Pleasantly eye-catching cover by Kulick for this Frank Lloyd Wright biography.
Not exactly a novel concept (no pun intended), but the excellent use of Wright’s Eaglefeather typeface along with the harsh black and white pushes this cover into the memorable.
Maybe it’s different in person, but I find the use of abit off in the FLW name. The reddish color sort of blends in a little bit with the black background and the thinness of the type doesn’t help matters. The “Lloyd” really stands out compared to the “Frank” or the “Wright.”
I would disagree Ben. The Eaglefeather typeface is overkill and weakens the cover. The use of the strong graphic treatment of the Guggenheim would have been enough on its own. It also looks weak typographically – sort of justified but not really. The authors name also looks tacked on and isn’t integrated into the overall design.
Process ain’t worth diddly squat when the result is the equivalent of the word ‘ruler’ written in a typeface made up of rulers.
But seriously, with such a striking illustration (it’s an abstraction of a photograph —by none other than the great Julius Schulmann— of a San Diego parking garage which I didn’t know was the work of Mr. Wright) to carry the cover, I’d have preferred a less quirky typeface. Or, at least, one that didn’t look so utterly out of place in its setting.
And what’s with having the praise quote set on a curve and then the author’s name so uncomfortably set on a straight line? So obviously a bad idea, the way the author’s name is placed. Same goes for the Penguin logo. It’s just… there. I know sometimes publisher’s logos are a pain to work with, but c’mon… You can almost hear the designer reluctantly clicking the logo into position, while bitching about it with the back of his teeth, without even trying to at least make it look like it belongs there.
This cover is nothing like Wright’s work. It’s just awkward. Awkward and annoying, to be exact.
Strange that a book about the greatest straight-edged, angular, and geometric designer & architect of our time would have a simple black and white, organically-themed cover to represent him. When I think of Frank L. Wright my initial thought isn’t of his later work with the cylindrical Guggenheim, but, rather, with his rectangular housewares and homes that made him a living legend at the time. I think of rich wood tones and the menagerie of surfaces he loved to deal with. I find it ironic that black and white circles would be chosen as the book cover of his life.
It’s not ugly by any stretch, just not terribly fitting or exciting, in my estimation, and therefore immediately forgettable.
The authors name sits funny on the whole thing and the very modern shape of the guggenheim clashes with the old school FLR font… I guess that works to represent the past and more recent work, but it still clashes. I am not sure Frank would approve… But Penguin did.
I also don’t get the whole red, white, red treatment on the title. All white would have been just fine and perfect…
Not feeling it I’m afraid. It looks like the result of somebody googling his name and picking motifs that way, rather reading up about the man and his work.
Choose either the font or the illustration, both together is overkill.
I completely agree with the other posters about the awkward placing of the quotes (which don’t even match the curve of the illustration!) author’s name and publisher’s logo.
That said, the tiny thumbnail version here: http://covers.fwis.com/search.php?keywords=Greg%20Kulick really does pop of the page.
Nothing else on this cover is centered. Why are the four lines of the title centered on top of each other? Treatment of the title clashes in a non-complementary way with the rest of the off-center cover.
And many other disagreeable points previously noted.
Helen Yentus’ Camus covers are cohesive works of art brilliantly reflecting their respective texts. The cover under discussion here is sloppy and uncontrolled.
i have to agree with c-dog on this and thought the treatment in regards to the content is pretty off/ironic. they basically took the most well known and recognisable building he’s designed and stuck it on. i also agree that it looks like a kafka cover ive seen before. to be honest it’s not awful but not amazing like lloyds work itself.
Pleasantly eye-catching cover by Kulick for this Frank Lloyd Wright biography.
Not exactly a novel concept (no pun intended), but the excellent use of Wright’s Eaglefeather typeface along with the harsh black and white pushes this cover into the memorable.
— Ben Pieratt, 2008-06-25 13:13:00
Maybe it’s different in person, but I find the use of abit off in the FLW name. The reddish color sort of blends in a little bit with the black background and the thinness of the type doesn’t help matters. The “Lloyd” really stands out compared to the “Frank” or the “Wright.”
— Dusty, 2008-06-25 13:31:00
I would disagree Ben. The Eaglefeather typeface is overkill and weakens the cover. The use of the strong graphic treatment of the Guggenheim would have been enough on its own. It also looks weak typographically – sort of justified but not really. The authors name also looks tacked on and isn’t integrated into the overall design.
— fridgemagnet, 2008-06-25 13:44:00
love the designer. don’t like this cover—but I know, i know—it’s all a result of a “process”.
