>album cover is just a photo of the artist
Holy fuck, I hate this shit. It's just lazy and narcissistic.
not always
>>74436648
nothing wrong with that if it's done AESTHETICALLY
it works sometimes
>>74436721
woah, good photographers, they made grimes look very pretty, relatively at least
no it is not. It works sometimes. I like this cover a lot for some reason.
>album cover is sexual
>>74436648
phil-collins.jpg
Perfection.
>>74436677
that's so manipulated it doesn't count
>>74436769
Cuz you have bad taste
Shit always cracks me up with classical music.
incorrect
>>74437235
>Moondog
My mother fucking nigga
>>74436896
way to expose your terrible judgement
Every country album ever
>>74436648
What else do you expect? A photo of the artist tells more than a shitty design or cropped painting/photograph
>>74436648
Me too. I hate it. This album sucks btw
its normally a woman who does this shit
>>74437638
women are demons who beg for attention and to be lusted after. Chads fall for it.
>>74436648
>narcissistic
thats literally the point
>This is me, the artist who has made this album
>"UGH YOU NARCISSIST AT LEAST TAKE A LO FI PICTURE OF A LANDSCAPE"
Sometimes it works good. Mudhoney's Superfuzz Bigmuff is the only one I can think of on top of my head.
>it's narcissistic when an artist wants to associate themselves with their music
fucking how
>>74436721
This made me giggle thanks anon
Another "sometimes it works" comment with an example
>>74436782
>album cover is just a average penis
Sometimes it works
So 80% of jazz sucks?
i thought it came from album covers' original purpose to give a face to the artist and help brand when no one could get any information on the artist if they wanted to
>>74443506
yea
>>74437235
Does it count as narcissism if the artist is blind?
>sexy Dylan
Hnnnnnggg
>>74436648
It works if you want to make the album a bit more personal and intimate for the listener
>>74436648
>>74436974
>>74443823
lmao
>>74436648
YOU are narcissistic, faggot