Does anyone actually like DaveArt masks?

[mod]

He makes the majority of masks we see in the NHL and some are over the top and some are simple and cool. He's pretty limited to what he can do with the awkward shape of the masks and the cage hole.

I'm browsing through them all now and for every one that I think is bad, I see two I like.

How can anyone hate this: https://www.flickr.com/photos/daveartmaskgallery/14198428638/in/album-72157645082980871/

See, that Bowser mask is cool. The thing is, you can have lots of detail like that in a mask, but it can't just be 20 random things thrown together, or it looks cluttered. He's extremely talented, he just gets too caught up in seeing how many different things he can fit on a mask
 
If you don't mind me asking, what is lens flare?

I'm referring to the fake shiny spots that he paints onto the masks to make it look like it's reflecting light.

You can see them here all over the Red Wings logo here:

020713_mrazek.jpg


And on the Predators logo here:

4946402382_ab9f47f044.jpg


I'm just being picky, but whatever.
 
I like a lot of his work, but some of it is far too overdone, and ruins what otherwise would be a good design with too much detail. Few examples -

1972513_10152325807004819_553187610_n.jpg


Unique design for a Canucks mask, but ruined with all of the extra logos.

16943593045_6f85fbe5cb_b.jpg


Again, a good design ruined with the extra logos.

1524802_10152302590009819_1793077344_n.jpg


Unique panthers on the sides, but too many mini-logos. Should have just kept the panther heads and the sun at the bottom, none of these extra logos that clutter it up.

7058_10152673224319819_5762957675124027763_n.jpg


Speaks for itself. WAY too many logos.

15841688458_0326ae76e2_o.jpg


One of the best designs on a Habs mask ever, but again, too many mini-logos on the sides, and the unneeded "31" on both sides of the chin adds to the clutter.




Now......

That being said, there are some of his masks that I think are absolutely great.

10410968_10152933472469819_8259232640989853438_n.jpg


Not a single think I'd change. Uncle Sam at the top is a unique touch, and the design isn't cluttered or ruined by 10 million mini-logos.

7986665678_7cb58afe39.jpg


Classic design, minimalist and a cool Pittsburgh steel vibe.

Pavelecs-new-mask.jpg


Probably my favorite DaveArt mask. Wish Pavelec still wore it.
 
I don't mind it as much, but I know that his self-proclaimed "Cradle of Creativity" and how every design description includes "Of course the mask is loaded with a treasure map of detail including DaveArt Super FX 2.0 and DaveArt GLOW Tech, etc" rubs people the wrong way.
 
I like his designs. I agree that they can be too detailed to be noticed on TV but I feel like, since the goalie (customer) is the one seeing it up close all season long, they probably like seeing those little details.

Always thought he did a really nice job with the Devils masks.
 
his masks are cutting edge and creative

therefore, they are the antithesis of stuffy, old timer, traditional hockey types

#GetOffMyLawn

:shakehead

I'm old enough to be a "stuffy, old timer, traditional hockey type". I remember the hockey establishment nearly having a collective coronary when San Jose unveiled their teal jerseys, which means I also remember the excitement over Brian Hayward's gaping shark mask.

The problem with most of these mask designs here and most of the great ones from the 90s is that, although those great ones were over-the-top, there was an ability to leave well enough alone. John Vanbiesbrouck's Panthers mask was four colors: navy, white, red, and gold. Hayward's shark mask was black, white, and varying shades of teal to create a narrow gradient. Mike Richter's liberty head was white, red, Ranger blue, and a slightly lighter shade of blue for the logo on the chin. Ed Belfour's eagle mask had the eagles on either side, and a lot of single-color red outside of that. Andy Moog's bear head was black, white, gold, and varying red that was limited to the mouth. Brodeur's longtime one was red, black, and white.

