|
Post by Steve M on Nov 12, 2012 14:46:40 GMT
So what do we prefer, art or photographic covers on our westerns?
Years back photographs appeared on the covers of some UK published westerns, such as Tom Curry's RIO KID books for instance. The vast majority were paintings though.
As digital photography (or photoshop if you like) became better it was inevitable that covers would start to be created this way and the first ones were awful - light coming from different directions, elements of the image out of scale with each other, mix colour casts, obvious cut-out edges....
Nowadays things are much better technique wise, I just wish the people who create these covers would use a wider bank of images...check books from the LONGARM and GUNSMITH series and see how often the same characters appear on different covers.
We still do get painted covers, such as those by Dennis Lyle (see James Reasoner's REDEMPTION series for one example).
There has been some superb photograph used on book covers too in recent years such as the double trade editions of David Thompson's WILDERNESS books (excellent landscapes).
Have said that, my choice is for paintings every time.
|
|
|
Post by john on Nov 12, 2012 17:23:05 GMT
Without second thought, paintings.
|
|
|
Post by limeyf on Nov 12, 2012 17:28:09 GMT
Paintings
|
|
|
Post by benbridges on Nov 18, 2012 10:32:16 GMT
Definitely paintings. Remember back in the 1970s a great number of books published by Fontana used photographic covers. This was done deliberately to give the impression that the book in question had been turned into a film, and the illustration was actually a scene from the film. The thinking was that readers would buy the books on the assumption that, "if it's been turned into a movie, it must be good!"
|
|