— ian shimkowiak, 2008-06-25 15:32:00
Awesome cover. Nice addition to the Penguin Lives series, too.
2 other good ones off the top of my head:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Winston-Churchill/John-Keegan/e/9780143112648/?itm=3
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Jane-Austen/Carol-Shields/e/9780143035169/?itm=5
— Sergio, 2008-06-25 16:27:00
Greg Kulick is the shit.
Ben et. al, have you seen this yet:
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20207076_20207387_20207386,00.html
— Auguste, 2008-06-25 21:01:00
Process ain’t worth diddly squat when the result is the equivalent of the word ‘ruler’ written in a typeface made up of rulers.
But seriously, with such a striking illustration (it’s an abstraction of a photograph —by none other than the great Julius Schulmann— of a San Diego parking garage which I didn’t know was the work of Mr. Wright) to carry the cover, I’d have preferred a less quirky typeface. Or, at least, one that didn’t look so utterly out of place in its setting.
And what’s with having the praise quote set on a curve and then the author’s name so uncomfortably set on a straight line? So obviously a bad idea, the way the author’s name is placed. Same goes for the Penguin logo. It’s just… there. I know sometimes publisher’s logos are a pain to work with, but c’mon… You can almost hear the designer reluctantly clicking the logo into position, while bitching about it with the back of his teeth, without even trying to at least make it look like it belongs there.
This cover is nothing like Wright’s work. It’s just awkward. Awkward and annoying, to be exact.
— Alfonso, 2008-06-25 21:05:00
Looks a lot like those Camus cover designs by Helen Yentus.
— Ogawa, 2008-06-26 00:34:00
Its not an abstraction of a parking garage. Its the inside of the guggenheim museum in NY designed by Frank Lloyd Wright.
— Nick, 2008-06-26 06:21:00
My bad. Saw the picture in Dwell Magazine a few months ago and read the caption all wrong. I stand corrected.
— Alfonso, 2008-06-26 07:59:00
Strange that a book about the greatest straight-edged, angular, and geometric designer & architect of our time would have a simple black and white, organically-themed cover to represent him. When I think of Frank L. Wright my initial thought isn’t of his later work with the cylindrical Guggenheim, but, rather, with his rectangular housewares and homes that made him a living legend at the time. I think of rich wood tones and the menagerie of surfaces he loved to deal with. I find it ironic that black and white circles would be chosen as the book cover of his life.
It’s not ugly by any stretch, just not terribly fitting or exciting, in my estimation, and therefore immediately forgettable.
At least they nailed the font, eh?
— C-Dog, 2008-06-26 16:12:00
The authors name sits funny on the whole thing and the very modern shape of the guggenheim clashes with the old school FLR font… I guess that works to represent the past and more recent work, but it still clashes. I am not sure Frank would approve… But Penguin did.
I also don’t get the whole red, white, red treatment on the title. All white would have been just fine and perfect…
— ian shimkowiak, 2008-06-26 17:04:00
Not feeling it I’m afraid. It looks like the result of somebody googling his name and picking motifs that way, rather reading up about the man and his work.
Choose either the font or the illustration, both together is overkill.
I completely agree with the other posters about the awkward placing of the quotes (which don’t even match the curve of the illustration!) author’s name and publisher’s logo.
That said, the tiny thumbnail version here: http://covers.fwis.com/search.php?keywords=Greg%20Kulick really does pop of the page.
— jim, 2008-06-27 05:07:00
very nice gregg. i think you rule.
— robin b, 2008-06-28 10:44:00
Nothing else on this cover is centered. Why are the four lines of the title centered on top of each other? Treatment of the title clashes in a non-complementary way with the rest of the off-center cover.
And many other disagreeable points previously noted.
Helen Yentus’ Camus covers are cohesive works of art brilliantly reflecting their respective texts. The cover under discussion here is sloppy and uncontrolled.
— Orlando, 2008-06-29 16:10:00
Whatever. I still find it eye catching and creative.
— nate s., 2008-06-30 08:03:00
i have to agree with c-dog on this and thought the treatment in regards to the content is pretty off/ironic. they basically took the most well known and recognisable building he’s designed and stuck it on. i also agree that it looks like a kafka cover ive seen before. to be honest it’s not awful but not amazing like lloyds work itself.
— blah, 2008-07-03 03:25:00
could i maybe interview some of you on your ideas and thought in an email? contact me please
xxxthreat@gmail.com
— T, 2008-08-11 11:20:00