MGM's Crappy Covers
Sydney Assbasket
pretty bad? Just look at "Princess Bride" or the 007 covers. They look like
something made with Adobe Photoshop or something.
________________________________________________________________
The Indian DVD Resource: http://www.fly.to/indiadvd
(not my site): http://www.boycott-riaa.com
"Gay" is not a synonym for "bad."
Remove "bination" to reply.
Mike McGee
Assbasket <drag...@aol.combination> wrote:
> Does anyone else think that the graphical quality of MGM's DVD covers has been
> pretty bad? Just look at "Princess Bride" or the 007 covers. They look like
> something made with Adobe Photoshop or something.
I know what you're trying to say, but I would guess that ALL covers are
made with Photoshop in one phase or another. What's the beef with
Photoshop?
--
Mike McGee, Inaka Software
http://home.pacbell.net/inaka/cd_dvd/coupons.html
Greg Bendokus
Assbasket ) wrote:
Bad analogy. PS is not some freeware kiddie drawing program, it's a
professional design tool, capable of producing incredible results with
the proper effort.
As far as the MGM covers are concerned, I agree that they look like
crap.
Greg B.
Zinema
HREF="mailto:in...@removethisnospam.pacbell.net">in...@removethisnospam.pa
cbell.net</A> wrote:
>I know what you're trying to say, but I would guess that ALL covers are
>made with Photoshop in one phase or another. What's the beef with
>Photoshop?
"ALL posters?" Hardly. Not even close, when you consider film poster art
history. I think the big problem with MGM is that they discard a lot of their
vintage poster art in favor of Photoshoppy collages (example: the Bond films.)
I've got nothing against Photoshop. I love using it. My beef is against
abandoning classic poster art in favor of (usually) sloppy and lazy "cut out
the star's head and slap it on a background with a little bit of action dropped
in at the bottom"-style designs that have become increasingly the mainstay
SINCE the advent of Photoshop.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove "nospam" to respond. But you knew that.
Tim Read
>>I know what you're trying to say, but I would guess that ALL covers are
>>made with Photoshop in one phase or another. What's the beef with
>>Photoshop?
>
>"ALL posters?" Hardly. Not even close, when you consider film poster art
He said covers, though, not posters.
>history. I think the big problem with MGM is that they discard a lot of their
>vintage poster art in favor of Photoshoppy collages (example: the Bond films.)
>I've got nothing against Photoshop. I love using it. My beef is against
>abandoning classic poster art in favor of (usually) sloppy and lazy "cut out
>the star's head and slap it on a background with a little bit of action dropped
>in at the bottom"-style designs that have become increasingly the mainstay
>SINCE the advent of Photoshop.
I think there's a real lack of good design work for DVD cases. This
could be because of a few things:
1) Designers have gotten a little stagnant & don't want to take risks
and/or push themselves (hey, it happens);
2) Designers *do* take risks, suits reject it or request alteration,
cool idea fails & something must be thrown together with a day's
notice or so;
3) Company policy (in the case of MGM) to release dull covers. :)
I would honestly like to see some of the poster art being used for
DVD's, at least when it's not unbearably awful. :)
But, I would guess that movie promotion is not unlike advertising
(which I study & intern in right now), and that the lion's share of
the work comes down to QuarkXPress & Photoshop.
-Tim Read
-Columbia, MO
-c71...@showme.missouri.edu
Mike McGee
<zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote:
> >I know what you're trying to say, but I would guess that ALL covers are
> >made with Photoshop in one phase or another. What's the beef with
> >Photoshop?
>
> "ALL posters?" Hardly. Not even close, when you consider film poster art
> history. I think the big problem with MGM is that they discard a lot of their
> vintage poster art in favor of Photoshoppy collages (example: the Bond
> films.)
> I've got nothing against Photoshop. I love using it. My beef is against
> abandoning classic poster art in favor of (usually) sloppy and lazy "cut out
> the star's head and slap it on a background with a little bit of action
> dropped
> in at the bottom"-style designs that have become increasingly the mainstay
> SINCE the advent of Photoshop.
Who said anything about POSTERS? I said COVERS, DVD Covers to be
specific. Just popping the MGM logo on a DVD cover will require use of
probably Photoshop and Quark.
