Do you think the band is aware of the "bad planet cut" in their album cover?

[johncal]

Maybe they should. It would serve the complainer right. I'd be laughing my ass off.

It's no BFD. These guys can't win.

[Makukula]

I think I never posted here before (I'm just a lurker for a few years now  ) but this I had to post since it is related with what I do for a living:

For those of you who are thinking this is nitpicking, let me just stay that I work as a webdesigner (so I work exclusively with graphics to be displayed on monitors) and this is without a doubt amateurism at best. 

I'm sorry but the "only seen on some monitors" is no excuse: it is a blatant error and worst than that, it is an easily correctable error... I feel ashamed that some designers out there think it's fine to put this kind of work (I'm not referring to the overall aspect of the cover or it's concept) out there and get away with it... The earth is outrageously bad cropped (a simple gradient or brush should've solved that in seconds...seconds!) and it's blurred or kind of compressed... I'm sorry but this is an unacceptable piece of design for me.

I know I'm no one, just a DT fan which works in this particular field, but it bothers me that one of my favorite bands has this kinda of work pulled for an album cover.

Rant mode off 

[johncal]

I think I never posted here before (I'm just a lurker for a few years now  ) but this I had to post since it is related with what I do for a living:

For those of you who are thinking this is nitpicking, let me just stay that I work as a webdesigner (so I work exclusively with graphics to be displayed on monitors) and this is without a doubt amateurism at best. 

I'm sorry but the "only seen on some monitors" is no excuse: it is a blatant error and worst than that, it is an easily correctable error... I feel ashamed that some designers out there think it's fine to put this kind of work (I'm not referring to the overall aspect of the cover or it's concept) out there and get away with it... The earth is outrageously bad cropped (a simple gradient or brush should've solved that in seconds...seconds!) and it's blurred or kind of compressed... I'm sorry but this is an unacceptable piece of design for me.

I know I'm no one, just a DT fan which works in this particular field, but it bothers me that one of my favorite bands has this kinda of work pulled for an album cover.

Rant mode off 

I guess if that's "unacceptable" that means you won't buy the album.

What I really want to know if that's the right word. Unacceptable is when somebody's boning your wife.

[Makukula]

I think I never posted here before (I'm just a lurker for a few years now  ) but this I had to post since it is related with what I do for a living:

For those of you who are thinking this is nitpicking, let me just stay that I work as a webdesigner (so I work exclusively with graphics to be displayed on monitors) and this is without a doubt amateurism at best. 

I'm sorry but the "only seen on some monitors" is no excuse: it is a blatant error and worst than that, it is an easily correctable error... I feel ashamed that some designers out there think it's fine to put this kind of work (I'm not referring to the overall aspect of the cover or it's concept) out there and get away with it... The earth is outrageously bad cropped (a simple gradient or brush should've solved that in seconds...seconds!) and it's blurred or kind of compressed... I'm sorry but this is an unacceptable piece of design for me.

I know I'm no one, just a DT fan which works in this particular field, but it bothers me that one of my favorite bands has this kinda of work pulled for an album cover.

Rant mode off 

I guess if that "unacceptable" that means you won't buy the album.

What I really want to know if that's the right word. Unacceptable is when somebody's boning your wife.

"Unacceptable piece of design for me" as in a piece of design that is not acceptable to me... 
That's exactly the right word. It has nothing to do with my wish to buy the album.

[Sycsa]

I think I never posted here before (I'm just a lurker for a few years now  ) but this I had to post since it is related with what I do for a living:

For those of you who are thinking this is nitpicking, let me just stay that I work as a webdesigner (so I work exclusively with graphics to be displayed on monitors) and this is without a doubt amateurism at best. 

I'm sorry but the "only seen on some monitors" is no excuse: it is a blatant error and worst than that, it is an easily correctable error... I feel ashamed that some designers out there think it's fine to put this kind of work (I'm not referring to the overall aspect of the cover or it's concept) out there and get away with it... The earth is outrageously bad cropped (a simple gradient or brush should've solved that in seconds...seconds!) and it's blurred or kind of compressed... I'm sorry but this is an unacceptable piece of design for me.

I know I'm no one, just a DT fan which works in this particular field, but it bothers me that one of my favorite bands has this kinda of work pulled for an album cover.

Rant mode off 

I guess if that's "unacceptable" that means you won't buy the album.

What I really want to know if that's the right word. Unacceptable is when somebody's boning your wife.

Imagine walking in on your wife and saying: "this is unacceptable".

[Big Hath]

Imagine walking in on your wife and saying: "this is unacceptable".

haha.  "This won't do, won't do at all."

[hefdaddy42]

I think I never posted here before (I'm just a lurker for a few years now  ) but this I had to post since it is related with what I do for a living:

For those of you who are thinking this is nitpicking, let me just stay that I work as a webdesigner (so I work exclusively with graphics to be displayed on monitors) and this is without a doubt amateurism at best. 

I'm sorry but the "only seen on some monitors" is no excuse: it is a blatant error and worst than that, it is an easily correctable error... I feel ashamed that some designers out there think it's fine to put this kind of work (I'm not referring to the overall aspect of the cover or it's concept) out there and get away with it... The earth is outrageously bad cropped (a simple gradient or brush should've solved that in seconds...seconds!) and it's blurred or kind of compressed... I'm sorry but this is an unacceptable piece of design for me.

I know I'm no one, just a DT fan which works in this particular field, but it bothers me that one of my favorite bands has this kinda of work pulled for an album cover.

Rant mode off 

I guess if that's "unacceptable" that means you won't buy the album.

What I really want to know if that's the right word. Unacceptable is when somebody's boning your wife.

It's unacceptable to YOU if someone is boning YOUR wife.

This is this guy's field.  It's unacceptable to HIM.  It's the perfect word.

WTF

[Jaq]

For the record, no, I wasn't trolling. I am willing to bet that a lot of people who are looking at this are only seeing it because it was pointed out to them by the altered images. That's just human nature. I'm with Bosk in that it'll likely look just fine as a CD cover, but the "uproar" over this is fairly ridiculous. If you guys had been around in the 70s, you'd be looking at the cover of Foxtrot by Genesis with a magnifying glass trying to see how the tiny duplicate of the cover of Nursery Cryme matches up to the original .

[Sycsa]

Imagine walking in on your wife and saying: "this is unacceptable".

haha.  "This won't do, won't do at all."

Reminded me of this, one of MP's favorite movies btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86z0Fh0zlUA

[DreamTension]

Let's just hope that the band doesn't get blown away by public..... outcry....... over this issue , and try to fix it, thus delaying the release of the album....   That would be some serious suck....

Does anyone know when the CDs would start to be printed?  I imagine if the band is aware of the issue now (the problem is pretty obvious to me), then they should have no problem getting it cleaned up without causing a delay.

What would be worse is DT not noticing the issue until they get thier pre release copies, then upon examining their newly born child (DT Jr.), going WTF?! Then delaying it to be re printed.

I'm sure they have the issue under control.

[countoftuscany42]

Maybe the cut is a reference to the abrupt ending of Pull Me Under, and DT are actually re-re-doing IAW 

[theanalogkid7]

I honestly can't believe there's still a discussion about this that is on going.  It's just the freaking cover.  We all go into DT because of the music, not because of the cool album cover artwork.  I don't listen to a new CD and stare at the album cover the entire time.  I guess to me this whole thing just seems like a lame excuse to find something else to bitch about.  If it annoys you, don't look at the album cover.

[Implode]

I completely agree with Makukula.

It's not like the cover is going to ruin the album, but they are still trying to look professional here. This cover does not look close to professional, and I personally wouldn't find it acceptable to have on the finished product.

That being said, I'm not really worried about. After reading what Blob said about Octavarium and SC's covers being edited after the initial release, I'm sure this is just a first draft/concept. With that cut and the horrible compression artifacts and blurry planet, there's no other explanation.

[The King in Crimson]

For the record, no, I wasn't trolling. I am willing to bet that a lot of people who are looking at this are only seeing it because it was pointed out to them by the altered images. That's just human nature. I'm with Bosk in that it'll likely look just fine as a CD cover, but the "uproar" over this is fairly ridiculous. If you guys had been around in the 70s, you'd be looking at the cover of Foxtrot by Genesis with a magnifying glass trying to see how the tiny duplicate of the cover of Nursery Cryme matches up to the original .

I only noticed it after it was pointed out (not with the altered images, I might add) but while it is total weaksauce, it doesn't really bother me. It doesn't stop the cover from being any less boring than it originally was/is.

[Dark Castle]

I honestly can't believe there's still a discussion about this that is on going.  It's just the freaking cover.  We all go into DT because of the music, not because of the cool album cover artwork.  I don't listen to a new CD and stare at the album cover the entire time.  I guess to me this whole thing just seems like a lame excuse to find something else to bitch about.  If it annoys you, don't look at the album cover.

It may not be important to you, but to many the album cover is a very important aspect. Autopsy's "Shitfun" has one of the worst album covers ever, and I never want to revisit it because of that. Death's "The Sound of Perseverance" however, has one of the best album covers EVER(Especially the re-issue ahh~), and that's one reason I like to go back and  listen to it. The album cover can convey the mood of an album, and if done sloppily, it reflects on the band.

[lonestar]

I for one am curious to see how the cut line continues onto the back flap of the album.....maybe it does serve a purpose there after all...

[The Stray Seed]

The album cover can convey the mood of an album

So much agreement on this one.

[Bolsters]

I honestly can't believe there's still a discussion about this that is on going.  It's just the freaking cover.  We all go into DT because of the music, not because of the cool album cover artwork.  I don't listen to a new CD and stare at the album cover the entire time.  I guess to me this whole thing just seems like a lame excuse to find something else to bitch about.  If it annoys you, don't look at the album cover.

The music might be the important thing, but a band is more than just its music. It's an image. Letting something like this through the cracks taints Dream Theater's image in a myriad of ways (makes them seem lazy, they have a lack of attention to detail, they don't care or can't be bothered, they're cheap, they're amateurish, the list goes on but these are the big points). Everything related to the band has an effect on their image from what they say to what they do, and what they release including album covers. And really, an issue with the cover like this one can only have a negative effect, right? Is there anything good you could say about this? Not caring about it is one thing, but to actually see something positive in it...if anyone does, they're just lying to themselves.

If a band's image means nothing to you...fair enough. But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter at all.

Oh and this takes literally seconds to fix in Photoshop. Why not fix it?

[BlastParadigm]

I honestly can't believe there's still a discussion about this that is on going.  It's just the freaking cover.  We all go into DT because of the music, not because of the cool album cover artwork.  I don't listen to a new CD and stare at the album cover the entire time.  I guess to me this whole thing just seems like a lame excuse to find something else to bitch about.  If it annoys you, don't look at the album cover.

Have you, perhaps, never heard an album on vinyl and stared at the beautiful, gigantic cover?
Because that's pretty much what a cover (in my opinion) does. It enhances the experience the music provides. It transmits the basic idea of the music, which is why almost every DT cover has elements on the cover that either reference the songs themselves or make you remember the songs (Awake has the clock marking 6:00, the mirror, the spider's web. I&W's cover is compromised of a scenery that will definitely remind you of Wait for Sleep. BC&SL follows the same path as Awake)
Does the cover for the new album transmit the idea of the music? Maybe it does, but it's poorly executed, which is the problem here.

You may not stare at the cover, but I assure you that I and many other people do.

Oh and this takes literally seconds to fix in Photoshop. Why not fix it?

Ah, yes, and this

[Sycsa]

Agree with the 3 people above me. Whenever I listen to an album, the color scheme of its cover flashes before my eyes, setting the mood. Thus, Scenes is complex and stirring, BCSL is dark and moody, ADTOE is peaceful and refreshed.

[bosk1]

Letting something like this through the cracks taints Dream Theater's image in a myriad of ways (makes them seem lazy, they have a lack of attention to detail, they don't care or can't be bothered, they're cheap, they're amateurish, the list goes on but these are the big points).

Except for the fact that it doesn't.

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

I honestly can't believe there's still a discussion about this that is on going.  It's just the freaking cover.  We all go into DT because of the music, not because of the cool album cover artwork.  I don't listen to a new CD and stare at the album cover the entire time.  I guess to me this whole thing just seems like a lame excuse to find something else to bitch about.  If it annoys you, don't look at the album cover.

We're not bitching, we're discussing. You strike to me as a "OMG STOP BLAMING DT THEY ROCK INDONESIA SOON MP AND JP DRM TEAM" DT fan, and I hope you prove me wrong, but I think the arguments we've presented on which we state that DT's new album cover is quite subpar are pretty reasonable and logical.

[kirksnosehair]

I for one am curious to see how the cut line continues onto the back flap of the album.....maybe it does serve a purpose there after all...

The more I look at it, the more I think there may be a massive amount of conclusion jumping going on regarding this album cover.  I didn't even notice it the first time I looked at it, but now I see it in almost every copy of the image that I see online, including the image on the official Dream Theater website


I don't think we have the whole story yet. 

[Implode]

On the page you just linked, the line is no longer there.

First release:


Currently on DT.net:


It seems like it's been fixed...unfortunately the horrible compression artifacts are still there for now.

[JayOctavarium]

[Zydar]

Niiice.

[Makukula]

I honestly can't believe there's still a discussion about this that is on going.  It's just the freaking cover.  We all go into DT because of the music, not because of the cool album cover artwork.  I don't listen to a new CD and stare at the album cover the entire time.  I guess to me this whole thing just seems like a lame excuse to find something else to bitch about.  If it annoys you, don't look at the album cover.

The music might be the important thing, but a band is more than just its music. It's an image. Letting something like this through the cracks taints Dream Theater's image in a myriad of ways (makes them seem lazy, they have a lack of attention to detail, they don't care or can't be bothered, they're cheap, they're amateurish, the list goes on but these are the big points). Everything related to the band has an effect on their image from what they say to what they do, and what they release including album covers. And really, an issue with the cover like this one can only have a negative effect, right? Is there anything good you could say about this? Not caring about it is one thing, but to actually see something positive in it...if anyone does, they're just lying to themselves.

If a band's image means nothing to you...fair enough. But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter at all.

Oh and this takes literally seconds to fix in Photoshop. Why not fix it?

Perfect post.

The fact that it was "corrected" (it is still compressed like hell.... and no, it's not because it's a jpeg file, actually the image is not compressed, only the planet in the background) only confirms that it was a mistake by the designer.

[theseoafs]

On the page you just linked, the line is no longer there.

First release:


Currently on DT.net:


It seems like it's been fixed...unfortunately the horrible compression artifacts are still there for now.

I'm surprised anyone can even tell there's a difference between these two images.

[wolven74]

On the page you just linked, the line is no longer there.

First release:


Currently on DT.net:


It seems like it's been fixed...unfortunately the horrible compression artifacts are still there for now.

Can someone invert the colors on the second image? that's the only way I saw it to begin with. I don't see that distinct a difference. I see something but I can't exactly tell what.

[Shadow Ninja 2.0]

Look at the illuminated outline of the planet. On the first one it cuts off, on the second one it goes all the way around. That's the only way I saw it.

[Makukula]

@theseoafs it depends on the monitor you're using. The color setting and brightness vary from manufacture to manufacture (and you're monitor is probably not well calibrated since they usually come overly bright and, well, "colorful" as default from the factory to make all look more eye candy to the user).

In a bright and fairly recent monitor it should be seen.

In any case, if you can't see it, let me help you:

In the red line present on the previous image, the background color abruptly changes from #070a11 (a dark blue) to #000000 (total black). You can check the difference here: https://www.colorpicker.com/ by inputing the values I made reference.

Also, on the white circle I drew you can see that the "earth" has poor quality comparing to the Majesty logo.

[Sycsa]

On the page you just linked, the line is no longer there.

First release:


Currently on DT.net:


It seems like it's been fixed...unfortunately the horrible compression artifacts are still there for now.

I'm surprised anyone can even tell there's a difference between these two images.

After 4 pages in this topic and half a dozen in the other one, still room for surprise.

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

Just saw the new DT.net image, and it does appear the horrible cut is gone. Yay! The overly .jpeg'ed planet still bugs me a little, but that's nothing I couldn't handle.

[Implode]

it is still compressed like hell.... and no, it's not because it's a jpeg file, actually the image is not compressed, only the planet in the background

What causes the horrible blurry/blocky look of the planet?

[JoeG]

Here's the inversion of the new DT.net cover. Looking better!




And the original for comparison.