2023 Fleming novel covers

timdalton007

mtm wrote: »

It’s easy to say what you don’t want when you see it though; suggesting that it’s easy to depict some incredible version of history distilled into one image is a bit tougher in practice though. ‘Put Oddjob on the cover’ isn’t all that much of an idea and dismisses pretty much every cover of GF ever printed. When expectations are so high that 70 years of history and all iconic characters should be represented, we’ll either end up with a mess or disappointment, probably both. They’re only book covers, they can’t do everything, and they’re not supposed to.

At this point, doing any new covers are a losing battle with a section of the fandom. I can remember people complaining about the photograph choices on the Penguin Modern Classic covers and the artwork on the Penguin editions before that on this forum’s predecessor. Part of it is nostalgia for a golden age of painted book covers that died out long ago and, as you said, the thought that you can somehow distill 70 years of history and iconic characters into a single image. Not everyone will agree on that image, given that Bond fans are like Doctor Who fans, so you’ll ask for ten opinions and get eleven back with little overlap.

All of which ignores the fact that while, yes, there’s probably some expectation that Bond book collectors will buy them, they aren’t the main market for these. As @Torgeirtrap commented about these catching the eye at the local bookstore. These are meant to pull in readers who (as shocking as it might be to some) haven’t read these before. And in that regard, I think they look rather good and standout from the homogenized “silhouetted man with his back to us” thriller cover that dominates on both sides of the Pond.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

mtm wrote: »

It’s easy to say what you don’t want when you see it though; suggesting that it’s easy to depict some incredible version of history distilled into one image is a bit tougher in practice though. ‘Put Oddjob on the cover’ isn’t all that much of an idea and dismisses pretty much every cover of GF ever printed. When expectations are so high that 70 years of history and all iconic characters should be represented, we’ll either end up with a mess or disappointment, probably both. They’re only book covers, they can’t do everything, and they’re not supposed to.

There’s a different thread for discussing the edits: this is about the covers.

I'm curious if you read my post. Didn't say it was easy to conjure up cover designs, nor that a Bond cover had to just have a Sgt. Pepper's styled splatter of all the main or supporting characters on it to feel satisfactory or suitable. The point I and others have made is that the books offer so much evocative content and imagery within their pages, including themes, symbols, locations, descriptions of particular figures, visceral scenes that stick in the mind's eye and so much more, that there is a broad canvas you'd have to pull from in thinking of a design for any of the books.

So with that in mind, it is particularly disappointing to see the Bond collection associated with what are mostly bland and milquetoast efforts. For FYEO we get...a hummingbird. For TB...a harpoon. For L&LD we get...flames. For OHMSS we get...a burst of snow that also seems to be bleeding for some reason. For GF we get...just gold. Literally just gold. I can't even tell if all the red stuff on the CR cover is meant to just be really watery blood or red smoke or dust. It just feels as if the designs are meant to neuter the content of the books, and cater to a preteen crowd, who shouldn't be reading this books at that young an age anyway. I just think Bond demands more imagination in its branding, especially when the books are so rich and striking in how they are written, and the content of the books are both so unique and evocative an artist would be given so much freedom to create something that fits the work but also allows it to stand out on its own. It also felt pertinent to make note of the censor due to how even the actual covers have been so reigned in from what you'd expect from such mature and adult stories. This whole effort top to bottom feels like a way to try and sell very challenging and mature books to those too young to be reading them, brought on by ridiculous social pressures.

The Jonathan Cape editions of the books from way back are of particular merit in this idea, of making something striking that pulls from the source its meant to be a representation of, and that has imagery that is multi-pronged in its ability to engage and entice while having an air of mystery, looming danger, and/or elegance. For more contemporary examples, given how very recent they are, I think those interested in the books would be wise to invest in what the Folio Society have been producing for Bond over the years: covers that nail all the essentials of not just good design work, but that also represent Bond's world and all the glamour and danger within it. It's an expensive example, but you get what you pay for, in comparison to what these anniversary editions are supposed to be. I can already see the orange SALE stickers on the covers, for when they're thrown on a clearance table in bookstores the world over.


I personally have art journals full of rough sketches and outlines of ideas for Bond covers I've had ruminating in my mind for years, and have seen other artists outside this space and even on this very forum produce some astounding designs that I would be more than happy to have on my bookcase or plastered on my wall. So from my particular perspective, as it would be for any person with artistic qualities, it would be a dream job to make a James Bond cover, and to see such an opportunity wasted by others is frankly sad.

Torgeirtrap

Indeed @timdalton007, distilling 70 years of history into a single cover image is an impossible task. You should definitely try to touch upon some elements of intrigue, danger and/or mystery – of which there are covers here I feel fail to do, and some that succeed. A book cover should be suggestive, but you shouldn't throw too much at it. I've only done one book cover as a designer myself, and it was a task where I had to keep the imagery to the bare essentials, and I think it worked fine for the subject matter.

What I think they have done right with these covers, no matter what one might think of the imagery for each title, is the large "007" – which is the one thing that surprises me the most of the criticism here. If not writing James Bond in bold (large) type, this is the one very recognisable Bond "element" to go for – and presented like this, it's one that will be visible even at a distance.

A bit of a side note regarding the criticism of stock imagery. This is something I definitely agree isn't ideal, but to put it simple: every designer does this. Look at any book in your bookshelf that's not of a certain age. I bet you'll find a text similar to "Cover illustration derived from images supplied courtesy of Getty Images.", or something along those lines. It's not because we are lazy, but it's often a question of budget and timeframe of the project which leaves us with no other choice. You won't be allowed the time or budget to set up a photoshoot to photograph a hummingbird, a scorpion – or a rocket blazing through the sky!

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

@Torgeirtrap, the thing I personally don't like about the 007 logo plastered on each cover is that is dominates the space where other elements could exist; it leaves little space for other more interesting imagery. I also never really care for designs that are so uniform across multiple editions, because it makes the books far less able to stand on their own. In the end, I just find it boring, especially because of how cool and diverse the covers could be from one another, which should be the whole point. The collection should represent the vast and unique jobs Bond has done, and entice readers with an array of feelings. None of them short of CR's design with the element of gambling tell you anything you may expect inside, so what is there that sells them to anyone?

The criticism of stock imagery wasn't to say stock imagery and its use in covers is bad: it just shouldn't look so obvious that it's stock imagery. With the right adjustments to lighting, how something is cropped or cut out and balanced within an image with accurate color matching, a stock image can obviously blend in very well, feel authentic and at home in a design. I just think these kinds of designs lose something more traditionally crafted ones never forgo, but there seems to be more divisiveness on this than I expected.

In some fairness to a few of the designs, while I feel they don't sell or represent Bond well at all, the way the images were mixed in partner with the 007 logo in the TSWLM, TMWTGG and MR covers is well done. I like that in TSWLM's design the tree line collides with the logo in spots, instead of being in the dominant foreground while blocking it out, the snake's body has been well blended for TMWTGG due to good shadowing that makes it far more direct and engaging, and I like that the MR cover's heavenly imagery brings your eye to the middle of the design where the second "0" of the logo helps to enhance the glow of the design.

Univex

I don’t like them. With a rich ficcional world as James Bond’s and that’s the best they can come up with? How disappointing.

timdalton007

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

I also never really care for designs that are so uniform across multiple editions, because it makes the books far less able to stand on their own. In the end, I just find it boring, especially because of how cool and diverse the covers could be from one another, which should be the whole point.

(Apologies in advance for the varying image sizes.)

As a bookseller and writer, I can tell you you're fighting a losing battle against what's been the trend since at least the start of the century. Especially where reprints of a series or the same author are concerned, as evidenced by Tom Clancy...




John le Carre...



And just as part of an author's brand in general, as evidenced by YA writer Collen Hoover's book covers (which I seem to restocking on a regular basis).



That sense of uniformity is (apparently) from bookstores and booksellers say readers want. And the market (and the almighty dollar/pound/insert currency of choice) speaks in that regard. These covers exist because people do buy them, after all. And it's true of smaller publishers as well. To risk sounding like I'm making a plug, I'll use my own books for an example. My non-fiction one, published as part of a series of Cult TV books, looks like other books in the same series though we're all covering different source shows, though I (and each of the authors) got some input into what we wanted the central image to be.





The same was true of my spy novel, Our Man on the Hill. The publisher of it has a house style for covers and, though mine was a spy novel (albeit inside the alternate history genre) it still had to conform to that style. It's part of their brand and a way to make their covers stand out on sites such as Amazon.





Like it or not, this is how publishing books works these days. And the Fleming Bond books are no exception. Thinking we're going to go back to the painted covers of decades ago or that a series isn't going to be published in a uniform style (outside of the most recent entry, with a 50/50 chance everything else before it will be reprinted to match it, as has happened with other Tom Clancy covers) seems like wishful thinking. The trend could bounce back to more individual covers, but looking at bookshelves as I do, I don't see it happening.

Torgeirtrap

@0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 That's a fair criticism of the use of the "007". Book covers are challenging in that you have to prioritise: what are the unique selling point(s)? Is it boldly displaying the authors name, like they do with contemporary writers like Lee Child? Had Fleming been a contemporary writer, you wouldn't be surprised to see that, but to potential new readers, they are unlikely to know Fleming by name. Is it the book title? Just like the author's name, the titles might not be something that a potential new reader can name. "James Bond" or "007 "however, is instantly recognisable.