Again, I know what you're trying to say, but Phoshop is the gold
standard for photo manipulation/editing software. The analogy is what's
a bit off.
Chris Oxford
of the VHS releases look horrible as well!
When MGM re-released "PHANTASM" on VHS a few years ago, I was very
disappointed with the cover art, I thought it looked like a crummy GoodTimes
Home Video cover art (previous video releases had the original poster
artwork, but I guess MGM had to be different; the same goes for "ZAPPED" as
well!)
And now, the majority of the MGM DVD covers look like crummy GoodTimes art
work.
Chris
Zinema
HREF="mailto:in...@removethisnospam.pacbell.net">in...@removethisnospam.pa
cbell.net</A> wrote:
>Who said anything about POSTERS? I said COVERS, DVD Covers to be
>specific.
Okay, relax, I jumped the gun! :) But my point still stands, as what's at
stake here is the original POSTER art that is either used or (in the case of
MGM's Photoshop art) NOT used for the DVD COVERS.
>Just popping the MGM logo on a DVD cover will require use of
>probably Photoshop and Quark.
Right, but see, that's not the point either. When most people refer to MGM's
"crappy covers," they're not talking about the technical production of the
cover, they're talking about the cover ART. They don't necessarily care about
how well comp'ed the MGM logo is, or how good the typography is in the credit
block. What's more important is the primary artwork used on the cover. And
I'm not just talking about artwork created with pencil and paint -- there is
even vintage photo-based poster art which is suffering in the Photoshop era.
(Compare the original "For Your Eyes Only" poster to the DVD cover. Ugh.)
>Again, I know what you're trying to say, but Phoshop is the gold
>standard for photo manipulation/editing software. The analogy is what's
>a bit off.
And again, I love Photoshop. It's a GREAT application. It's the COVER ART
that has suffered in its wake, mostly due to lazy PS artists -- and that
post-PS sensibility is what has allowed many "crappy" DVD covers to be
produced. Like a weapon or a tool, Photoshop shouldn't be blamed for the act,
but it HAS allowed certain people to overextend the limits of their talents --
thus resulting in sunstandard artwork.
Mike McGee
<zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote:
> >Who said anything about POSTERS? I said COVERS, DVD Covers to be
> >specific.
>
> Okay, relax, I jumped the gun! :) But my point still stands, as what's at
> stake here is the original POSTER art that is either used or (in the case of
> MGM's Photoshop art) NOT used for the DVD COVERS.
No worries, man. I agree with you. Your debate is really between the
original movie posters and the new revised (and crappy) dvd covers. I
just wouldn't even bring up Photoshop then, especially if you're trying
to show how bad the new covers are. It's a design issue, not a software
issue. And yeah, the new covers for Misery and Married to the Mob are
total cheese, but at least I give them credit for including the
original artwork on the inside cover.
Steven Hill
>As far as the MGM covers are concerned, I agree that they look like
>crap.
I dunno, I *love* the cover for HENRY V.
And I like the fact that MGM covers aren't
usually cluttered with a lot of text.
-shill
Sydney Assbasket
>made with Photoshop in one phase or another. What's the beef with
>Photoshop?
The "Princess Bride" cover looks like a rough version someone made on Photoshop
and didn't bother to polish.
Sydney Assbasket
covers have a weird non-photographic quality to to them. And the compositions
should show a little more class. I saw a website someone put up with his own
version of DVD covers for the 007 discs, WITH the original artwork.
Pete Briggs
> Again, I know what you're trying to say, but Phoshop is the gold
> standard for photo manipulation/editing software.
Originally created at I.L.M. to do the water tentacle, if anyone's
interested in a bit of trivia!
You Die Joe
"Zinema" <zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20000819141934...@ng-fu1.aol.com...
> Mike McGee <A
> HREF="mailto:in...@removethisnospam.pacbell.net">in...@removethisnospam.pa
> cbell.net</A> wrote:
>
> >made with Photoshop in one phase or another. What's the beef with
> >Photoshop?
>
> history. I think the big problem with MGM is that they discard a lot of
their
> vintage poster art in favor of Photoshoppy collages (example: the Bond
films.)
> I've got nothing against Photoshop. I love using it. My beef is against
> abandoning classic poster art in favor of (usually) sloppy and lazy "cut
out
> the star's head and slap it on a background with a little bit of action
dropped
> in at the bottom"-style designs that have become increasingly the mainstay
> SINCE the advent of Photoshop.
Yes, yes. What happened to all those painted posters? I know they don't
come out anymore but there was a real hey-day in the eighties for those
things and we never get reproductions on the DVDs.
YDJ
You Die Joe
"Zinema" <zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> Mike McGee <A
> HREF="mailto:in...@removethisnospam.pacbell.net">in...@removethisnospam.pa
> cbell.net</A> wrote:
>
> >specific.
>
> Okay, relax, I jumped the gun! :) But my point still stands, as what's
at
> stake here is the original POSTER art that is either used or (in the case
of
> MGM's Photoshop art) NOT used for the DVD COVERS.
I think the phrase that eluded you was "photocollage." Because of course,
as you say, many other things can be done with P-shop, but that's the only
one favored by DVD producers.
YDJ
Zinema
(Sydney Assbasket ) wrote:
>My beef is not only that the original poster art has been butchered. MGM's
>covers have a weird non-photographic quality to to them. And the compositions
>should show a little more class. I saw a website someone put up with his own
>version of DVD covers for the 007 discs, WITH the original artwork.
That would be yours truly. I know it seems crazy, but damn it, I'm a purist
when it comes to original poster art. :-)
Pete Briggs
> That would be yours truly. I know it seems crazy, but damn it, I'm a purist
> when it comes to original poster art. :-)
Give us a URL. I'd love to see 'em. (And -- yes. Give us the goddamn
movie posters, film companies!)
blu...@megsinet.cutcaps.net
Tim Read <tmr...@mizzou.edu> wrote in message
news:399ed3b...@news2.missouri.edu...
>
> I think there's a real lack of good design work for DVD cases.
Tim,
My biggest gripe about DVD case designs involve bad spine art. This
can make a DVD invisible. Anyone seen the case for "Fallen"? They used the
same ultra-narrow typeface as was used on the front cover along with dark
red letters on black background. You literally have to stand two inches
from the box to see what movie it is. Other spines use the stylized
typeface of the movie. These are legible on the cover or on a poster but
not so on the spine. Some examples include "Pink Floyd The Wall" and "Fear
And Loathing In Las Vegas".
Most of us have DVDs stored on shelves (with only the spine visible).
This bad design means people won't know you have a movie they might like to
see, even when the disc is right in front of them.
Jay
8/20/00
Sydney Assbasket
>>version of DVD covers for the 007 discs, WITH the original artwork.
>
>That would be yours truly. I know it seems crazy, but damn it, I'm a purist
>when it comes to original poster art. :-)
>
Well, great job on the covers. Hopefully, you will get a job at MGM :-)
You Die Joe
<blu...@megsinet.CUTCAPS.net> wrote in message
news:NYRn5.39865$QD5.3...@news.corecomm.net...
Obviously you don't have experience with laserdiscs. Yow! DVDs are easy
peasy shelfshopping by comparison... even a little gaudy.
YDJ
Zinema
In a message dated 8/20/00 2:35:24 PM, drag...@aol.com writes:
>Well, great job on the covers. Hopefully, you will get a job at MGM :-)
Thanks! But I'm happy with my current job. This DVD cover thing is just a
hobby. :-)
Zinema
(Pete Briggs) wrote:
>Give us a URL. I'd love to see 'em. (And -- yes. Give us the goddamn
>movie posters, film companies!)
Pete,
It's not really a proper website. It's just my modest AOL directory.
This all started in alt.fan.james-bond when a similar thread popped up
regarding disappointment over the Bond DVD covers. Someone considered making
their own covers and wondered how to go about it. Coincidentally, I had
already began work on my own covers and offered them up as a possible example
of how to go about it. It wasn't so much to say, "Here, THESE are the better
covers," so much as I just wanted to show how easy (and fun) it was for a
layman like myself to whip up something a little more vintage. I was very
surprised to see them spill over into Home Theater Forum and even get a
write-up at DVDFile.
By the way, I've abandoned my current "red" design and have gone back to the
multi-color look of the current MGM covers, just using my own redesign and
layout -- as well as the original poster art. I think it offers a little more
variety. And I got sick of looking up at my DVD collection and seeing this red
blaze of 14 (soon to be 21) Bond DVD cases.
