The Red Temperance

[@Lockfin]

Carly took the unhinged vitriol of the internet with more grace than anyone deserved. What a phenomenal artist

[@demianrusso2499]

I might pick up a playset of Faithless Looting just to upset people😅😅

[@Makingnewnamesisdumb]

Anything better than shame is too much grace.

[@RobertJW]

​@@demianrusso2499I bought the playmat as a giant middle finger to those who hate it. I love that playmat.

[@Goonwild5299]

​@@demianrusso2499 no one cares

[@Goonwild5299]

Pretty dramatic comment here. I don't like the art, am I hateful?

[@ponchoman6277]

I remember seeing this art for the first time and going "wow, I will never use this version of Faithless Looting." It baffles me that someone could look at unflattering card artwork and go "this is the fall of western civilization"

[@giantotter319]

It's a common tool to take the most unhinged criticism and highlight it so it seems every criticism is just as unhinged.

[@davidjohnson9186]

@@giantotter319that doesn’t seem to be what the video is about. It doesn’t claim all the criticism is unhinged, they even show direct clips of the whole range of emotional reactions to the art, from disinterest to “fall of western civilization”. Totally fine to not like the art. That’s not really what this video is about.

[@armorclasshero2103]

It's always fascists.

[@fieldrequired283]

A certain type of reactionary needs everything they don't like to be a threat to civilization. That way they have an excuse to call for its destruction.

[@MrAzulmagia]

​@@davidjohnson9186 He did bring into atention that specific quote, so is fair to be wary of manipulation for the sake of narrative. But i think he just wanted to hammer home his position on the comflict.

[@truetekkit]

I feel as though a large portion of what makes the art difficult to parse in a noncritical way is the solid block color choices like the orange fire or the red robe, as you mentioned, digital art is so ingrained that what is effectively solid single colors tend to be a mental short hand for that "fill bucket" or clip art style that I think most people have an immediate association with MS paint or something, and I think entirely independent of the realism of the piece is what makes it so immediately challenging when lacking context. That personally is the choice that makes the art not for me, but I think when viewed in a vaccum it is all too easy to make that association.

[@Dirpman42]

She said in the interview that she needs textures and information from handwork. Dear how did you choose the flattest choices for the dress and hood? The hood itself seems like it has no curve or depth. The print even cuts off like the border of paper. She said she would add tattoos or body paint to fix it. LITERALLY JUST ADD A BROOCH AND SOME CRUMPLED CLOTH AND IT'S GORGEOUS!

[@thisisobviouslybait]

@@Dirpman42 it looks like a shitty photoshop done by my nephew. No crumpled clothes and a broach is saving that shit

[@espinacasable]

Yeah, I was thinking this too. The other mystical archives arts are very similar, but faithless is the only one with big blocks of flat color. Not even the card frame and text box has flat color, so it really stands out. I really like the social climber art, didn't know it was hers too but it makes sense in retrospect, I think it's a perfect example of what faithless was trying to be.

[@espinacasable]

​@@Dirpman42she means the brush strokes and uneven-ness of actual pigments on a surface, which you can appreciate in person or in high res scans, but not in the card. I think giving the cloth folds would go against her style, but I would've loved a pattern like what she did in the gray and black parts of the background at the bottom. It could still be flat but not "fill bucket" flat.

[@Welverin]

For me it's the black of the top of the face and the red eyes. The flat nature of those is terribly off putting for me. The rest of it is find and I like other pieces Carly has done for MtG.

[@fuminy6175]

I don't really like the artwork, I really don't. Yet I use this printing in all my decks. It's just so damn unique that I find myself using it just for the novelty. If an art piece can give me such conflicting feelings, it did its job.

[@parallel38]

an actual photo of a dog turd would be unqiue too...... and still be better than this

[@aaronvanloon1330]

"Social Climber" is one of my favorite pieces of magic art. Also, I feel that varying the frame around the "Faithless Looting" piece really did alter the aesthetic substantially and the original card printing was almost certainly a disservice to the art.

[@PhilleeLeePhive]

social climber is incredible : )

[@ThatOneVeganGuy]

It just brings diversity to MTG. Love it.

[@admiralsky56]

I am late to the video but I agree- when I saw her faithless looting art in the borderless frame, I thought "oh, now I get it!" (well, that and the explanation about tarot). It makes me wonder when the frame is designed- like do the artists get to see what frame the card will be in when they start designing their piece? or is it something that gets tacked on later in the process? I love social climber and her DMU legends! I still probably wouldn't pick her faithless looting as my first choice (I really like the full art commander masters one), but I appreciate this video for giving me a new appreciation for it

[@artemi7]

@@aaronvanloon1330 social climber is an incredible piece of artwork, especially compared to faithless looting

[@ellentheeducator]

Her style worked quite well for Mystical Archive, but it is utterly perfect for New Capenna. I honestly think of Social Climber as the best representation of New Capenna - it's bold, it's not-quite-nostalgic, and it's intensely evocative. It gives up on pure realism for showing you exactly what you are meant to understand.

[@ZeHamberglar]

100%. Carly's style very much feels to me like "what if fantasy art deco?" which fits capenna so well.

[@andrewb378]

Agreed. It would be a massive effort from her, obviously, but could you imagine if she did alt art for that entire set? I personally wasn't a big fan of a lot of the new capenna art (despite enjoying art deco) but I think if she did the art for all the cards in her style I would like it a lot more.

[@tijnhollanders6932]

I also like her 3 dominaria legends (special art of radha, queen allenal and meria)

[@thadrin]

Even within the mystical archive, her Harmonize is fantastic. I just looked Carly up on Gatherer and I really like her other work.

[@jchadwick4918]

REAL! It’s been one of my favourite pieces from the set since drafting on release. So striking!

[@Amascut]

I was there when the card was first previewed and I remember being confused by the art until looked closer and recognized the cultist as being painted as well. It’s a testament to Carly’s talent that at a glance on the card, the cultist looks almost like a photo, and recognizing that it’s an exquisite painting showcases the variety of styles around the figure that makes the card really pop now. It really turned me around on the piece overall.

[@ZanderKreegan]

I had the exact same experience. This was a piece that I enjoyed more and more as I examined the art. While the flatness of the colors was initially of-putting, I now only find the flatness of the dress strange; I really appreciate the simplicity of the flames and wine as it makes them strong focal points

[@Bananasforthesoul]

I feel like most peoples reaction is tied to the same thing, the person looks so hyper realistic that it looks edited in. Thus against the typical mtg vibe. But when you realize it’s painted it’s cool.

[@Glimmerglint]

To be honest, ive never realised that it was painted before - i always thought it was a photo. I still dont like the art but it is an impressive feat that so many people couldnt tell.

[@Sugmatron]

This is my inherent issue with it as used. Hey style, the contrast, is inherently jarring, which has merit in of itself, but not as the art for a game. It seems like an explicit part of her style is that it is difficult to immerse in.

[@jamesbourgeois1357]

I wasn't a fan of the art for faithless looting, but I couldn't imagine being hateful to an artist for their art. They stick their neck out to express themselves and that alone is a noble effort.

[@Marco_DC]

Next artwork: Rancor To send the community a flavorful message, "Hatred outlives the hateful"

[@zenithquasar9623]

You are an agent of the end of the western civilisation, and possibly the entire world!

[@remigusker6024]

Agreed. I strongly dislike the art for the card. But the way the whole conversation around it turned into a cesspool is ridiculous.

[@evankraabel5415]

Part of sticking your neck out is an acceptance that people will openly tell you when your work is bad. That is WHY it is noble to stick your neck out. Im glad she made an attempt to break the rules of magic art, but I wish somebody behind the scenes had been willing to state the obvious that the art is pretty bad overall, and cut it from the file

[@ezrabartsch1505]

Thanks for the video. This helped me see the artwork differently and appreciate it for the first time.

