Covering Album Covers

General music discussion.
Kory
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 7406
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 1:42pm
Location: In the Discosphere

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Kory » 31 Oct 2017, 4:13pm

Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:46pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:34pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:58pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:45pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:29pm


Is it generally a faux pas to use two different designs/fonts within the album title like that? Other than their close proximity, isn't it a signal that they are two separate elements?
I can't think of another album which does it like this, but I don't know if I'd call it a faux pas. I might not have chosen that font, but they might have been trying to make a statement, meaning the the two separate elements are intentional ("germfree" is clean and orderly, "adolescents," both in life and typographically, is not). I'd also have chosen to have the two words in the same color to pull it together more, but I think the play for garishness may have been intentional too (although I think the original used different colors from this anyway).
So common colour is a more important unifier than common typography?
It depends entirely on the application. These are all just tools in one's box for making design work, but I would say generally so. Design has a rich tradition of mixing fonts, and it's one of the hardest things to get right. But if the two lines were the same font, but still different colors, I would personally say that would be less effective that what they have now. But it all depends on context and intent. Different solutions in different environments, for sure.
It's not just about different type fonts and different color. Correct distancing/spacing are equally vital. Also knowng when not to include something.
Yup, I was just answering the specific question.
Inder:
Absolutely. Here's another collection of words:

Table salt (spoon hinge)
Octopus (Ukraine)
St. Petersburg (arms)
Ginger beer (cauliflower)
Pat Sajak (PSak)
Lamp post (self evident)
Florida Timeshare (ditto)
Heraclitus (EMI)
Developers (Developers Developers)
Boogie With Your Children

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 71177
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Dr. Medulla » 31 Oct 2017, 4:14pm

Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 3:42pm
Sure but to say you can't do it is so defeatest. Especially as you are the guy who likes all those indie albums with odd covers. I mean anyone could pick up a camera point it at something you like a go click. A tree or a branch taken up close or pattern on a rock and there's your cover art. There are no rules to what looks good. That even counts regarding the font. Once an artist picks a font they then become associated with it. The Smiths are a prime example of this.
This is taking the thread off-course, but, sure, I could fake it. People do that all the time. But I know it would be faked because I lack that knack, that eye. That talent just isn't in me anymore than I could write and perform a symphony. I'm creative in some ways, but visual art? Nope. That's not defeatist. It's respecting the people who do have the talent and not asserting membership in a club that I don't merit.
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 35452
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Marky Dread » 31 Oct 2017, 4:23pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:14pm
Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 3:42pm
Sure but to say you can't do it is so defeatest. Especially as you are the guy who likes all those indie albums with odd covers. I mean anyone could pick up a camera point it at something you like a go click. A tree or a branch taken up close or pattern on a rock and there's your cover art. There are no rules to what looks good. That even counts regarding the font. Once an artist picks a font they then become associated with it. The Smiths are a prime example of this.
This is taking the thread off-course, but, sure, I could fake it. People do that all the time. But I know it would be faked because I lack that knack, that eye. That talent just isn't in me anymore than I could write and perform a symphony. I'm creative in some ways, but visual art? Nope. That's not defeatist. It's respecting the people who do have the talent and not asserting membership in a club that I don't merit.
I simply can not agree with this attitude. For me it's about having a go. I see this as the whole ethos of the D.I.Y. ethic that punk brought about. Some of those record covers that were done on next to no budget are great. All it takes is an idea a little inspiration from something you maybe see everyday like a soap packet for example. Or maybe something that looks how your music sounds.
Image
Image

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 35452
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Marky Dread » 31 Oct 2017, 4:24pm

Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:13pm
Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:46pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:34pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:58pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:45pm


I can't think of another album which does it like this, but I don't know if I'd call it a faux pas. I might not have chosen that font, but they might have been trying to make a statement, meaning the the two separate elements are intentional ("germfree" is clean and orderly, "adolescents," both in life and typographically, is not). I'd also have chosen to have the two words in the same color to pull it together more, but I think the play for garishness may have been intentional too (although I think the original used different colors from this anyway).
So common colour is a more important unifier than common typography?
It depends entirely on the application. These are all just tools in one's box for making design work, but I would say generally so. Design has a rich tradition of mixing fonts, and it's one of the hardest things to get right. But if the two lines were the same font, but still different colors, I would personally say that would be less effective that what they have now. But it all depends on context and intent. Different solutions in different environments, for sure.
It's not just about different type fonts and different color. Correct distancing/spacing are equally vital. Also knowng when not to include something.
Yup, I was just answering the specific question.
For sure mate I realised that.
Image
Image

