Update on Bush
Update, Friday noon: Going to go into the weekend. Would rather beg for an extra couple of days than not get this one right — and it’s proving sticky. I so want to use the red, white, and blue, all the type treatments I’ve tried are icky (and there’s a tone of type — long subtitle and two authors), etc., etc. Sometimes things just don’t “flow” the way you’d like.
Update, Thursday afternoon: Red, white, and blue definitely do not work. I’ve settled on a couple of different crops, but the colors and type are taking forever.
Original Post:
After a ton of culling through photo selections, the final three, uh, candidates were presented for this two-color, scholarly title yesterday:
The editors went with the first photo, which happened to be my favorite, as well. Alas, all three of the final images are from Corbis, so from here, it’s not a photoshop game but more a question of taking this photo and making a book cover out of it.
Parenthetically, I generally prefer to use cover subjects that are facing or whose action leads to the opening side of the book. The image chosen has Bush looking towards the spine. While in no way as powerful as the left-action image from Oote, for instance, Bush is well-known enough (heh) to attract attention to a cover no matter what.
Red and blue (with some paper showing through, for white) seem like the obvious choice for colors, but we’ll see how that plays out. Also, there’s deciding how to crop this photo; the title is 6×9, and the photo obviously isn’t — so do I use boxes, cropping, a combo? Time will tell.
Suggestions and “here’s how I would put this together” comments welcome.
TrackBacks: 0
Posted by Giles, Wednesday, April 19, 2006, at 10:30 AM.
Posted to Book cover photography | Book design | Books | Jobs | Photography
Comments:
I assume that this title is favorable to Bush; that alone makes the first photo the best. While some might see passion in the second photo, some might see anger instead. The third has a whiny quality to it.
The New Press (which doesn’t have too many pro-Bush titles ;-)) does, I think, a good job with its books on politics. I would look there for some inspiration.
Joseph, while I haven’t read it — only a few paragraphs to guide me on this one, darned it — I understand that the title does its best not to lean either way.
If, with Bush, such a thing is possible…;)
One of the reasons I liked the first photo best was because it played to both crowds; to the supporters, there He is, at Fort Benning (2003), leading the troops and world — while to the detractors, that smile (combined with the fatigues, bulge-in-back, and overall “attitude”) make for an evil look indeed. Heheh.
Thank you very much for the New Press pointer.
I like the first photo also.
Would flopping the image towards the opening side of the book and then enlarging it be allowed by Corbis?
I think you need to be careful with this first image as it could create the exact opposite to the intended effect if not handled correctly. My immediate reaction was “OMG, the idiot is facing the wrong way”.Throw a typo into the titile and you might have something here.
; )
Leslie, while I’m very much looking at different crops/enlargements, I’m not going to mess with flipping it over.
If you look at the photo on Corbis (search for photo DWF15-318029 in “current events” — their site is difficult to link to, sorry), there’s a usage warning. The publisher kindly chased that warning down, which turns out to be a photographer review on the cover comp to decide on credit. This title’s on a short deadline, so I’d prefer to avoid hiccups (in case “review” means something other than I expect) and design around it.
Well, that’s part of it. The other part is that every photo I saw of Bush in front of a flag had the flag pointing this way. I’m pretty sure there’s a rule about the “union” part of the flag being in the upper left, so flipping it might introduce some (unwanted) editorial.
Ew — just noticed the icons are still on the comment preview page. Sorry. [Adds to “to do” list.]
Kevin — LOL!!
Not going to even touch it.