[@NathanLazyBear]

The piece as a magic card is such a flop, they knew it was going to get cut from the waist up, the composition as an artist should of been considered more. They needed their comfort format of 18 x 24, and not the smaller compressed area. Wizards fault for not being more clear with the intended format of the finished work. I know it's more up to the artist to consider what to put in their commissioned piece, but a little more consideration would have saved their piece from a lot of unfair criticism. A lot of their work is great.

[@GR20000]

I think my biggest issue with that card specifically is just how MUCH flat red there is. It feels very jarringly out of place due to the sheer amount of real estate it takes up. A lot of the other examples of her art you showed use the flat colors and clip art style far more sparingly, taking up far less of the real-estate of the card. Another issue is that, while this art isn't digital, it is both by design and intent meant to FEEL digital, and that feeling is a significant step further out from, say, the Icon or Stain glass inspired cards, wthcih draw from a suitably antique staly of design as to be recognizably within the fantasy aesthetic. This faithless looking instead, despite the incredibly artsmanship of the photo realism and strong composition, I think is hit a giant red button in people's brains, it certainly did for me. I certainly appreciate the artist's effort more knowing this was a canvas painting, but that doesn't change that it's trading in the aesthetic language of clip art and, unlike her other works, it's a high degree of the focus, rather than as emphasis (say, with the white halo of social climber). A lot of her work I think slots well enough into magic's aesthetic to be innofencive and allow people to appreciate it's craft, but I think Fiathless looting in particular emphasizes what is the most imediarly objectionable aspect of her art by bringing it from a place of accent to a place of primacy.

[@elizabethhicks4181]

I like that it has so much broad color though. So many pieces for MTG are these intricate little things that have tons of detail that I feel like I can’t appreciate fully in the art of the card, I need to see the full work to really notice all the cool stuff about it. This piece feels much more like it’s pushing back on the idea that one MUST do as MUCH as possible with the limited space. It’s evocative and pops and is beautiful and makes you feel things. That’s great, I love it.

[@GR20000]

@@elizabethhicks4181 There's a line between simplicity and next to nothing. That flat read reads very much as the latter. Particularly without the ability o see the actual paint texture, due to the card being printed and meant to be viewed small scale (failing to take into account your medium is a failure) comes acress as just very flat and lifeless. The absence of any shading or easily dicernable texture of any kind, while also failing to have anything interesting happening in the shape language makes it feel exceptionally boring, and detracts from some of the astonishing artistry of the work (the stain glass behind the figure is amazing, for example). And it';s hard to say you want simple when the central figure is a photo realistic human.

[@elizabethhicks4181]

@@GR20000 I'm... not sure why you think you know what I want, unless that's a generalist 'you' at the end, but I really like the evocative, popping color contrasting with the figure in the painting. It's striking and wild. You're still pushing for detail, detail, detail. You're looking for shading, for texture, for 'interesting things' to be happening. I like that the art pushes back on the idea that is required in MTG art. I really do think that this card art looks like it's about to leap off the page, which is a very different vibe than the deep little intricate worlds on so many other cards. I like it a lot for that. What's boring for you is interesting for me, I guess.

[@housemana]

​@@elizabethhicks4181 I'm... not sure why you're.... pausing... while making a comment on the internet. say what you mean or don't say anything at all. jfc.

[@pbailed8007]

It’s amazing how much better that piece looks on any other background

[@LeonBelmont1000]

Almost like sugarcoating shyte.

[@sams.975]

Really? I actually like it best on the original border. I think the black, red and gold complement really nicely.

[@Kryptnyt]

@@sams.975 I found a lot of the Archive cards looked really poor without the gilding, as the "gold" becomes more of a mustard yellow. They look great with the gilding

[@ppppppqqqppp]

@@LeonBelmont1000 yo hey look it's one of the mouth breathers sam mentioned

[@LeonBelmont1000]

@@ppppppqqqppp Magic is woke, get over it.

[@ivandragovic5958]

I like her other art a lot more than the Faithless Looting but hope she does more card art

[@Makingnewnamesisdumb]

No you don't. Keep her away from this game.

[@augustuscook5262]

​@@Makingnewnamesisdumb wtf is your problem dude? Responding to every comment that even remotely challenges your opinion in a very garish way does nothing for you. Go get a life instead of replying to every opinion that differs from yours

[@demianrusso2499]

Yes, her take on Naturalize was great

[@JusticeJanitor]

Not a fan of her Faithless Looing art but her Harmonize and Social Climber are great. I wish she did more stuff in New Capenna, her art was a great fit there.

[@jimshotfirst4887]

​@@Makingnewnamesisdumb damn this card really is living rent free in your head huh

[@oh_gosh]

I was (and still am) critical of the art Faithless Looting. Not because it's "different" or "doesn't look like a magic card," but because the bright, solid oranges and reds are distracting and garish to me. I'm a fan of her other pieces for MTG, though I admittedly don't know much of her art outside the game.

[@strangelaw6384]

The bright solid colors are probably not as much when you're looking at the actual painting. Shrinking the image down to a card throws away the brushstrokes and skin textures. Also, her style really takes advantage of dynamics (implied motion), and forcing her to paint a person with symmetric posture ended up so detrimental.

[@pogeman2345]

Same. Like her work on Harmonize, a card that she also made the art for in the Mystical Archives, blended and worked so much better than Faithless Looting. It just looks very... unreal compared to Harmonize.

[@nomurLethalmud]

@@strangelaw6384 Yeah and both the artist and the art director team know that it's going to be shrunk and have to take that into account.

[@strangelaw6384]

@@nomurLethalmud I blame the art director for not foreseeing the suboptimal compatibility between her painting style with the medium (mtg card)

[@TheMinskyTerrorist]

You're allowed to say that it's bad, it's okay

[@hastur2905]

IMO the problem isn't that it is too different, you yourself said towards the end that we have a lot of more untraditional art that wasn't so criticized. It just kind of sucks? When you look at it it just looks like a Photo with some flat colors slapped on top. I get it's actually a drawing and it took a lot of effort but the fact you have to be told that is a bad signal, and doesn't change how the piece looks

[@rorschach1]

“Art is not a pissing match.” That is my title of this video and this is the inspiration we need.

[@ShjadeNexayre]

@randomvideoboy1 How on earth did you get "artists are free from criticism" out of "Art is not a pissing match"? "The colors are flat and uninteresting" is criticism. "I don't think the composition suits the theme" is criticism. "I could do this" is not criticism. It's attempted one-upsmanship. It's dismissal. It's negation. It's a pissing match.

[@tragicarrogance2401]

Not every piece of art needs to work for me, but not everything that doesn't work for me isn't art.

[@u13erfitz]

This statement says nothing. This art sucks. The entire style of art sucks and for sure doesn't belong in magic. Bad art exists.

[@demianrusso2499]

Actually this statement is great; for example i dont like most of the artwork used in the first sets of magic but i would never say that it isnt art or attack people that like that art.

[@RafaelTrocatti]

@@u13erfitz your tone seems very pointed right now.

[@mnm1273]

A work can be art and ugly at the same time.

[@Makingnewnamesisdumb]

It's not art.

[@VirusVescichetta]

I don't like the art for Faithless Looting, but that doesn't mean I don't think it's well done. The genuine skill that went into it is truly impressive; it's a painted picture that looks nearly photorealistic. It also really does look better in alternate frames and as a plain piece, which says a lot about how important composition is to appearance.

[@thomaspetrucka9173]

Came here to say this. Much more palatable with the alt. frame.

[@kaspershaupt]

Really don't think it fits as a standard card or what I think a standard card should look like. I think it would have looked great in a saga frame though

[@bradcallahan3546]

Cuck comment:

[@ToxicAtom]

My issue with specifically the piece Faithless Looting is the large swaths of red, rendered completely without texture in print. Alongside the shadow over the top half of the face reading more like a comical mask than a veil of darkness, it leaves the impression of someone opening Illustrator and drawing shapes over otherwise phenomenal work. All of Carly's other works, both for magic and not, are stunning. Her effort and skill is still well represented in Faithless Looting, coming through in the aspects of the piece not rendered textureless by print; the actual woman is behind the mask is rendered so well, it fooled many into thinking it was a photo, atop a stony, stained-glass-esque backdrop. I'm glad she continued to work on magic. A lesser artist would be discouraged by the unjust vitriol Carly received for one under par piece in a collection of masterwork. I just wish she had more pieces in New Capenna, a plane that felt almost tailor-made for her style to shine.

