Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by serendipity8777, Apr 20, 2018.
kevinkkelly1 on ebay
I don't know why they needed a complete redesign. Changing the masthead always seems like a bad idea to me. But if they get rid of that childish scribble font, I'll give it a chance, lol.
Melissa looks good! I like the make-up.
That masthead is absolutely appalling.
^It is. Samantha Barry was digging into the Glamour archive, and obviously drew on the vintage inspiration and now we've stuck with this disastrous retro masthead. How on earth was this approved? It looks so amateurish and resembles something from WordArt. I just had to take a few minutes to realise this mess is now our reality.
This is surely to get ravaged by everyone else! *Grabs popcorn for more comments...
Authentic.Accessible.Relevant. Because if we print the words they will be automatically true. I almost expect this to be stapled together from someone’s Office xerox machine. I can probably do better when I’m killing time in my cubicle.
This looks like a parody of a magazine cover!
And my god, why so much airbrush on her face, took me a while to recognize her!
Wow, this is horrible and I actually enjoy Glamour. Poor Melissa, she is so pretty and talented and deserved a better cover!
This looks like a poor supplement to a newspaper, like the Sunday Times Style or something. It's not appropriate for an independent monthly magazine.
Part of me thinks I'm only seeing this cover shot because I came home from work on a Friday evening and started drinking what was left at the bottom of both a gin AND a whisky bottle, in order to get them shifted from the kitchen cupboard, and then I went on the internet.
WHO would think any of this is a good idea, except someone who hates magazines? That masthead belongs above a shot of Lauren Bacall on an old-time movie magazine. But this is not the time nor the place... and that's certainly not the face.
Forget 'the money issue' - why has someone been paid to mastermind this?
I never cared for Glamour, but I'm really shocked this happened.
For a split second I thought it was Samantha herself! They've really gone to town on Melissa's face here.
All the hype and wait for this? I didn't think it was possible for Glamour to go any worse than their most recent messy direction, but Barry just did! I'll skip right past Barry because this is just Glamour and she doesn't really have much editing experience, but how on earth did Anna approve this?????
But it's not just the art direction which screams for attention, or to be taken seriously. It's also Melissa's shot. All stifled and buttoned up that the effect look much like she's sticking her head through a hole board.
Terrible debut! This will be a bumpy ride.
Beyond bad. Why do so many magazines feel the need to re-design, only to end up looking like cheap supplements? Now is not the time in publishing for this!!
LMAO!! Why'd they do her dirty like that!? And magazines need to stop with the closeups of bigger women. Either go all the way and make a statement or don't!
This is literally one of the ugliest magazine covers I have ever seen. I don't know what to say and I don't even have high expectations anymore!!
London fashion 1980s redux.
Ridiculous, like Allure and W, Glamour has lost its way. If your going to do a complete re-do at least put someone on the cover that would offset the hideous fonts.
That doesn't look like Melissa! Poor her seriously everything is wrong on this cover and the redesign. There's no "glamour" at all.
All because of Anna. This woman needs to go before she bankrupt Conde Nast. This is horrible. Please stop this woman
The more i look at this, the more i cannot believe it got approved and signed off.
Im all up for change and making a difference and taking risks... but.....
I prefer the childish font. The old covers looks good, now it’s a mess. Such bad thing. Hate it