Then you might have to consider imagery vs "James Bond"/"007" as well. Firstly, a set of 14 covers are bound to have some uniformity. Even the lovely 1960's Pan Books releases on the previous page have that. The quality of the imagery and how they depict the content of their respective novels we can debate upon (as well as how good each element is presented visually) – I think several of them work really well, and especially the colour palette throughout. They have without a doubt been conscious in keeping the imagery to a minimum, instead evoking small elements representative of the books – and letting the "007" be the focal element, because again, it is instantly recognisable.

The Folio Society books are mentioned above. I really, really dig the look of them myself, but these cater to a very specific audience - those with a particular interest in these titles, and who are willing to pay what these cost. If you were to present several of these books, as well as other older releases side by side with these upcoming 2023 books to the general audience in a store however, I bet you that most of them would pick up these rather than the Folio ones. For example, take these three CR covers. Which one would a young, "Tiktok age" reader pick up at the bookstore? I'm quite certain it wouldn't be the first two. The Folio one might even be dismissed as a comic book before the person in question even bother to read the title. I'm saying this as a comic book reader myself, just to make that clear.

mtm

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

mtm wrote: »

It’s easy to say what you don’t want when you see it though; suggesting that it’s easy to depict some incredible version of history distilled into one image is a bit tougher in practice though. ‘Put Oddjob on the cover’ isn’t all that much of an idea and dismisses pretty much every cover of GF ever printed. When expectations are so high that 70 years of history and all iconic characters should be represented, we’ll either end up with a mess or disappointment, probably both. They’re only book covers, they can’t do everything, and they’re not supposed to.

There’s a different thread for discussing the edits: this is about the covers.

So with that in mind, it is particularly disappointing to see the Bond collection associated with what are mostly bland and milquetoast efforts. For FYEO we get...a hummingbird. For TB...a harpoon. For L&LD we get...flames. For OHMSS we get...a burst of snow that also seems to be bleeding for some reason. For GF we get...just gold. Literally just gold. I can't even tell if all the red stuff on the CR cover is meant to just be really watery blood or red smoke or dust. It just feels as if the designs are meant to neuter the content of the books, and cater to a preteen crowd, who shouldn't be reading this books at that young an age anyway.

All perfectly fine choices of imagery for the books they're depicting. You describe them as if it's self-evident that those are bad choices.
No idea how those choices 'neuter the content of the books': I think you're reading an awful lot into those.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

The Jonathan Cape editions of the books from way back are of particular merit in this idea

And yet the Cape edition of Goldfinger depicted not a single Oddjob or golden lady, so must have been an 'unsatisfactory effort'.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

I personally have art journals full of rough sketches and outlines of ideas for Bond covers I've had ruminating in my mind for years

I'd be more than happy to consider if your ideas are better.

timdalton007 wrote: »

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

I also never really care for designs that are so uniform across multiple editions, because it makes the books far less able to stand on their own. In the end, I just find it boring, especially because of how cool and diverse the covers could be from one another, which should be the whole point.

(Apologies in advance for the varying image sizes.)

As a bookseller and writer, I can tell you you're fighting a losing battle against what's been the trend since at least the start of the century. Especially where reprints of a series or the same author are concerned, as evidenced by Tom Clancy...




John le Carre...

I think those Clancys are hideous, whereas the Le Carre's are pretty gorgeous. It comes down to an artistic eye and tasteful designer, not whether everything is on there. Simplicity and elegance, with a strong visual hook seems to be the most important thing generally to me.

They are a series so they should all be visibly part of the same family. And 007 is one of the strongest brandnames in the literary world.

Torgeirtrap

I see that Webb & Webb have published images of some of their book covers on Instagram, with a quote from each book alongside it.

Casino Royale: '…a wonderful nine of hearts, the card known in gipsy magic as ‘a whisper of love, a whisper of hate’, the card that meant almost certain victory for Bond.'

Live and Let Die: "It is fun for me to be able to tease such a strong silent man. You burn with such an angry flame.”

Moonraker: '…there she was like a great silver pencil. Standing upright on this huge column of flame and slowly climbing into the air…'

Diamonds are Forever: 'Reassured, its fighting claw withdrew from the half-severed beetle and its two small feeding pincers reached out and into the beetle’s flesh.'

From Russia with Love: 'Roses. From that moment his life had been nothing but roses. Roses, roses, all the way.'

Dr. No: 'It seems there’s a bird called a Roseate Spoonbill… Looks like a sort of pink stork with an ugly flat bill which it uses for digging for food in the mud.'

Goldfinger: 'We are going to burgle fifteen billion dollars’ worth of gold bullion, approximately half the supply of mined gold in the world. We are going, Mr Bond, to take Fort Knox.'

This design is enhanced with a gold foil fingerprint…

For Your Eyes Only: 'The most beautiful bird in Jamaica, and some say the most beautiful bird in the world, is the streamer-tail or doctor humming-bird.'

Thunderball: 'Automatically, Bond sprang back from the hull. Below him the bright needle of the spear wavered slowly down into the depths.’

mtm

Thanks, as I said earlier, I did wonder what print treatment these would receive. I suspected Goldfinger might see a bit of foil, I can imagine perhaps even some debossing for the 007 possibly. The stock makes all the difference to handling a lovely book too.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

@timdalton007, I honestly don't mind a lot of the covers you shared. I guess when it comes to uniformity I should stress that it isn't uniformity itself that is bad, but the degree of it. Most of the examples you shared have enough creative individualism outside a similar/shared template to stand out and be enticing to the eye. The giant 007 logo on each of the Bond covers just comes back to being something I don't like, so that uniformity doesn't work for me. That may be due to how dominant it is on each cover, I'm not sure. Just something I don't like about it. It could also just be that I find the imagery so lacking, and with more impressive content the 007 logo wouldn't feel as disappointing.

And I definitely understand the reality of the world we're in, and that I am very much a part of a dying breed in terms of what I like. The old man inside me winced just reading "TikTok" in your post, if that is any indication of how out of touch I feel with the mass audience for these things. I guess I should just be happy anyone is still reading anymore.

mtm wrote: »

And yet the Cape edition of Goldfinger depicted not a single Oddjob or golden lady, so must have been an 'unsatisfactory effort'.

Either or would certainly be far more satisfactory than a cover that appears to be made of one of the golden tickets from Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory. But to each their own.

mtm wrote: »

I'd be more than happy to consider if your ideas are better.

As stated, they are rough, scribbled versions of what could be finalized designs, with no finer detailing to them, therefore there's no point in sharing them. The only ones worth sharing would be those that were fully completed, as a polished final product. Wouldn't be all that different from screening a stitched together compilation of storyboards for movie critics instead of the final cut of a film.

mtm

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

@timdalton007, I honestly don't mind a lot of the covers you shared. I guess when it comes to uniformity I should stress that it isn't uniformity itself that is bad, but the degree of it. Most of the examples you shared have enough creative individualism outside a similar/shared template to stand out and be enticing to the eye. The giant 007 logo on each of the Bond covers just comes back to being something I don't like, so that uniformity doesn't work for me. That may be due to how dominant it is on each cover, I'm not sure. Just something I don't like about it. It could also just be that I find the imagery so lacking, and with more impressive content the 007 logo wouldn't feel as disappointing.

A personal preference to not like the particular aesthetics of anything is obviously fine: we all like what we like. I just don't think that criticising them because they don't encapsulate the entirely of the 'legacy' of the books is fair, and to say they're not special enough, which is a nebulous concept and placing way too much emphasis and expectation on what is just a book cover.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

mtm wrote: »

And yet the Cape edition of Goldfinger depicted not a single Oddjob or golden lady, so must have been an 'unsatisfactory effort'.

Either or would certainly be far more satisfactory than a cover that appears to be made of one of the golden tickets from Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory. But to each their own.

If your objection is to the way the concept has been realised then there's no way of knowing that either of those concepts would be more satisfactory until you see how they have been rendered. They might be drawn like Bugs Bunny: I would hardly find that preferable to the silly Willy Wonka idea. But each to their own.
Your point was that "Anyone that just makes a gold cover for GF, without making any note of the fascinating figure of Oddjob or the haunting visual of a painted woman, has made an unsatisfactory effort."; which I'm saying suggests Chopping produced a poor effort because he didn't put any of those elements in. The only gold on it is a couple of coins. And the Chopping covers have many, many fans and are regarded as classics.
My point is that you don't have to go for the obvious elements to make these covers (also remember that the golden girl is never even seen by any of the characters), but there's also nothing wrong with simplicity.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

mtm wrote: »

I'd be more than happy to consider if your ideas are better.

As stated, they are rough, scribbled versions of what could be finalized designs, with no finer detailing to them, therefore there's no point in sharing them. The only ones worth sharing would be those that were fully completed, as a polished final product. Wouldn't be all that different from screening a stitched together compilation of storyboards for movie critics instead of the final cut of a film.