Kory
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 7406
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 1:42pm
Location: In the Discosphere

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Kory » 31 Oct 2017, 4:25pm

Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:52pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:34pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:58pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:45pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:29pm


Is it generally a faux pas to use two different designs/fonts within the album title like that? Other than their close proximity, isn't it a signal that they are two separate elements?
I can't think of another album which does it like this, but I don't know if I'd call it a faux pas. I might not have chosen that font, but they might have been trying to make a statement, meaning the the two separate elements are intentional ("germfree" is clean and orderly, "adolescents," both in life and typographically, is not). I'd also have chosen to have the two words in the same color to pull it together more, but I think the play for garishness may have been intentional too (although I think the original used different colors from this anyway).
So common colour is a more important unifier than common typography?
It depends entirely on the application. These are all just tools in one's box for making design work, but I would say generally so. Design has a rich tradition of mixing fonts, and it's one of the hardest things to get right. But if the two lines were the same font, but still different colors, I would personally say that would be less effective that what they have now. But it all depends on context and intent. Different solutions in different environments, for sure.
Sure sure, art and dogma shouldn't mingle. But that is quite enlightening to me because my instinct would be to think that consistent font type trumps all else. Then again, it's enlightening because that kind of work is so beyond my ken. I can bullshit interpret as well as the next phony, but designing something is just utterly foreign.
A lot of designers will vehemently and persistently tell you that what they do isn't art, but "visual communication." Art is something you do because you want to, design is something you do because your client needs the most effective visuals to move their product. That kind of talk bugs me because it's kind of douchy, but I think it's mainly to remind designers that they do things for well-considered reasons, not because it "looks cool." Art is supposed to be free from rules, and indeed, if you don't care about selling it, you can and should do whatever you like. But there are generally accepted notions on color, scale, position, etc that improve paintings, collage, etc. So it's like "duh. shut up, designer, it's true of anything that's visual." So an album cover, being a little of both, will be subject to a bit of dogma, but it's all situational, and CERTAINLY it's all subjective.

If you ever have time, Google around for "font combinations." There's a lot of study and thought on the subject, and as I say, it still stymies me sometimes. It's hard to get the combos just right, which is why you may have an aversion to that kind of thing.
Inder:
Absolutely. Here's another collection of words:

Table salt (spoon hinge)
Octopus (Ukraine)
St. Petersburg (arms)
Ginger beer (cauliflower)
Pat Sajak (PSak)
Lamp post (self evident)
Florida Timeshare (ditto)
Heraclitus (EMI)
Developers (Developers Developers)
Boogie With Your Children

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 35452
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Marky Dread » 31 Oct 2017, 4:29pm

Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:25pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:52pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:34pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:58pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:45pm


I can't think of another album which does it like this, but I don't know if I'd call it a faux pas. I might not have chosen that font, but they might have been trying to make a statement, meaning the the two separate elements are intentional ("germfree" is clean and orderly, "adolescents," both in life and typographically, is not). I'd also have chosen to have the two words in the same color to pull it together more, but I think the play for garishness may have been intentional too (although I think the original used different colors from this anyway).
So common colour is a more important unifier than common typography?
It depends entirely on the application. These are all just tools in one's box for making design work, but I would say generally so. Design has a rich tradition of mixing fonts, and it's one of the hardest things to get right. But if the two lines were the same font, but still different colors, I would personally say that would be less effective that what they have now. But it all depends on context and intent. Different solutions in different environments, for sure.
Sure sure, art and dogma shouldn't mingle. But that is quite enlightening to me because my instinct would be to think that consistent font type trumps all else. Then again, it's enlightening because that kind of work is so beyond my ken. I can bullshit interpret as well as the next phony, but designing something is just utterly foreign.
A lot of designers will vehemently and persistently tell you that what they do isn't art, but "visual communication." Art is something you do because you want to, design is something you do because your client needs the most effective visuals to move their product. That kind of talk bugs me because it's kind of douchy, but I think it's mainly to remind designers that they do things for well-considered reasons, not because it "looks cool." Art is supposed to be free from rules, and indeed, if you don't care about selling it, you can and should do whatever you like. But there are generally accepted notions on color, scale, position, etc that improve paintings, collage, etc. So it's like "duh. shut up, designer, it's true of anything that's visual." So an album cover, being a little of both, will be subject to a bit of dogma, but it's all situational, and CERTAINLY it's all subjective.

