It seems to me that either creating a great cover is becoming a lost art or perhaps the quality of artist has taken a dive in the past few years. Case and point the new cover for The Return of Wolverine #1. Looks like a $150 commission piece from a tier 3 artist.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]66994[/ATTACH]
So many covers are just a poster-style shot of the title hero in a generic pose or a group shot in a generic pose. You almost never get covers that convey actual story scenes anymore. It's a lost art.
I barely even pay attention to covers anymore.
Come to think of it, the same applies to music/album covers.
[QUOTE=Duskman;3721954]So many covers are just a poster-style shot of the title hero in a generic pose or a group shot in a generic pose. You almost never get covers that convey actual story scenes anymore. It's a lost art.[/QUOTE]
"Poster" covers used to be special as they were rare. Now, they're stock art used when nothing else is available.
Dunno,that Wolverine cover do not seem that bad.Sure is not the best Wolverine cover that i have seen but is not as bad as some of the covers of comic books of the 90s.
For great comic book covers i think curently Arthur Adams and Alex Ross are awesome.
Some of us still care and give a considerable thought to the process of creating the cover(s).
Blues Ratz #1, not only picks from the story, but actually, it is the first page of the book. Cover for #2, aims to be funny. And #3 will be the combination of #1 and #2. It will open that same issue, with a humorous concept.
Here is the cover to Blues Ratz #1.[ATTACH=CONFIG]67105[/ATTACH]
Honestly I don't think covers are any better or worse than they ever were. Well, except for a very special decade of particularly rough art.
I buy largely based on the cover of a book. But I agree, that Wolverine cover isn't fantastic. Hunt for Wolverine #1 was way better than that, and it was just a one-shot.