Smoke and mirrors – how book designers get their favourite covers over the line

JA October 08

Cover by John Gall

A while ago I asked a photographer who worked for a local paper whether he had any say in which of his images make the final cut. The answer was not really, but he did admit that he often included the shot he really wanted among a host of other more mediocre pictures, in hopes of making it stand out, or else submits a limited range of shots to even out the odds.

So I guess it’s no surprise then that this article by Peter Mendelsund and Peter Terzian over at Print mag – in which various book designers reveal the techniques that they use to try and sway clients towards their own personal preference – caught my eye. Interestingly, one of the most common involved inserting fake typos or errors for those who like to feel as if they are contributing in some way to the final product. After making the ‘corrections’, the design itself often went through without a hitch.

There was also this from legendary Vintage designer John Gall:

I go into a meeting and before I show anything, I announce, ‘What you are about to see is not at all what we’ve been talking about. In fact, it’s probably the polar opposite of what you’re expecting and you’re probably not going to like it.’ this automatically focuses everyone’s attention, issues a challenge, and forces everyone to drop, at least temporarily, whatever frames of reference they had been using for the project.

And from David Pelham, who worked for Penguin UK during the 60s and 70s:

You show something totally out of order and maintain that you are mad about it. ‘Over our dead body,’ they cry. so you drag out your second choice, which is still pretty tacky, and they tug their bottom lips. ‘then there’s this, my third choice,’ I say, producing my first choice. they are so relieved to see an image which is diagrammatic and not actually pornographic that they fall upon it, nodding and smiling at each other and saying, ‘Oh yes, yes, that’s far more like it.’’

And, finally, from Barbara de Wilde of Knopf:

I’ll comp up multiple bad versions of the project design that represent what the other guys would do … I show these first, and remark disparagingly on them. ‘Isn’t this misguided?’ I say. ‘I know you, and this isn’t you.’ then I show them what is them. And they feel affirmed.

The full article is available as a PDF, here. (via The Casual Optimist)

Our Friends

• Overland
• Alien Onion
• Ampersand Duck
• Andrew McDonald
• A Pair of Ragged Claws
• Arts Victoria
• Australia Council for the Arts
• Ben Eltham
• Bookshow blog
• CAL
• City of Tongues
• Crikey
• darkly wise, rudely great
• David Astle
• Elmo Keep Does Stuff
• The Ember
• Fly the Falcon blog
• Going Down Swinging
• Griffith Review
• Hackpacker
• Harvest
• HEAT
• Island
• Killings blog
• Literary Minded
• Lorraine Crescent
• Lynden Barber
• Mandy Ord
• Marcus Westbury
• Matilda
• Meanland
• Melbourne University Publishing
• Mel Campbell
• The Monthly
• Musings of an Inappropriate Woman
• Oslo Davis
• Paul Callaghan
• Read, Think, Write
• Sleepers Publishing
• Sorrow at Sills Bend
• SPLOG
• Tom Cho
• Virgule
• Wet Ink
• Wheeler Centre

Comments