(14 including Waves 1, 2 and "The James Bond Story" and 21 including Wave 3 and
"Never Say Never Again.")
Mr. Moody
>> I saw a website someone put up with his own
>>>version of DVD covers for the 007 discs, WITH the original artwork.
>>
>>That would be yours truly. I know it seems crazy, but damn it, I'm a purist
>>when it comes to original poster art. :-)
>>
>
>Well, great job on the covers.
I second that! I don't suppose there are larger hi-res versions anywhere for
printing them out... :)
-Mr.Moody-Remove the 'am from Spam to mail
Join ebates for Free DVD rebates:
http://www.ebates.com/index.jhtml?referrer=miksayrs
"Your eyes are bloodshot." "You oughtta seem 'em from my side."
Zinema
HREF="mailto:Mr.M...@mindspAMring.com">Mr.M...@mindspAMring.com</A> wrote:
>Well, great job on the covers.
>I second that! I don't suppose there are larger hi-res versions anywhere for
>printing them out... :)
Hopefully, after Wave 3 comes out in October, I'll make the hi-res versions
available. They're still works-in-progress.
Thanks for the kind words. :-)
Will Bueche
the controversy of what resolution such files should be in, and it seems
that (arguably) a resolution of 200 is enough. 200 is about the same
resolution as a photo you pick up from the local photomat. While it seems
that 300 is used in the production of magazines, etc., 300 is overkill for
consumer color printers. Next debate is whether to use .JPGs or .TIF. I
think you can safely save them as a medium resolution .JPG. I know this
would be considered taboo by many who prefer the completely unadultered TIF
format, but I'd take pity on everyone with dial up connections and forget
about using TIF. The files would be way to huge.
I hope someday you make a bunch of alternate Bladerunner covers. Like, oh,
say, every last cover that is rejected. (Hm...you know, for DVDs with
DVD-Rom features, the studios could -and maybe should- toss on a dozen
alternate covers for people to print. And THOSE could be massive .TIF
files!)
Zinema <zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20000822143734...@ng-fx1.aol.com...
Zinema
>Zinema, just my amateur 2 cents for you, that may be of help: I've studied
>the controversy of what resolution such files should be in, and it seems
>that (arguably) a resolution of 200 is enough. 200 is about the same
>resolution as a photo you pick up from the local photomat. While it seems
>that 300 is used in the production of magazines, etc., 300 is overkill for
>consumer color printers. Next debate is whether to use .JPGs or .TIF. I
>think you can safely save them as a medium resolution .JPG. I know this
>would be considered taboo by many who prefer the completely unadultered TIF
>format, but I'd take pity on everyone with dial up connections and forget
>about using TIF. The files would be way to huge.
Thanks for the advice. The current files I'm working with are 600 dpi, which I
chose
because of all the really small text and graphical minutia. Don't know if it's
true, but I once heard the human eye couldn't register anything more detailed
than 700 dpi, so I figured 600 dpi would do. I know it's WAY too much, but I
figured I could easily work down, but I couldn't (or shouldn't) work up.
>I hope someday you make a bunch of alternate Bladerunner covers. Like, oh,
>say, every last cover that is rejected. (Hm...you know, for DVDs with
>DVD-Rom features, the studios could -and maybe should- toss on a dozen
>alternate covers for people to print. And THOSE could be massive .TIF
>files!)
That's actually a pretty cool idea.
Don Johnson & Russ Felton
work at 300 dpi and it always looks great whether it's printed on a high
quality laser jet or my Lexmark ink jet at home.
Russ Felton
Zinema <zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20000822195137...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
Will Bueche
resolution images up. So I was suggesting the lowest possible resolution
that would still look good.
Don Johnson & Russ Felton <hedc...@ptd.net> wrote in message
news:SfUo5.127$b65....@nnrp1.ptd.net...
Mr. Moody
wrote:
>No doubt. The problem is Zinema doesn't have much disc space to put high
>resolution images up. So I was suggesting the lowest possible resolution
>that would still look good.
If he wants to provide, I'm sure we can find space; there's lots of free web/FTP
space everywhere these days... I'd rather have as high resolution as possible
(600dpi would be ideal)...