If the concepts are strong and original they should shine through. I look at scamps of designs every day: the really good ones with brilliant concepts behind them are clear.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

@mtm, I feel a cover is far more valuable than some give it credit for. After all, it is a big factor in what makes a sale. A shopper picks a book up, looks at what is displayed on the cover, and that content can either trigger more fascination as the individual opens the book up and looks at the pages, or it can be such a turn off that the book is placed immediately back on the shelf. The package really is everything, and if I was new to the novels I wouldn't bother with any of these if I picked one up at random. They'd go right back where they were, and that would be that. But I also feel my artistic nature makes me more of a snob in this regard, as that kind of stuff matters to me. I'm a visual person driven by visual things and like things to look and feel a particular way. In contrast, people that just like to read books for the works themselves and care only about the content in between the covers likely wouldn't care less about the design of a book's outer shell.

I am glad these appeal to some, and they probably do have broader appeal than I realize, as what I enjoy is more traditional and like everything else these days, those tastes are very much out to pasture. I would be more excited about potential readers discovering Bond if I didn't know they wouldn't even be getting the purest experience of the novels when opening the books up. The censor issue will never be something I'll forgive, and that draws me all the more towards older editions I already have. So fortunate to have picked up my versions when I did, so that I can always get an experience of the books you'll never be able to have again going forward in future printed editions.


The GF cover example is a beaten dead horse at this point, but my statement was made just to point out the unique imagery the books offer that covers could utilize, instead of more blander imagery. That is also what I meant when I said the covers felt watered down and neutered, as I feel the Bond novels shouldn't have such clean, sensitized covers. They feel like travelogues, not spy novels, and I just feel the design work could've sold Bond and Fleming's work better.


As for design concepts, maybe it's just my own perfectionist nature, but I wouldn't offer something up for criticism unless it was a final product I was happy with, because I'm not foolish enough to face judgement on something that isn't a polished, fully detailed design. I would get criticism such as, "well, I don't like the way that element is positioned or that line of text is arranged," and I'd chime in with, "it wouldn't actually look like how you're describing, it's just a scribbled version I did in a few minutes." A raw, rough design can't accurately inform you of the colors at play in a design, the kind of text implemented, how it's oriented and exactly how something each element looks like a final product design would, obviously, and that would be the whole point.

MajorDSmythe

SIS_HQ wrote: »

It's decent covers, the Harper Collins' version are really mediocre, so these covers were still a bit better than the former, but it's still not saying much, these covers were just only a small inch better.

These book covers were really I'm not a fan of, these covers made the Michael Gillette covers looked great in comparison (and that's saying something as I'm not also a fan of those covers too).

My favorite Fleming Book Covers so far:


This one is one of my favorite Fleming Book Covers, it's a shame, this cover didn't continued for the other Bond books.


I also liked these:

For some reason, I missed out on those Vintage Classic editions, which go for a tidy little sum these days. Understandable, as they are striking in a good way. I'm looking for more Bond in hardback as well. :-w

Kronsteen

mtm wrote: »

I think CR looks great. What makes it look a Photoshop fail?
How would they honour their legacy in a set of book covers?

It's something with the transparent smoke and the card which makes it look cheap and sloppy. Hard to describe, I just don't like it one bit.

I'm not that picky as it might sound. Most of the paperback covers the recent 20 years are really good. Some of them posted earlier in the thread.

They've made such a big thing about "Bond finally coming home" and wanting to celebrate "70 years" (I mean of course, we all want to celebrate it!), but so far it all feels a bit underwhelming. I was hoping for something more. Maybe it'll come? Fingers crossed! Releasing the books with new covers is hardly a big celebration.

NickTwentyTwo

There's something ambiguously hollow/soulless about stock photography, or AI art, and to me these covers feel the same way as those.

I feel like really extraordinary covers may well have convinced me to buy another full set of Bond novels, a collection from the Fleming Estate could have been cool. But these are not it.

It's an odd point of comparison, but on the flip side of the coin, Macallan's latest efforts with their limited edition Bond bottles feel deeply connected to Bond.

goldenswissroyale

They make it really easy for me to NOT buy these books. They change the text and give us these covers. Wow.
I don't like the covers and I don't think they will attract many readers this way. The shape of the 007 is way too long/skinny. I don't like the shape of the 7 at all. And no thrill or danger or exotic feeling. Disappointing.
Why should a fan pay for this after buying the wonderful Gillette covers? I won't for sure.

Torgeirtrap

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

It's an odd point of comparison, but on the flip side of the coin, Macallan's latest efforts with their limited edition Bond bottles feel deeply connected to Bond.

It's not an odd comparison at all, IMO. For me it's the other way around really. I didn't feel a strong Bond vibe from those bottles and packaging, despite the imagery used. They do however look really nice.

NickTwentyTwo

Torgeirtrap wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

It's an odd point of comparison, but on the flip side of the coin, Macallan's latest efforts with their limited edition Bond bottles feel deeply connected to Bond.

It's not an odd comparison at all, IMO. For me it's the other way around really. I didn't feel a strong Bond vibe from those bottles and packaging, despite the imagery used. They do however look really nice.