If you ever have time, Google around for "font combinations." There's a lot of study and thought on the subject, and as I say, it still stymies me sometimes. It's hard to get the combos just right, which is why you may have an aversion to that kind of thing.
This is exactly how I feel about art. You have put it perfectly mate. Sometimes being deliberately wrong can be right. But always pleasing to the individuals eye.
Image
Image

Kory
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 7406
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 1:42pm
Location: In the Discosphere

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Kory » 31 Oct 2017, 4:35pm

Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:23pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:14pm
Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 3:42pm
Sure but to say you can't do it is so defeatest. Especially as you are the guy who likes all those indie albums with odd covers. I mean anyone could pick up a camera point it at something you like a go click. A tree or a branch taken up close or pattern on a rock and there's your cover art. There are no rules to what looks good. That even counts regarding the font. Once an artist picks a font they then become associated with it. The Smiths are a prime example of this.
This is taking the thread off-course, but, sure, I could fake it. People do that all the time. But I know it would be faked because I lack that knack, that eye. That talent just isn't in me anymore than I could write and perform a symphony. I'm creative in some ways, but visual art? Nope. That's not defeatist. It's respecting the people who do have the talent and not asserting membership in a club that I don't merit.
I simply can not agree with this attitude. For me it's about having a go. I see this as the whole ethos of the D.I.Y. ethic that punk brought about. Some of those record covers that were done on next to no budget are great. All it takes is an idea a little inspiration from something you maybe see everyday like a soap packet for example. Or maybe something that looks how your music sounds.
But still, there are things that are definitely considered bad design. Having a go is one thing (and to be encouraged), but coming up with a result that is effective and striking is another matter entirely, and often takes years of experience. I had friends ask me before I went into school "can't you just teach yourself?" And yeah, I could teach myself the programs, but the fundamentals really are super-important if you want to make the best decisions for maximum effect. Visual stuff is definitely subjective, but to paraphrase Orwell, some things are more subjective than others.

I sort of liken design to wine tasting, frankly. It's largely crap, but parts of it are real.
Inder:
Absolutely. Here's another collection of words:

Table salt (spoon hinge)
Octopus (Ukraine)
St. Petersburg (arms)
Ginger beer (cauliflower)
Pat Sajak (PSak)
Lamp post (self evident)
Florida Timeshare (ditto)
Heraclitus (EMI)
Developers (Developers Developers)
Boogie With Your Children

Rat Patrol
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 14581
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 9:23pm
Location: A flat burning junkheap for twenty square miles

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Rat Patrol » 31 Oct 2017, 4:36pm

Image

Kory
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 7406
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 1:42pm
Location: In the Discosphere

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Kory » 31 Oct 2017, 4:37pm

Marky Dread wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:29pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:25pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:52pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 2:34pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 1:58pm


So common colour is a more important unifier than common typography?
It depends entirely on the application. These are all just tools in one's box for making design work, but I would say generally so. Design has a rich tradition of mixing fonts, and it's one of the hardest things to get right. But if the two lines were the same font, but still different colors, I would personally say that would be less effective that what they have now. But it all depends on context and intent. Different solutions in different environments, for sure.
Sure sure, art and dogma shouldn't mingle. But that is quite enlightening to me because my instinct would be to think that consistent font type trumps all else. Then again, it's enlightening because that kind of work is so beyond my ken. I can bullshit interpret as well as the next phony, but designing something is just utterly foreign.
A lot of designers will vehemently and persistently tell you that what they do isn't art, but "visual communication." Art is something you do because you want to, design is something you do because your client needs the most effective visuals to move their product. That kind of talk bugs me because it's kind of douchy, but I think it's mainly to remind designers that they do things for well-considered reasons, not because it "looks cool." Art is supposed to be free from rules, and indeed, if you don't care about selling it, you can and should do whatever you like. But there are generally accepted notions on color, scale, position, etc that improve paintings, collage, etc. So it's like "duh. shut up, designer, it's true of anything that's visual." So an album cover, being a little of both, will be subject to a bit of dogma, but it's all situational, and CERTAINLY it's all subjective.