[@BrianBors]

Especially that "New Capenna" comment I agree with wholeheartedly! It fits so well with her style.

[@dupuis2000]

The hyper realistic human covered by what looks to be someone using the paint bucket tool to fill in clothing really is what makes this card art look so bad. It might look good on canvas with the texture but goddamn is that lost in print

[@housemana]

While you are seemingly grounded and logical, empathetic in your approach... you miss the mark entirely with assuming that lesser artists cannot take negative (unjust vitriol, in your words) energy and feedback into driving force.

[@tcsmagicbox]

It was amazing how the 2-D illustrations mixed with the hyper realism of the central figure gave the illusion of a cheap photoshop.

[@cayden5257]

It's quite a shame, because many of Carly's works are truly stunning, but to me, there is something lacking in faithless looting. The dress being a single, bright red color clashes with the detail present in the rest of the cultist, and the hood feels detached and out of place. The eyes, as well, are disconcerting and feel cheap. I love many things about it, but ultimately it feels like it needs more work done to reach a finished product.

[@poenpotzu2865]

I wasn't there when the reaction first came out. The painting has this weird uncanny feeling. I dont mean that in a bad way. The way the flesh contrasts with the rest felt like a disonance between the caster and the spell.

[@Makingnewnamesisdumb]

You should have meant it in a bad way.

[@JohnAutopsy]

@@Makingnewnamesisdumb imagine getting this riled up over a piece of cardboard.

[@penguindrummer252]

​@@MakingnewnamesisdumbYou do not belong under this video.

[@pyrock0227]

I feel like that uncanny feeling is because the composition of the piece at large matches how stained glass motifs are often composed (large pieces of a single color or texture alongside quite detailed, hand-painted human figures), but only the window behind her has the solder lines between the pieces like we expect to see in an actual stained glass window. It gives me a feeling that this figure has stepped out of the stained glass image behind them, eschewing the solder lines that only exist because of the limitations of the medium in our world (ones that may not exist in the theoretical stained-glass dimension they're coming from).

[@boorango122]

@@Makingnewnamesisdumbyou are the people this video is telling off why are you even here. are you perhaps afraid of red yellow and blue? she should make her art weirder I think. this is art.

[@MrGreenJackal]

I still don't like it, the hood-dress combo is off putting in a "this doesn't really make sense to wear" kind of way, the shadows cast from the hood is a singular flat color which distorts any sense of depth to the picture, this can also be applied to the dress which when is also a singular flat color which while it does contrast with the background, bringing more focus to the subject of the painting, it only further emphasizes the lack of color in the dress. It also doesn't help that while the figure is holding an open flame, no shadow is being cast leading to a more uncanny feeling. Now I will admit that Mazur can draw people, more specifically flesh, in a realistic manner, however this only serves to hinder the art more as the figure looks as if they simultaneously don't belong in their own clothes, nor in the background they are put in. If it was intentional in trying to evoke this uncanny feeling I commend it, but something tells me it wasn't. Now is it bad? No I just don't like it and I don't care enough to harass anyone about it.

[@sukamii]

I find myself in agreeance with you on this. I don't think I'd go so far as to say it's a bad work, there's quite a lot of strong elements going on there- the textures in the skin and background elements are really nice, and I find myself appreciating the bold blocked colors- but I feel the painting is just a little too messy for me. The work feels like so many elements are pulling away from itself, and I just don't like it very much. I certainly hope the Carly continues to make more art for Magic, as I believe they have a very strong creative image that can really bring some cards to life.

[@sukamii]

@randomvideoboy1 Are you stupid, illiterate, misconstruing his point or all of the above? He literally criticized the artists work in the opening and said he doesn't like it. What is being spewed is predominantly not criticism, but vapid meaningless anti-rhetoric, which is exactly what you're doing.

[@koalabro6118]

this exactly. The one thing I would say more than anything for me, is that I don't see how this art relates to lacking faith or to the act of looting. Whatever relation it does have is obscured, thus making the art feel like it was just slapped onto a random card, which only makes it feel even more amatur/low-effort, even though it's not.

[@machspeed5025]

For me, it's not the style itself that I don't like, it's actually the prompt the was given. To me it doesn't represent Faithless looting but more represents a ritual card like Rite of Flame or Pyretic Ritual. Carly just provided what was requested.

[@Meganstaek]

A friend of mine has this art as a playmat. I remember thinking how unique and striking it was, and how excited he was to tell me that it was painted traditionally. I was blown away! It makes me sad that people can look at art they don't like and assume it's Bad or Wrong

[@Meganstaek]

@randomvideoboy1 criticism? i mean in this specific case the video is about basically amounted to "I personally don't like how this looks, so you should be ashamed" like it's a moral failing on the part of the artist or something that you didn't like what they made. The entitled ones are chuds who think any given piece of art is only worth anything if it appeals to them personally. Hope that helps!

[@nahfam8794]

@randomvideoboy1 Did you miss the part in the video where she took the critique of others and said it was important to do that as an artist?? Also AI is coming for everyone not just the artists. Hope you're ready for the mass unemployment, not gonna be as fun as you think.

[@1YCARADOFACAO]

Yes, it's wrong to attack the artist and their craft. Yes, it's wrong to judge the work put on the art piece. Yes, it's bad when you say an artist has less value just because of a piece of art that differs from your tastes. But that faithless looting is so fucking ugly, OMG.

[@someguy4405]

This is all most people ever said. The "criticism is vitriol" trick is very old, and very tired. Incidentally, so is people who admit to being revolutionaries and admit to hating western civilization in other contexts trying to gaslight by saying it's silly to attribute those motives to them.

[@memezurdreamz2203]

I really don't get why you would find it ugly. Please explain.

[@someguy4405]

@@memezurdreamz2203 When people say it's ugly it's an instinctive reaction they can't explain, but here's why it happens: 1: It's a mess, there's really nowhere for the eye to focus on so you just kind of drift around. A good piece catches your eye on a specific element and then guides you through. 2: The blocky solid colours contrast horribly with the realistic figure. The contrast might be OK if it was in one specific place to stand out but it's all over the place, to the point there's less realistic figure than solid colour areas. 3: The colours are awful. Genuinely really bad. We have bright red all over the place and bright orange on a background of bright blue-green and bright orange. Nothing stands out. It would genuinely look better with a completely black background, but even then it would still look pretty bad. Seriously, the turquoise circle thing is a baffling decision. 4: You can tell from the full art that the artist did not consider card size when painting it. It looks sooo much better when the ridiculous turquoise ring is taking up a minority of the space, although even at full size the colour choices are still pretty terrible. This art simply wasn't designed to have 1/3rd of it be a tiny image on a card, which is a shame because if they played to the strength of their style I think it could have really worked.

[@memezurdreamz2203]

@randomvideoboy1 the rest of the world won't be the same without its creatives. You have every right not to understand a piece of art, however you're too much missing in experience to be able to claim that your opinion is valid as well.

[@someguy4405]

​@@memezurdreamz2203 When people say it's ugly it's a basic reaction they can't explain, but there are a few reasons why. 1: It's a mess. A good piece attracts your attention to one point and then guides you through the image. 2: The blocky areas of solid colour are all over the place, so they contrast pretty terribly with the realistic figure. It might work if it was in one place, or if it was just the background. 3: The colours are awful. We've got bright red and bright orange on blue-green and bright orange. The grey background is a baffling decision. The weird turquoise ring is a disaster. 4: It doesn't really work at card size. Judging from the full image, it looks like it wasn't really painted with that in mind. At full size it looks a lot better, although it's still a bit of a catastrophe.

[@naus6081]

I’m sorry this is still one of the absolute ugliest cards in Magic to me. Just because something’s “different” doesn’t necessarily mean good. I’m glad someone out there can appreciate it- and if we get more unusual things that’s cool. Composition, contrast, depth, that’s all key and I can see why this card was heavily maligned.

