Hi Greg.
Man... I've thought about your bunker question this morning. It's a good one. But, there are too many aged courses of good quality out there which currently feature "blah" bunkers - as a result of the affects of time, etc. - to pick one. And, I don't want to (potentially) offend anyone either, by naming names!
Your question does spark another thought relative to bunkers though:
Too often, architects have implemented a "trademark" bunker style at course after course without drawing on unique site characteristics, heritage, and even evolutionary factors to determine a distinctive bunker style. My approach is always to draw on these important factors to create unique bunker style at different courses. Using a practical example, we won't be implementing the same bunker style we're building at Victoria Golf Club at Overlake G&CC. While both courses have a "Macan connection", site characteritics and design history at these two courses are very different, dictating distinctive bunker style.
As has been discussed here, there's really no such thing as a "Ross bunker style" or "Tillinghast bunker style" or a "Macan bunker style". The works of a true artist cannot be defined by a single rule. Historical materials prove this.
Throughout my career thus far, I've designed and personally shaped a lot of bunkers. I'm proud to say that the bunkers at Blackhawk are different than those at Sagebrush for example; and, the bunkers at Cabot Links will be different from both of those courses. Every golf course deserves to be distinct; and, as you know, bunker style plays a big part in creating such distinctiveness. When it comes to renovation/restoration work, delving into the design history of individual courses, drawing on heritage and the nature of distinct properties and, in some cases, incorporating elements which have evolved over time greatly assist with creating a bunker style that is distinctive.