I've always assumed that Naxos' cover theory was cost/benefit
analysis-based [as we say in the biz]; by copying and using works in the
public domain (or whatever is low-cost), and having the rest of the CD
"look" standardized, production costs must be a fraction of what the majors
make -us- pay for.  You better bet that the cost of a new photo shoot--
easily a couple of rolls of film and hours with a pro --is passed along in
the top-of-the-line CD price.

Just the -rights- to artwork can cost a fortune.

My favorite thing about Naxos covers (back included), admittedly biased,
is that no matter how obscure or common the composers or works represented,
Naxos (almost invariably) includes lifespans, composition dates, opus (or
catalog) numbers, revisions, movements, and alternate titles.  This is SO
nice for me, and (I extrapolate) for the average consumer, who maybe didn't
know Hugo Alfven's dates, or what opus the Triple Concerto is, or what have
you.  That borders on musicology!

Go Naxos.  Ahh, choice.  The only refuge of the consumer.

"One is not even one; two is one hardly"  --Plato

Bob K., Platonist Naxophile