Dec-14-2010, 07:50 AM (UTC)
(Dec-13-2010, 06:16 PM (UTC))Mervi Wrote: Thanks for adding them!
I don't know, I kind of like these although the hooded figure makes me think more of Chade than Fitz and I don't know what the birds (eagles?) are about, but these aren't *horrible* if you know what I mean? Bright colours, quite ~dramatic... but I guess that's what sells?
Anyway, reprints with mediocre covers are better than no reprints at all, right? *side-eyes the Finnish publisher*
The colors aren't dramatic...they're garish D8
(Dec-14-2010, 04:13 AM (UTC))Rendezvous Wrote: What annoys me is its the same picture in each, just a different pose for figure on the front and a new colour. Its lazy.
Agreed. It was probably cheaper to have one person redo all three books in one style than to commission three separate works, never mind three works by accomplished artists like Howe and Whelan. I wouldn't mind so much if only the artist weren't so, as you said, lazy. He/she probably didn't even read the manuscript and went by whatever "fantasy" elements he/she thought of first "Okay so there's this castle....and a mysterious hooded figure....with a magical staff! And then I'll add some fancy corners so it looks like an old book, but with hip colors!"
I wonder why they couldn't just make a new cover that still features Howe's paintings? I guess they want to attract a new audience (I'm thinking young teenage goths/vampire fans.)