I’ve been checking out the Communication Arts Illustration Annual and discussing it friends and associates. As I was relating to a friend this evening, I’m particularly noticing techniques involving stylized realism. My buddy Brad was pointing out Jim Salvati as a point between impressionism and photorealism that he likes, and I agreed by noting the work of Greg Manchess. Although I have always enjoyed Tim O’Brien whose work I’d say is fairly photorealistic. In contrast to those, there’s more distorted styles in the narrative vein such as Jack Unruh and Jody Hewgill that I’ll notice in so many issues. There’s always so much to take in and I’ll likely notice new things for different reasons on another read.
This issue struck me as having more weight on narratives and broadly realistic approaches than I’ve seen in issues in recent years. I could be wrong, but there appeared to be a bit of a broader spectrum rather than a heavy focus on highly political editorials and plethora of naive styles that I often see in design periodicals. Sometimes it seems that there’s a bit too much focus on anger and politics, and while those themes need to be communicated, they aren’t the only things to convey.
I was also discussing with Brad some of the artists I was looking at in New York this last month. The J.C. Leyendecker show at the Society of Illustrators was definitely worth the time. There were a couple pieces there that called to mind some sketches of Dean Cornwell. Thinking of the way I sketch the figure, I’m probably drawn to the the deco-style adaptations. I like the way that Leyendecker streamlines organic shapes and how, even with paint, there’s a certain kind of cross-hatching.
You bet! I really enjoyed our discussion on illustration styles. I tend to have my favorites, but it’s surprising how diverse the styles are out there. They all still seem to be primarily done in traditional methods, with more and more computer aided pieces creeping in all the time. Thanks for the post.