Good idea! Yes, completely post-waters ‘floyd’-ize it with meaningless and pretentious ‘symbolism’ and gimmicks.crofloyd wrote:It would have been better if they modernised an old DSOTM cover, like put some LED lights (like on PULSE) or things like that.
final dsotm cover
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:24 pm
- Location: London
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 10:55 pm
- Location: Austin
ok, so you dont like post waters floyd, we can all see that, but the vibe im getting is that all your anger regarding AMLOR and TDB is now being taken out on the artwork, which is actually pretty cool, better than the final cut, which is the 2nd worst pink floyd cover. TDB is a really cool cover, especially with the way it can either be one or two faces. i also like the AMLOR artwork. im not saying i hate the final cut artwork, but it is somewhat bland and not very exciting
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:24 pm
- Location: London
I really like the final cut artwork. Because it was so minimal and tasteful it hasn't dated like MLOR and TDB have. I'd describe TFC artwork as 'timeless', I'd say the same about the original DSOTM cover. I'd describe this new one as 'dog-dirt'.Tommy wrote:ok, so you dont like post waters floyd, we can all see that, but the vibe im getting is that all your anger regarding AMLOR and TDB is now being taken out on the artwork, which is actually pretty cool, better than the final cut, which is the 2nd worst pink floyd cover. TDB is a really cool cover, especially with the way it can either be one or two faces. i also like the AMLOR artwork. im not saying i hate the final cut artwork, but it is somewhat bland and not very exciting
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 1083
- Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:52 pm
Well, probably everyone who posted on this thread... I only meant the front cover to begin with, but...Real Pink in the Inside wrote:Who really cares about artwork and such?
That's why I voted for Wish You Were Here - not only is it a great cover, it's also got great continuity and has a big impact on me when I look at it - the LP, I mean, not the CD.
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
Hey, I also said "An album cover and lyric sheet should suffice IMO"Feeling Very Pink wrote:Well, probably everyone who posted on this thread... I only meant the front cover to begin with, but...Real Pink in the Inside wrote:Who really cares about artwork and such?
Obviously album covers are a tad more important than the artwork inside a CD booklet, which is what I was referring to when I asked, "Who cares about artwork...?
Album covers help you quickly recognize a work when you see a bunch of albums scattered around the place...
I suppose I'm just trying to say that some people act like the artwork is actually a part of the musical piece. That's not the case...Some people act like it's more important than it really is.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17166
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
Is that your final answer? Surely the artwork is a part of the final package and is not there just a symbol to represent a work? Surely it is there to add something - perhaps in a small quantity - to the overall package. It is not just for fun.Real Pink in the Inside wrote:I suppose I'm just trying to say that some people act like the artwork is actually a part of the musical piece. That's not the case...Some people act like it's more important than it really is.
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
I suppose the primary function of artwork is to make the lyric sheet not appear so "bla." From a business standpoint, I can understand trying to make a lyric sheet look "nice" or "deep" when the lyrics are indeed crap. You want your product to sell and you'll do whatever it takes for it to sell. I think the artwork can cloud one's evaluation of the lyrics, which tend to take a backseat on the page to the artwork with most individuals.
Sure, artwork is another part of the product, but it's far from being on par with the actual content of the album it is attached to.
Sure, artwork is another part of the product, but it's far from being on par with the actual content of the album it is attached to.
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 10:55 pm
- Location: Austin
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17166
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 10:55 pm
- Location: Austin
-
- Embryo
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2003 3:57 am
30th aniv cover
how can you improve on a classic. leave it alone!!!
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:24 pm
- Location: London
I reckon the artwork is a really important to record companies these days. Lots of images and general bumf and things will make it appear as though consumers get their money’s worth so they won’t just go and steal the mp3s from the internetReal Pink in the Inside wrote:I suppose the primary function of artwork is to make the lyric sheet not appear so "bla." From a business standpoint, I can understand trying to make a lyric sheet look "nice" or "deep" when the lyrics are indeed crap. You want your product to sell and you'll do whatever it takes for it to sell. I think the artwork can cloud one's evaluation of the lyrics, which tend to take a backseat on the page to the artwork with most individuals.
Sure, artwork is another part of the product, but it's far from being on par with the actual content of the album it is attached to.
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 1083
- Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 4:52 pm