Do you consider using the cover art in music videos cheap?

[brucee 1,690]

no, i consider that allowing too much importance to the visuals is cheap because the music in itself is the whole point. 

Visuals can be meaningful and artistic, but something simple is enough. Don't judge a book by it's cover.

[GagaUnderYou 4,915]

When Gaga does it, it's not considered "cheap". Ya'll wild 

It's apart of the visual representation so I personally think it's fine, but it's nice to have separate visuals 

[Lemondeduerl 3,239]

51 minutes ago, DiamondKing said:

If it's for an album then yes 

Glory deserved this cover

[Xoxo Adriana 15,040]

not on album covers at least. also don't screen grab your face looking confused then using it for a cover

[HausOfMark 4,101]

Its a single cover, who cares.  Its only the song we should care about. 

[RAMROD 96,223]

I don't care, this is method as old as the record history itself. It is classic and if it works for them then it works.

 

 

[Pop Music 20,522]

29 minutes ago, Kylie Jenner said:

not on album covers at least. also don't screen grab your face looking confused then using it for a cover

This is one of the worst covers of all time in my opinion 

[whore 11,440]

If it’s for a single, then I don’t see a reason why anyone should be against it. Anymore, a lot of singles don’t even have official artwork because it’s The streaming age, so any artwork is a bonus. 

But in the case of album artwork, it is cheap and makes the album feel as if it were thrown together haphazardly. 

[huttont 4,678]

I don’t think it’s cheap in the sense of tackiness. In the sense of saving them coins, then yes is it cheap.

[Nightwing 518]

The thing that usually ruins the cover for me is the font. The font will make or break make it. Having a picture used from the music video, though, is charming... in my opinion.