5 ms·

"Sticky Fingers", I think. The famous 'zipper cover'.

decode 17y ago
That seems to be correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_Fingers#Cover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_Fingers#Cover
gruseom 17y ago
Which means that there's a huge irony here. That cover is notorious for being the worst-of-all-time example of what it turns out Jagger was explicitly trying to avoid: In my short sweet experience, the more complicated the format of the album, e.g. more complex than just pages or fold-out, the more fucked-up the reproduction and agonising the delays. But, having said that, I leave it in your capable hands to do what ever you want... It's quite the detail that Warhol went ahead and did exactly the opposite. Of course, the fact that people are writing about it 30 years later just confirms what a genius at promotion he was. I heard an interview with a great album cover designer who mentioned that the zipper in the Sticky Fingers cover had the interesting property of shredding the albums that were sitting next to it. Scissors beats paper. With that completely off-topic excursion (what, no "how is this HN" rants?) I hereby unplug the entire internet to get some goddamn work done. I wish PG had implemented that "I promise not to be on here for X hours and if I come back before then my user name will be red for all to see" feature. If you see me on here again today kindly tell me to GTFO...
- foldr 17y ago
  I doubt it was sticky fingers because sticky fingers was not a hits album. More likely to be Hot Rocks?
KC8ZKF 17y ago
"Sticky Fingers", though, was not a "hits" album. (It was also two years after this letter, but I think that is a reasonable amount of time.)
- adamc 17y ago
  Right, as a post above said, it was clearly _intended_ to be for "Through the Past, Darkly", but Warhol didn't get it in time.
amouat 17y ago
A bit of digging (http://www.iorr.org/talk/read.php?1,1138009,1138221 http://www.iorr.org/talk/read.php?1,1138009,1138221) suggests it was originally meant for "Through the past, darkly", which was a hits album (released in 1969). Warhol never recieved the materials in time and ended up doing the Sticky Fingers cover instead. I believe Warhol also designed the famous Rolling Stones lips logo.
- kree10 17y ago
  I thought the logo was Warhol too, but it was somebody else: http://www.johnpasche.com/ http://www.johnpasche.com/ [edit: googling I see there's some controversy about whether it was Pasche or another artist named Ernie Cefalu. Either way, not Warhol]
  - katon 17y ago
    I read both stories on-line at "RockPop" and according to their separate timelines, it looks like Mr. Cefalu was first with his logo by a good 3 months before Mr.Pasche. - Neo

That seems to be correct: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_Fingers#Cover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_Fingers#Cover

gruseom 17y ago

Which means that there's a huge irony here. That cover is notorious for being the worst-of-all-time example of what it turns out Jagger was explicitly trying to avoid: In my short sweet experience, the more complicated the format of the album, e.g. more complex than just pages or fold-out, the more fucked-up the reproduction and agonising the delays. But, having said that, I leave it in your capable hands to do what ever you want... It's quite the detail that Warhol went ahead and did exactly the opposite. Of course, the fact that people are writing about it 30 years later just confirms what a genius at promotion he was. I heard an interview with a great album cover designer who mentioned that the zipper in the Sticky Fingers cover had the interesting property of shredding the albums that were sitting next to it. Scissors beats paper. With that completely off-topic excursion (what, no "how is this HN" rants?) I hereby unplug the entire internet to get some goddamn work done. I wish PG had implemented that "I promise not to be on here for X hours and if I come back before then my user name will be red for all to see" feature. If you see me on here again today kindly tell me to GTFO...

foldr 17y ago
I doubt it was sticky fingers because sticky fingers was not a hits album. More likely to be Hot Rocks?

KC8ZKF 17y ago

"Sticky Fingers", though, was not a "hits" album. (It was also two years after this letter, but I think that is a reasonable amount of time.)

adamc 17y ago
Right, as a post above said, it was clearly _intended_ to be for "Through the Past, Darkly", but Warhol didn't get it in time.

amouat 17y ago

A bit of digging (http://www.iorr.org/talk/read.php?1,1138009,1138221 http://www.iorr.org/talk/read.php?1,1138009,1138221) suggests it was originally meant for "Through the past, darkly", which was a hits album (released in 1969). Warhol never recieved the materials in time and ended up doing the Sticky Fingers cover instead. I believe Warhol also designed the famous Rolling Stones lips logo.

kree10 17y ago
I thought the logo was Warhol too, but it was somebody else: http://www.johnpasche.com/ http://www.johnpasche.com/ [edit: googling I see there's some controversy about whether it was Pasche or another artist named Ernie Cefalu. Either way, not Warhol]
- katon 17y ago
  I read both stories on-line at "RockPop" and according to their separate timelines, it looks like Mr. Cefalu was first with his logo by a good 3 months before Mr.Pasche. - Neo