That's fair. To me, I look at the imagery used by each, and this video put out by Macallan, and the effort on display is night and day:



Come to think of it, if IFP had released these books with matte covers featuring beautiful concept art like this, and had deckle edging, I'd be a hell of a lot more tempted to pick them up.

For anyone familiar with this particular edition of The Hobbit:



Would have been perfect IMO.

chrisisall

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

I'm a sucker for covers that feel authentic to the 50s and 60s, like they could've been original covers, since we can't have the originals just reprinted. To this day, my favorite covers that aren't the original printed editions are the Penguin editions that came out for Fleming's 100th birthday in 2008. They hit that sweet spot of having classic, vintage flare but with a modern eye towards design, and they were also the editions I chose to pick up when I started collecting the books, so they have a special place in my heart:

Yes, those covers are some of the best IMHO.
I actually kinda like this cover coming out in a few months:
It's simple & clean. I think I'll get it.

mtm

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

@mtm, I feel a cover is far more valuable than some give it credit for. After all, it is a big factor in what makes a sale. A shopper picks a book up, looks at what is displayed on the cover, and that content can either trigger more fascination as the individual opens the book up and looks at the pages, or it can be such a turn off that the book is placed immediately back on the shelf. The package really is everything, and if I was new to the novels I wouldn't bother with any of these if I picked one up at random.

It's absolutely fine if they're not to your personal taste, but that doesn't mean that they don't work at what they do.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

They'd go right back where they were, and that would be that. But I also feel my artistic nature makes me more of a snob in this regard, as that kind of stuff matters to me. I'm a visual person driven by visual things and like things to look and feel a particular way. In contrast, people that just like to read books for the works themselves and care only about the content in between the covers likely wouldn't care less about the design of a book's outer shell.

You're not the only visual person in this discussion. Do you work as a designer?

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

The GF cover example is a beaten dead horse at this point, but my statement was made just to point out the unique imagery the books offer that covers could utilize, instead of more blander imagery. That is also what I meant when I said the covers felt watered down and neutered, as I feel the Bond novels shouldn't have such clean, sensitized covers. They feel like travelogues, not spy novels, and I just feel the design work could've sold Bond and Fleming's work better.

I don't really know what you mean by 'clean, sensitized'. I tend to think that putting skulls and girls and guns on the covers is rather played out, and the travelogue feel is an immensely important part of these novels. You didn't like the blood on a couple of them, so I'm not sure what you're looking for.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »

As for design concepts, maybe it's just my own perfectionist nature, but I wouldn't offer something up for criticism unless it was a final product I was happy with, because I'm not foolish enough to face judgement on something that isn't a polished, fully detailed design. I would get criticism such as, "well, I don't like the way that element is positioned or that line of text is arranged," and I'd chime in with, "it wouldn't actually look like how you're describing, it's just a scribbled version I did in a few minutes." A raw, rough design can't accurately inform you of the colors at play in a design, the kind of text implemented, how it's oriented and exactly how something each element looks like a final product design would, obviously, and that would be the whole point.

Feel free to work one up then, I'd be curious to see how much better the ideas are.

goldenswissroyale wrote: »

They make it really easy for me to NOT buy these books. They change the text and give us these covers. Wow.
I don't like the covers and I don't think they will attract many readers this way. The shape of the 007 is way too long/skinny. I don't like the shape of the 7 at all. And no thrill or danger or exotic feeling. Disappointing.
Why should a fan pay for this after buying the wonderful Gillette covers? I won't for sure.

I did love the Gilettes: there was a feeling of real artistic work going into them, and they were just nice and simple. They felt stylish and classy in a slightly pulpy way, which is perfect for Fleming. If I'm nitpicking, as I said before, I'm not sure the psychedelic style was entirely in the correct period, but they were just so classy I didn't care.

Torgeirtrap

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

Torgeirtrap wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

It's an odd point of comparison, but on the flip side of the coin, Macallan's latest efforts with their limited edition Bond bottles feel deeply connected to Bond.

It's not an odd comparison at all, IMO. For me it's the other way around really. I didn't feel a strong Bond vibe from those bottles and packaging, despite the imagery used. They do however look really nice.

That's fair. To me, I look at the imagery used by each, and this video put out by Macallan, and the effort on display is night and day:



Come to think of it, if IFP had released these books with matte covers featuring beautiful concept art like this, and had deckle edging, I'd be a hell of a lot more tempted to pick them up.

For anyone familiar with this particular edition of The Hobbit:



Would have been perfect IMO.

I really like that video from Macallan. You got to admire the effort that has gone into putting all of that together, for sure. I do think however, the Bond imagery is much better displayed there, more so than a still image on each bottle and packaging. I would also not be against fine detail in printing, such as deckle edging, coloured page edges or stencilled edges like the signed Waterstones edition of With A Mind to Kill, for example. These are finer details that can make a book cover into something really special.

