Borders skipping a title isn't surprising--their finances are ick, and frankly, they're not taking a LOT of titles, cover or not, lead title on the list or not. I can't speak to B&N's reasoning, though it often depends on which buyer this went to. Though the original cover is gorgeous as a piece of art, I don't know that I love it as a book cover (it's very pink and has that photo+photoshop art that is starting to feel a little dated to my eye).
I hate the choice of photos for the repackage--I wish they'd shown the ethnicity of the model more prominently--but overall, it's a better piece of design for the marketplace (more dramatic color and design, comparable to what's selling in the genre today). The sad thing is that what makes the design more modern and appealing would not change if they'd have gone with a more accurate cover model--it only would have been stronger, in my opinion.
I suspect the reason for the fade at the top, the ambiguity, is that these are stock photos (and most stock photos that are of pretty, thin, white girls who are models), and not even stock photos of the same model. Which doesnt' surprise me, as cover shoots are expensive, which makes the repackage even more expensive.
no subject
I hate the choice of photos for the repackage--I wish they'd shown the ethnicity of the model more prominently--but overall, it's a better piece of design for the marketplace (more dramatic color and design, comparable to what's selling in the genre today). The sad thing is that what makes the design more modern and appealing would not change if they'd have gone with a more accurate cover model--it only would have been stronger, in my opinion.
I suspect the reason for the fade at the top, the ambiguity, is that these are stock photos (and most stock photos that are of pretty, thin, white girls who are models), and not even stock photos of the same model. Which doesnt' surprise me, as cover shoots are expensive, which makes the repackage even more expensive.