Confirmed Album Cover - Grey Boxes Are? / U2 Album Cover Rip-Off?

[BVS]

I think, seeing as how the image has already been used as an album cover, U2 should at this late date PICK A NEW COVER!

I assume you're joking...

 

[david]

I think, seeing as how the image has already been used as an album cover, U2 should at this late date PICK A NEW COVER!

I don't think it'll be a big deal. The people that used the cover originally for their album said they only printed 1,000 copies of the disc anyway.

 

[Danny Boy]

No, U2 should be infinitely familiar with the cover art of every crap band that has ever put out a CD, no matter how small the production run.

Time to delay the album release for another two months while we sort all of this out.

 

[Niceman]

I assume you're joking...

No, I'm actually not.... I know it'd be an expense, but they do have a month and a half until it's released. They could keep the same theme but find something new.

Send Anton down to the beach on a cloudy day. Maybe this time pick a picture where there actually ISN'T a line on the horizon (Unlike the one they've chosen at this point!)

 

[BVS]

No, I'm actually not.... I know it'd be an expense, but they do have a month and a half until it's released. They could keep the same theme but find something new.

Send Anton down to the beach on a cloudy day. Maybe this time pick a picture where there actually ISN'T a line on the horizon (Unlike the one they've chosen at this point!)

So you're just saying this because you don't like the cover...

They had to know the photograph has been used.

I'm sure they aren't worried about the few hundred copies that may have been sold, plus they turned it into their own. This is what they wanted.

 

[thanksu2]

^I don't like the cover either, but it's ludicrous to suggest that they change it. It's just something you'll have to grow to like or ignore.

 

[david]

It's the photographer that wins in the end, not some small band that used it first.

 

[BVS]

It's the photographer that wins in the end, not some small band that used it first.

Exactly...

 

[Niceman]

So you're just saying this because you don't like the cover...

They had to know the photograph has been used.

I'm sure they aren't worried about the few hundred copies that may have been sold, plus they turned it into their own. This is what they wanted.

Noooo. Not just because of that! LOL! I don't hate it. I've actually been hoping I might like it more when I see it in person..... BUT using a piece of artwork for the cover which has ALREADY been used as an album cover is an amazingly epic failure!!!! If its at all physically possible to substitute at this point, I think they should.

Put it this way; if I were Bono, and in love with the cover, and discovered it had been used before, I'd want to see if we could replace it!

 

[david]

To give U2 credit, they did use a photograph that was used before, but at least it was altered in such a way to give it a different take. Adding the = sign to symbolically say "Sky Equals Sea" to reference the album title at least was different than just using the photograph untouched.

 

[Niceman]

But to be fair... while I LOVE Get on Your Boots and am hoping for an amazing album..... I do think it's completely inane to choose a picture of the sea and sky which does have a clear line on the horizon!!!!! That's madness!!!!!!!

 

[BVS]

Put it this way; if I were Bono, and in love with the cover, and discovered it had been used before, I'd want to see if we could replace it!

Discovered? I'm pretty sure they knew, if the photographer didn't inform them that he's sold the photograph before for an album cover he could be sued. But why? No one saw it, and it's been altered, it's not the same cover...

 

[BVS]

That's madness!!!!!!!

Art is madness!!!!!

 

[Niceman]

Art is madness!!!!!

Sure it is..... but my feeling here is that its as if they're all looking at this photo and somehow not processing that the picture does the OPPOSITE of what they think it does.... I feel like they actually think it illustrates a foggy day when you can't see where the sky and the sea separates....... but from what I see... there is a thick black line there. There is a line on the horizon. Can I conceive of this being intentional? Well, yeah, but why would they do that? It isn't working for me...

I took a friend of mine out on the beach a month ago. It was dark and foggy and I pointed out to the distance and asked him "Do you see the line where the sea ends and the sky begins?" And he replied; "Actually, no I don't!" And I said; "Exactly, that's the idea behind U2's new album!" This is an exciting idea! This is a concept worth spending time on and thinking about.... but when there is a line on the horizon? Gah! It's like some Bush appointee was in charge of the concept!

LOL! All that said though, I think using a cover that's already been an album cover is an even more serious problem. It's my opinion that they should change it as a result. Why use someone else's old idea? That's not U2....

 

[david]

I think it's wonderful that the artist's photograph is being displayed on a U2 album as now the artist and his work is going to be in the homes of millions of people.

 

[Danny Boy]

Sure it is..... but my feeling here is that its as if they're all looking at this photo and somehow not processing that the picture does the OPPOSITE of what they think it does.... I feel like they actually think it illustrates a foggy day when you can't see where the sky and the sea separates....... but from what I see... there is a thick black line there. There is a line on the horizon. Can I conceive of this being intentional? Well, yeah, but why would they do that?

Irony?

I'm sure they can see the horizon just as well as anyone.