[@SergeiTheAnarch]

The reason folks don't like her Faithless Looting and Harmonize is not because they don't "get it", it's because the styles clash heavily, are generally unintelligible, and come across as incongruous. Flat elements and photorealism are uncanny when put together in the same piece. Her art is better suited towards black cards or in a horror setting; they are deeply unsettling and convey a sense of unease. To me, her art is unappealing but that doesn't make it bad art; just mishandled by whoever commissioned her to do these pieces.

[@Jack958]

It’s not my cup of tea but I think she seems nice and sincere and wish her the best.

[@TheSillySils]

Exactly. She seems very nice and kind. you can absolutely hate the art and like the artist. Like maroon 5.

[@ImrahilToChaos]

I find it really funny that this video focuses on this particular unpopular art for an otherwise extremely important card with tons of history to mine and discuss. Even the nice people here in the comments don’t really like it but are sugarcoating it to hell and back. I don’t really have an opinion on the art apart from preferring other renditions(which has more to do with me preferring art that represents in-universe happenings and figures, same goes for lands), and I’m not sure I find the topic as interesting as hearing about it’s history as a playing piece and how it affected the games development as hearing about some art that most people still aren’t a fan of. This almost feels like a justification and crack back instead of anything particularly engaging.

[@IGNEUS1607]

Knowing that faithless looting is banned in a few formats, I clicked on this video expecting an analysis of what sort of role it played in magic's meta across the years, like this channel's other videos on iconic cards like tarmogoyf or black lotus. It definitely came as a surprise when he just started yapping about an ugly card art, although maybe "faithless looting" is an apt description of what artists are doing when they make money off this postmodern sort of simplistic "art."

[@mizzogames]

I cannot do that. It is still ugly imo. Also, I don't fear change. But not everything need to be changed. If a game art direction is everything else, that game is not unique anymore. Just think about a Dragon Quest game with american 3D art direction (not manga style). This is the classic example "Yes, but why?"

[@waytvbe]

her other art looks so good, how did she end up with that faithless looting. ironically I think her amazing rendering of a realistic person makes it worse when it's crushed down into the size of a card and looks like a composite photo with paper shapes glued on top

[@Razmatschannel]

Its an ugly and jarring artwork and I dont think it belongs in Magic the Gathering. Obviously the artist has their own style and own fans of that kind of artwork (and nobody should go out and HARRASS an artist just for doing the work they were paid to do!), but I and many others are entitled to the opinion that this piece does not belong or fit in Magic the Gathering (just as of course dissenters of the dissent can assert it does). Personally, Magic has always been a high fantasy game with high fantasy artwork that can give you a feeling of being part of a world that is still similar to ours with high fantasy concepts within it. This artwork (and mind you many artworks, especially newer ones) detract from that view and stylise some magic cards as more cartoonish or completely voiding from reality which personally i dislike and despise seeing on my game boards or collection.

[@caffeinelemon6373]

its one of the best magic arts in my opinion

[@Razmatschannel]

@@caffeinelemon6373 it looks like someone took a pic of a naked man and put things from Microsoft paint over the top of that person, but sure you can claim that terrible opinion

[@caffeinelemon6373]

@@Razmatschannel Stay mad at pixles

[@JonathansProductions]

Wow, the Japanese version is so much nicer to look at 😢 all of her other work you showed looks much better than Looting. Faithless Looting clashes to me in a way that none of her other art does. I appreciate the video attempting to defend Faithless Looting, but my goodness texture changes would have saved it so easily.

[@trolleymouse]

Honestly, calling the backlash based on "fear" is a stretch. It's not that they weren't comfortable with new ideas, but that they didn't think it was a good fit for a card. Many of the people criticizing it still liked the canvas version, even, but when scaled down to a card, it lost a lot of its charm. When you look at Mazur's later cards, you can tell that she's figured out how to make a painting read better at that scale since then, and even the people who still don't like FL are cool with them, despite still being far from traditional.

[@loganjmcquaid]

Some art is just bad.

[@chrismitchell4665]

Agreed, the whole "if you don't like something or don't agree, it must be fear" is getting real old.

[@PhoenicopterusR]

Plenty of people have a "this is bad because it's bad" argument, though. How do you understand where they're coming from when they don't express why they think it's bad?

[@chrismitchell4665]

@@PhoenicopterusR because visual like and dislike is often pretty simple.. do you find this person/thing attractive? Yes/no. Are there things that you find ugly/unattractive? It isn't always a deeper than the surface sort of thing.

[@PhoenicopterusR]

@@chrismitchell4665I think that's a bit of a cop out, because that's not criticism at that point. If someone can't recognize why they dislike something, then why are they making the conscious choice to express hatred for it?

[@ricepresidents]

I understand the sentiment about challenging pieces of art, but at the end of the day I find it deeply unpleasant to look at. I'd rather have something more aesthetically pleasing on my cardboard and save the challenging pieces for museums/galleries.

[@hil449]

Then don't buy it

[@ricepresidents]

@@hil449 way ahead of you

[@jeffreyedwards6402]

I'm drawn to art because I CAN'T do that. When I hear a song with a great bass line I'm awestruck, trying to think of how it was composed, played, etc.

[@IGNEUS1607]

I think just reducing art to your ability to recreate it is sort of missing the point, but there definitely is something to be said of artist talent, whether that is pure technical skill, or a unique style or particularly interesting framing. While the artist definitely has some great works, the faithless looting art just misses the mark, which is think comes down to its composition. Her style definitely can look nice, but something about this artwork feels flat, which definitely gives off an amateurish feel, leading to all the criticisms of "I could've done that". I think what Rhystic Study misses is that such a complaint is not always reducing the artwork to ease of reproduction, but that there is something missing or amateurish about it that gives off the vibe that it did not really take an artist's expression to make.

[@AzureTheSky]

Fantastic documentary, great artist. Yet, I still think this is some of the worst artwork ever printed in a modern MTG card and I really can't blame the frame or the cropping.

[@AnarchoCatBoyEthan]

Holy hell Rhystic Studies just came out swinging in this one, great work.

[@ironjawedangels2812]

I think that reducing criticism of the piece to uncultured people who you would never find in an art gallery is dismissive. I think that people did not like the blocky style of the Chalices and Flames and robes which to many people Clash with the realism style of the person. To many people the blocky pop art style looked like emojis And the Chalice in the right hand looked almost like a coffee shop logo. Maybe I just don't like pop art, but to dismiss my criticism as being uncultured I think is pretentious.

[@thatguyintherain3168]

I think i just dont like "warm" colours, if the art was blue it wouldnt bother me at all, i like weird art. The fact this was painted is so cool

[@maxlove8707]

Regardless of what the more ignorant critiques state its still undeniable that the piece was just bad , by comparaison you can look at the rest of art in the same set and see that theres just straight up worse, the flames in the back are messy , their outline is too thick and it draws attention away from the main subject ,on the other hand the flames in the foreground and especaiilly the ones in the chalice on the left are very weak and i straight up missed them on my first glance, something simmilar happens with the right chalice , it just doenst draw attention the same way that the ugly flames in the back or the watery cobblestone do , and even the pop art elements are low quality , on close inspection you see that the outlines are weak and wobbly , the chalices are asymmetrical and some edges bleed into each other .The lighting is also very unsipired , with a big flame on the left and behind the subject and the big red glowing eyes she chose to not give any of those elements any light and instead she rendered the skin as being lit from up and to the right , almost like thats the one lighting that shes accostumed to portray , she seems to do that skin tone and lighting in every one of her pieces , and i suspect that the only reason why she only renders skin is because thats the only thing that she can actually render. In the video she describes how painstaking is her process and how much time and energy she invests , but i dont think thats something to be very proud of , its just not a lotta bang for a whole lotta buck. There is place for other artstyles in MTG, but not of this level of quality.

