Three variations on a theme for the cover of the next issue4 of APR. Who likes which?
The first two use the same photo taken from the ISS. The difference is that the lightest possible amount of “fade reduction” was done to the photo, producing the much clearer “covertest1.” “Covertest2” is the original photo. “Covertest3” is a false-color Landsat shot…more colorful, less realistic. But for cover art, I’m looking for “looks best” not necessarily “looks most realistic.”
I know the engineering of art, just not the art of art.
UPDATE: Due to seemingly everyone preferring #2, that’s what I’ll probably go with. Here’s a snippet of the full-rez version, with some additional tinkering… I’ve added some noise to take the edge off of the unrealistic sharpness of the image.
7 Responses to “Cover art options”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
take “Covertest2″
why ?
because of original photo.
it give good contrast to Orion Model
and at first look you focus direct on Orion
(the 1&3 others have to “much information”
and you focus on that first and not the Orion )
I second ‘covertest2’.
I’ll plump for Covertest2 too.
I wonder if it could be ‘noised’ up a bit though – the pristine nature of the Orion knocks the ‘suspension of disbelief’ a bit.
Scott,
You take good landscape photos and must have an eye for composition and colour. How can you possibly consider number 3? The colours are garish. Horrible!
Number 1? The subject does not stand out sufficiently from the background.
Number 2 is the one to go for.
Mike
Covertest2 for me, just looks beter.
Covertest2 gets my vote. I like the sense of realism even for wishful thinking.
Is it too late to vote for #4? The one with the Orion backdropped by Saturn and the moon they had planned to visit by 1979?
(Books at home or I’d quote the name :o)
Randy