The July issue of Astronomy Magazine has an interesting article entitled "Visions of Space", by Andrew Fazekas.  The article gives an overview of space art, along with quotes and images from a few notable artists in the field.  Here's the description from the Astronomy website:

"Imagine having a ringside seat at the most magnificent cosmic events; space artists provide such a vantage point, allowing anyone to take vicarious journeys through the universe."

Although the article itself does not appear online, there is related content, which profiles four well-known artists.  On a related note, the previous issue included a brief interview with William K. Hartmann.  This sort of Space Art coverage certainly doesn't happen in every issue, so take a look if you can.

 

My personal opinion is that, although the article was a worthwhile overview, it could have been written 5, or even 10 years ago with very few changes.  I would like to have seen it dig deeper into the community surrounding this area of interest today, including a wider range of artists. 

In addition, a mention of a few enthusiast websites might have been useful, such as our own.  SV has been around for 3 and a half years now and helped, on many levels, generate interest in Space Art among tech-savvy youth.  Other sites, like DA, or even GFXArtist have contingents of budding space artists as well.  These young artists are often off the mark in many ways regarding scientific accuracy, and many may not be making space art 5 years from now, but the community (everyone combined) has an energy that shouldn't be overlooked.  Some WILL remain as the years pass and become contributors to the field.  Some "new" artists like Greg Martin and Gary Tonge have blazed this "next generation" trail and others have now picked up the torch as well.  Give us a preview!  At least a short paragraph. 

Maybe this would be a good spin for a future article?

These comments aren't meant to take ANYTHING away from the veterans in the field (many of whom are personal friends), but just a point to vary the coverage from time to time, even in the smallest of ways.  

 

yes i agree with you there dave that there should have been more of a push towards the upcoming artists and more aiming at the enthusiasts websites and that there was not very many artists mentioned at all it looked like a very quickly written article that did not delve as much as i was hoping into the subject of space art and its artists. It was worthwhile having a look thanks for brining it to our attention!
(sorry if this is just a re-print of ideas!!)
Will

Art, just like music, has quite an intriguing mathematical and scientific properties. No piece of non-abstract art is truly realistic when it is off-tangent. Therefore in making any piece of art, including space art, a fine distinction must be made between abstract space art and realism. Therefore I think it would be unfair to judge young artists simply because their art is off the mark in terms of realism, but give them a chance to improve, tips and base specs for them to work on, and inspire them about the marvel of space.

just my two cents worth

djspinnet wrote: Art, just like music, has quite an intriguing mathematical and scientific properties. No piece of non-abstract art is truly realistic when it is off-tangent. Therefore in making any piece of art, including space art, a fine distinction must be made between abstract space art and realism. Therefore I think it would be unfair to judge young artists simply because their art is off the mark in terms of realism, but give them a chance to improve, tips and base specs for them to work on, and inspire them about the marvel of space.

Agreed...unfortunately the article didn't even get around to "judging" the younger artists because they weren't mentioned at all...  

There is a lot of room to write more details about the scene today than what was covered.  I'm not sure that we will find anything like that in a mainstream magazine right now though.