The paperback of this came out last month, and can I just say how much more I like this than the hardcover.
Despite the similarities between the two, this one is much stronger, both in its structure and its whimsey.
For those who are unfamiliar with this title, the book covers a wide range of basic science for those of us who are interested in science but overwhelmed by our lack of knowledge. Given the breadth of topic, I decided to go with particles, and then alluded to galaxies (astronomy), veins (biology), the double helix (chemistry), etc. (quote from her site)
You can see a nice large vector version of the cover at Bantjes’ website.
I do agree with Ben. I wasn’t too impressed with the hardcover but this looks like a roller coaster of fun. It reminds me of K’NEX that I played with when I was a kid.
I really like the color selection too. The basic colors really helps with the lack of knowledge (or childish) concept without making it too elementary.
Here’s a crazy thought…I have a feeling there might be a different reaction to this cover if it had a different title, something to tie the illustration to the subject at hand. The Canon tells me nothing. In other words, blame the editor!
I don’t care for the carnival of colors motif, but I certainly prefer the more fluid hardcover.
If I were to glance at this in the bookstore I would think this was a book about needlepoint sewing… and then I would be surprised that there is a canon of great needlepoint designs… and then I would get to the subtitle and wonder what needlepoint has to with Science.
The design here is just a bit too 1970s-carnival-ride for me. Drop the swirls and leave the dotty title text. That’s more than enough.
This also makes me imagine what a San Francisco townhouse would look like if you put an incredible amount of primary-colored Christmas lights on it and then dropped the townhouse only to leave the Xmas lights behind.
For the paperback what I do not like most is that it is busy to look at. It has all this intricate (dots) frame work and then all that text to read as well.
The paperback of this came out last month, and can I just say how much more I like this than the hardcover.
Despite the similarities between the two, this one is much stronger, both in its structure and its whimsey.
For those who are unfamiliar with this title, the book covers a wide range of basic science for those of us who are interested in science but overwhelmed by our lack of knowledge. Given the breadth of topic, I decided to go with particles, and then alluded to galaxies (astronomy), veins (biology), the double helix (chemistry), etc. (quote from her site)
You can see a nice large vector version of the cover at Bantjes’ website.
— Ben Pieratt, 2008-05-19 07:09:00
I do agree with Ben. I wasn’t too impressed with the hardcover but this looks like a roller coaster of fun. It reminds me of K’NEX that I played with when I was a kid.
I really like the color selection too. The basic colors really helps with the lack of knowledge (or childish) concept without making it too elementary.
Is this cover embossed?
— Arthur, 2008-05-19 07:32:00
This does not have anymore of an effect on me than the original. They both have a very similar feel…
— Ian Shimkoviak, 2008-05-19 08:41:00
Here’s a crazy thought…I have a feeling there might be a different reaction to this cover if it had a different title, something to tie the illustration to the subject at hand. The Canon tells me nothing. In other words, blame the editor!
— Blair, 2008-05-19 08:51:00
I don’t care for the carnival of colors motif, but I certainly prefer the more fluid hardcover.
If I were to glance at this in the bookstore I would think this was a book about needlepoint sewing… and then I would be surprised that there is a canon of great needlepoint designs… and then I would get to the subtitle and wonder what needlepoint has to with Science.
The design here is just a bit too 1970s-carnival-ride for me. Drop the swirls and leave the dotty title text. That’s more than enough.
— C-Dog, 2008-05-19 10:07:00
This also makes me imagine what a San Francisco townhouse would look like if you put an incredible amount of primary-colored Christmas lights on it and then dropped the townhouse only to leave the Xmas lights behind.
— C-Dog pt. 2, 2008-05-19 10:11:00
For the paperback what I do not like most is that it is busy to look at. It has all this intricate (dots) frame work and then all that text to read as well.
— Ian Shimkoviak, 2008-05-19 10:49:00
Here’s a thought: asymmetry
— Auguste, 2008-05-19 19:50:00
I was going to mention the symmetry of this cover, but I’d already posted twice and three times is overdoing it.
— C-Dog pt 3, 2008-05-20 16:48:00
c-dogs townhouse joke was horrid.
— mike, 2008-05-21 21:10:00
It wasn’t a joke, so if you took it that way, then yeah … it wouldn’t be funny.
— C-Dog, 2008-05-21 21:30:00
the type seems pinched – needs a little breathing room. hard for me to rest my eyes on this one.
— zach, 2008-05-23 07:09:00
awful. Hardcover slightly better, but not much.
— boblet, 2008-07-17 05:51:00