Diamond Eyes album cover reveal

[m1nusblindfoLd]

that was posted on another topic sby someone else than me BUT i think this is important

  http://www.glowimages.com/index.cfm?/imageDetails_EN&imgid=20922297&extIntCode=0

this means this is a stock photo, which means warner brother didn't actually paid a photographer and a designer, they bought an already made picture from a company who pays artists to get the right for their art. They don't actually have the right for it. All and all, this is a very cheap move from them.

dude are you serious?!?! who cares whether the picture existed independently of the album?  Whether a totally new work was created or not, the album artwork is obviously meaningful to the band and represents the music and emotion in a different way.  Obviously the band feels the picture is symbolic and meaningful.  And of course they have the rights to the photo, or else they couldn't use it.  I imagine they paid a fee to the original rights-holder for either a limited, exclusive license and or an entire buy-out.

Actually I agree that's pretty shitty. I mean look, he just showed us a link where this exact photo exists..I mean I can't think of any other album cover that I can say the same about. Kinda ehh.

[Saturday Night Whiskey999]

thats cheap, but not shitty.

[mikau]

that was posted on another topic sby someone else than me BUT i think this is important

   http://www.glowimages.com/index.cfm?/imageDetails_EN&imgid=20922297&extIntCode=0

this means this is a stock photo, which means warner brother didn't actually paid a photographer and a designer, they bought an already made picture from a company who pays artists to get the right for their art. They don't actually have the right for it. All and all, this is a very cheap move from them.

dude are you serious?!?! who cares whether the picture existed independently of the album?  Whether a totally new work was created or not, the album artwork is obviously meaningful to the band and represents the music and emotion in a different way.  Obviously the band feels the picture is symbolic and meaningful.  And of course they have the rights to the photo, or else they couldn't use it.  I imagine they paid a fee to the original rights-holder for either a limited, exclusive license and or an entire buy-out.

Actually I agree that's pretty shitty. I mean look, he just showed us a link where this exact photo exists..I mean I can't think of any other album cover that I can say the same about. Kinda ehh.

The Mars Volta uses Jeff Jordan paintings as covers

[m1nusblindfoLd]

that was posted on another topic sby someone else than me BUT i think this is important

   http://www.glowimages.com/index.cfm?/imageDetails_EN&imgid=20922297&extIntCode=0

this means this is a stock photo, which means warner brother didn't actually paid a photographer and a designer, they bought an already made picture from a company who pays artists to get the right for their art. They don't actually have the right for it. All and all, this is a very cheap move from them.

dude are you serious?!?! who cares whether the picture existed independently of the album?  Whether a totally new work was created or not, the album artwork is obviously meaningful to the band and represents the music and emotion in a different way.  Obviously the band feels the picture is symbolic and meaningful.  And of course they have the rights to the photo, or else they couldn't use it.  I imagine they paid a fee to the original rights-holder for either a limited, exclusive license and or an entire buy-out.

Actually I agree that's pretty shitty. I mean look, he just showed us a link where this exact photo exists..I mean I can't think of any other album cover that I can say the same about. Kinda ehh.

The Mars Volta uses Jeff Jordan paintings as covers

I love Volta

[Sushi-X]

Like I said in the other thread who cares? Is it affecting the music in some way. No because everyone already knows that this album fucking rocks. An even you minus, who was whining about how it didn't have the "classic" deftones guitar before you heard the entire thing.  

[m1nusblindfoLd]

Like I said in the other thread who cares? Is it affecting the music in some way. No because everyone already knows that this album fucking rocks. An even you minus, who was whining about how it didn't have the "classic" deftones guitar before you heard the entire thing.  

WTF? Why would you bring that up? Totally unrelated...

But seeing as you brought it up....nothing's changed since I said that, still not a single song on this album has that classic Deftones/Steph guitar lol. If you can't realize that, um get some new ears?

[Dienekes]

that was posted on another topic sby someone else than me BUT i think this is important

  http://www.glowimages.com/index.cfm?/imageDetails_EN&imgid=20922297&extIntCode=0

this means this is a stock photo, which means warner brother didn't actually paid a photographer and a designer, they bought an already made picture from a company who pays artists to get the right for their art. They don't actually have the right for it. All and all, this is a very cheap move from them.

dude are you serious?!?! who cares whether the picture existed independently of the album?  Whether a totally new work was created or not, the album artwork is obviously meaningful to the band and represents the music and emotion in a different way.  Obviously the band feels the picture is symbolic and meaningful.  And of course they have the rights to the photo, or else they couldn't use it.  I imagine they paid a fee to the original rights-holder for either a limited, exclusive license and or an entire buy-out.

Actually I agree that's pretty shitty. I mean look, he just showed us a link where this exact photo exists..I mean I can't think of any other album cover that I can say the same about. Kinda ehh.

So I guess you really don't dig the cover of Led Zep 1? Seriously, maybe it is just cause you are into photography. How many peoe in the world today really know that the cover of led zep 1 is the Hindenburg? How many think it is the cover to led zep 1?

Point being, that shit was a historical tragedy, this, well, it is a fucking stock photo. See what I am saying...

It is no white pony but I am loving it.

[m1nusblindfoLd]

that was posted on another topic sby someone else than me BUT i think this is important

   http://www.glowimages.com/index.cfm?/imageDetails_EN&imgid=20922297&extIntCode=0

this means this is a stock photo, which means warner brother didn't actually paid a photographer and a designer, they bought an already made picture from a company who pays artists to get the right for their art. They don't actually have the right for it. All and all, this is a very cheap move from them.

dude are you serious?!?! who cares whether the picture existed independently of the album?  Whether a totally new work was created or not, the album artwork is obviously meaningful to the band and represents the music and emotion in a different way.  Obviously the band feels the picture is symbolic and meaningful.  And of course they have the rights to the photo, or else they couldn't use it.  I imagine they paid a fee to the original rights-holder for either a limited, exclusive license and or an entire buy-out.

Actually I agree that's pretty shitty. I mean look, he just showed us a link where this exact photo exists..I mean I can't think of any other album cover that I can say the same about. Kinda ehh.

So I guess you really don't dig the cover of Led Zep 1? Seriously, maybe it is just cause you are into photography. How many peoe in the world today really know that the cover of led zep 1 is the Hindenburg? How many think it is the cover to led zep 1?

Point being, that shit was a historical tragedy, this, well, it is a fucking stock photo. See what I am saying...

It is no white pony but I am loving it.

No need to be rude. The Hindenburg has some significance and is widely known. This is not.

[Sushi-X]

Because, why nitpick when the finished product is already great!!   

And yes I know what guitar sound your talkin about.

[m1nusblindfoLd]

I do agree that it's great. Bed time! lol

[Saturday Night Whiskey999]

deftones are simple, in a good way. thats enough.

[Dienekes]

that was posted on another topic sby someone else than me BUT i think this is important

   http://www.glowimages.com/index.cfm?/imageDetails_EN&imgid=20922297&extIntCode=0

this means this is a stock photo, which means warner brother didn't actually paid a photographer and a designer, they bought an already made picture from a company who pays artists to get the right for their art. They don't actually have the right for it. All and all, this is a very cheap move from them.

dude are you serious?!?! who cares whether the picture existed independently of the album?  Whether a totally new work was created or not, the album artwork is obviously meaningful to the band and represents the music and emotion in a different way.  Obviously the band feels the picture is symbolic and meaningful.  And of course they have the rights to the photo, or else they couldn't use it.  I imagine they paid a fee to the original rights-holder for either a limited, exclusive license and or an entire buy-out.

Actually I agree that's pretty shitty. I mean look, he just showed us a link where this exact photo exists..I mean I can't think of any other album cover that I can say the same about. Kinda ehh.

So I guess you really don't dig the cover of Led Zep 1? Seriously, maybe it is just cause you are into photography. How many peoe in the world today really know that the cover of led zep 1 is the Hindenburg? How many think it is the cover to led zep 1?

Point being, that shit was a historical tragedy, this, well, it is a fucking stock photo. See what I am saying...

It is no white pony but I am loving it.

No need to be rude. The Hindenburg has some significance and is widely known. This is not.

Sorry, I was not trying to be rude but you are kind of probing my point.

I really don't believe many people today know what zep 1 is a pic of. And you are absolutely correct. This is just a stock photo. My point is that when people see this image forevermore they will think deftones, diamond eyes.

I guess my point is that when 90% of people see that hindenburg pic they think led zep. When everyone sees that owl pic they are going to think diamond eyes. No one is ever going to know or care about a stock photo in 2 months. That image is now deftones. See what I mean?