[@nellylongarms]

I unironically loved this art as soon as I saw it. I found it very funny that people said it was symptomatic of "cultural decline," because I saw the opposite - bold, unconventional artistic choices standing out against a sea of increasingly uniform and generic fantasy illustration. I hope Carly gets more commissions for cards in their standard printings, not just special editions. Her art for Social Climber was one of my favorite pieces from New Capenna.

[@MichaelMoore99]

I loved Social Climber and Harmonize and all of her stained glass, which is why I found it difficult to understand why I hate Faithless Looting. There's nothing I can point to specifically, because the elements exist on every single piece of her art.

[@manifatzigula]

Same. I think it´s one of my favourite magic artworks of the last years It just feels like actual high art. It pushes boundaries and provokes you.

[@liberalistbat6352]

You're part of that cultural decline then. Let me guess, far left leaning commie

[@nellylongarms]

@@MichaelMoore99 I can understand that. I think faithless looting displays her style in a more aggressive way than her other MtG works. For me it worked because it felt in-your-face and sacrilegious in a way that was fitting for the card itself, but I understand why many people feel differently.

[@LeonBelmont1000]

I think its funny you dont see it as a symptom. The past 2 generations have desperately been trying to reinvent the wheel, and the only way they can do that is to pave over everything that has preceded them. Every facet of life is experiencing this, but in your eyes, it's conspiracy theories. Classic ignorance.

[@tinfoilslacks3750]

I don't hate Carly or have posted any sort of extreme backlash about this piece, but I'm sorry. It's a truly hideous card and not in a flattering way where the subject matter is meant to be of something ugly and evoke that feeling in the player. The block colours and the geometric symbol drawings of the flame don't work because the colour is too intense and garish, and the shadow cast over the face could have worked but is undermined by the perfectly circular eyes. It doesn't work, and the exact manner the art is put together makes it look like a cheap photoshop collage, regardless of the fact it isn't. Intention and media is only half of art, interpretation and context is the other. Being a proper physical multimedia artwork rather than a simplistic low effort digital arrangement doesn't matter when that's the impression it creates in the playerbase. If anything I'd argue it lowered my opinion of the piece even more the first time I found out it wasn't, since it's so much additional misplaced effort to create something that's directly analogous to something that would be so much simpler and low effort. It especially doesn't gel with MtG's traditional artstyle or overarching aesthetic, but wasn't part of a secret lair that was pushed based on its stark alternative visuals. I look at Faithless Looting and I see a B list post-punk artstyle indicative of the early-mid 2000s in the vein of something like Killer 7. And it's a shame because the art of Harmonize by the same artist in the same style looks fantastic! The big issue visually Harmonize overcomes that looting falls into is superior discretion regarding where solid blocks of colour are used.harmonize uses deep white, a chromatic black, and a deep turqiuoise for the silhouettes of the moon, trees, and elf's hair, and it just works so much better because all of them are background elements and either a light source or silhouette'd backsplash. They're by the same artist in the same art style and yet they are leagues apart in terms of impact and impression. Demonic Tutor's strixhaven alt art, which although wasn't done by the same artist, was still done in a hard edged collage style in the same general timeframe which was excellent in comparison. Faithless looting pales against works by its own artist like Harmonize and Radha and similar works of its contemporaries like tutor. It's just genuinely mediocre.

[@apfundhe13]

I really think the frame does this art no favors. Still doesn't all come together for me but a ton of Carly's pieces are so striking, really feels like she was done dirty. Separately, my GOD do I love her Radha from Dominaria United

[@ThulerPedro15]

When i first saw the art, i liked it simply because it was visually obnoxious, to the point of being kinda disturbing. Now, knowing it was made in traditional painting, the realistic human form became even more impressive

[@pairot01]

You can analize symbolism and compare it to tarot all you want, but at the end of the day looks matter. It's a VISUAL ART, one that is simply there to enhance a product, so it's only requirement is looking good. I think it's undeniable that this piece looks like bad photoshop from a first time user, even if it was painted physically. This video comes off as you thinking you are smarter than everyone else, and are here to impart your divine wisdom. It's a bad magic card art, took a chance and it didn't work, it's not that deep.

[@immoralnight9895]

I still don't like the art, but finding out it was her first pro piece made it sting being so negative at first. I literally saw it and thought the artist started working on it and then just finished it in photoshop to meet a deadline. Multiple clashing styles forced together like icecream, spaghetti and a fried egg all on one plate. Though I do appreciate an artist creating art to not appease the masses, but do not expect acclaim when it fails to inspire.

[@mahtimonni97]

I think it's not a good fit for the card. The art seems static, with its clear lines and flat colour planes. The main figure stands regal and upright, like they're supported by the strong geometry. I actually really like the piece. But for me, the term "faithless looting" awakens thoughts of manic movement and violence. I can see how the imperious pose can also seem proud and heretical. Someone standing against the infinite and declaring themselves its equal. But that wasn't my first interpretation, which kinda means this art with this card is not really my thing...

[@RazgrizAce67]

I feel so ashamed of so many of the MtG community in how they reacted to this piece. The level of hyperbole is simply uncalled for. It's OK to not like a piece of art but to disparage the artist or their skill is just not. I truly hope Carly is not discouraged by the worst of us and continues to provide art in future for MtG.

[@Tseims]

I would not play this card by myself and I see where the hate comes from, but I am glad that Wizards uses different kinds of art. Nowadays there isn't a huge number of more abstract pieces on Magic cards and abstract art always is always very hit and miss. The community should be glad that WotC is willing to try these more esoteric pieces that do not include making the card frame or text ilegible. After all, art is meant to evoke feelings and the feelings you can have do include disgust.

[@MakeaBlaze]

I can see how people can have positive opinions of this art, and I respect Carly Mazur for following her own heart in the art she does, but I am also free to have my own opinion, and I still personally have a very negative response to this art and do not like it.

[@tzorfireis425]

I'd never seen this version of Faithless Looting before seeing it in the thumbnail of this vid, and my first thought was literally just "Oh, this is a Secret Lair card, obviously. MtG does use the lairs to push some really experimental styles and I guess this one just didn't work out" It did not occur to me that someone would claim that a card in the trading card game about wizards would be the end of civilization or whatever.

[@whorcares123]

I'm sorry she got all the hate that she did for this piece, people definitely blew it way out of proportion and she handled the hate way better than I ever could have. I had never said anything to the artist myself, but I too laughed at it with my friends when it was revealed, and pulling not one, not two, but three of them from opening Strixhaven boxes became a joke among me, my friends, and my wife, who all agreed it was not pleasant. That said, I stand by my initial reaction to the card. In fact, I want to double down. As a case in point, Carly's art for Harmonize in the exact same set was significantly better, and I heard about zero backlash for it at the time (something this video failed to mention). Her later artworks for the stained glass treatments of Meria, Queen Allenal, and Radha in DMU are beautiful, and again had no backlash. I think Social Climber's art in SNC is kind of off putting in a number of ways, but the Mystical Archive Faithless Looting is just horrible to look at. If she wants to go down the route of disconcerting art like that used in Living Wall, which this video has claimed to be an inspiration for her, then great, but teetering on that edge, trying to make it both beautiful and a little unsettling traces a very fine line between her vision, and the piece just being ugly to look at. The Tarot card inspiration is, well, inspired, and something I hadn't even realized looking at the Mystical Archive cards, but the execution here is lacking in my eyes. But Faithless Looting just has so much wrong with it: -First, while I get that the nearly photo realistic person surrounded by scenery and decoration is her art style, the execution in Faithless Looting is just not it. The way the shadow drapes over the subject's eyes and the eyes are instead replaced with perfect red circles is not only in my opinion the worst part of the piece, but is in a direct contrast with the rest of her works. In most of her works, either the eyes are uncovered and the focus of the piece, as the sort of thing your eyes are drawn to, like you are in a staring contest with her work, or they are tastefully off screen and something else is the focus. In Harmonize and her Meria artworks, the eyes are closed, yet the face is still the focus and is basically uncovered. Had Faithless Looting's art not obstructed the face with what frankly looks like a construction paper mask, and the subject were allowed to look directly at the viewer, I think there wouldn't have been nearly as much uproar about the piece. -Second, the robe is just a flat, single-color shape. In Harmonize, the subject's garb has shape and coloration to mimic shadows and wrinkles in the clothing, showing depth and a lack of rigidity that really sells the meditation and the wind blowing through. Yet, the robe and cloak in Faithless Looting does just look like a photoshop layer, that criticism is very valid, because well, that is what it looks like. In all of the stained glass arts, she seemed to have learned the lesson, giving the subjects varied or even contrasting clothing coloration. Had some of the orange or black been used in the same way the red was used in Harmonize, it would have done a lot of work to give the depth that a lot of people complained the art lacked. -Finally, the card frame really just works against her. Had it been a full art card, allowing us to see the entire subject's body like in the painting, to see the painted "digital' effects surrounding the subject with the subject being the only "realistic" looking thing, to allow the eye to travel from the bottom of the painting to the top, then it would have been much better. Instead, in the card frame just shows what looks like the photo of a naked person covered up by paint, and emphasizes all of what I am sure were deliberate choices made by the artist, as imperfections that hallmark an unfinished piece. If the art were made more with the frame of the card in mind, then it would certainly be better to look at. I hope I gave a thorough analysis here, and hopefully provides a decent foil to both this video's air of nearly unwavering support for what is still, in my opinion, an ugly card, and to some of the other comments, which still hate on the piece and the artist without providing anything useful to the discourse.

[@cyvoc2316]

Well, yeah, it's a piece of art. But it's not beautiful. The style looks cheap and the card is not nice to look at. But yes, it is a piece of art. No question about it.

[@Armadan7]

Art is a product, because it has a type of value to be "sold". The market responded: this product is obtrusive and cacophonic to the average taste test. The old guard didn't "leave their post" they were pushed out by force. Looking at you Seb McKinnon haters.

[@UmbraBree]

This is probably one of the best comments here

[@bradcallahan3546]

This!!

[@gaugea]

i understand this isnt the main message, but i have a slight disagreement with what you say about “I could do that.” That phrase was the exact words I said to my friend when I watched a video with him once, and he replied “you should, I think so too.” A few days later I made my first youtube video, with the idea from that video I watched, and discovered my passion for video editing. I was always inspired by your work as well, and when I watch your videos I always think “I could do that,” meaning “I can see myself doing this, and I don’t think I’d ever get tired of it.” Now I understand of course that every person on that reddit thread that wrote those same words almost assuredly had the ignorant attitude that you’re describing, but I don’t think the issue is the words. I think its very possible to say them, with the same literal meaning in both cases, and be inspired rather than dismissive. The reason I think this is important is because I don’t think it’s a very big jump to make, and I think a very slight tweak in someone’s attitude could completely change the way they think and approach media or any product really.

[@xyoung8687]

When I saw this art for the first time I thought is was actually a photo edit. Once I realized that it was a highly realistic painting, I appreciated it a lot more.

[@mekklord]

Oh thank god, I thought I was the only one LOL

[@Zolti14]

Why? A lawn cut with scissors is no better than one cut with a mower.

[@memezurdreamz2203]

If all you can appreciate in a painting is its realism, you're severely missing the point.

[@heathenwizard]

WOW! That borderless version makes for a phenomenal card! Carly’s art is truly great; they did a disservice by having it printed with the border they did.

[@thehouseof-l4066]

I feel like she’s a very good artist but I don’t think her faithless looting piece reads well on tiny cardboard zoomed up.

[@mariahanover9335]

You know a card is ugly when you have to make a 15 minute video about why it's not actually ugly. People were mad about the construction paper flames and blank red robe. It looks so low effort. Her other art is great, but she comes off as massively pretentious saying were used to only digital art, like magic doesnt have thousands of beloved hand painted pieces from older sets.

[@mr_oger]

For me personally the Faithless Looting is just "it ain't it, chief". Something is wrong with the way the hood/mask and dress interact with the body and the full picture, "square" cloak is also a strange choice, maybe if it's lines/borders were moved a bit perpendicularly each time it's view was blocked (by example, arms, smoke, etc) it would be more interesting. The biggest miss tho in my opinion is the fire, while i think i kind of get it why it's so "bleak" and "bland", i feel that at the same time it's misused/overused here. I think the way it's used near the dress is actually the perfect place for it - roughly following outline of the dress. Maybe if the 2 pieces of fire in the down-left corner instead were moved to continue following the dress (something like above the down-center-right fires between the smokes), and the small fires in the stained glass instead were placed around the hood in a sense of "adorning" it it would look cooler, but i dunno, i obviously don't know what i'm talking about here. Just it's so weird to me that Social Climber feels so, so much better compared to it.

[@jamescarrigan6649]

I never really liked this version of Faithless looting because it just didn't translate for me as a real painting. If I had to explain it, the difference in the realistic human skin and the flat colors of the robe, flames, wine, etc make the whole thing look very fake. It's fine to try out new styles and designs in mtg artwork as each set has it's own unique flavor, but IMO this design just doesn't really work. At the end of the day people can just buy whatever version they want, it's not like you have to use art you don't like.

[@Jerorawr_XD]

Anyone who draws art for this game deserves mad props. Its certainly not my favorite art. But it certainly left a legacy and people I know tried to collect as many as they could because the art was certainly unique, in a funny way.

[@cataphracts123]

"Art is an exercise in empathy...fosters relationships between people, sentiments and ideas, art is an open ended opportunity to expand your perspective and grow." I don't seek to put words in the mouth of RS, but this is a common perspective from those in the art community that do not believe in objectively good or bad art and that all art is inherently subjective. If this is the belief, it's self-contradictory to claim it is wrong to view art as having quantifiable metrics. If "quality of art" is a fictional concept, then it's meaningless to say someone else's opinion or perspective is invalid on the subject. If art can't be "bad" then an opinion cannot be either. It's interesting some of the comments bring up fascism. It's somewhat correct that elements of authoritarian culture have the opposite belief because that side of culture does believe in objective concepts in the world, that artwork can be improved or even perfected to their own standard. This flows down to all other thinking and influences their utopian-minded concepts on art, philosophy, economics, and politics. That's where the "downfall of civilization" quote comes from. Art that's viewed as objectively bad transgresses this philosophy that art should be created to show the idealized world in the realistic or the sublime. To such a mindset, giving bad art a platform seeks to tear down pillars of society. My perspective on the art is in neither of these extremes, and I think the artwork in question is good but bad in the medium. (The comparisons between the differing frames showcase that the artwork can be improved aesthetically.) Quality and reception of art also changes as human tastes change. Art should be both an exercise in self-expression to engage people with ideas and concepts, but it is and should also be a craft which which the artist can measure their improvement (which Ms. Mazur clearly does) over time and compare it to other artists. Purpose of the artist should be accounted for when trying to judge art. Ideally this should be expressed by the artist rather than assumed. As a work of art making what the art director requested in her own style: achieved. Making artwork that's pleasant to look at on a MTG card to be played with: more speculative.

[@Bongus_Bubogus]

It just is an assault on the eyes, that the brightest parts of the image were also the flattest but layered over the textured body feels like negative space but wrong. Regardless of the propaganda I can’t be convinced it isn’t objectively ugly and I distrust the judgement of those who it appeals to more than the symbolism

[@WGProductionsREUBEI]

I don't even play this game but your videos are just so entertaining.

[@owenkaplan2179]

Hah same, I sold my collection in 2015 and this channel is the only remaining connection I have to MTG. Every time there's a new upload, I stop what I'm doing to watch-the beauty of Sam's poetry and the incredible art of the game make me want to fall in love with it all over again.

[@DrFeltcher]

Man ppl really hate this art. I kinda like it actually. Lots of dislikes on this vid too

[@xXOblivionXx1]

This is an ode to why deeper thinking is more critical than ever in this day and age. Surface level thinking is creating so much negativity these days.

[@MaeseEidos]

I still think it was a big mistake to use this art in Mystical Archive and not in New Cappena where it fits perfectly. Same thing with the Cast Down wich was obviously meant to be in Cappena and ended up in Commander Masters Baldurs Gate or something. The reception of a piece that, to a person not versed in art reminds of Andy Warhol (if you're lucky) doesn't fit inside an "old book of powerful spells" but certainly does in New Cappena. I personally really dislike the art, but not exactly because of the piece, but because I have seen other works of Mazur that I really would have loved in magic cards like Hope Dead, Siren or Dream Predation (yes, I'm aware those are slightly older works). I really dislike this piece, but I'm really glad they keep trying to make new things as extra versions; I'm perfectly aware I'm not gonna be a fan of all of them, and that's good, I don't need a boring algorythm to feed me only art that is not gonna make me feel, that's the opposite of what I want. I'm also happy that you took the time to defend this position with calm, I'm sure Mazur aprecciates it a lot.

[@Tylerbremner]

There’s no magic channel I look forward to a new video from than Rhystic studies. They dont drop as frequently but they’re always more than worth the wait. Your videos are art Sam. I appreciate what you do so much

[@LlywellynOBrien]

10:00 this section of your otherwise great video comes across as arrogant. You offer one definition of, and approach to, art and imperially declare that it is correct and other views, including those held by a large number of people, are just 'muck'. There are many views on what art is, what it is for and what makes it good. The view you express is regnant in some spaces today, but it isn't truth simpliciter and self-evident. There are great art theorists and philosophers of beauty who are by no means "dense" or "insecure" who do not share this view. Making such a strong claim without argumentation and in a way which paints (get it) those who disagree in such negative light is poor.

[@colinmarsh8902]

I don't think a great art Theorist would demean a piece of art by saying "I could do that" as if it took no talent

[@Horky_Porky]

He critizises the argument, which is bad. Saying "I could to this" manages to say nothing about art and at the same time be condescending. There are interesting and different views on art but they manage to put up interesting arguments.

[@Imanmagnet00]

It doesn't come across as arrogant. It IS arrogant. The whole video is shrouded in a holier than thou attitude that looks down on people's opinions for a piece of art they simply didn't like. We all agree the reaction was overblown but to catalogue those who simply claim they feel as if they can replicate or do something similar as "Dense" and "insecure" is the same type of muck he claims to champion against.

[@mindlightwave]

It's political, everything has become politicized.​ ideological biases and opinions get mixed up and people take criticism as a personal attack or an affront to the umbrella they stand under.

[@colinmarsh8902]

@mindlightwave by believing that ypu are the problem. Just do better

[@kal2598]

This one really spoke to me. Carly's message at the end is one that always makes me stop and take it all in. I played this printing of the card at my LGS and was met with laughter as people lambasted the artwork as slapchop and simple, but I've always loved it myself.

[@MirraMazDuur]

What got me into Magic art as a kid was the weirder pieces, and I think modern magic is sorely lacking in that right now. This art was a breath of fresh air against the past several years of the technically proficient but incredibly repetitive style magic has become. Bring back more artists like Drew Tucker and Rebecca Guay! Let's get weird again

[@Crovax]

I have this card. It is an ugly card, i will not change my mind juat because someone finds it beautiful. And i hope they don't change their mind just because i find it ugly.

[@kyleedwards3168]

Still not a fan of this art, but I am impressed that it is an actual painting.

[@woodsmithjr]

When this game becomes unrecognizable through universes beyond and art and looks like this we will have lost something we can't get back. I will not want to play it anymore

[@Beldurkin]

I agree that this painting might not have been suited for the card frame. A lot of her signature style is lost or muted. That said, I can't not notice this art whenever it's present. It's presence is that powerful.

[@apophis456]

Yeah no amount of flowery language and compiled visuals will make me think that faithless looting artwork is anything but horrible. If it wasn’t a magic card I could see some argument for why people would like it, but for what it is and the setting it’s in it’s just flat out bad

[@TheJeffersW]

I still hate this art. I do not care if the internet has gaslit itself into liking it. Even talented artists are going to miss the mark now and again. If you cannot fail, what merit is success?

[@intraocellus]

It evokes disgust

[@bohneneintopf]

Agreed, if no art can be objectively bad, how can any art be good?

[@TrixyTrixter]

​@@intraocellus If only the art was for a card where that was the feeling the card should evoke.

[@drpibisback7680]

Mazur and Jeremy Wilson are my two favorite artists in Magic right now because they maintain such a unique artstyle. Most modern Magic art reads like filler, jobbers imitating a basic half-realistic digital painting style that could be on the cover of any random RPG sourcebook, but when you see Mazur's eclectic collage-esque work or Wilson's bright white negative space cutouts, you know instantly whose work it is. None of that other art is "bad," per se, but it doesn't wow me the way they do.

[@Big_Dai]

@4:23 Yes, and they still are. 1. Magic has expectations tied to it, specially in art.. and whoever thought to choose this artist, should not be making such choices. But the state of Magic has been in disarray for a while.. and the "important things" that were, are no longer the norm. Which is something that has been lost, specially in Secret Lairs. 2. I'm one to think continuing to print SEVERAL different versions of the same thing, is bad design anyway. A card should have a representation and not change, otherwise, it becomes something else. They make functional reprints all the time.. why not just do that? 3. As for her specific piece.. It doesn't ultimately matter which frame is chosen. The displayed red and flat texture of the robe, as well as the empty black on the face is just too contrasting with the rest of the piece. Even the fire on the other goblet. It is a fact that this card could have been much better (or already was)! Even while retaining the idea, Yayoi's take on such a similar idea isn't as "repulsive" .. but it also feels flat! The kind of piece you'd expect to find in YuGiOh! 4. Also, mentioning @12:19 Matthew G. Lewis besides such a piece? Really?

[@laurie345]

Its probably a bit reductionist to say as much but I think like the average person is just a little too jaded and literally minded to engage with art that isn't strictly representative and within that sweet spot of being detailed, but not overly rendered in an off putting way. Most people just kind of want media to be agreeable because they engage with it primarily as a distraction from the real world, which is anything but. Me personally, I think that's stupid. I want art to be confrontational sometimes, I want it to reflect the world around me not obscure it. Not all the time but at least some of it. When I first saw that printing of Faithless Looting and the art for Social Climber I was genuinely captivated by how odd each piece was, how thoroughly apart from anything else in Magic they stood. Carly Mazur's contributions to Magic's card art feel to me like a spiritual successor to the tile-fixated art of Margaret Organ-Kean, or the three wolf moon, fairy painting, sensibilities of Susan Van Camp. All three artists are among the most unique to grace Magic, and while many might write off their work as out of place or just plain ugly, I think each possesses a special kind of beauty only found in those things which break the conventions of artistic beauty.

[@doomhowar]

It's a nice story and all but that doesn't change how ugly that rendition of faithless looting is. The artist isn't even necessarily bad at art either, which makes the style choices baffling.

[@lopppopp9581]

This video is so pointless, you basically called your viewers and magic players uneducated in art. Nothing against peculiar magic art styles but this Faithless Looting variant just sucks. Even good artists can produce a terrible piece.

[@rathlord]

I made this comment last time you talked about this card, and I’ll say it again: Art is subjective. I think you agree with that. That means it’s okay for people to *not* like specific art. Everyone who dislikes this piece is not just spreading vitriol or being ignorant, and it’s extremely disappointing to see you champion that idea. I think a lot of Carly’s art is incredible. I do not like this piece. That’s informed from pure personal opinion- I didn’t know it was disliked widespread until recently. But I also don’t like the abolishment of Magic’s artistic identity. As I’ve also said before- Magic is a game first. What drew a lot of us to this game was the art and the identity of that game, and that style and consistent identity are unquestionably eroded by the addition of all of these kinds of pieces. I love it as someone who loves art, but I don’t love it as someone who loves Magic. All in all, I’m genuinely really disappointed by your uncharacteristically heavy handed and one-sided take on this topic. Even a single sentence acknowledging valid critique of the art direction of Magic would go along way, but you seem intent on convincing us that our opinions on subjective art are wrong, or worse that disliking a single piece of art lumps you in with the ignorant and “dense”.

[@RhysticStudies]

You're cherry-picking a lot of the video because of how you feel about me or the painting and my position is intentionally being misrepresented as a result. Nowhere in the video did I make value judgments about the piece. Nowhere did I claim it to be "good" or "bad" and nowhere did I give preference to those who liked (or disliked) it. Instead, I lent Carly a platform to describe her work and allow her to respond to the vitriolic responses she received when it was released. I then criticized the weak arguments made against the painting and addressed why they were weak ("this doesn't depict Faithless Looting, the painting is unfinished, this was made in MS Paint, I could paint this," etc). Not once did I say anyone was wrong for disliking the painting. You can feel however you want. The point of the video was to provide some much-needed context and give insight into its creation and reception. From there, and better informed, you can decide how you feel about the piece.

[@AB-sw4kb]

I agree with this take. It can't be both challenging for Magic and also just like everything else. Part of this print's identity is how much of a break it is from identifiable Magic art. It can't be both jarring and as easily acceptable as something familiar, yet Sam's arguing that it's wrong to be opposed to something jarring. It's jarring for a reason. I like Carly's other work, and I guess it's fine to have something "out there" for a special art edition, but you can't tell me it's just a normal Magic card.

[@Rabidconscience]

@@RhysticStudiesIf know anything about art, which from your prior works I have seen you know much, you should know very well that you don’t have to say something out loud for your message to be vividly clear.

[@qriist1850]

@@RhysticStudiesyeah but the art is bad

[@rathlord]

@@RhysticStudies I understand where you’re coming from, but I think it’s a bit unfair of a response. I feel it’s pretty clear from the tone of the video how you feel about the detractors of this piece. As for how I feel about you- I respect you immensely and enjoy your content a lot. I’m really disappointed that you think this is an attack on you and worse an intentional misrepresentation of your point. I know seeing criticism of your content is hard, but I assure you I’m here because I care about the topic and enjoy your content, and mean absolutely no ill will towards yourself or this talented artist. I understand, respect, and appreciate where you’re coming from. I think giving Carly a positive place to share her perspective and her story with this piece is fantastic. But by covering off on 4 reasons why critiques of this piece were unfair and *zero* reasons why they might be acceptable, the implication is clear to the viewers, even if it might not have been to you making it. I don’t expect you to change your mind here, but I do wish you would sit down and watch and consider the implications of how you covered the topic. If you’re happy with that- fine. But I do think it’s okay for us to be disappointed if we feel this wasn’t covered fairly.

[@zackfair9088]

We can go into detail about why it was made the way it was all we want, at the end of the day it's still an unappealing piece of Art to me

[@cheesi]

So, what does that add to the conversation?

[@grantpolley]

It adds precisely what the video essay failed to discuss: the functionality of a premiere set MtG artwork. In other words, it should ideally evoke the card and be pleasant to the eye.

[@MTGBear]

This, every time art weirdos say that some garbage like this or taping a banana to a wall is good and I dont "get it"

[@MTGBear]

​@@cheesi arts bad

[@cheesi]

@@grantpolley I don't see the relevance of this at all. Someone thinking it looks bad for no particular reason does nothing. It's pointless. For a better example, personally I do think the card looks pretty bad, for me it's mostly due to the framing, and that issue _was_ covered in the video.

[@milesstone2501]

To be fair, they kind of gave her a shit prompt. I would've given her several, or used one of her other existing artworks for a card. She's made some really good art but I think they boxed her in creatively too much, and it shows

[@danontheinternets]

MtG is too good for a great chunk of its fanbase.

[@Shmitty-nx5gz]

surprised to find out this was a full-size canvas painting which is very awesome and knowing the inspiration gives me a new appreciation for the piece than before

[@jackthecoolkid1995]

This was the card that got me into collecting art cards alternate styles of art. I can attribute this one art to much of how I have found myself as a player today. It's one of my favorite art pieces on a card, ever. I'm so glad someone else is talking about it in a positive way. Thank you Sam.

[@LeonBelmont1000]

You must have terrible taste lmao.

[@SmuggyOcelot]

@@LeonBelmont1000 "someone has a different opinion than me, I'm going to cry about it" because apparently people can't have different opinions on the internet. Art is subjective. The idea of "bad taste" is complete bullshit

[@LeonBelmont1000]

@@SmuggyOcelot Art being "subjective" means everything is free from ridicule because if everything is art, nothing can be good/bad. Another dipshit position to take, well done.

[@SmuggyOcelot]

@@LeonBelmont1000 lol what you say means nothing to me; you are nothing to me. No point in arguing with someone who thinks they know everything also, so you're saying people can't have their own opinion?

[@LeonBelmont1000]

​@@SmuggyOcelot I'm everything to you if your ego hinges on responding to my comment. I'm just imagining you defending eating feces with the "some people enjoy it, therefore its not bad". Your position sucks, and it always will.

[@GamingEthos]

You know what's crazy. When I got into commander almost 2 years ago. I went to my lgs to get singles for my isshin deck and the first card I needed was faithless looting. I saw in the case the foil version of this card and thought it was really striking especially with the gold border so I picked it up. I had no clue people lost their minds over it 😅

[@Juniper-111]

I love her art so much

[@Lucarioguild7]

Personally I didn't like the art but the hate the artist got was insane and I'm glad WotC takes risks on new and weirder artists

[@pvtpain66k]

Your video from 6 years ago, Framing Magic juxtaposed with this hard defense of a very different to the traditional style.

[@Lyubimov89]

Initially I listened to this episode during a car ride, and spent the whole time anxiously wondering what the art was to draw such harsh criticism. I was surprised at how brilliant and striking it was, and not just cause it’s a good painting. I LOVE that it’s not a scene of character looting something, it’s not blatant and upfront. Magic (in general, not the game) is now deep in pop culture, and with that it became formalized. Magic is not a mystic and unknowable force that rejects human logic, it’s a spell of X level that does Y damage. But this art brings the mysticism right back. When I saw the art, I immediately began wondering, how is this faceless looting? What is being stolen, how, why? To what end? So much wonder was brought back to magic (and, indeed, to Magic) with this artist’s work. Brilliant art.

[@eliluke2427]

This is my favorite Magic card. I have it in foil and treasure it. I don’t think I’ve ever loved a piece of artwork more.

[@alejandrorivas4585]

Even if I don't like it, I'm glad its target audience such as you resonated with and cherish it! I love her broader portfolio I just dislike this piece

[@p2trivej]

Not a big fan when the art was revealled, but someone mentioned this was supposed to be a prank. A grattiti done over a mural of classic beauty. Hence, faithless looting. I remember seeing pictures like this back in my college, so it makes some sorta sense in the context of the magical school. I appreciated the art more. It turns out that's not the case. Oh well.

[@Mostimpressiveindeed]

The feature of Donato Giancola's Cartographer at the 3:52 mark made me soar with joy because that was the first magic card whose art ever wowed me when I was a teen.

[@jesusojeda7850]

You're playing devil's advocate in this one, and it's a bit contradictory considering your tone by the end of the previous video about "the bling"- I agree that personal attacks are childish and out of place, I understand that art is a form of expression and concepts like "beauty" and "aesthetics" are in the eye of the beholder, however I can always question the art decisions for art on MTG cards. I wouldn't in any way make this ad hominem and point towards the artist- but I can say WotC is taking very "questionable" decisions with the art design for the many alternate and premium cards in recent times, and it reeks more and more like overproduction and product exhaustion.

[@Willensimperium]

Now, I'm not a MTG player (played in my youth for fun, but adore your channel), so I don't want to judge if I find it fitting for the game to be honest. What I can say, is that I indeed, as you mention in the video, think the yellows in the frame don't help it, as well as the big cut outs. I liked the version with the verticality and transparent frame by far the most. In general, apart from MTG I think the piece is absolutely stunning tbh, would hang that on my wall all day. Also the other few pieces from her you showed. Will follow her work now just because of your video. So Carly, your work really rocks and don't let internet idiots get you down in any way, you have a lot of new fans for sure now. :)