While certainly not the sexiest cover on the lot, what really impresses me about this cover is how well Kidd worked with the obvious constraints. Most of us (myself included), when given a bunch of marketing photos that we have to put on a layout, grumble and bitch about it. (Which isn’t to say that Kidd didn’t bitch about it. Who am I to say? Haha.)
The solution in this case came out really elegantly, though. It matches the hectic and cluttered feel of Bourdain’s show, while keeping the constraints at the forefront.
It’s a good reminder to work with what we’re given and make the best of it.
I like it, on an overall compositional level—the color pallet is to my liking—but I think if one were to analyze each individual graphical component one would come to the conclusion that this is the design equivalent to fitting a live action “War and Peace” into a 30-minute time slot. How about we just focus on one … or two… elements? OH WELL… this is one of my favorites of the past several months of the Covers Blog.
I like the desaturated photos, the check paper and the Futura (?) it’s has the look of travel shots from old magazines. Is it a bit strange to have Anthony Bourdain in 4 out of five photos on the front though?
I got an Elizabeth Dole Christmas card this year. A h.s. friend works on her committee so I guess he put me on their mailing list but the card is a graphic design treasure: the front features no less than 6-8 pictures of the Doles, dead-center in every shot, and two had them wearing the exact same clothes. What’s more, their expressions were unchanged from one shot to the next. Anyway, Nick, your comment reminded me of that, and I’m sure an editor directed Chip to smother the cover with Mssr. Bourdain’s pretty photos.
I’m not particularly fond of the type treatment here. I understand that he was given a lot to work with, and as you all pointed out, I like the color pallet, but the words feel smooshed and lost. Especially the quote at the bottom—it’s the first thing that draws my eye.
Does it bother anyone else that the receipt paper is slightly crooked? It’s not crooked enough to feel like it’s on purpose, but it’s definitely not straight. Maybe that’s my biggest problem with this.
But as a novice, I probably have no room to pass judgement.
Wow, this looks and feels so similar to what Chip did for the Oliver Sacks covers in 1999…
Yeah, wow. Very odd typography, spacing, and choice of images. Cool, nice to see another cover by the author/designer/singer…
Honestly, the first thing that I see—and maybe this is a good thing for the target audience—is that goofy smile on that mans grill.
I do like that it ties in to the TV show. But boy is it an eye full.
It would be cool if the images were perforated and you can rip them off to just have the receipt as the cover…
I agree with the first part of Jim’s assessment. It’s a shame, could have been a cool looking cover. I still like it overall, Chip Kidd’s type choice almost always seems appropriate.
I wonder what Bourdain thinks about the cobra’s heart making the picture cut on this cover. It seems to be a feat that had haunted him into annoyance.
Anyway, great cover and I can’t wait to read this.
Nance, that Canadian cover was actually bought in from the UK.
This US cover is very cluttered, yes, and I have a hard time reading it as one object, but its intriguing. The letterspacing of the subtitle and quote bugs the heck out of me, though.
yikes. i’m sorry, but i think this one is just plain bad. if you’re going to go with the check motif, why not handwrite it, and make it look like an actual check? otherwise that 19001 really jumps out. ingrid, you’re correct, the letterspacing isn’t pretty. how about that end quote hanging way out there? the photos are all crap. ben, i would hope that even a marketing department could supply better shots than these. though i think the thing that bugs me the most (heh) is that the ticket seems ever so slightly tilted. and i don’t know if having it tilted or not would help, but at least choose one way or the other. it makes my eyes hurt.
Jon. If people didn’t know who did this they would say the same thing they would say about Andy Warhol, Picasso, and David Carson: Their work sucks… But put that in a cultural and popular context and your opinion changes. The fact that Chip (a fairly accomplished and well known book cover artist) did this makes it a piece to discuss and try to understand for those in the field (if only on this blog). But if his name was not attached to it, I think most can agree it is kind of busy, typographically unbalanced, kitsch, and overall not too fun to look at.
Looking at this again, one bothersome thing is the cropping of the checkbook. That blue “x” in the bottom left jumps out as it’s really the only typographic element from the original checkbook showing.
Otherwise, I don’t see what all the ugly typography hub-bub is about.
While certainly not the sexiest cover on the lot, what really impresses me about this cover is how well Kidd worked with the obvious constraints. Most of us (myself included), when given a bunch of marketing photos that we have to put on a layout, grumble and bitch about it. (Which isn’t to say that Kidd didn’t bitch about it. Who am I to say? Haha.)
The solution in this case came out really elegantly, though. It matches the hectic and cluttered feel of Bourdain’s show, while keeping the constraints at the forefront.
It’s a good reminder to work with what we’re given and make the best of it.
— Ben Pieratt, 2008-04-03 11:04:00
Well said. Cluttered, but tonaly very pleasing.
In the flesh does it look like all the photos have had ‘shadow/highlight’ applied?
— Luke Tonge, 2008-04-03 12:24:00
It’s by far more authentic to the TV series and the writing. Definitely a vast improvement from the Canadian cover:
http://www.amazon.ca/Cooks-Tour-Anthony-Bourdain/dp/1551926202/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207254826&sr=8-1
— Nance, 2008-04-03 13:34:00
I like it, on an overall compositional level—the color pallet is to my liking—but I think if one were to analyze each individual graphical component one would come to the conclusion that this is the design equivalent to fitting a live action “War and Peace” into a 30-minute time slot. How about we just focus on one … or two… elements? OH WELL… this is one of my favorites of the past several months of the Covers Blog.
