Nathan: I always love your commentary, but I have to disagree with you on this one. I don’t think that a good cover could have been made from that angel image (not without a boatload of advanced image-trickery). The outfit that the angel is wearing is eau-de-High-School-play; it looks like it was sewn from white cotton sheets. The sleeve hemming makes me want to cry–what, do all the competent tailors go to hell, so that heaven has no seamstresses? or is it just that Heaven has no ironing?
The top of the wings look like el cheap-o faux fur; I can’t tell what the remainder of the wings are made from. I would be the first to say, whatever poor person made these wings, slaved–no two ways about it. BUT, that’s not the same thing as the wings being suitable for an “A”-rated book cover. The metalworking looks good–the sword, the chest piece/armor.
I suppose that with some filtering, etc., this could have worked. Hell, a simple FONT CHANGE on this, as-is, would dramatically improve its chances of selling.
I know, it’s picky–but all I can see are the yuck hems on the sleeves, and the way the wings are made. And, of course, the fonts from hell. (We need a new site: fontsfromhell.com . God knows, we get plenty of candidates.)
Is that fur? I thought the feathering had just become matted, and the blur effect pronounced the matting. I think the wings could work.
I agree, however, that the garment choice doesn’t fit with the wings and the armor. If an angel (or anyone, really) wears a tunic or other flowing garment into battle, it’s going to be cinched at the waist and folded above the knee (in technical terms, the wearer would be girding their loins), and ditto with the sleeves. You can have a flowy garment angel, or a warrior angel, but combining the two just raises a bunch of questions about how exactly the angel intends to be effective in battle. Also, more minor quibble/personal preference, but the hems of those sleeves are blatantly machine-stitched. I want my angels wearing hand sewn garments.
Well, Nathan: you know I wuvs you, and given that I have the photo-manip skills of a turnip, I’ll defer to your expertise on what “coulda been.”
@Shea: Yes, that’s exactly right. it would be more Paul Bettany in that B-movie that was knocked-off for some 2nd-rate Sci-Fi Channel series, than “guy in floor length white muumuu wearing body armor.” I really hate the cheesy angel-warrior thing. Either make them Thrones, or just make them cherubs. This half-assedness drives me bonkers. (Yeah, yeah, MORE bonkers than I already am, thanks for the asides.)
They slay children?
My OCD wants to scooch that title over just a tad.
It’s the text that’s unbalanced. Bad design choice to surround the kid wit it.
What am I saying? Good design choices don’t appear here. Duh.
Nathan: I always love your commentary, but I have to disagree with you on this one. I don’t think that a good cover could have been made from that angel image (not without a boatload of advanced image-trickery). The outfit that the angel is wearing is eau-de-High-School-play; it looks like it was sewn from white cotton sheets. The sleeve hemming makes me want to cry–what, do all the competent tailors go to hell, so that heaven has no seamstresses? or is it just that Heaven has no ironing?
The top of the wings look like el cheap-o faux fur; I can’t tell what the remainder of the wings are made from. I would be the first to say, whatever poor person made these wings, slaved–no two ways about it. BUT, that’s not the same thing as the wings being suitable for an “A”-rated book cover. The metalworking looks good–the sword, the chest piece/armor.
I suppose that with some filtering, etc., this could have worked. Hell, a simple FONT CHANGE on this, as-is, would dramatically improve its chances of selling.
I know, it’s picky–but all I can see are the yuck hems on the sleeves, and the way the wings are made. And, of course, the fonts from hell. (We need a new site: fontsfromhell.com . God knows, we get plenty of candidates.)
Is that fur? I thought the feathering had just become matted, and the blur effect pronounced the matting. I think the wings could work.
I agree, however, that the garment choice doesn’t fit with the wings and the armor. If an angel (or anyone, really) wears a tunic or other flowing garment into battle, it’s going to be cinched at the waist and folded above the knee (in technical terms, the wearer would be girding their loins), and ditto with the sleeves. You can have a flowy garment angel, or a warrior angel, but combining the two just raises a bunch of questions about how exactly the angel intends to be effective in battle. Also, more minor quibble/personal preference, but the hems of those sleeves are blatantly machine-stitched. I want my angels wearing hand sewn garments.
Well, yeah. I think that a good cover could be used with this image as the starting point — then some filters, retouching, etc…
I agree with Hitch. I have seen some AMAZING cover with angels, and this image is laughable by comparison.
Well, Nathan: you know I wuvs you, and given that I have the photo-manip skills of a turnip, I’ll defer to your expertise on what “coulda been.”
@Shea: Yes, that’s exactly right. it would be more Paul Bettany in that B-movie that was knocked-off for some 2nd-rate Sci-Fi Channel series, than “guy in floor length white muumuu wearing body armor.” I really hate the cheesy angel-warrior thing. Either make them Thrones, or just make them cherubs. This half-assedness drives me bonkers. (Yeah, yeah, MORE bonkers than I already am, thanks for the asides.)
…they choose terrible, misaligned fonts.
Did that angel spend a few too many hours watching Miley Cyrus’ ‘Wrecking Ball’ video where she’s licking the hammer, perchance?