Irene Gallo Discusses Mistborn Art *New MB paperback artwork*

[PixelFish]

Irene Gallo, the art director at Tor, has a blog, where recently she posted some works by Jon Foster, the artist for Mistborn covers. I guess they are doing a second cover for the paperback version, and she posts a shot of the cover as it proceeds from sketchy underpainting to finished work.

I thought the Mistborn fans would be interested in seeing this, if they hadn't yet.

http://igallo.blogspot.com/2006/11/jon-foster.html

[Spriggan]

Humm...weird that they're doing a new cover for the PB and one that's not as visually drawing as the HB cover.  To me that PB artwork's colors are to dull and everything blends into each other while the HB cover the characters stick out from the background, so from a glance at a distance there's nothing that makes the cover stand out against all the other paperbacks.

also, I edited your original title to include reference to the new artwork, hope you don't mind but I figured more people would read the thread if they knew about that.

[Skar]

Whoah.  Forgive me, but that cover sucks a big fat one.  It looks like something kids I knew in high-school might paint...badly. 

What's with the lightning coming off of Vin?  Is it supposed to be the metal lines?  Why would they be all wavy? 

And is that Death from Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey lurking there in the background?  With a sickle no less?

Did this guy read the book?  Did he talk to anyone who had read the book?  Can he read?

It flabbergasts me that this is, apparently, the same artist who did the hardback cover.  I suspect alien mind invasion.

[Spriggan]

Ya, I couldn't figure who that was until I remembered that as an incentive for buying the paperback EUOL added extra characters and changed the ending and is calling it "Mistborn The Director's cut" and each different edition will have a different ending, we're calling it the "Blade Runner Effect".

[Nessa]

Grim Reaper? What the...?

So I read the comments she has on the blog and here's her reply to a question about why they're changing the artwork:

In this case, we loved the hardcover art but we were worried that it would be hard to make out at the smaller paperback size. Since we felt we got the right tone across the first time, we decided to go back to Jon and see if he'd be up for revisiting it. (It also helped that I knew he really loved the book.)

You are right that it is unusual to go back to the same artist for new cover. More typically, if we are changing the cover for mass market, we are doing so to get a completely different feel on the book. Sometimes it's because we failed to get the hardcover the right audience, other times it's just the nature of paperback publishing versus hardcover publishing.

Most paperbacks are _not_ bought in bookstores, they are bought on impulse in drug stores, airports, supermarkets, etc. Because of that, the feeling is that you have to "STOP THE SHOPPING CART!" Things need to pop more, more foil and emboss, etc. Hardcovers are often bought in bookstores were people take their time and browse more...plus you have a lot more room to do more subtle things with.

So he had read the book, but I still don't know where the Grim Reaper comes from. Beyond strange.

[EUOL]

I am very interested in this discussion.  Please, if others browse this thread, please say what your impressions of the cover are.

[Chimera]

I don't like it. I have to say I wasn't a huge fan of the hardcover either. I think it is a significant step down from the cover art for Elantris. I know you weren't allowed to use the same artist, but I think it's too bad.

So, saying that I wasn't a huge fan of the hardcover, I'd have to say that this is a step down from that. It's not a style I'm a fan of. I don't like how everything is elongated and out of proportion. Plus, the lightening lines are confusing,  and the grim reaper is just weird. The hardcover at least seemed to make sense.

[dawncawley]

Ok, I have the hardback in front of me, and I have looked at the paperback version, and I agree with the alien mind invasion theory. I can see parts where you can tell that it is the same artist, and then there are parts that make you think the artist changed hands or something. Like the intent was there, but the ability just jumped ship. I hope that it isn't a final draft, and maybe is just one of the rough sketches. If that was the case it would make more sense to me.

[PixelFish]

I may be in the minority here, because by and large, I like Jon Foster's work, although I have to admit that I like the original cover better than the paperback. And I felt it suited the story better. The view of Vin from below, flying over her nemesis, was intriguing. I know his angular, slightly shifted surreal style isn't everybody's cup of tea, but I liked the energy Jon Foster was able to get into the work.

New cover: I disagree with the Grim Reaper figure being in the background, even allegorically, because I think the inclusion of that throws off the tone of the book. And while Vin is still very much in motion, seeing her from the side, or from above, does less to convey the same sense that she's using her powers to skate over the heads of her adversaries. As an artist, I think the painting is fine, BUT I don't feel that it's the right cover for Mistborn, per se. I'm very much a fan of the first cover.

[Oldie Black Witch]

I don't have time to give details, but in a lot of ways, I prefer the pb cover to the hb cover. This is probably just a style preference.

[Parker]

I don't hate the cover, but I'm not crazy about it, either.  The grim reaper definitely throws me off, and her skewed face doesn't do much for me.  It's not a cover that would draw me to a book.

[MsFish]

I like this cover much better, except that Vin's face is kinda freaky.  She looks like a twisted old man.  But then, I never liked the HB cover.  I prefer this one over the other one, but I'm not in love with either.

[Archon]

I can't tell if that is supposed to be Vin or Kelsier. That's usually a bad thing. The grim reaper just plain doesn't belong there. Neither do the crows. Even disregarding those things, I think the art is repulsive. The hardcover art was much better.

[Spriggan]

Archon  you bring up a good point, for a while I thought it was a depiction of Kesler's fight with Lord Ruler and not Vin at all until I figured they wouldn't use Kelser on a cover plus you can see the character is wearing a dress under the mistcloak.  I don't think the cover is hideous as some have mentioned but as a cover it doesn't work for the reasons I mentioned in my first post plus what Archon said.  I hate book covers that even after I read the book I have no clues as to where the cover came from, tells me as a book reader that the publisher doesn't care much about the book.

Also, I'm probably one of the few that like the push/pull lines as electricity over straight lines, while when I read the book I thought of them as straight (like a laser pointer) this works much better visually and actually adds some nice variation to the art itself and shows a sense of movement/action with those that straight lines wouldn't convey well.  I like how they vary in intensity too.

[The Lost One]

I'm in line with those who don't care for the paperback cover.  It's not the artist style that bothers me as much as it appears as if the artist didn't read the book and created the cover based on some brief descriptions. The cover just does not match book because of stupid elements like the grin reaper or the crows. Anyone who actually reads the book will look at this cover and be confused. This cover was poorly done regardless of how good the artist might be otherwise.