And that's the issue that there is with a lot of these on this thread: too many damned colors, too much fine detail that makes them impossible to be spotted and identified from a distance. Almost all of them are overloaded with shadowing, gradients, flares, or other fine details. It makes them absolutely stunning up close, and a muddled mess of nothing from 10 feet away. It's the same problem with the Blackhawks Stadium Series crest: the basic standard one is fine, and didn't need the extra embellishments of looking like it was in chrome.

As a wise man once said, "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
 
They look like airbrushed t-shirts from the fair. can't stand the glossy look.

basically, everyone needs to go where hiller goes. the majority are flat and simplistic. even the more busy ones have a good sense of style
anaheim-ducks-jonas-hiller-single-image-cut.jpg
 
I like his designs. I agree that they can be too detailed to be noticed on TV but I feel like, since the goalie (customer) is the one seeing it up close all season long, they probably like seeing those little details.

Actually, that should be the other way around. The most important with these masks is how they'll look from the fans' perspective (at the arena or on TV) .

And in that regard, DaveArt fails, big time.
 
So, since we don't own the mask, we shouldn't be able to have an opinion of if we like them or not? :laugh:

Uhm, I never said that? The original question in the thread title was "does anyone actually like DaveArt masks?" and I came up with a theory on who might like them. Furthermore, I even expanded this theory by speculating about why he is still around even though most HFBoards members seem to angrily yell at their screen whenever a new design comes out.
I never said you shouldn't have an opinion.


Actually, that should be the other way around. The most important with these masks is how they'll look from the fans' perspective (at the arena or on TV) .

And why is that? It's a piece of personal equipment, the most important thing is that 1) it provides the desired functionality and 2) that the person owning it likes it.
 
Now these Canucks masks are completely overdone.

10417754_10152868851714819_2217954299757709702_n.jpg

10710694_10152777659699819_2507645098025605838_n.jpg


First thing that comes to mind:





....whereas this Coyotes and Jackets mask is relatively simple and looks good.

1517462_10152864460784819_1588704041579783764_n.jpg

1897742_10152249992754819_340296856_n.jpg
 
Some good some bad. But he seems to go for the proverbial american more is better, not just more.

Some more Hiller (and Berra to apparently) for the thread as a reference of what I find ok and not overdone, I do like them other posted two of his:

olympics-mask-jonas-hiller.jpg


olympia-maske-reto-berra.jpg
 
If he cut out all the lens flares and actually let empty spaces just be empty rather than filled with countless shadows of other things, I think a lot of the masks he's done would be amazing.
 
I'm old enough to be a "stuffy, old timer, traditional hockey type". I remember the hockey establishment nearly having a collective coronary when San Jose unveiled their teal jerseys, which means I also remember the excitement over Brian Hayward's gaping shark mask.

The problem with most of these mask designs here and most of the great ones from the 90s is that, although those great ones were over-the-top, there was an ability to leave well enough alone. John Vanbiesbrouck's Panthers mask was four colors: navy, white, red, and gold. Hayward's shark mask was black, white, and varying shades of teal to create a narrow gradient. Mike Richter's liberty head was white, red, Ranger blue, and a slightly lighter shade of blue for the logo on the chin. Ed Belfour's eagle mask had the eagles on either side, and a lot of single-color red outside of that. Andy Moog's bear head was black, white, gold, and varying red that was limited to the mouth. Brodeur's longtime one was red, black, and white.

And that's the issue that there is with a lot of these on this thread: too many damned colors, too much fine detail that makes them impossible to be spotted and identified from a distance. Almost all of them are overloaded with shadowing, gradients, flares, or other fine details. It makes them absolutely stunning up close, and a muddled mess of nothing from 10 feet away. It's the same problem with the Blackhawks Stadium Series crest: the basic standard one is fine, and didn't need the extra embellishments of looking like it was in chrome.

As a wise man once said, "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

Very good post, avoids me making a snarky comment about ageism etc in response to the post you are answering to. Whether its '60's, '70's, '80's '90's etc "fashion", classic good taste and simplicity in design and colour usually withstands the test of time across all eras.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad