Why, Gutenberg? Why?

[Calenorn]

What on EARTH is going on with the covers added to Project Gutenberg ebook downloads? Those things are beyond hideous! Those colors make them physically painful to look at.

What are they thinking?!?!?!

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Calenorn

What on EARTH is going on with the covers added to Project Gutenberg ebook downloads? Those things are beyond hideous! Those colors make them physically painful to look at.

What are they thinking?!?!?!

AI cover generation is cheap?

[Quoth]

Easily changed.
Also a lot of the "covers" on out of copyright editions are just faded text on faded background. Some dust covers survive, but often poor quality.

Actually even a lot of the "reprint" covers are poor text for an ereader or images unrelated to the novel.

[Calenorn]

All true. But there's no reason an AI generated cover has to be garish.

[Quoth]

I doubt it's even AI.
Someone must like them. Not so bad in monochrome!

[hobnail]

Most people have no clue about what colors look good, and how to use them together so that they look good.

For example see

https://color.adobe.com/create/color-wheel

I don't know if the above has an API but if so they could have used it to generate the colors.

[wold]

Initially I found these new PG covers ugly* as well. Digging into the background is however quite interesting.

Before getting to that: IMHO the PG implementation screwed up the font. Not to go into rant overdrive, but one of basic visual rules for me is *no font stretching*, especially horizontally. Things start to look off, amateurish, quickly. Sure, PG has long titles and subtitles, but this makes a border case edgy. Anyway.

The design came from some library people who researched automatic cover generation. The PG one uses the title letters, arranges them into a square. and converts them into PET ASCII symbols. So the gibberish is really the title, quite neat actually.
The PET symbols were found on the Commodore 64's keyboard. IIRC they were mostly used in quirky BASIC games. The ones I recall when a child were... dubious :P The colors are derived using some method. Indeed not with the best results, but hey

They made a number of designs, shown on their blog page:
https://www.nypl.org/blog/2014/09/03...e-ebook-covers
At the bottom there's also a link to the Print 10 book/project.

I'm still considering added this cover generator to calibre with some tweaks, mostly to check out the code. Doubt it will be popular

* some prepend an f there.

[hobnail]

Originally Posted by wold

Initially I found these new PG covers ugly* as well. Digging into the background is however quite interesting.
...
The colors are derived using some method. Indeed not with the best results, but hey

For me, if it's boring or unattractive it doesn't matter how clever the technique or technology was in making it. Those ugly colors really ensure their unattractiveness.

[ownedbycats]

I just took a look myself. My poor eyes...

[gmw]

Ah, the old problem of thinking that complementary will also be complimentary.

Still, as noted above, the colours looks absolutely fine on an e-ink reader, and the generated random shapes on the cover are at least not offensive to the eye, unlike many human created PD covers I have seen.

[cromag]

I agree. It seems to me that it would have been just as easy to scan in a nice piece of pebbled leather and then put the book's title on the scan. At least that would look like an old, leather-bound book.

[haertig]

Those new covers are indeed hideous. I could understand hideous if it served some purpose. Like making books easier to identify on a shelf (electronic of physical). But these new designs actually hamper identifying a book. Though different from each other, the mind would group them all together and not easily be able to distinguish one from the other if scanning for something.

It's like someone works at Gutenberg and their child got an "F" on their geometric shapes science project. So the parent says, "I'll show that teacher a thing or two!"

[blar]

Originally Posted by wold

Initially I found these new PG covers ugly* as well. Digging into the background is however quite interesting.

Before getting to that: IMHO the PG implementation screwed up the font. Not to go into rant overdrive, but one of basic visual rules for me is *no font stretching*, especially horizontally. Things start to look off, amateurish, quickly. Sure, PG has long titles and subtitles, but this makes a border case edgy. Anyway.

The design came from some library people who researched automatic cover generation. The PG one uses the title letters, arranges them into a square. and converts them into PET ASCII symbols. So the gibberish is really the title, quite neat actually.
The PET symbols were found on the Commodore 64's keyboard. IIRC they were mostly used in quirky BASIC games. The ones I recall when a child were... dubious :P The colors are derived using some method. Indeed not with the best results, but hey

They made a number of designs, shown on their blog page:
https://www.nypl.org/blog/2014/09/03...e-ebook-covers
At the bottom there's also a link to the Print 10 book/project.

I'm still considering added this cover generator to calibre with some tweaks, mostly to check out the code. Doubt it will be popular

* some prepend an f there.

I found it pretty neat, too! But yeah, as gmw observed, complementary colors were not a wise choice. Especially in that early MS Paint color palette.

While trying to see what people were talking about (before I read down to your post), I also found this cover generator designed for Polish books. It's pretty intriguing, and much easier on the eyes:

http://variable.io/generative-covers/

Maybe someone at Project Gutenberg should get in touch with them.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I doubt it's even AI.
Someone must like them. Not so bad in monochrome!

Wow. Just wow.

And here I've been kvetching about Amazon's Cover Creator all this time. PG has got them utterly whipped!

Hitch

[BadBilly]

They're fine. Not that I'm going to spend much time looking at them anyway.