— C-Dog, 2008-04-03 15:18:00
I like the desaturated photos, the check paper and the Futura (?) it’s has the look of travel shots from old magazines. Is it a bit strange to have Anthony Bourdain in 4 out of five photos on the front though?
— Nick, 2008-04-03 16:09:00
I got an Elizabeth Dole Christmas card this year. A h.s. friend works on her committee so I guess he put me on their mailing list but the card is a graphic design treasure: the front features no less than 6-8 pictures of the Doles, dead-center in every shot, and two had them wearing the exact same clothes. What’s more, their expressions were unchanged from one shot to the next. Anyway, Nick, your comment reminded me of that, and I’m sure an editor directed Chip to smother the cover with Mssr. Bourdain’s pretty photos.
— Auguste, 2008-04-03 17:34:00
I’m not particularly fond of the type treatment here. I understand that he was given a lot to work with, and as you all pointed out, I like the color pallet, but the words feel smooshed and lost. Especially the quote at the bottom—it’s the first thing that draws my eye.
Does it bother anyone else that the receipt paper is slightly crooked? It’s not crooked enough to feel like it’s on purpose, but it’s definitely not straight. Maybe that’s my biggest problem with this.
But as a novice, I probably have no room to pass judgement.
— Julie, 2008-04-03 20:32:00
Why keep the ‘19001’ check number?
— Leon, 2008-04-04 05:24:00
Wow, this looks and feels so similar to what Chip did for the Oliver Sacks covers in 1999…
Yeah, wow. Very odd typography, spacing, and choice of images. Cool, nice to see another cover by the author/designer/singer…
Honestly, the first thing that I see—and maybe this is a good thing for the target audience—is that goofy smile on that mans grill.
I do like that it ties in to the TV show. But boy is it an eye full.
It would be cool if the images were perforated and you can rip them off to just have the receipt as the cover…
— Ian Shimkoviak, 2008-04-04 07:02:00
Honestly? It looks like Kidd wanted to use the check motif but the publishers insisted on seeing some photos on there.
The strong composition binds it visually, but conceptually the cover just doesn’t sing for me.
— jim, 2008-04-04 09:22:00
I agree with the first part of Jim’s assessment. It’s a shame, could have been a cool looking cover. I still like it overall, Chip Kidd’s type choice almost always seems appropriate.
I wonder what Bourdain thinks about the cobra’s heart making the picture cut on this cover. It seems to be a feat that had haunted him into annoyance.
Anyway, great cover and I can’t wait to read this.
m
— m welch, 2008-04-04 15:13:00
Jim. Your name links to some amazing work. Good stuff. Another perk of people linking their names to their work. Puts comments into perspective.
— Ian Shimkoviak, 2008-04-04 15:56:00
Nance, that Canadian cover was actually bought in from the UK.
This US cover is very cluttered, yes, and I have a hard time reading it as one object, but its intriguing. The letterspacing of the subtitle and quote bugs the heck out of me, though.
— Ingrid, 2008-04-07 10:28:00
yikes. i’m sorry, but i think this one is just plain bad. if you’re going to go with the check motif, why not handwrite it, and make it look like an actual check? otherwise that 19001 really jumps out. ingrid, you’re correct, the letterspacing isn’t pretty. how about that end quote hanging way out there? the photos are all crap. ben, i would hope that even a marketing department could supply better shots than these. though i think the thing that bugs me the most (heh) is that the ticket seems ever so slightly tilted. and i don’t know if having it tilted or not would help, but at least choose one way or the other. it makes my eyes hurt.
— zach, 2008-04-07 12:11:00
I’m wondering what people would say about this cover not knowing who did it.
— Jon, 2008-04-07 13:09:00
Thanks Ian :)
— jim, 2008-04-08 05:49:00
Jon. If people didn’t know who did this they would say the same thing they would say about Andy Warhol, Picasso, and David Carson: Their work sucks… But put that in a cultural and popular context and your opinion changes. The fact that Chip (a fairly accomplished and well known book cover artist) did this makes it a piece to discuss and try to understand for those in the field (if only on this blog). But if his name was not attached to it, I think most can agree it is kind of busy, typographically unbalanced, kitsch, and overall not too fun to look at.
— Ian Shimkoviak, 2008-04-09 10:49:00
this looks like a fucking rip off of NYT crosswords for your lunch hour.
http://www.amazon.com/York-Times-Crosswords-Your-Lunch/dp/0312348576/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208401596&sr=8-1
— WTF, 2008-04-16 20:07:00
What? Because they both use a Guest Check book in the design? Get real. Not even close to a rip off.
— ????, 2008-04-20 20:34:00
Looking at this again, one bothersome thing is the cropping of the checkbook. That blue “x” in the bottom left jumps out as it’s really the only typographic element from the original checkbook showing.
Otherwise, I don’t see what all the ugly typography hub-bub is about.
m welch
— m welch, 2008-04-22 08:42:00
In the past Chips site (http://www.goodisdead.com) was not that informative or comprehensive. Now there is more to it. Check it out.
— ian shimkoviak, 2008-04-25 08:23:00