If you ever have time, Google around for "font combinations." There's a lot of study and thought on the subject, and as I say, it still stymies me sometimes. It's hard to get the combos just right, which is why you may have an aversion to that kind of thing.
This is exactly how I feel about art. You have put it perfectly mate. Sometimes being deliberately wrong can be right. But always pleasing to the individuals eye.
Exactly. If your doing it "wrong" is for the greater concept of the piece, then it's an effective choice.
Inder:
Absolutely. Here's another collection of words:

Table salt (spoon hinge)
Octopus (Ukraine)
St. Petersburg (arms)
Ginger beer (cauliflower)
Pat Sajak (PSak)
Lamp post (self evident)
Florida Timeshare (ditto)
Heraclitus (EMI)
Developers (Developers Developers)
Boogie With Your Children

Kory
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 7406
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 1:42pm
Location: In the Discosphere

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Kory » 31 Oct 2017, 4:37pm

Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:36pm
This is the correct answer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/27193825@ ... 083976781/
Heartily endorsed.
Inder:
Absolutely. Here's another collection of words:

Table salt (spoon hinge)
Octopus (Ukraine)
St. Petersburg (arms)
Ginger beer (cauliflower)
Pat Sajak (PSak)
Lamp post (self evident)
Florida Timeshare (ditto)
Heraclitus (EMI)
Developers (Developers Developers)
Boogie With Your Children

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 35452
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Marky Dread » 31 Oct 2017, 4:40pm

Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:36pm
This is the correct answer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/27193825@ ... 083976781/
Damn Medulla was right he can't do it.😁
Image
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 71177
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Dr. Medulla » 31 Oct 2017, 4:43pm

Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:25pm
A lot of designers will vehemently and persistently tell you that what they do isn't art, but "visual communication." Art is something you do because you want to, design is something you do because your client needs the most effective visuals to move their product.
In other words, art cannot be contaminated by commercialism and they are, in essence, degrading their own work. Whatever neuroses get you thru the night …
That kind of talk bugs me because it's kind of douchy, but I think it's mainly to remind designers that they do things for well-considered reasons, not because it "looks cool." Art is supposed to be free from rules, and indeed, if you don't care about selling it, you can and should do whatever you like. But there are generally accepted notions on color, scale, position, etc that improve paintings, collage, etc. So it's like "duh. shut up, designer, it's true of anything that's visual."
And even "breaking the rules" is, at heart, a search for different rules because, in then end, you ask yourself whether it "works." And assessing whether it works necessarily means calling upon some kind of schema or developing a new one. Art is a form of communication and successful communication does depend on the participants sharing common interpretative guides.
If you ever have time, Google around for "font combinations." There's a lot of study and thought on the subject, and as I say, it still stymies me sometimes. It's hard to get the combos just right, which is why you may have an aversion to that kind of thing.
Cool—something to feed my inadequacies. :wink:
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Rat Patrol
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 14581
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 9:23pm
Location: A flat burning junkheap for twenty square miles

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Rat Patrol » 31 Oct 2017, 4:51pm

Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:37pm
Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:36pm
This is the correct answer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/27193825@ ... 083976781/
Heartily endorsed.
Some of us liked Mick's original mix better.

Image

:shifty:
Image

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 35452
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Marky Dread » 31 Oct 2017, 4:54pm

Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:51pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:37pm
Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:36pm
This is the correct answer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/27193825@ ... 083976781/
Heartily endorsed.
Some of us liked Mick's original mix better.

Image

:shifty:
😁
Image
Image

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 71177
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Nerdo Crombezia
Contact:

Re: Covering Album Covers

Post by Dr. Medulla » 31 Oct 2017, 5:04pm

Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:51pm
Kory wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:37pm
Rat Patrol wrote:
31 Oct 2017, 4:36pm
This is the correct answer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/27193825@ ... 083976781/
Heartily endorsed.
Some of us liked Mick's original mix better.

Image

:shifty:
That is definitely the sleeve for the version that includes "First Night Back in London."
Walrus birth doesn't make good breakfast conversation!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 7 guests