Dance Of Death aged very well

I edited one of the alternative covers I found on the internet. I replaced the logo with the traditional one (with "legs" in the letters R, N, and M) and scaled it up. I also added some shadow on the floor to hide a bit of the terrible placement of Eddies' feet, which seems totally artificial in the original. Lastly, I edited contrast and colours in a way to look nice to me. It's darker and less colorful.
 

Attachments

  • Dance_of_Death_version_2.png
    Dance_of_Death_version_2.png
    1.5 MB · Views: 28
In retrospect, we can see that the DoD cover was doomed to ridicule. It happened on release, thanks to the botched computer graphics. But what if somehow they had made it work in 2003, by the standards of that time? Then by now, we'd be saying that the computer-generated people looked bad by 2021 standards. Maiden fans are impossible to satisfy.
 
In retrospect, we can see that the DoD cover was doomed to ridicule. It happened on release, thanks to the botched computer graphics. But what if somehow they had made it work in 2003, by the standards of that time? Then by now, we'd be saying that the computer-generated people looked bad by 2021 standards. Maiden fans are impossible to satisfy.
The digital artwork wasn't botched. It was a work in progress and 'Arry overruled the band (and the artist presumably) and insisted on it, despite it being unfinished work. I'm surprised the artist didn't remove his name off it.

If it had been finished it would have probably stood the test of time. There's plenty of digital artwork from that era that still looks good today.
 
The digital artwork wasn't botched. It was a work in progress and 'Arry overruled the band (and the artist presumably) and insisted on it, despite it being unfinished work. I'm surprised the artist didn't remove his name off it.

If it had been finished it would have probably stood the test of time. There's plenty of digital artwork from that era that still looks good today.
As far as I know the artist did remove his name from it. He is not even cited in the booklet. But agreed, even some concept arts made by fans of reworks on this cover look good enough
 
In retrospect, we can see that the DoD cover was doomed to ridicule. It happened on release, thanks to the botched computer graphics. But what if somehow they had made it work in 2003, by the standards of that time? Then by now, we'd be saying that the computer-generated people looked bad by 2021 standards. Maiden fans are impossible to satisfy.

This is known its not about Maiden fans. The CGI of the day was horrible because of the day, not because of Maiden.

Californication promo by RHCP for instance. Looked cool back in the day on CRTs but it's really really awkward now to look at. Different World by Maiden - even worse. The DoD cover, artist told he don't want to do anything with it, because that draft contains errors. Composition errors, shadowing errors, etc. But it's a draft, therefore the final would look something like that and I can't see that as a good thing. I think cover would suck anyways being finished or not.

Take Final Fantasy movie from 2001, that's probably the peak production regarding CGI. Try to remove the motion blur, fog and dynamic lighting from the scene you're watching, try to see how many polygons do the faces have, how precise the human body is drawn. It's still low-poly. It looks good because it's a moving picture. Still, with full ambient lighting, no occlusion, and printed out on a piece of paper, these models would not look that good. This is the peak Maiden could've achieved if they threw tens if not hundreds of thousands of $ for CGI.

Usage of raytracing was always pushing towards hyper realism. Even when game engines couldn't depict it, cutscenes would, like in Warcraft III for instance which is of the same age. In the cutscenes hyper realism is shown. Therefore the player associates himself with "real heroes" as opposed to small objects that you control through birds eye view.

Using CGI for anything, covers, promos in those years = fail. Too much $ to make realistic production ala Blizzard, normal $ -> average product, average quality beyond bad. I was bedazzled to see some people here appreciate Riggs' 3D output because it frankly sucks. If you weren't consuming media/games back then, go on a nostalgia trip, you'll see how bad standard 3D graphics of the age were.

The band went with the times and wanted a raytraced art. If they had this idea with ball macabre, it could've been realized via other means. They just wanted to ride the 3D train.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was bedazzled to see some people here appreciate Riggs' 3D output because it frankly sucks

Some people just like shit things.

I used to think the complaints about Maiden's production was way over the top, and I used to get worked up about it. I made the mistake of thinking that people had the same tastes as me. But the GMAC opened my eyes to some of the bands that people are listening to and how the albums that they like sound. I can understand more where they are coming from now.
 
Back
Top