The paperback cover doesn't make sense to me....

[summer-breeze01]

I have the "original" cover of AWAb and the paperback copyright I have is 1997, I guess. It says "Copyright 1993 by Diane Duane" and "First Magic Carpet Books edition 1997." So the date of the weird AWAb cover is 2001, and I'm guessing it would say "second Magic Carpet Books edition" or something along those lines. Interesting. I don't understand why you would reissue a cover with only slight changes made. Isn't it usual to just completely re-do covers? And I know there are the other versions of the covers for this series, the ones that are completely drawn, so why change the people in these versions?

All of my covers are like the ones Wolf posted, except for WH. I have this one:

with Spot, Sker'ret, Filif, and Roshaun. Actually, I'm assuming that's Roshaun because it doesn't look like Dairine. Although why Spot would be there and not Dairine is beyond me.

[Wolf]

Oh wow, I didn't even think of hard cover v soft cover images... that's a really, really good idea, alla, and it's probably the right answer. I didn't even notice the difference between the two AWAb covers until I looked at them a third time, and then it really freaked me out. Because, with the girl's face more towards you is the "freaky" one to me, and I mistook it for the "normal" one that I have! Yikes.

Okay, so as you might know from the randomness topic, I got photoshop... and I thought it would be a good idea to photoshop the two covers together, to compare them. So the "freaky" cover of SYWTBAW is the one that's softer than the other, although I tried to adjust the opacity so it looked like they were the same. It helped me look at them a little easier, because you might spot more changes rather than when you look at them side by side. (Besides, I hate those "spot the differences" pictures =P )

[SilveredBlue]

Ooh, thanks, Wolf! That looks...cool.

Okay, so maybe it's soft/hard cover. But check the upper right hand corner in the two side-by-sides: the "Magic Carpet Books" logo is smeared looking in the "odd" version. Why would they change their logo for hard cover vs. soft cover editions of books?

Sorry if I'm shooting down your ideas, alla! I just seriously dislike the "odd" version, and I'm trying to take the blame off of my favorite publishing company. (Well, favorite next to Firebirds.)

[Garrett Fitzgerald]

I lined them up so that the buildings matched, because they appeared to be the same in both. The differences aren't quite as noticeable that way.

[alla]

Okay, so maybe it's soft/hard cover. But check the upper right hand corner in the two side-by-sides: the "Magic Carpet Books" logo is smeared looking in the "odd" version. Why would they change their logo for hard cover vs. soft cover editions of books?

Sorry if I'm shooting down your ideas, alla! I just seriously dislike the "odd" version, and I'm trying to take the blame off of my favorite publishing company. (Well, favorite next to Firebirds.)

Why change the covers at all then? I know that my favourite covers either belong to the first editions or the mid-90s Magic Carpet covers. I'm not a big fan of the latest ones. I like hand drawn cover images, especially the "collage-y" Magic Carpet covers. It's just not as fun not being able to stare at them and play spot the character. For example:



As for why you'd change between hard cover and soft cover? I don't know, but it happens. Here's the covers for A Wizard Alone:

This is the soft cover

This is the hard cover. I personally like this one better

And while looking for those images, I found another site that shows the "strange" covers in their list - another review site too. http://www.lookingglassreview.com/ht...rds_books.html

I tried using ISBN numbers to differentiate, but they're both the same. It appears to be random on the net which one gets used.

That it can be found in more than one location, to me suggests that its not just a fan mock-up. The SYWTBAW cover has the most noticeable differences and I'm seeing it show up more often on book review websites. Could it be that that was a "preview" to the cover sent out to review sites/companies before they were re-released and then it was tidied up for the actual book release? As for the "odd" AWAb, I like it better. It makes it seem like Tualha is jumping out of the cover, and Nita's turning to watch her.

[Lee Enfield-Burke]

In messages 32 & 34 above, the cruder of the two images is an early artist's rough -- not the final cover. The other one is the final.

DD has shown me copies of the roughs on past books as they come in. These are "dry runs" that Cliff Nielsen does while working out with the art director and the editor what the final should look like -- and sometimes the roughs can look pretty crude, but it's understood that these are not intended for public consumption. Cliff then goes off and adjusts the art, adds detail, does the final character work, etc.

What I don't fully understand is how these things get out into the wild and wind up at Amazon, etc., because they shouldn't. DD doesn't seem to have any answers for this either.

Meanwhile, DD has said that eventually she wants to do an "all the covers" page for each of the books, like this one for SYW at the wiki.

[SilveredBlue]

Okay! Muchos gracias, Lee, for clearing that up! Actually, it wasn't at amazon. Amazon has the regular covers- the finals.
This was at SF Review Site, which I actually found because of an old thread about reviews of WH.

Ooh, I like the old Magic Carpet SYW cover. Spot the characters, like alla said!

[summer-breeze01]

Actually, it wasn't at amazon. Amazon has the regular covers- the finals.
This was at SF Review Site, which I actually found because of an old thread about reviews of WH.

Actually, Amazon has the "other" one for AWAb, which was part of my confusion as I went to see if the hardbacks differed from the paperbacks (Amazon wasn't being too helpful with that, but whatever) but when you click on "see what's inside this book" it corrects itself. It's a moot point now, anyways. Thanks, Lee!

[Wolf]

Garrett.... I pretty much did the same thing, except I lined up the "W." I was doing it quickly, and just thought that everything was slightly off, so I figured I'd just chose a focal point. =P I like your idea better, though.

And... Lee! Oh my gosh! Hah... thanks for finding this thread and giving us the simple answer we were looking for.

Btw, I love this line....

What I don't fully understand is how these things get out into the wild and wind up at Amazon, etc.,

Thanks for the moment and the quip, as well. =D Don't know if we would have figured it out on our own... lol

[EricG1793]

I'm so glad that my old thread is of use again!

I prefer the appearance of the newer softcover editions myself. They're more realistic-looking to me; I find that the hardcover drawings make it look more cartoon-like and take away from the "this is how the Universe works" theme of the books.

Lee, you/DD should totally do a book-by-book cover "museum"! :applause:

[Lazy Leopard]

What I don't fully understand is how these things get out into the wild and wind up at Amazon, etc., because they shouldn't. DD doesn't seem to have any answers for this either.

Could it have gone something like this:

1. Publisher's marketing department announces proposed date for new edition.
2. Amazon puts up a pre-order page and asks publisher for a cover image.
3. Publisher's marketing department doesn't have a final cover image, but does have the rough, and sends Amazon a copy...
4. Amazon store the rough in their system, and there it remains for ever more.

(I'm extrapolating from my personal experience that marketing departments are a law unto themselves, and seem incapable of understanding phrases like "for internal circulation only", "in development" and "not for sale".)

[estar9821]

Wow, this is really strange. Too bad that DD doesn't know herself, or I'd say ask her...wierd.

I mainly get mine from the library, where they have tons of different editions. It's fun to pick and choose which edition it read. But one of the older ones has a blonde Nita on the cover! I can't think of a blonde in the series except for Joanne in the first book, but it couldn't be her.