[m1nusblindfoLd]

Sorry, I was not trying to be rude but you are kind of probing my point.

I really don't believe many people today know what zep 1 is a pic of. And you are absolutely correct. This is just a stock photo. My point is that when people see this image forevermore they will think deftones, diamond eyes.

I guess my point is that when 90% of people see that hindenburg pic they think led zep. When everyone sees that owl pic they are going to think diamond eyes. No one is ever going to know or care about a stock photo in 2 months. That image is now deftones. See what I mean?

I understand now. And yeah I agree...plus nobody really knew this was a stock photo until that person posted it.

But I'm confused- one of these threads had small photos of Chino and someone with a similar looking owl...I thought it was a photo shoot for this cover maybe? Or maybe those were older, unrelated pics?

EDIT:
These-

 

[Saturday Night Whiskey999]

"Stockphotoguy - Chino - Chino - stockphotoguy "

[FeetLikeFins]

The cover is SICK.  It fits the mood of the music perfectly.

[Saturday Night Whiskey999]

I think the cover of the diamond eys single (stock photo or not) would fit better the mood of the album.

[Dienekes]

Sorry, I was not trying to be rude but you are kind of probing my point.

I really don't believe many people today know what zep 1 is a pic of. And you are absolutely correct. This is just a stock photo. My point is that when people see this image forevermore they will think deftones, diamond eyes.

I guess my point is that when 90% of people see that hindenburg pic they think led zep. When everyone sees that owl pic they are going to think diamond eyes. No one is ever going to know or care about a stock photo in 2 months. That image is now deftones. See what I mean?

supposedly that is off his facebook.

I must be friends with chino. I must get chinosox. I must know what name he goes by on there...

Ok, nevermind! I just had a stalkerish mancrush for a sec...

Anyway, I already have chinosox. Although I would rely like to see the other pics on there. I can't wait for the story of the owl to come out. It appears he has some sort of interest in them.


I understand now. And yeah I agree...plus nobody really knew this was a stock photo until that person posted it.

But I'm confused- one of these threads had small photos of Chino and someone with a similar looking owl...I thought it was a photo shoot for this cover maybe? Or maybe those were older, unrelated pics?

EDIT:
These-

 

[Subliminal]

Jesus christ, stock photo or not, it's perfect for the album. Why are you people so critical? does it really affect your life that much if you don't like it?..

[Dienekes]

I am stoked about the cover. An owl seems kind of weak at first but it just fits.

1. The owl is a nocturnal predator. This album has such a nighttime vibe for me. The mindset of a killer.
2. The album is called diamond eyes. The teaser featured the golden eyes of a great horned owl which are very cool, however, I much prefer the black eyes of the barn owl (correct me if I am wrong here) they are empty, black. These might be diamond eyes but they are a blank slate. They are left for you, the listener to fill in. I love that.
3. The owl is white, soft and pure. But the owl is, as I established, a predator and a killer. A beautiful dichotomy. Exactly like the album, and, much like the band.

For me, this image is the icing on the cake. A perfect visual metaphor for the music and writing.

The synergy of music, imagery and feeling behind this album make it a pinnacle for the band. Nobody in the music business today is doing what these guys are doing right now. Deftones are in thier prime as artists at this moment.

Sorry, I know I am going off but I just have to gush. This album for me is a life changing, genre bending colossus.

I am in love.

[Subliminal]

I am stoked about the cover. An owl seems kind of weak at first but it just fits.

1. The owl is a nocturnal predator. This album has such a nighttime vibe for me. The mindset of a killer.
2. The album is called diamond eyes. The teaser featured the golden eyes of a great horned owl which are very cool, however, I much prefer the black eyes of the barn owl (correct me if I am wrong here) they are empty, black. These might be diamond eyes but they are a blank slate. They are left for you, the listener to fill in. I love that.
3. The owl is white, soft and pure. But the owl is, as I established, a predator and a killer. A beautiful dichotomy. Exactly like the album, and, much like the band.

For me, this image is the icing on the cake. A perfect visual metaphor for the music and writing.

The synergy of music, imagery and feeling behind this album make it a pinnacle for the band. Nobody in the music business today is doing what these guys are doing right now. Deftones are in thier prime as artists at this moment.

Sorry, I know I am going off but I just have to gush. This album for me is a life changing, genre bending colossus.

I am in love.

1+

They do it everytime, but this.. this is something else! I totally agree with you