Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by serendipity8777, Jul 26, 2018.
kevinkkelly1 on ebay
And the border is gone
Very happy to see Tiffany on the cover of a September issue.
Too bad it’s such a bad shot with questionable styling.
Horrible cover. They already need a new EIC. Glad the ridiculous border is gone.
I love Tiffany but there is no fashion here.
This actually looks... good
For the first time, the new logo worked. The layout needs work.
Its very American. I like it.
agree, actually the new logo works here. Overall it looks well put together, except that horrible styling
At least they are making some changes, but the styling lol is a big hell no.
Well, at least they're outdoors. That's it for me. The retro font doesn't work and the coral is too light for the setting, and what's with the styling?
I'm afraid I can't really abide Tiffany. Everytime she opens her mouth she just comes across as obnoxious. Her mouth will be her downfall.
Everything about this new art direction is completely wrong.
I saw the Kate cover on the newsstand and it disappeared visually.
That masthead is a disaster, it simply doesn't stand out.
Worst decision they could have made. Readers like the consistency of a familiar masthead.
A magazine that's been around as long as Glamour shouldn't change that up.
The border idea could have worked if they addressed it the way 'National Geographic' does.
NG always has a yellow border, Glamour could have changed the color of the border each month to compliment the cover photo.
Hey, Glamour! I'm available and I work cheap!
A September issue????????????
Who exactly is Glamour’s target audience? Teenagers?
This is something I’d expect from Seventeen Magazine or Teen Vogue.
I actually love it!
This is what you get when you hire someone with no magazine background as your EIC
True!! Styling is far too juvenile, I wonder which grown woman would take the streets in something a tantrummy teen would wear???
Agreed! A week ago I read an article on Bloomberg about how she'll focus more on politics while editing this magazine. Looks like that will be her legacy. You're damned if you don't care for politics, I'm afraid.
The cover actress is beautiful, it's everything else I have a problem with. Design wise, the cover has 5 typefaces including the logo. That is far too many. It's a design no no. Those little headlines at the top are almost invisible. Your eye naturally doesn't go there, especially when that big ugly logo is right below it. Then they just had to add that autograph. Also, the smiley face is grotesque. It honestly looks like they let some first time graphic design students create this cover. It looks so tacky and amateur. It looks like it should be priced at $1.99.
PHOTOGRAPHS BY BILLY KIDD
STYLED BY LAW ROACH
HAIR: OSCAR JAMES
MAKEUP: DIONNE WYNN
MANICURE: GINA EDWARDS
I love Tiffany and so happy for her cover. The cover itself works, at least the new logo does make sense now. However, the stylinng and photography direction is bad. And the editorial is even worse. Styling is juvenile and the images are like worst throwback thursday.
She's done well to smile through the pain of being put in that get-up. This is probably their best cover since the redesign, but I can't get past the styling...
Couldn't help but notice this too! The border started off huge, last month's was smaller and now it's completely gone. All we need now is the previous Glamour masthead to make a reappearance (because this one is seriously awful).
I'm almost certain I read in the Business of Magazines thread that a whole bunch of suits (or someone) at Condé Nast thought the redesign was atrocious too.
Got this in the mail today. 148 pages
"Wild, Wild Country"
P: Matthew Kristall
S: Michaela Dosamantes
Celeb/model: Taylor John Smith, Eliza Cummings
"Go Your Own Way"
P: Catherine Servel
S: Akari Eno-Gaut
M: Stella Duvall, Chanel de Leon Gomez
Stories about Confederate monuments, male birth control activists, "What politicians don't understand about me," and "My boyfriend is white and rich; I'm neither"