I agree...
). But the reason why I wrote this post is because the new
album has probably the dullest cover ever.
Is that a crime? I wouldn't say that. But it's clear that we've seen that picture somewhere before...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0258/a02588bcf5b1613f3abca695d31d452c06c1f3e4" alt=""
The cover for the new U2 album uses the same photo by Hiroshi Sugimoto that was used by electronic/ambient musician
Taylor Deupree for his CD "Specification.Fifteen" (based on Sugimoto's work) from 2006.
You can read all about it
here.
Without using the words
stealing or
plagiarism I would say that's not very smart. Who's to blame? I wouldn't know. Sugimoto himself, or his management? U2, or their management? This will probably stay an ongoing discussion...
Fact is, that it is a dull cover.
So I tried to pimp it (fake covers again!) but I kept the black&white picture. I didn't use any
bigger-than-life typography and I didn't add any graphical elements.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/181c7/181c73be3eecb2ad8fa37df058bcb2f48c3ebff5" alt=""
Did it get any better? Tell me.
And that brings me to a second subject about U2.
The U2 album sleeves look always a bit simular. (Let's make an exception for "Pop") You could call that a
house style but I don't think it's intentional. There's never any great design. Never any creativity. Always
pale brown,
dark red and
black&white. Always a bit symmetrical. Always a bit old fashioned. I'ld almost say: always a bit dull.
What would happen if U2 used the same dull photo and the
cliche title of their last album, but if they'ld use an old design?