Imaginative illustration, used with minimal blurbage gives a magazine more individuality, style and class, making it more desirable and marketable.
As a current non-magazine buyer, I would purchase women's (or any other) magazines all month long, all year long, at full modern prices—if they used modern illustrators, but looked at all like this:
William Welsh — Woman's Home Companion — June, 1932
6 comments:
Amen! I wouldn't care about the contents -- Hell, I'd subscribe to CROCHET MONTHLY -- if they had covers like that!
M.D., we need to start a revolution . . .
Hi Thom,
I don't know why magazine publishers don't understand this. I love the printed word, but on a magazine cover, too much of it reads like an assault or a bombardment, rather than an enticement.
I only buy one magazine -- Drawing. But if there were more covers like this, I would leave with an armful of magazines every week!
The New Yorker, though, is the current leader of the pack in magazine covers, I think.
Gorgeous!
Couldn't agree more but when even magazines called "artist and illustrator" would rather use photos and a ton of copy what hope have you got.
Post a Comment