Question for Zinema: where are you getting high-res scans of the original
posters? In case I wanted to try my hand at this on some other ugly titles... :)
Zinema
HREF="mailto:Mr.M...@mindspAMring.com">Mr.M...@mindspAMring.com</A> wrote:
>Question for Zinema: where are you getting high-res scans of the original
>posters? In case I wanted to try my hand at this on some other ugly >titles...
:)
Man, it's been a bitch. Fortunately, "Red Grant" of The Art of James Bond
website (http://members.xoom.com/artofbond/) was kind enough to supply me with
a few hi-res scans. The rest came from renting old VHS tapes and (preferrably)
original laserdisc covers and scanning them myself. A lot of them required
some meticulous touch-up in Photoshop.
I've also done custom covers for all of my Kubrick discs, all of my Coen Bros.
discs, all of the Romero "Dead" films, "The Rocketeer," "Excalibur" and a few
others.
Personally, I think it's a fun little hobby. You should definitely give it a
try. I'd love to see what other people come up with! :-)
Pete Briggs
> I've also done custom covers for all of my Kubrick discs, all of my Coen Bros.
> discs, all of the Romero "Dead" films, "The Rocketeer," "Excalibur" and a few
> others.
Can you e-mail me a copy of your "Rocketeer" cover? I'd be terribly
grateful!
You Die Joe
"Zinema" <zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> I've also done custom covers for all of my Kubrick discs, all of my Coen
Bros.
> discs, all of the Romero "Dead" films, "The Rocketeer," "Excalibur" and a
few
> others.
>
> Personally, I think it's a fun little hobby. You should definitely give
it a
> try. I'd love to see what other people come up with! :-)
I may have to do that for CONAN the SE. And if anyone can come up with an
original MIRACLE MILE poster, I'll have one ready and waiting for the DVD
when it comes out with whatever horrible art it has on it. (Only criterion
could handle that movie with aplomb)
With MGM stuff, I find it's usually worthwhile just to slip the inner notes
into the cover plastic.
YDJ
Derek Janssen
>
> > I've also done custom covers for all of my Kubrick discs, all of my Coen
> Bros.
> > discs, all of the Romero "Dead" films, "The Rocketeer," "Excalibur" and a
> few
> > others.
> >
> original MIRACLE MILE poster, I'll have one ready and waiting for the DVD
> when it comes out with whatever horrible art it has on it. (Only criterion
> could handle that movie with aplomb)
Speaking of Criterion, anyone got *real* covers for "The Magic Flute"
and "The Bank Dick"?... >_<
Derek Janssen (what is their art department ON??)
dja...@ultranet.com
Dug Weir
somewhere already?
Dug
--
"Failure has a thousand explanations. Success doesn't need one."
-Alec Guinness
Zinema <zin...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20000823223614...@ng-ce1.aol.com...
Zinema
>somewhere already?
At this point, I could only e-mail you a lo-res version of it. And I've done
two different covers for "Dawn" (Director's Cut and Special Edition.) Which
one are you interested in?
Same goes for you Pete, re: "The Rocketeer." Based on the number of requests
I've gotten via e-mail, I'd really rather not get into a situation where I have
to e-mail these out to everyone each time. Anyone out there want to host the
hi-res covers for everyone to download?
Zinema
custom DVD covers, this time from some non-Bond movies:
"The Rocketeer," "Paths of Glory," "Lolita," "Dr. Strangelove," "Barry Lyndon,"
"The Shining" and "Dawn of the Dead" (both DC and SE.)
Stephen Cooke
On 24 Aug 2000, Zinema wrote:
> For anyone who's interested, I just uploaded a few more lo-res versions of my
> custom DVD covers, this time from some non-Bond movies:
>
> "The Rocketeer," "Paths of Glory," "Lolita," "Dr. Strangelove," "Barry Lyndon,"
> "The Shining" and "Dawn of the Dead" (both DC and SE.)
What's the URL?
Sydney Assbasket
BTW, what font did you use for the "credits" graphic right above the
Universal-type specification graphic?
Zinema
Zinema
wrote:
>Why not?
>
>I'll host them. How much space are we talking here?
I'm still trying to work that out, in regards to file size vs.
resolution/quality. And I've received some very kind offers to host the hi-res
versions of these covers, so I think it should work out at some point. I'll
let you know, but thanks for the offer!