"Which artistic style is more your flavor? More "realism" or
more "cartoony?" "

I think both have their places. I know this may sound like a cop out but I really admire storytelling ability over "realism" or "cartoony". Ed McGuiness and Darwyn Cooke have both been criticized for being too cartoony but I find they can both really tell a story. The subtleties of their characters' faces shines through. Sometimes less is more. Look at Waterson's "Calvin and Hobbes". Great emoting.

On the other hand, I remember back when a certain upstart X-Men artist was criticized for being "too realistic". "Both Colossus and Storm have chests that are far too big for that level of realism!"

Of course, that "too realistic" look is why I'm on this forum today.

Depends on the story.

I can't picture New Frontier in anyone else's style but Cooke's. It's a relatively dramatic piece of historical fiction but it works in a more cartoony style.

Likewise, Batman: Hush is a relatively fun romp through Batman's rogues gallery, a sort of summer popcorn movie treatment of the character. It works well with Jim Lee's ultra detailed, sharply defined art style.

If Hush is a bit of a fun romp, and New Frontier is a bit of a serious story, why not switch art styles? The answer is I don't think either story would be served by different art. Hush is supposed to look "kewl" - that's part of its reason for being. New Frontier is supposed to look like retro 50's pop, because that's when it takes place.

It's one of the reasons I like Marvels or Alex Ross' work with Paul Dini - the art style matches the type of story being told. I think we can all agree Ross wouldn't be able to do a standard, web-slinging fun time on an issue of Spider-Man though. Mark Bagley or JRJr would be better for that.

Steve, I believe that's Jose Garcia Lopez riffing on a Hawkman cover originally done by Murphy Anderson...