...which is why my typical take on arts is suum cuique.
But those weird legs on the lobster? The featureless gray-and-blue thing painted over the detailed claws? I know it sounds like "I consider my opinion objective", but I can't see how anybody thinks this holds up to the seamlessly composed images from PAoNA.
And then there's the technical things - a pixelated image is a pixelated image. Compression artifacts around small text are compression artifacts. Subjective? Well, if a a shop sends you an offer, written on half a page ripped from a notebook, in scrawly writing and with some remains of the writer's breakfast on it, is it subjective to consider that unprofessional?
This.
It's fine to argue over who one feels is the superior artist, such as Laubenstein or Bradstreet. That's completely subjective. What can be agreed upon is that both artists turned in professional work which resulted in their going on to bigger and better commissions. I can objectively say that not all the artwork in
Parazoology meets the criteria of professional presentation. That's not a matter of taste, it's a matter of consistent and accurate renderings. Some of the art is passable and I would even go so far to say "good". But a lot (I'd say too much) is not. The bulldog stoat and the cactus cat have both issues with anatomy as well as their renderings in watercolor (or whatever format Ms. Hardy used); heavy black outlines which make photo-realistic images look strangely cartoony, weird placement of musculature, bizarre subject matter placement. Many of the faults can also be placed on the eBook designer. Compression artifacts? Really? That's amateur hour.
If I had to take a guess, and judging by the inconsistency of the art I don't think I'm wrong, Kat had a certain number of paintings completed and in order to make the due date had to whip out the rest without taking as much care or time. Paychecks and deadlines often result in rushed work. It happens. It's not an excuse but it's a (possible) explanation.
As for the lack of shadowjabber, that's disappointing but it isn't a deal-breaker. This is a
game supplement (no offense intended, Pathica). Is Winterhawk's treatise on the bunyip going to affect my game or provide material I can really use? Probably not. The writing does the job even though I don't think Michael quite has his SR legs under him yet. He's almost there. Unfortunately there's also quite a bit that's going to need to be added in as errata. Water critters should probably have the Gills quality.
It's not as great as This Old Drone or 10 Jackpointers, but still a decent product that fits as an addendum to Running Wild.
I'm honestly a little surprised by that statement. I wrote half of
10 Jackpointers and I think
Parazoology is the better buy.
10JP was a bloody nightmare to write and didn't deliver what I was told it was going to.
