Album cover artwork

How important is it to you?

Has the album cover artwork ever strengthened or weakened an album for you?

How would you feel if album covers were a flat white with the name of the band and album and a plain text?

if you feel like posting examples how artwork is used effectively or ineffectively, then go for it, but I wonder how soon we are flooded with dear Roger.

 

I personally would be content if there wasn't any album cover artwork.  It suggests something to the listener before you even get a chance to listen to it.  Shouldn't the music paint the image?  Is it possible that mp3s are the solution to this problem?  Especially if you are downloading from a site that doesn't not show the artwork of the album that you are downloading.  Personally, that doesnt work for me.  It is important for me to hold the album and play it on the cd player or turntable.  Something about the act of playing it is important at times, but that has nothing to do with the artwork.  Have a flat white album cover would be like painting at a museum hung on a white wall.  White is meant to suggest nothing, so therefore the artwork is all you see and all that can affect you.

I don't know, right now I am on this kick that I could do without the artwork.  At the same time though, maybe it is the artists choice to use an image to help the listener hear the music in a way that they intended it to be heard.  Then again, so often the album covers dont have much to do with anything, but there are times you can tell the album cover was designed specifically for that album. 

Okay, so this is basically what I just convinced myself, good artwork or no artwork at all

Aaron

I adore good cover art - always have. I'm sure everyone here has been tempted to buy an album just for the cover before now! Personally I don't always care for Dean's artwork. I'd go as far as to say the man's a bit overrated. For example:



Versus...




On the one hand we have something quirky, eye-catching, relevant and humourous. On the other we have something dark, brooding and if I'm honest not exactly mind-blowing technically. Now, which of those better reflects the MOOD of Gentle Giant's Octopus? Quirky or dark? I think you know the answer. Why, therefore does everyone say "make sure you find a copy with the Dean cover". Could it possibly be JUST because of his reputation? Sad, but I think that's probably true...

People want the Dean cover to Octopuss because its a better painting. You just don't believe that to be true. But it is IMO

STORM THORGERSON RULES

Paradox wrote: Album artwork is extremely important. Artwork seems to have taken a turn for the worse I blame the 80's.

Depends what you're looking at.  The likes of Storm Thorgerson seem to be getting better with each piece of artwork they do.  Just check out TMV - Frances the Mute and yourcodenameis:milo.  2 great examples of a genius at work.  Also, a new band called gloryscene, the artwork is amazing.  taken from a painting by a guy called alex waller.  I'm sure you'll appreciate that one. 

there's still something inherently wonderful about the 70s covers though.

spectral wrote: Paradox wrote: Album artwork is extremely important. Artwork seems to have taken a turn for the worse I blame the 80's. Depends what you're looking at.  The likes of Storm Thorgerson seem to be getting better with each piece of artwork they do.  Just check out TMV - Frances the Mute and yourcodenameis:milo.  2 great examples of a genius at work.  Also, a new band called gloryscene, the artwork is amazing.  taken from a painting by a guy called alex waller.  I'm sure you'll appreciate that one.  there's still something inherently wonderful about the 70s covers though.

I took a look at the artwork you suggested. Frances The Mute...Bagism? I couldn't find any artwork for Gloryscene, their website is just confusing!

Edited by Paradox

Aaron wrote: How would you feel if album covers were a flat white with the name of the band and album and a plain text?

I think that would generally be pretty dull. Yes, the music is the most important thing where an album is concerned, but artwork- or just interesting design- are also important. But they should always be suited to the bands style and the albums mood. So, the classic and much overused example: Roger Dean and Yes. Like many others, I reckon Roger Deans fantasy landscapes and bizzare architecture match up with the majority of Yes music perfectly. I'm not so fond of the non Roger Dean Yes album covers- for example Going for the one. But then again, the guy who did that album cover (sorry but I don't remember his name) did lots of Pink Floyd covers, and they match Pink Floyd brilliantly. Similarly, whilst those few covers for Pink Floyd by Roger Dean (eg Dragons Garden I think) are good as paintings, but I don't think they really work as Floyd covers.

Of course, some albums are uniform in colour, I'm sure I saw one with an all white cover with the band name in black just like you said, somewhere. That could potentially be an extremely effective cover for a bleak or pure sounding album!

Yes, I agree with that totally. On the other hand, I said i don't like the non Dean Yes covers- but that doesn't make me like Going for the one any less. I think that a good, suitable work of art definitely adds something to an album as a whole, although it isn't an absolute necessity