More Publisher Laziness
Rickards has copped it twice now. The Rap Sheet has been keeping an eye out for it. Now it seems to be Olen's turn, although at least his book came out first. I only noticed it because I'm still reading Olen's previous novel and I was surprised to see what I thought was his book in the wrong part of the crime section.
I have to ask: Has it always been this way, or are we all just noticing it now?
13 comments:
Being a Photo Editor, more and more people will buy an image from a Photo Library now instead of spend mulla on a shoot. Yep, lazy but the budget isn't there either. Hopefully the designer does a good job with the image. Everything is either copied or borrowed these days...
Strangely, I like Olen's cover better. Wish I could explain why.
Mary, as a complete layperson, I can't help but wonder why the designer can't just take their own shot of a moody tree or street scene. But then, do they have the artistic skills for that, a decent camera, proper model releases signed by the tree...
Steven, it has to be the blurriness. Maybe you should get your eyes checked.
Actually, I think the zoom-in on Olen's cover makes it seem more personal. The other's a little cold and distant.
It's not that simple. You're not paying a designer to be a photographer. It'd be like saying a writer could write romance just because they write crime. Yeah? Maybe not a good example.
"You're not paying a designer to be a photographer."
I think that sums it up nicely.
While it's true a designer isn't a photographer, there's more to actual design work than choosing a zoom level and/or overall colour tint on a stock photo and slapping some text over it. To complement your nice big pro stock library image there's plenty of free-for-use stock which could provide extra objects, images, textures, whatever, to build up a scene relatively easily. It still wouldn't mean much differentiation, but it'd be some at least.
I wonder how much of this has to do with what Jakubowski was talking about in The Guardian.
In the poker machine industry, it's not uncommon to design a game based on the jurisdiction that is the fussiest, meaning it can be a bit bland for other markets.
Are the supermarkets playing the part of lowest common denominator to the publishers?
Pretty annoying, particularly for John for obvious reasons. I've just posted my new jacket over at http://www.contemporary-nomad.com/ and would appreciate views, and reassurance that it doesn't resemble anything else out there (okay, it's the Equalizer with the Invisible Man's head, but other than that...)
I would soooo pay to see a remake of The Equaliser with the invisible man in it.
Kevin mentioned you'd caught this, and you just fucked my day, Daniel! Actually, no. As you say, at least mine was first.
I think Mary's hit the nail on the head: The Budget. It's always the problem in these instances.
Ironically, though, in my experience art departments completely ignore design suggestions by authors. This is either a general truth, or my covers are terribly lame.
Kevin, I'll check out your Equalizer shortly.
Olen, sorry to do that to your day, especially seeing as I didn't use any lubricant. Actually, I just don't have your email so I didn't think to check with you first.
BTW, I like your covers. Moody and elegant.
Don't get me wrong, Daniel. All press is good press. And actually, it was nice to see another publisher mooning off of a path I've already traversed.
The only annoying thing is I think I like the other cover better!
Stock photos are SO prevalent these days. As an art director, I see it all the time. The worst was seeing Jennifer Solow's book, THE BOOSTER on the discoutnt table at B&N next to another book with the exact same cover image. Ouch.
Post a Comment