Just because it is a book for children, that doesn't give the illustrator the right to not try. Dr. Seuss, Berenstain Bears, Arthur, The Very Hungry Caterpillar and so many others have so much love and detail put into their pictures. Why does this book get an exemption from effort?Cristal2408 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2018, 14:13I agree that the pictures are unprofessional and sloppy, but isn't that the point? It is a children's book after all, and kids don't care for illustration quality. At ages 5 and 6, their drawings are like that too, so it could be a marketing strategy. Parents buy what children want, and a child will most likely choose a book because they liked and felt related to the drawings.Kmykel wrote: ↑01 Jul 2018, 13:24 I'm going to be the odd one out here, but I thought the illustrations were far too simple. I speak as a cartoonist myself (be it not a professional one), and I thought they were just a wasted opportunity. A book like this needs big, beautiful, detailed pictures and these look unprofessional and sloppy. There was a nice sense of movement, but that's about the only positive thing I can say about it.
As a parent, and therefor the purchaser of this product, I wouldn't pay a cent for this. I'd much rather invest in books that had effort put into their worlds.