tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post5266004323221361607..comments2007-11-23T07:52:02.988-08:00Brian P.http://www.blogger.com/profile/12255526524629514605noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-22559997784624190392007-11-23T07:52:00.000-08:002007-11-23T07:52:00.000-08:00Daniel, you bring up a salient point. I for one would love to see covers by comic people. Comparing the magazines to current comics on the shelves, it's amazing how much more comics stand out.SpecLithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255526524629514605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-32038182104838431702007-11-22T23:37:00.000-08:002007-11-22T23:37:00.000-08:00Just had to say, this was great work. <BR/><BR/>Also, that original Asimov's cover looks like it was celebrating the 30th anniversary in 1967, not 2007. Good lord, I didn't realize there were artists who still drew like that. <BR/><BR/>One other suggestion: maybe instead of using some of the stodgy illustration styles that mags like Asimov are currently invested in, they could try tapping the world of comics. False advertising maybe?Danielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13774088181468086376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-4884778700183023262007-11-22T18:55:00.000-08:002007-11-22T18:55:00.000-08:00hear hear. this is what the big three needs!<BR/><BR/>great job.Colin YJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07997920990972000741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-11305125902589610522007-11-22T08:16:00.000-08:002007-11-22T08:16:00.000-08:00Why, thank you Mr. Gibson. Very kind of you to say so.SpecLithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255526524629514605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-21940273640229385352007-11-22T06:22:00.000-08:002007-11-22T06:22:00.000-08:00Well, I <I>am</I> a graphic designer who's worked on magazines, and I think you've done a very very good job indeed. You're quite right in believing the appearance of these publications is an enormous barrier for many people who might otherwise buy them - possibly including me. The originals are, by contrast, somewhat fuddy-duddy looking, as you've made eminently clear.gary gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16479905286212513002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-51088696618114967972007-11-21T08:41:00.000-08:002007-11-21T08:41:00.000-08:00Thanks to both of you.<BR/><BR/>I do know that one of the barriers to buying the magazines for me has been their boring look and feel. Postscripts stands out as a beautiful object compared to the "Big Three".SpecLithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12255526524629514605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-36738106111059899532007-11-21T06:38:00.000-08:002007-11-21T06:38:00.000-08:00I hope someone's paying attention, because I would start buying more subscriptions simply on cover art alone if they looked like these.Christopher Barzakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05317256912942472481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4694531798395883422.post-62058460132849081472007-11-21T06:04:00.000-08:002007-11-21T06:04:00.000-08:00GReat Post!!!<BR/><BR/>I love the ideas you have a bout redoing the look of the big 3. <BR/><BR/>I am shallow, first off. And the big 3 are dry as toast. I need a nice pretty picture to get me in the mood (ask my wife. Just kidding. Ahem...). The artwork on any of those 3 is dull. About 10 years too old. Maybe 15.<BR/><BR/>It's amazing what a simple redo like yours accomplishes. I bet that would allow them to acquire a serious number of new subscribers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com