 

[david]

And besides, the band that originally used the photo were asked to make the album to compose music for the artists showing, was granted permission by the artist to use the photograph as the cover, and the album was limited to 1,000 copies.

I read the artist's blog, and I was saddened at the selfishness of the guy who originally used it for the album cover.

 

[cseggleton]

Noooo. Not just because of that! LOL! I don't hate it. I've actually been hoping I might like it more when I see it in person..... BUT using a piece of artwork for the cover which has ALREADY been used as an album cover is an amazingly epic failure!!!! If its at all physically possible to substitute at this point, I think they should.

Put it this way; if I were Bono, and in love with the cover, and discovered it had been used before, I'd want to see if we could replace it!

every artist is a canibal.....every poet is a thief.......all kill their inspiration and sing about their grief

 

[Niceman]

Irony?

I'm sure they can see the horizon just as well as anyone.

Maybe..... I guess I would have preferred something deeper to think about than irony.... Irony is kinda Kindergarten in the scope of things.....

 

[Niceman]

every artist is a canibal.....every poet is a thief.......all kill their inspiration and sing about their grief

LOL! That answer works for everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[cseggleton]

LOL! That answer works for everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i could not resist. i think u2 should have also thought about the similarities between GOYB and Pump it Up or Wild Wild West. The more i listen to boots the less i think about the similarities.....

 

[david]

"that really sucks, man. SUGIMOTO is my all-time favourite photographer…..and i was SO pissed off when i saw Sugimoto’s photo as the album cover to the U2. Such an insult to Sugimoto….but then again, he was dumb enough to let U2 use that photo…..terrible…..that photo will never be as special again."

That's awesome thinking.

 

[Y2K]

I don't understand - where are any rip-off claims coming from?

 

[edgeplaytheblue]

I don't understand - where are any rip-off claims coming from?

i'm curious too about this ...

 

[Niceman]

Read the thread. Apparently the photo has already been used as an album cover by someone else.

 

[last unicorn]

It's the artist that's important here and obviously he has given U2 the right to use his picture for the cover.

I honestly don't think U2 are aware of this French nobody that used the picture before them. If they want that photo, they should use it.

 

[indra]

The photographer licensed the use of this photo to the various users (each for various applications -- I'm sure the license U2 has is much more extensive than the one the musicians who used it for the cover of the 1000 cd edition to accompany the photographer's exhibit) and apparently has not granted or sold the exclusive use of it to anyone. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the same photograph used in many situations an on many products such as in advertising, on calendars, greeting cards, posters, and yes, on cd covers. Licensing is common amongst photographers (and painters) -- it's they way many make their living. Surely the musicians granted a free license to this image (for the cd in conjunction with the exhibit) didn't think it would also be exclusive.

 

[coemgen]

Another cover similar to NLOTH:

Images for Brothomstates - Claro

 

[OrARoundabout]

"NLOTH's Cover" is Similar to Taylor Deupree's "Specification.Fifteen"

RollingStone.com:

After a 30-second leak of U2’s first No Line on the Horizon single “Get On Your Boots” emerged early this weekend, the band decided just to stream the whole track in its entirety on their Website. From the opening drums and fuzzed out riff, it’s clear the band went the “Vertigo” route for their comeback single.

The verses are similar to Elvis Costello’s “Pump It Up,” with Bono singing, “You free me from the dark dream, Candy floss ice cream, All our kids are screaming, But the ghosts aren’t real” in a similar cadence to Costello’s This Year’s Model hit. On the chorus, Bono sings “You don’t know how beautiful you are” in a style that echoes How To Dismantle an Atomic Bomb’s “City of Blinding Light,” which boasted a chorus of “Oh, you look so beautiful tonight.”

“Get On Your Boots” was supposed to become available digitally on February 15th, but lo and behold it’s for sale on iTunes right now. The physical release is still scheduled for February 16th, while No Line and all of its five formats are due out March 3rd. For Rolling Stone’s exclusive preview of the new U2 album, check out our track-by-track breakdown.

In other U2 news, it’s come to our attention that there’s a bit of an uproar over No Line’s pretty-awesome new cover art. A bunch of comments on our item last Friday about the new album image led us to this, the cover of Richard Chartier & Taylor Deupree’s specification.fifteen. Both covers feature similar oceanic photos from Japanese artist Hiroshi Sugimoto. Still, the likelihood U2 stole this image from the sound artists seems just as likely as Coldplay stealing “Viva La Vida” from Joe Satriani. Commenters also pointed us to Brothomstates’ 2001 album Caro, which features a similar horizon image complete with an equal signs.

I LOLed at that part


U2 ALBUM COVER…HAVE I SEEN THIS BEFORE?? � 12k
^Pictures of Both Covers

An interesting observation. But it's certainly just a coincidence.

 

[coemgen]

We've already got a thread on this. It's interesting stuff though.