However, the Macallan's limited edition Bond bottles – much like the Bond Folio releases and that particular release of The Hobbit no doubt, are special releases made specifically for fans and collectors. These 2023 covers are paperback covers for books one might pick up on a whim at the airport for all we know. I think these covers have a more general commercial appeal (in lack of a better way to put it), than the imagery on those Macallan's bottles might have. Could more work have gone into the artwork? Sure? I would definitely have touched upon some details and changed some elements on several covers, adding some element of danger where needed. I'd be tempted to add "A James Bond novel" somewhere too. Overall though, I think these are alright.

It would have been interesting to see some quotes or even more so a case study from Webb & Webb, covering the project. I can count more than a few times where I've seen a new branding for a popular brand, packaging for a well known product etc., where I haven't been sold on the design initially – until I've seen a case study explaining the process and the decisions made.

NickTwentyTwo

Torgeirtrap wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

Torgeirtrap wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

It's an odd point of comparison, but on the flip side of the coin, Macallan's latest efforts with their limited edition Bond bottles feel deeply connected to Bond.

It's not an odd comparison at all, IMO. For me it's the other way around really. I didn't feel a strong Bond vibe from those bottles and packaging, despite the imagery used. They do however look really nice.

That's fair. To me, I look at the imagery used by each, and this video put out by Macallan, and the effort on display is night and day:



Come to think of it, if IFP had released these books with matte covers featuring beautiful concept art like this, and had deckle edging, I'd be a hell of a lot more tempted to pick them up.

For anyone familiar with this particular edition of The Hobbit:



Would have been perfect IMO.

I really like that video from Macallan. You got to admire the effort that has gone into putting all of that together, for sure. I do think however, the Bond imagery is much better displayed there, more so than a still image on each bottle and packaging. I would also not be against fine detail in printing, such as deckle edging, coloured page edges or stencilled edges like the signed Waterstones edition of With A Mind to Kill, for example. These are finer details that can make a book cover into something really special.

However, the Macallan's limited edition Bond bottles – much like the Bond Folio releases and that particular release of The Hobbit no doubt, are special releases made specifically for fans and collectors. These 2023 covers are paperback covers for books one might pick up on a whim at the airport for all we know. I think these covers have a more general commercial appeal (in lack of a better way to put it), than the imagery on those Macallan's bottles might have. Could more work have gone into the artwork? Sure? I would definitely have touched upon some details and changed some elements on several covers, adding some element of danger where needed. I'd be tempted to add "A James Bond novel" somewhere too. Overall though, I think these are alright.

It would have been interesting to see some quotes or even more so a case study from Webb & Webb, covering the project. I can count more than a few times where I've seen a new branding for a popular brand, packaging for a well known product etc., where I haven't been sold on the design initially – until I've seen a case study explaining the process and the decisions made.

I think this is a good point and one I overlooked. Have to remember not everything is for me. ;)

FoxRox

Asking the experts who have been around longer than me:

Are the Folio editions the best ones yet? Or is there another edition(s) that is considered superior for any reasons? Considering upgrading my collection at some point, and some qualities that I’m looking for are hardback, great artwork, and no censorship.

NickTwentyTwo

FoxRox wrote: »

Asking the experts who have been around longer than me:

Are the Folio editions the best ones yet? Or is there another edition(s) that is considered superior for any reasons? Considering upgrading my collection at some point, and some qualities that I’m looking for are hardback, great artwork, and no censorship.

I'm probably not exactly who you're looking for, but of course I'd take any first edition over a Folio. Otherwise, I think Folios are the best out there.
Hardcover, check. Great artwork, incredible all original art by Faye Dalton, check, and no censorship, check.
Otherwise I think it just depends on your preference of covers. And of course the price of the Folios could be seen as points against.

FoxRox

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

FoxRox wrote: »

Asking the experts who have been around longer than me:

Are the Folio editions the best ones yet? Or is there another edition(s) that is considered superior for any reasons? Considering upgrading my collection at some point, and some qualities that I’m looking for are hardback, great artwork, and no censorship.

I'm probably not exactly who you're looking for, but of course I'd take any first edition over a Folio. Otherwise, I think Folios are the best out there.
Hardcover, check. Great artwork, incredible all original art by Faye Dalton, check, and no censorship, check.
Otherwise I think it just depends on your preference of covers. And of course the price of the Folios could be seen as points against.

The art by Faye Dalton looked incredible to me. Do you or does anyone else know if Octopussy and The Living Daylights is going to get the Folio treatment? I was fairly set on this being what I went for, but if it ends up incomplete or there are better ideas I should know.

Dragonpol

FoxRox wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

FoxRox wrote: »

Asking the experts who have been around longer than me:

Are the Folio editions the best ones yet? Or is there another edition(s) that is considered superior for any reasons? Considering upgrading my collection at some point, and some qualities that I’m looking for are hardback, great artwork, and no censorship.

I'm probably not exactly who you're looking for, but of course I'd take any first edition over a Folio. Otherwise, I think Folios are the best out there.
Hardcover, check. Great artwork, incredible all original art by Faye Dalton, check, and no censorship, check.
Otherwise I think it just depends on your preference of covers. And of course the price of the Folios could be seen as points against.

The art by Faye Dalton looked incredible to me. Do you or does anyone else know if Octopussy and The Living Daylights is going to get the Folio treatment? I was fairly set on this being what I went for, but if it ends up incomplete or there are better ideas I should know.

I saw a reputable source on the Spybrary Facebook group yesterday saying that he'd gotten confirmation from the Folio Society that Octopussy was indeed going to be their next Bond release.

NickTwentyTwo

FoxRox wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

FoxRox wrote: »

Asking the experts who have been around longer than me:

Are the Folio editions the best ones yet? Or is there another edition(s) that is considered superior for any reasons? Considering upgrading my collection at some point, and some qualities that I’m looking for are hardback, great artwork, and no censorship.

I'm probably not exactly who you're looking for, but of course I'd take any first edition over a Folio. Otherwise, I think Folios are the best out there.
Hardcover, check. Great artwork, incredible all original art by Faye Dalton, check, and no censorship, check.
Otherwise I think it just depends on your preference of covers. And of course the price of the Folios could be seen as points against.

The art by Faye Dalton looked incredible to me. Do you or does anyone else know if Octopussy and The Living Daylights is going to get the Folio treatment? I was fairly set on this being what I went for, but if it ends up incomplete or there are better ideas I should know.

I think it's coming, but someone on the forums (@ColonelAdamski?) mentioned that it may not be exactly the Octopussy & TLD that we're used to if Folio is following along with UK first editions? Or something.

Torgeirtrap

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

Torgeirtrap wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

Torgeirtrap wrote: »

NickTwentyTwo wrote: »

It's an odd point of comparison, but on the flip side of the coin, Macallan's latest efforts with their limited edition Bond bottles feel deeply connected to Bond.

It's not an odd comparison at all, IMO. For me it's the other way around really. I didn't feel a strong Bond vibe from those bottles and packaging, despite the imagery used. They do however look really nice.

That's fair. To me, I look at the imagery used by each, and this video put out by Macallan, and the effort on display is night and day:



Come to think of it, if IFP had released these books with matte covers featuring beautiful concept art like this, and had deckle edging, I'd be a hell of a lot more tempted to pick them up.

For anyone familiar with this particular edition of The Hobbit:



Would have been perfect IMO.

I really like that video from Macallan. You got to admire the effort that has gone into putting all of that together, for sure. I do think however, the Bond imagery is much better displayed there, more so than a still image on each bottle and packaging. I would also not be against fine detail in printing, such as deckle edging, coloured page edges or stencilled edges like the signed Waterstones edition of With A Mind to Kill, for example. These are finer details that can make a book cover into something really special.

However, the Macallan's limited edition Bond bottles – much like the Bond Folio releases and that particular release of The Hobbit no doubt, are special releases made specifically for fans and collectors. These 2023 covers are paperback covers for books one might pick up on a whim at the airport for all we know. I think these covers have a more general commercial appeal (in lack of a better way to put it), than the imagery on those Macallan's bottles might have. Could more work have gone into the artwork? Sure? I would definitely have touched upon some details and changed some elements on several covers, adding some element of danger where needed. I'd be tempted to add "A James Bond novel" somewhere too. Overall though, I think these are alright.

It would have been interesting to see some quotes or even more so a case study from Webb & Webb, covering the project. I can count more than a few times where I've seen a new branding for a popular brand, packaging for a well known product etc., where I haven't been sold on the design initially – until I've seen a case study explaining the process and the decisions made.

I think this is a good point and one I overlooked. Have to remember not everything is for me. ;)

Haha! I think the 007 shop is a good example to look at: There's stuff there that I'd love to own, and stuff that I would never bring into my home – as well as stuff I can never afford. Just shows that there are many target groups within the small corner of fandom which is Bond fans as well.
_________

Regarding the Folio Society releases: is it likely that we will see The Diamond Smugglers and Thrilling Cities get the Folio treatment? I guess it might be less likely given the subject of either book isn't Bond, but still.

NickTwentyTwo

If I had to make a total guess, I would say that they are not likely. I was thrilled (pun) when I found copies of them that matched my other full set of Bonds.