New versions

Welcome to the Sir Terry Pratchett Forums
Register here for the Sir Terry Pratchett forum and message boards.
Sign up
Oct 1, 2009
4,743
129
2,250
Boston, MA USA
#3
I'm thoroughly unimpressed with the cover art for these. So, people won't be smart enough to know which series a book belongs to unless basically ever cover in the series uses essentially the same design elements with a little variation? Maybe Kirby went over the top at times, but at least each cover of his Corgis was visually arresting.
 

gaspodescrew

Lance-Constable
Jun 16, 2022
22
4
100
40
#5
It’s generous to describe it as “art”. Publishers must have such a hard life, always having to find ways not to pay royalties to the people they depend on.

Those covers would be disappointing coming from a first year undergrad.
 

=Tamar

Sergeant-at-Arms
May 20, 2012
9,346
750
2,675
#6
Hi, gaspodescrew.
They also misuse the word "branding" to refer to things that are merely similar. A true brand is exactly the same every time, like a logo. It's not a brand, it's a style.

Admittedly, covers have to do a lot of work. They have to be recognizable from five feet away in a bookstore, and reduced to less than one inch in height on a computer screen, and still make some sort of impact. I think the best ones have two pictures - the one you see when you look at it full size, and the embedded one you see when you look at the tiny version. Pareidoleia can make even a vague shape into a face and thus attract your attention. Now if only they would make the title legible.

On the other hand, they are ebooks, and while a nice cover is pretty, I would assume that the people buying them bought for the name of the author and the title of the book, not the picture.
 
Oct 1, 2009
4,743
129
2,250
Boston, MA USA
#7
Hi, gaspodescrew.

On the other hand, they are ebooks, and while a nice cover is pretty, I would assume that the people buying them bought for the name of the author and the title of the book, not the picture.
Probably so, and even these are better than the versions with the awful black covers with a stock photo image of some object on it. And just about every UK version is better than the horrendous U.S. paperback version covers.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
12,585
891
3,400
45
Melbourne, Victoria
#8
Oh? *curious* Now I'm Curious Rath. ;) I've never seen the U.S. paperback covers; what are they like? Can I see one or two, please? :)
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
12,585
891
3,400
45
Melbourne, Victoria
#10
Oh, dear. Do you mean something like this or this or this, raisindot? Sheesh.

I can picture Madonna cavorting and crooning "Like a version - hey! Drawn for the very first time..." =P
 

Book of the Month

Good Omens

"Pratchett’s wackiness collaborates with Gaiman’s morbid humour; the result is a humanist delight to be savoured and read again and again."

Latest posts

User Menu

Newsletter