DT15: A View From The Top Of The World (Timeline for DT15)

[Dedalus]

Relax guys, no need to get all angry because some of us don't like Hugh Syme's art. In the end it's the music that matters.

I couldn’t care less if you don’t like it, but there are better ways for people to articulate that. Most people are great, but then there are a bunch of comments which are childish and lame. It’s almost like the minute DT put out a Syme cover, there’s this thing where instead of saying “that’s overall pretty cool”, or “I’m not feeling this one as much”, they are like “here we go again with Syme, what can we find that’s wrong”. They’ll get out a microscope and nitpick every fucking detail. It’s like “Hugh Syme has got form of missing the last half centimetre of a shadow, so I’d better check every shadow on this new album art”. And if they find something off the size of a bees dick, they are the first to get on the forum and say “see, see, I told you so, man that guy is lazy hahaha”, like there is some prize at the end of it all. Sorry man, but that’s just bullshit.

Look on the bright side. In a while the negative comments will be about the production, JLB and Mike Mangini, and no one will remember the cover. 

[jayvee3]

Relax guys, no need to get all angry because some of us don't like Hugh Syme's art. In the end it's the music that matters.

I couldn’t care less if you don’t like it, but there are better ways for people to articulate that. Most people are great, but then there are a bunch of comments which are childish and lame. It’s almost like the minute DT put out a Syme cover, there’s this thing where instead of saying “that’s overall pretty cool”, or “I’m not feeling this one as much”, they are like “here we go again with Syme, what can we find that’s wrong”. They’ll get out a microscope and nitpick every fucking detail. It’s like “Hugh Syme has got form of missing the last half centimetre of a shadow, so I’d better check every shadow on this new album art”. And if they find something off the size of a bees dick, they are the first to get on the forum and say “see, see, I told you so, man that guy is lazy hahaha”, like there is some prize at the end of it all. Sorry man, but that’s just bullshit.

Look on the bright side. In a while the negative comments will be about the production, JLB and Mike Mangini, and no one will remember the cover. 

Hahaha, that’s a very valid point mate! The joys of a new DT album cycle 

[evilasiojr]

I personally don't care very much for the artwork, not saying this new one is the best I've seen though, cause it's not.

But I think what drives some fans nuts is the fact the band is very thoughtful for every step of the process involving new music, maybe a bit more care with the artwork would be more suitable to the music itself.

Again, not saying they haven't been thoughtful on these albums working with Syme, but maybe working with another artist who has a different approach would improve the experience as whole for fans.

[GasparXR]

A 3D View From the Top of the 3D World + Hugh Syme's Fury

I love this post.

Would "Hugh Syme's Fury" be the bonus disc where Dream Theater goes a step further in the heaviness and makes hardcore metal songs in the style of bands like Between the Buried and Me?

Yeah, and every 5 minutes, it starts raining and a giant version of the monster from TDEN appears

[Setlist Scotty]

Relax guys, no need to get all angry because some of us don't like Hugh Syme's art. In the end it's the music that matters.

I couldn’t care less if you don’t like it, but there are better ways for people to articulate that. Most people are great, but then there are a bunch of comments which are childish and lame. It’s almost like the minute DT put out a Syme cover, there’s this thing where instead of saying “that’s overall pretty cool”, or “I’m not feeling this one as much”, they are like “here we go again with Syme, what can we find that’s wrong”. They’ll get out a microscope and nitpick every fucking detail. It’s like “Hugh Syme has got form of missing the last half centimetre of a shadow, so I’d better check every shadow on this new album art”. And if they find something off the size of a bees dick, they are the first to get on the forum and say “see, see, I told you so, man that guy is lazy hahaha”, like there is some prize at the end of it all. Sorry man, but that’s just bullshit.

