My only complaint about some new issues, is that instead of featuring some joke for the potential buyers amusement, it shows a picture of the story it is going to feature like the "Pals N Gals "  with Archie and the gang bowling, or the one with them stacking cups, or the one with Archie looking through binoculars at B&V. What happens to the  cover jokes, WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM???

I'm a pretty big fan of the different era's of Archie covers.  The Life with Archie series has some particularly stunning covers.

But

I also happen to think that some covers from today are tomorrows classics.    Needless to say - I have my favourites and a couple of note for me are the Halloween covers this year and last with Betty and Veronica.

Well.... now I'm just going to have to pull some new covers.

What era classifies as "new" (how far back can I go?)

If you take the "best" of 50 years and compare it to the "best" of 2 years - then, yes.  Older covers are going to seem better.

Also - there's the nostalgia factor.

However, I still will play the cantankerous one and insist that today's work is really very, very good.

...take a peek at Archie's Christmas Stocking #6 on Ebay.  Now that cover looks much richer and vibrant than later (80's on) covers.  I'm not saying they're not good.  But even look at TV and old album covers vs new.  An old, 1960's Christmas album cover...featuring a star or stars of the day, looks much more vibrant than it's modern counterpart.  Same with old color movies or tv shows.  Compare Bonanza or Bewitched to , say, Law and Order.  The oldies are much richer looking.  I think there was more color saturation used in old days.  That's one reason for it, I think.

It's also worth noting that older covers will catch our attention more because they are not ... well ... modern.

What I mean by this is - if you look at something like a 1940's comic - the cover really stands out.  Some of this can be attributed to the great artists of the time - absolutely!  However, some can also be attributed to the fact that they are reflections of the time which they were created and stand-out to us in comparison to todays graphics.

This is why an artist can draw a "retro" look.  It's "retro" for a reason.

I think that the covers of the 70's are starting to hit the level where folks are saying...wow! Check it out!  Look at the Marvel and DC books from 1971-1975 and they have a certain "feel" that is cool.  Look a the covers from the 1990's and they seem to have less appeal...so far.... wait 20 years.

The reason I am so "big" on current covers is that I think there is some work being done at Archie that is different than anything done before.  Obviously, I am a huge DeCarlo fan.  His work was amazing and defined many of the characters for many years.  If the average reader has more exposure to Montana and Lucey would they be more "present" in our thoughts?

I've had several folks comment on the covers when I buy Archie's today.  Quite positively.

I love Holly G!. Her work on Cheryl's solo series was amazing.

A few older covers from Captain Hero's gallery. They all seemed like ads in a way. "Look at all characters, jokes, number of pages featured in this comic!"

 

While still interesting, the amount of characters, and advertising (which has made a return to the top right of the comics) is minimal. Covers aren't as busy, and there's more focus now on the main scene/panel. Most covers now tend to be a prequel of the first story.

A few newer covers from Captain Hero's gallery: