tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033598682489350651.post744961831737396152..comments2023-05-27T01:53:21.676-04:00Comments on Diane L. Major: Specificity, Magic, and Getting Lost in Cover ArtUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033598682489350651.post-30946729703901499132016-08-01T09:32:17.096-04:002016-08-01T09:32:17.096-04:00Thank you for not planting anything in my head! :)...Thank you for not planting anything in my head! :)<br /><br />A lot of what I'm talking about is historicals, though - and I mean those set in an era before photography to a degree.<br /><br />https://donnaeverhart.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/the-education-of-dixie-dupree.jpg <br />Dixie's cover isn't merely the standard decapitated model, it's something much more evocative - a closeup instead of just a chopped off head. The butterflies are beautiful, the jar traps them. It has a lot to say, your cover.DLMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08768285199864217885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033598682489350651.post-41032193832208691562016-08-01T07:06:11.046-04:002016-08-01T07:06:11.046-04:00And so, this of course has me thinking about my co...And so, this of course has me thinking about my cover. There is a detail I questioned at the beginning, but the thought was it didn't matter in the grand scheme of pulling readers to it, i.e. no one picking up the book would think, "oh, but this..." (not going to say what cause then it's planted in your head - ha!)<br /><br />I know what you mean about book covers and the use and overuse of the same images. (I read somewhere that's actually a deliberate marketing tactic) Someone on JR's blog talked about "leg" covers. She said she refused to buy "leg books," i.e. the ones who's covers show only the legs. Publishers love the anonymity of that, plus the headless (like mine) or full body, but facing away from readers. Stock art is used because because it's the easiest to touch up or change should there be the need. And cost is a factor of course. Donnaevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09026536210749494257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033598682489350651.post-9904140435399770622016-07-28T20:53:10.528-04:002016-07-28T20:53:10.528-04:00Exactly! And why is it the subjective is so much b...Exactly! And why is it the subjective is so much better in some contexts?<br /><br />I've realized I failed to quantify it: created images, unlike captured ones, leave out just enough objective information that *we get to explore* ... and create. Even the most detailed matte painting invites you to imagine behind the windows, or beyond the mountains; to populate empty scenes with people, or to behold mute people and hear their voices.<br /><br />Created images demand <b>imag</b>ination. They don't tell us everything.DLMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08768285199864217885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3033598682489350651.post-30786570925582318672016-07-27T21:22:51.874-04:002016-07-27T21:22:51.874-04:00Thanks for the shout-out, Diane! My go-to example ...Thanks for the shout-out, Diane! My go-to example of great book cover art is the <a href="https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/2d/a3/e5/2da3e59abd28e1f5f640bd2a3aed00ab.jpg" rel="nofollow">1975 Pan Edition of THE WAR OF THE WORLDS</a>. It holds sentimental value since I have fond memories of borrowing that book from the library when I was about 9, and reading it for the first time. But I also love the detail and atmosphere of the artwork. A photograph wouldn't have worked as well.Colin Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03292997431935215499noreply@blogger.com