I don't know how much of your post is directed at me, but I'll say this: Hugh Syme has been designing album cover artwork for 46 years (maybe even more). It is his profession. From past artwork (especially Rush), it is clear that it is something he took great care in doing. But that attention to detail is not what it once was. So if some, especially those like myself that are pretty familiar with Photoshop take issue with some details not right, why is it wrong to bring that up? They may not be glaring errors (although there was that issue with the s/t cover that was) but they are simple things that someone like him could easily fix, if he would take the time (no pun intended) to give the artwork a final once over before submitting the final version.

And for those that say "it's just artwork - get a life!", don't forget that the cover art is a visual *representation* of the album. Yes the music is the most important thing - no argument there - but the cover is the first thing people see when looking at the album, especially vinyl with it's resurgence in popularity. Why wouldn't you want it to be the best it could be? First impressions are lasting.

For the record, I do like the cover art for this one and don't have a problem with it, aside from perhaps questioning the size of the child in relation to the viewfinder or whatever you call it (which is a minor quibble) and wondering if the 3D metallic style band logo was a good choice against that shade of blue since it seems a bit hard to read.

[the_silent_man]

For the record, I do like the cover art for this one and don't have a problem with it, aside from perhaps questioning the size of the child in relation to the viewfinder or whatever you call it (which is a minor quibble) and wondering if the 3D metallic style band logo was a good choice against that shade of blue since it seems a bit hard to read.

^This is the only thing i really have an issue with. The child is proportionally WAY too small in relation to the viewfinder, and it doesn't take a lot of analysing to see that. The boots themselves are also not that pleasing to be such a focal point, although they do make sense with the whole "Sleeping Giant" thing. Other than that, i find it quite a pretty cover tbh.

[Enigmachine]

For the record, I do like the cover art for this one and don't have a problem with it, aside from perhaps questioning the size of the child in relation to the viewfinder or whatever you call it (which is a minor quibble) and wondering if the 3D metallic style band logo was a good choice against that shade of blue since it seems a bit hard to read.

With the size relation thing, I actually kinda like that exaggerated sense of scale. The tour art seems to go even further in regards to that. As for the metallic logo, I do see where you're coming from, although it's one of those things where it looks pretty clear at a certain size (it looks just fine when it's the size of a desktop background, so maybe it was designed for a vinyl size), but the smaller it is, the harder it is to distinguish. I also wouldn't necessarily agree that Hugh's attention to detail has decreased over the years, because Permanent Waves' cover is simply a photo by Flip Schulke with three elements pasted on, with seemingly nothing other than a filter to blend them in (after all, he's pasted two of them in a convenient spot where the lack of shadows won't be noticable, but the newspaper actually sticks out for its lack of blending). A Farewell to Kings is similarly rough around the edges as a composite image.

I'd actually say that comparatively, a lot more work seems to have gone into, at the very least, the processing of an image like this one (though I'll acknowledge that the technology of today makes things more convenient). That's the thing though, his style often isn't to make things look photorealistic. The abstract visual choices and the highly saturated lighting should probably be clues to that. They've often had that slightly otherworldly and imperfect collage vibe where a lot of the elements seem to pop out that I've generally considered more of a feature than a flaw (barring a couple of the errors in DT12's art like the cut in the cover art or the guitar that clipped through). Of course, he does occassionally go for more of a realistic approach (Parallels) or to paint his art (Vapor Trails), but that seems to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

[Kotowboy]

Yes.

I don't mind the cover / art per se. It's just that - as others have pointed out - it just seems sloppy with not a huge amount of pride / care gone into it versus the Astonishing art for example.

Things just stick out un-naturally. And there must be hundreds of bedroom artists who would kill for that exposure.

[Another_Won]

For the record, I do like the cover art for this one and don't have a problem with it, aside from perhaps questioning the size of the child in relation to the viewfinder or whatever you call it (which is a minor quibble) and wondering if the 3D metallic style band logo was a good choice against that shade of blue since it seems a bit hard to read.

*snip

I'd actually say that comparatively, a lot more work seems to have gone into, at the very least, the processing of an image like this one (though I'll acknowledge that the technology of today makes things more convenient). That's the thing though, his style often isn't to make things look photorealistic. The abstract visual choices and the highly saturated lighting should probably be clues to that. They've often had that slightly otherworldly and imperfect collage vibe where a lot of the elements seem to pop out that I've generally considered more of a feature than a flaw (barring a couple of the errors in DT12's art like the cut in the cover art or the guitar that clipped through). Of course, he does occassionally go for more of a realistic approach (Parallels) or to paint his art (Vapor Trails), but that seems to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

I've been waiting for someone to say this. 

[Kotowboy]

Yes and that's not the problem. It's when it's noticeably shoddy that's the problem.

[noxon]

My main issue with detail nitpicking like this is the echo chamber amplification effect. A lot of those minuscule details would never be noticed by the majority of users until they're pointed out to them. And then, when it's pointed out to you, you can't help but seeing it. So you basically end up having something you enjoyed ruined by nitpickers, AND you feel stupid for liking it in the first place. And all of a sudden everyone are professional digital artists who "could do it much better"...

When we first released the album artwork on the socials, the reaction was 100% positive. People really liked it. We were actually a bit surprised that it was received as positively as it was. But then certain people started doing the inevitable "it's just stock photos" jokes... and you could actually see a change in the perception of what people thought of it. So it's a small spark, into a wildfire...

I mean, this is supposed to maximum be on a 12"x12" printed cardboard box for a select few - the majority of people will see it on either a CD cover or a small icon in their Spotify/Apple Music/Tidal/whatever streaming service they use... Maybe they'll get a t-shirt of it (but to be fair, print quality on t-shirts aren't exactly detailed)... And it works just fine for that. So the shadow isn't 100% perfect - to be honest, I don't see what some of you guys are seeing with that. And the other elements... look fine to me as well...

[Enigmachine]

The thing is too... I'm still not really sure how it should've been done, because as far as I'm aware, nobody here criticising Hugh for 'laziness' actually has a significant experience within his style (Setlist Scotty, who does have experience in using Photoshop, seems to have no major issues with this one in particular, at least from what I'm reading) of digital art. I don't even mean that as a sort of "well, why don't you do it better?" type thing, but simply to illustrate what's supposedly incorrect in a clear way. Much like noxon, I really don't see the issue in regards to the shadows.

Honestly, given the vitriol Hugh Syme gets, I'm kind of surprised that the same sort of thing isn't directed towards Larry Freemantle whenever his work is brought up. Images and Words alone has like 3 different artstyles, worse perspective issues, a wonky majesty symbol, a lack of clarity in the logo and title and probably a few more things if I looked hard enough. Awake's mirror casts no shadows (it also looks like an asset from Diablo or something in the way it gleams garishly in contrast to the lighting of the rest of the image) and the spider's web finishes in the air. Syme would be verbally lynched here if he did a cover with those same qualities.

Also sure, DT could commission any number of relatively unknown artists... but Hugh Syme definitely has his own visual signature (that has come to be associated with the band), regardless of if it's to everyone's taste. Would your average unknown artist be as instantly recognisable (which ultimately, matters a lot when it comes to things like album art) as him? I kind of doubt that.

[WilliamMunny]

There's something I've noticed about this forum in recent years (or maybe it goes back longer, but my memory is simply blurred by old age):

When people are happy/excited/stoked about a topic, they post something positive and move on.

But when people are annoyed/upset about a topic, they post again, and again, and again...compulsively restating the same thing over and over, until the 'need' for others to understand their opinion eclipses their original point.

This cover art is a great example.

I logged on here last week, saw the cover, thought, 'Man, that looks pretty cool,' posted my thoughts and moved on. From a quick glance of the pages that followed, it looks like dozens of other forumers share my sentiments.

But, I check back in a week later, and like clockwork, there are pages and pages devoted to 'shoddy' work that Syme has done. Now, far be it from me to critique how often anyone wants to state their displeasure with something, but I guess I'm one of those people that tends to invest 'less' time into things I don't like, not more.

Rather than write a dozen posts about how the shading in the spider's seventh leg doesn't line up with the light source, I'd rather hop on over to a different thread and drop some positive. But that's just me

Either way, the eloquence with which some of you guys take this band to task is pretty damn entertaining.

[Ben_Jamin]

For the record, I do like the cover art for this one and don't have a problem with it, aside from perhaps questioning the size of the child in relation to the viewfinder or whatever you call it (which is a minor quibble) and wondering if the 3D metallic style band logo was a good choice against that shade of blue since it seems a bit hard to read.

^This is the only thing i really have an issue with. The child is proportionally WAY too small in relation to the viewfinder, and it doesn't take a lot of analysing to see that. The boots themselves are also not that pleasing to be such a focal point, although they do make sense with the whole "Sleeping Giant" thing. Other than that, i find it quite a pretty cover tbh.

You know why I think that child is proportionally small?....It's to emphasize the size of the giants shoes.

These small sized children are on the patch of land where the giant sleeps, which is on The Top of The World.

This is what I see when I view the artwork.

Just like how people analyze Dream Theaters music for any music theory mistakes or for simplicity, people will analyze their artwork for it's artstyle and it's creativity.


Also, no matter how you guys think this is uncreative or unworthy of representing a Dream Theater album. John Petrucci enjoys Hugh Symes style and doesn't mind working with him one bit, so if you have a problem or concern about JP utilizing Hugh Syme then take it up with him.

[JediKnight1969]

[/quote]
And if they find something off the size of a bees dick...
[/quote]

 

[Madman Shepherd]

There's something I've noticed about this forum in recent years (or maybe it goes back longer, but my memory is simply blurred by old age):

When people are happy/excited/stoked about a topic, they post something positive and move on.

But when people are annoyed/upset about a topic, they post again, and again, and again...compulsively restating the same thing over and over, until the 'need' for others to understand their opinion eclipses their original point.

This cover art is a great example.

I logged on here last week, saw the cover, thought, 'Man, that looks pretty cool,' posted my thoughts and moved on. From a quick glance of the pages that followed, it looks like dozens of other forumers share my sentiments.

But, I check back in a week later, and like clockwork, there are pages and pages devoted to 'shoddy' work that Syme has done. Now, far be it from me to critique how often anyone wants to state their displeasure with something, but I guess I'm one of those people that tends to invest 'less' time into things I don't like, not more.

Rather than write a dozen posts about how the shading in the spider's seventh leg doesn't line up with the light source, I'd rather hop on over to a different thread and drop some positive. But that's just me

Either way, the eloquence with which some of you guys take this band to task is pretty damn entertaining.

1) That's a societal thing and extends far beyond this forum but generally I agree.
2) Constructive criticism breeds more discussion than just "neato" and moving on. At the same time, a lot of discussion here gets old.

I think Hugh Syme's artwork for the last several records has been amazing. Best of DT's career. Aside from the clear fuckup where a watermark was visible in the DT12 booklet work, I really don't see anything to be that critical of. Clip art, originality? None of that matters too much as long as it looks cool and this definitely looks cool.

[Dream_Theater01]

Any idea when a single from the new album might be released?

[Untethered Angel]

Any idea when a single from the new album might be released?

My best guess would be one single per month before it’s released. Most bands do it that way plus MM said “not too too soon”. Not sure if it was on his IG or FB he said that. Considering AVFTTOTW is one of the shorter albums in terms of individual songs, we might just get one. How was it before BC&SL came out? I was a kid then, so I have no idea lol

[gzarruk]

Any idea when a single from the new album might be released?

My best guess would be one single per month before it’s released. Most bands do it that way plus MM said “not too too soon”. Not sure if it was on his IG or FB he said that. Considering AVFTTOTW is one of the shorter albums in terms of individual songs, we might just get one. How was it before BC&SL came out? I was a kid then, so I have no idea lol

Inside Out almost always releases 3 singles, so that's most likely what will happen. My bet is we get one this friday or next friday

[Untethered Angel]

Any idea when a single from the new album might be released?

My best guess would be one single per month before it’s released. Most bands do it that way plus MM said “not too too soon”. Not sure if it was on his IG or FB he said that. Considering AVFTTOTW is one of the shorter albums in terms of individual songs, we might just get one. How was it before BC&SL came out? I was a kid then, so I have no idea lol

Inside Out almost always releases 3 singles, so that's most likely what will happen. My bet is we get one this friday or next friday

So we’ll get to hear almost half of the album before it’s released? I wouldn’t be complaining if that were the case! 

[Seppe76]

I think will get two singles until album release.
I hope the first within next Friday, but probably second half of August

[Untethered Angel]

I think will get two singles until album release.
I hope the first within next Friday, but probably second half of August

I’m thinking two singles also. The first one might drop sometime this month or in early September, then the second one late September or early October.

[The Letter M]

Any idea when a single from the new album might be released?

My best guess would be one single per month before it’s released. Most bands do it that way plus MM said “not too too soon”. Not sure if it was on his IG or FB he said that. Considering AVFTTOTW is one of the shorter albums in terms of individual songs, we might just get one. How was it before BC&SL came out? I was a kid then, so I have no idea lol

Inside Out almost always releases 3 singles, so that's most likely what will happen. My bet is we get one this friday or next friday

So we’ll get to hear almost half of the album before it’s released? I wouldn’t be complaining if that were the case! 

If they pick the 3 shortest songs on the album to release as singles, it'll only be about 28-29% (about 20 minutes) of the album, nowhere near half.
Conversely, they could do single edits of some of the tracks and we'll hear even less of the song itself.

-Marc.

[Untethered Angel]

Any idea when a single from the new album might be released?

My best guess would be one single per month before it’s released. Most bands do it that way plus MM said “not too too soon”. Not sure if it was on his IG or FB he said that. Considering AVFTTOTW is one of the shorter albums in terms of individual songs, we might just get one. How was it before BC&SL came out? I was a kid then, so I have no idea lol

Inside Out almost always releases 3 singles, so that's most likely what will happen. My bet is we get one this friday or next friday

So we’ll get to hear almost half of the album before it’s released? I wouldn’t be complaining if that were the case! 

If they pick the 3 shortest songs on the album to release as singles, it'll only be about 28-29% (about 20 minutes) of the album, nowhere near half.
Conversely, they could do single edits of some of the tracks and we'll hear even less of the song itself.

-Marc.

Yeah I mean almost half of the album with respect to overall track listing, not time. So 3/7 songs is almost half.

[Pax]

Here's my opinion that nobody asked for. The album cover looks fine, much nicer than the last few of Syme's DT artworks, but on the other hand, much worse than The Astonishing. The Astonishing artwork was simply... astounding

[Ben_Jamin]

Here's my opinion that nobody asked for. The album cover looks fine, much nicer than the last few of Syme's DT artworks, but on the other hand, much worse than The Astonishing. The Astonishing artwork was simply... astounding

Yup. I'm glad JP decided to go with a different artist for that album. One where he could cooperate and create a world with.

[dream75]

The first single for InsideOut always comes out 9-11 weeks earlier than the album… So it will be released between 6 and 20 August.
I think we will listen to The Alien at 13th august

[gzarruk]

Here's my opinion that nobody asked for. The album cover looks fine, much nicer than the last few of Syme's DT artworks, but on the other hand, much worse than The Astonishing. The Astonishing artwork was simply... astounding astonishing

 

[Setlist Scotty]

With the size relation thing, I actually kinda like that exaggerated sense of scale. The tour art seems to go even further in regards to that.

I get that - and especially with the child on the giant's shoe. But the child and viewfinder are "normal" size, so shouldn't the two items be consistent in scale? It's not like that tour art where it's a miniature child on top of a viewfinder.
 
 

As for the metallic logo, I do see where you're coming from, although it's one of those things where it looks pretty clear at a certain size (it looks just fine when it's the size of a desktop background, so maybe it was designed for a vinyl size), but the smaller it is, the harder it is to distinguish.

Understood, but it is something to consider, because while vinyl has seen a resurgence, its sales are still relatively small compared to CD sales, and especially digital sales and streaming. OTOH, it also should be remembered that the artwork will be featured at a large scale on vinyl and maybe even some posters, so the smaller details should also be thought of, too.

I also wouldn't necessarily agree that Hugh's attention to detail has decreased over the years, because Permanent Waves' cover is simply a photo by Flip Schulke with three elements pasted on, with seemingly nothing other than a filter to blend them in (after all, he's pasted two of them in a convenient spot where the lack of shadows won't be noticable, but the newspaper actually sticks out for its lack of blending). A Farewell to Kings is similarly rough around the edges as a composite image.

That may be true, but he didn't have Photoshop available to him in 1979, let alone 1977!    What can be done with manual photo composing is far more limited than what can be done since Photoshop developed into a powerful tool in the early 90s.
 
 

That's the thing though, his style often isn't to make things look photorealistic. The abstract visual choices and the highly saturated lighting should probably be clues to that.

I beg to differ on that. While there is a certain amount of creativity obviously included, the majority of his artwork is intended to look photorealistic, or else he wouldn't constantly be using various photographic elements and manipulating them into the image so that (in general) they fit. Otherworldly does not mean non-photorealistic.
 
 

My main issue with detail nitpicking like this is the echo chamber amplification effect. A lot of those minuscule details would never be noticed by the majority of users until they're pointed out to them. And then, when it's pointed out to you, you can't help but seeing it. So you basically end up having something you enjoyed ruined by nitpickers, AND you feel stupid for liking it in the first place. And all of a sudden everyone are professional digital artists who "could do it much better"...

You do bring up a good point, and I agree that there is the pile on effect where many end up taking it too far. But while I don't condone those that go too far with their criticisms (I'd like to think I'm not one of those who have, altho you and/or others might disagree) or blanket statements about how it "sucks", as was already pointed out, this is human nature especially in the world we live in now. So knowing that and that this artwork is going to be viewed by a very rabid fanbase that does tend to nitpick every detail, wouldn't it have been good for Hugh to make sure all those little details were resolved? It's not like this is the same as the artwork he's done for businesses where it's forgotten about weeks after it is published.
 
 

Honestly, given the vitriol Hugh Syme gets, I'm kind of surprised that the same sort of thing isn't directed towards Larry Freemantle whenever his work is brought up. Images and Words alone has like 3 different artstyles, worse perspective issues, a wonky majesty symbol, a lack of clarity in the logo and title and probably a few more things if I looked hard enough. Awake's mirror casts no shadows (it also looks like an asset from Diablo or something in the way it gleams garishly in contrast to the lighting of the rest of the image) and the spider's web finishes in the air. Syme would be verbally lynched here if he did a cover with those same qualities.

The Awake cover doesn't really bother me altho I'm not big on that spider's web; I've always attributed the mirror to floating in space, so its shadow is outside the cropping of the image. But personally I've always had issues with the cover art for IaW and it's always ranked low for me because of the odd mix of styles used in it. I would love to see the cover redone properly in a photorealistic manner.
 
 

Also sure, DT could commission any number of relatively unknown artists... but Hugh Syme definitely has his own visual signature (that has come to be associated with the band), regardless of if it's to everyone's taste. Would your average unknown artist be as instantly recognisable (which ultimately, matters a lot when it comes to things like album art) as him? I kind of doubt that.

Artwork by someone else may not be instantly recognizable, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The TA artwork was a real surprise for a lot of the fans and IIRC, one that was welcomed by the majority.
 
 

You know why I think that child is proportionally small?....It's to emphasize the size of the giants shoes.

These small sized children are on the patch of land where the giant sleeps, which is on The Top of The World.

And that's fine - I don't have a problem with that. But IMO, the viewfinder could've been made just a wee bit smaller so that it was at the same scale as the child, since they're the same distance away from the person looking at the artwork. That said, it's a minor quibble that doesn't bother me much.

[RodrigoAltaf]

I think the cover is absolutely gorgeous, and really don't have the need to overanalyze every minor detail it presents. I actually sent a message to Hugh last week congratulating him on his work, and he said it's really fun to work with the DT guys, "almost as much as working with that 'other' band".

[Enigmachine]

I get that - and especially with the child on the giant's shoe. But the child and viewfinder are "normal" size, so shouldn't the two items be consistent in scale? It's not like that tour art where it's a miniature child on top of a viewfinder.

I mean... I don't see why the viewfinder has to be consistent with the child. It could just very well be pretty large.

I beg to differ on that. While there is a certain amount of creativity obviously included, the majority of his artwork is intended to look photorealistic, or else he wouldn't constantly be using various photographic elements and manipulating them into the image so that (in general) they fit. Otherworldly does not mean non-photorealistic.

I think there's a difference between making them fit and making them look photorealistic. Stuff like Hear in the Now Frontier, Second Nature and his Stone Sour piece might have a degree of realism, but he doesn't apply things like a depth blur for distant objects and likes to make the elements pop with that clear, almost cut-out look (which I can imagine some here would take issue with). His painted or photographed art seems to be used when he feels like the bold collage look won't fit the moodier vibe he's going for and I think DT fit the whimsical angle of that more collage style more often than not.

That may be true, but he didn't have Photoshop available to him in 1979, let alone 1977!    What can be done with manual photo composing is far more limited than what can be done since Photoshop developed into a powerful tool in the early 90s.

Yes... hence why I said this in the following paragraph:

(though I'll acknowledge that the technology of today makes things more convenient)

The thing is though, just because technology gives us the resources to iron things out sometimes, doesn't mean that it'll always be the intended aim to do so. There are people who like the almost pop-art appeal of the old collages so in my opinion, he's transferred a bit of that appeal to his modern covers, while polishing things up to get a result somewhere in the middle of a composite and a slightly more realistic approach.

Artwork by someone else may not be instantly recognizable, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The TA artwork was a real surprise for a lot of the fans and IIRC, one that was welcomed by the majority.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Jie Ma already had a lot of his assets ready by the time DT commissioned him, with the seemingly more bespoke art for TA actually being criticised a fair bit (the characters, I mean). So, there are two points here: One is that Jie Ma is pretty rare as an artist already in terms of technical ability and the second is that it's not exactly a guarantee that artists like that would be able to deliver what the fanbase would consider original, quality content on a regular basis. They could of course go the route they did for something like Train of Thought and simply use an already existing piece for the cover, but they seem to have a good working relationship with Hugh and the amount of people who heavily take issue with Hugh's style generally seem to be in the minority in the vast scheme of things (like noxon said, the broad reaction to the art was positive).

The Awake cover doesn't really bother me altho I'm not big on that spider's web; I've always attributed the mirror to floating in space, so its shadow is outside the cropping of the image. But personally I've always had issues with the cover art for IaW and it's always ranked low for me because of the odd mix of styles used in it. I would love to see the cover redone properly in a photorealistic manner.

I think I've said this before but if Awake doesn't bother you, neither should any of Hugh's recent work for DT other than the watermark, the guitar clipping and the initial DT12 error.

[DTwwbwMP]

The Astonishing artwork was simply... astounding astonishing

Agreed. Absolutely that was the BEST thing about The Astonishing!

[Schurftkut]

so, with jordan posting a count of tuscany, john myung talking about the epic being hard to play live... perhaps we can get an epics live show?

[Dream Team]

so, with jordan posting a count of tuscany, john myung talking about the epic being hard to play live... perhaps we can get an epics live show?

I’ve always hoped for this to happen one day. ACOS is the encore.

[KevShmev]

As great as ACOS is, if they were gonna do an epics-heavy show, Octavarium would make a lot more sense since it hasn't been played since 2006 (aside from a snippet in a medley).  ACOS was just played two tours ago.