for it), so it is still definitely supported as a concept and an established part of the Nid background, even though you can't get special rules for Magus' driving around in limousines any more

They showed a set of doctrines/counts-as during the previous Guard Codex to do a Genestealer Cult.

I always like the old style sci fi that is depicted in Fallout 3. (for those of you who have played Fallout ) Classic sci fi, with a dark and gritty look.

Some great old stuff posted here. Brings back so many memories.

For my own two cents, I think every period has its great pieces of art and its stinkers, but I don't think the overall quality is as simple as 'One was mostly bad, the other was mostly good', rather I think the overall quality of art peaked between 3rd and 4th ed and has actually gone downhill a little now.

My justification for this is mostly the art in the section of the BRB where each race is detailed. Check out the tyranid warrior in the 4th ed book on their page, then compare it to the bland, uninspiring beastie in the current rulebook.

What I liked about 3rd ed was that a lot of the art still had the oldschool atmosphere, but the majority of the artists were technically accomplished.

Personally, I think GW should lay off that guy who did (amongst other substandard pieces of art) the current BA codex cover. On a side note, did he do the 3rd ed BA codex too? The art seems quite similar.

Isn't the BA codex cover a John Blanche piece? I don't think they're laying off the guy who's been their art director for decades, and who is responsible for the overacing "feel" of all of their art. Blanche isn't to everyone's tastes (and I think there are issues with the central figure on the BA codex cover), but overall he's an amazing artist and central to GW's art in general.

Im pretty sure its not Blanche. Blanche is the fellow who does the washey abstractey paintings.

I'm not a huge fan of his work, but I don't think John Blanche should go, he has a unique style.

I honestly miss the portrayal of imperial citizens and such like the old art had.

These are from the books that came in the second edition boxed set:

With an exhaust as a cigar and a spring in his step, the Orks Stompa goes to play with the Blood Angels



Whether you like the old Warrior models or not, this rocks! The shock of the Eldar and the arrogance of the 'Nid really seems to come across



An Eldar idly surveys his craftworld home - great to have a range of emotions in the artwork, not just rage and warfare:



A true Hound of Hell:



and the grotesque avatar of Papa Nurgle - a Great Unclean One with Nurglings scuttling around:

George Spiggott wrote:I love the old Ian Miller stuff.

I was actually hoping that this thread would be about stuff like this:

Ahhh yes a Melvyn painting, and a badass one at that! I own the entire series of Galactic Encounters and Terran Trade Authority books, as well as dozens of others including Jim Burns. Love all that stuff, it blew my mind when I was a kid, and still does to this day.

Peter Elson is my favorite.

Art in those days seems so boundless, so innovative. Those artists were pushing borders and influenced by the emergence of technology. There really weren't any rules or established parameters, they just painted directly from their imaginations.

Not saying that isn't still happening, mind you. The new artwork GW produces is pretty effing phenomenal, and as others have mentioned, technically perfected.

I wish GW would publish a comprehensive artbook, or hell, any artbook. I'd be so there and have to get it covered in plastic to prevent my drool from ruining it.

This iconic painting from Jim Burns...wow! My god it just makes me want to race into my painting room and start cranking out models!!!

Ah thanks for posting that pic of the eldar and the nids Grim.Badger, I had asked if anyone had a scan of that earlier in the thread

Cave_Dweller wrote: There really weren't any rules or established parameters, they just painted directly from their imaginations.

From their imaginations and screenshots of Scarface.

plastictrees wrote:

From their imaginations and screenshots of Scarface.

Yeah I saw that, very funny. You could almost directly overlay them for a perfect match. But, doesn't change my opinion of the excellence of the painting or Jim Burns.

Pacific wrote:Ah thanks for posting that pic of the eldar and the nids Grim.Badger, I had asked if anyone had a scan of that earlier in the thread

Cool, glad to help! I haven't read much of the text in this thread as I don't like knowing too much about the origins of peices of art as occasionally it can somehow ruin/change the feelings I associate with it.
This piece though was one that really stood out to me as a kid

Here's some more:

An insane looking Runtherd:



Tech Priests discussing a sample:



A rather miffed beurocrat:



And probably one of the first group picture of Orks that fits the current IP:

Screamer Killer from issue 210.

Not old art, but and old How-to.

Thanks for posting on this thread again so I can give it an exalt

Exalt from me - lovely jubbly. The older art looks more bleak but not in a GRIMDARK sort of way. And they're still using a lot of old art in the modern books from what I've seen. Also glad to see they've got Paul Bonner back doing artwork (did he ever leave?). He did so much to shape the early visions of the Orks from Waaagh and Ere we go. Quite a lot of it showed scenes of Orks in day to day life that you do rarely see these days. I Loved the picture of the Ork sitting on the snotroom "finkin'"!

I want it back.

George Spiggott wrote:

<3

zedmeister wrote:Exalt from me - lovely jubbly. The older art looks more bleak but not in a GRIMDARK sort of way. And they're still using a lot of old art in the modern books from what I've seen. Also glad to see they've got Paul Bonner back doing artwork (did he ever leave?). He did so much to shape the early visions of the Orks from Waaagh and Ere we go. Quite a lot of it showed scenes of Orks in day to day life that you do really see these days. I Loved the picture of the Ork sitting on the snotroom "finkin'"!

Zedmeister, don't suppose you know what artwork he is doing these days?

I agree about the change in fluff with regards to the orks. They used to be much more of a separate culture of their own, closer to brutish humans in some ways, with their own society and way of life. Now they are much more bestial, and in some accounts do little more than drop from a mushroom screaming and run towards an enemy and die. Certainly, the concept of them sitting still, or not killing each other, for long enough for them to board a starship and form any kind of organised attack seems more and more outlandish in the current background.

Although it's completely down to personal taste, I think I probably prefer the older background simply because there was a lot more depth to it!

Pacific wrote:Zedmeister, don't suppose you know what artwork he is doing these days?

Yep, he was last seen doing artwork for IA8:
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Imperial_Armour_Books/IMPERIAL-ARMOUR-EIGHT-RAID-ON-KASTOREL-NOVEM.html

He has credits in that book (including the poster) and I think he's done work for IA9 and 10. Certainly if you look at a lot of the Ork images in IA8 and compare them to the older ones in Ere We Go, there is a similarity in style. Personally, I think its a shame they can't make him the Ork visionary in the same way Jes is for Eldar!

I must admit that when looking at most of these images without the taint of nostalgia, they're just not very good.

A few of them are made by people with lots of technique, but no artistic ability. Most of the images just look like Rorschach ink-blots. A huge pile look like unfinished sketches where a cat tipped over the inkwell and had a stroll around in it. Almost all of them are very badly proportioned. The vast majority looks to be sketched by a small child, then shaded by someone who knows what they're doing.

There are a very few exceptions, where the images are very evocative and disturbing because they look like mutated images that salvador dali painted as a child. And there are a very few exceptions where the images are really very good, like the vampire coming in through the window for example, but these exceptions are few and far between. I'm glad I hadn't heard of WH40K when the art style was like this, because then I most definitively would not have got into it. It looks like children's horror picture-books.

I think that to miss the old art over the new art is a powerful case of nostalgia-bias, because any objective observer can tell that the quality, artistry and "soul" of the new artwork far exceeds the old stuff.

But to avoid this being a complete rant, and a waste of all of your time, here's some pics I can't say I've seen in this thread. Feel free to remove them if they've already been posted.








Searching here on Dakka I also found a thread called "the nostalgia thread". I don't know if it was for models or art (I didn't check), but there might be something in there.

SgtSixkilla wrote:

I think that to miss the old art over the new art is a powerful case of nostalgia-bias, because any objective observer can tell that the quality, artistry and "soul" of the new artwork far exceeds the old stuff.
.

You should have been here a few pages ago

I would argue it is still deeply subjective (I mean, how can you say something has any kind of 'soul' and say it is an objective judgement??), but in any case thanks for the new pictures. And, fortunately enough people did like the artwork at the time that we still have a 40k around nowadays and even more artwork to enjoy

Pacific wrote:

SgtSixkilla wrote:

I think that to miss the old art over the new art is a powerful case of nostalgia-bias, because any objective observer can tell that the quality, artistry and "soul" of the new artwork far exceeds the old stuff.
.

I would argue it is still deeply subjective (I mean, how can you say something has any kind of 'soul' and say it is an objective judgement??),

I can tell that many things have "soul" even if I don't personally like it. Lots of music for example, and more related, visual art. In some works of art, you can tell that the artist "feels deeply" for the work he/she creates. I use the word "soul" for lack of a better one.

Looking away from the "soul", there's no doubt that there's a level of skill and quality which also figures into the comparison. Proportion and perspective is almost completely lacking in the earlier stuff, and that makes it look childish and unprofessional.

Art is purely subjective.

Your claim that a lack of perspective or proportion somehow invalidates the quality of the art is misguided.

Consider religious art from the medieval period. Perspective had yet to be invented and relative scale and proper proportion was rare. Do those factors make that art any less important than what came about during the renaissance and after? Of course not. The older works have an important task of conveying what the culture was like then.

I think it's very similar to the progression of the art that GW puts out. The early stuff was created by people, perhaps less talented, but those who had the vision, to get the larger moires of the fluff across and inspire future generations to create their own art and attract "better" artists.

That said, it's all subjective and everyone has an opinion. Some people hate this stuff. Others love it. For a lot of us, it encapsulates a time period and holds strong memories.

PS: yea, I went to art school.

Love this thread guys, great stuff

I'm one of those guys who likes pretty much everything shown here - most, if not all, have their own certain charm to them. It's all good

92acclude wrote:Art is purely subjective.

Your claim that a lack of perspective or proportion somehow invalidates the quality of the art is misguided.

I never said that. I said the lack of perspective and proportion made it childish, ugly and silly. I think it looks stupid when a space marine's individual boots are bigger than his entire torso. But that wasn't my only reason for not liking it. Not even the main reason.

92acclude wrote:
Consider religious art from the medieval period. Perspective had yet to be invented and relative scale and proper proportion was rare. Do those factors make that art any less important than what came about during the renaissance and after? Of course not. The older works have an important task of conveying what the culture was like then.

Importance and quality are two different considerations. I never said the old art wasn't important. I said it looked silly and childish. Personally, I don't think old religious art is very good or of high quality. It may have been compared to other art at that time. But we're not at that time. We're now, and we have to compare it with what we have now. And compared to current warhammer art, the early stuff just can't compete. Unless you have nostalgia-bias, that is. Which was my entire point.

92acclude wrote:
For a lot of us, it encapsulates a time period and holds strong memories.

Which is the very definition of nostalgia-bias.


Here are a few more images I found. Some of them will most likely have been posted before, but hopefully there's some that hasn't been as well.