![71HVHYSemfL._AA1023_[1]](https://lousybookcovers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/71HVHYSemfL._AA1023_1.jpg)
Pro tip: If you have an illustration that’s “on the edge” of adequacy, using a digital camera to capture it instead of a scanner (or possibly using a filter that makes it look like the output of a digital camera) is a sure way to tip it the wrong direction. (h/t Waffles)
I don’t think my digital camera has ever taken a picture that looks like this cover, so I gotta ask: What characteristics of this cover make it look like it was taken by a digital camera?
There’s just a certain something to the color scheme that tells me it was photographed rather than scanned.
It does have an odd, sort of digitally-frosted shower door look to it, I just didn’t associate that with digital cameras.
The blue fish with a porky pig head floating in the clouds adds a distinctive touch, too.
I don’t know what Nathan is seeing, but I have read complaints that some digital cameras tend to tint toward the yellow.
I’m not too sure either, but the foreground objects are muted and dull and have a weird fuzzy look, while the sky has colors that look more normal (except for that flying blue pigfish spraying green snot from its nose).
Every cover in Rhavensfyre’s collection, including the other on LBC, is verging on not completely terrible.
If during the week not completely terrible is spammed 18 times in your news-feed however, you stop ignoring the little flaws.
What bothered me the most was the figure. All kinds of strange in that flannel.