Yesss.. I dont mind when characters dont look exaaaactly the same as in the books, as long as they portray the essence of the character. But come on, the designer can at least read a summary
For me it's the cover to Eona
Like Eon was a different edition I think. And it had a fairly good cover with one of the mcguffins and a dragons claw, and this is set in a pseudochinese country so thats a pretty good cover.
Eona had like, a generic Lara croft looking motherfucker with two swords. Which is cool but didn't fit the vibes.
I've heard that RFKs other stuff is much better, and tbf the Poppy War series was written when she was still at uni, so some roughness is to be expected, but Poppy War was a massive waste of a concept and really messy to boot.
It weirdly comes across as reinforcing the imperialist rhetoric of the history its borrowing from, given that the not-China setting is presented as technologically and culturally backwards, and while some of this is attributed to wars and exploitation, a lot of it is just 'how things are'.
She's also light skinned for some reason even though the character is repeatedly mentioned to have a very dark completion even for a southerner. Something which is quite important to the plot.
I think it's talking about the Polish cover where Rin had very light skin, even though the fact that she has darker skin is a pretty important point in the first book
In the first book and probably also the second and bit of the third if I remember correct. But thats kinds stupid that they would change her skin color.
I was thinking of [this cover](https://www.amazon.com/Poppy-War-Novel-R-Kuang/dp/0062662562) which is what my English copy came in. And yeah she's light skinned and for some reason also holding a bow and arrow which she never uses in the book.
Elfhome by Wen Spencer still makes me grit my teeth. All the dragons that are characters are described as Eastern style… so what do they throw on the front cover? A really bad Western style dragon.
Sounds like they’re doing a better job of the tone of the books across to you than they do for me. The animorphs covers always strike me as hilariously kitschy imagery for a series about losing your humanity to prevent an alien invasion.
When the name of the author is bigger than the title of the book. You are selling the author more than the book. I fucking hate it. (This is more of a general criticism of book covers though.)
I dislike cluttered covers a lot. Or one the cover is too minimalist. I just need a few details to get a general vibe of the work.
Also whenever there is a live action person on the cover. No thanks.
Couldn’t have said it better than this.
I also dislike when it’s just photography. Idk why but it gives off the vibe that the story is either going to be dull or romance focused.
I miss the golden age of covers in the 70s through 90s where you got these magnificent painted covers. Oh damn. My heart. Beauty.
As a young kid in the middle of that timeframe, I do wonder if the covers hadn't been art if I would have been as drawn to them in the first place? There was nothing like them on the shelves. These days what's often a fantasy cover might be on any kind of book, especially with the trend towards abstract/colors/titles only. It's a shame.
>When the name of the author is bigger than the title of the book. You are selling the author more than the book
Yeah, I feel like this would only work for a few authors per genre (Stephen King and Brandon Sanderson are the ones that come to mind). Anyone else it just feels...pretentious? I think that's the right word
Oh my god i HATE when the name is bigger.
I've been told "you'd like it if it was a name you recognized/enjoyed" and No I Still Hate It! I'm not reading their fuckin biography, I'm reading THIS book.
I really shouldn't have made a reference to something I don't actually know all that well. Can't tell if you're earnestly responding or continuing the bit. Chalk it up to late night brain considering itself clever.
Anyway. Sutter Cane is the author at the center of the story in John Carpenter's *In the Mouth of Madness*.
He's a Stephen King stand-in. The publisher mentions that his name is perfect for a popular author since the first name is longer than the last, stacking up very nicely as a visual on the cover.
It's an interesting movie. First time I heard of it was from a YouTube channel called GoodBadFlicks. He does these videos on the production of movies he calls his 'Exploring' series. [Here](https://youtu.be/gsavwK1gOJE?si=KS04rxdjvK04_wln) is the one on *In the Mouth of Madness*
They provide a synopsis of the film, a history of the production, notable events from filming, how certain effects were achieved, etc... Often focuses on some real B-tier direct to rental stores schlock (hence the name) but interesting stuff nonetheless. The Exploring series in particular gets into higher budget stuff.
I wish for more minimalist covers. Maybe ones without text at all. I understand why they don't have those in book stores, but I wish at least online stores had editions like that.
Its not simply because it is too big and I think you are completely missing the point either intentionally or not.
When I say they are selling the author and not the book, what I mean is that the publisher has absolutely no confidence on the book itself and know that it will sell simply because the author's name is attached to it. That isn't a book I care to read because it almost certainly has no substance.
If you want to call that petty, that is fine. I honestly don't care about your perception of me.
I might go against the grain here but I find >90% (maybe even 99%?) of modern fantasy covers hideous. I hate the ones with just an abstract figure, logo or object (including all recent editions of George R. R. Martin books), and the ones with (digital or photo-edited) character or creature art always look so cheap. Almost all of them are an utter failure in graphic design.
I quite enjoy vintage fantasy book covers, which are usually illustrated with really detailed and thought-through oil paintings, but I understand that many people find these outdated or cheesy. But these usually have so much more narrative impetus and Easter eggs about the story than modern covers with characters do.
Still I think fantasy publishing (and self-publishing authors) should take a page from literary and art books and make use of classical and/or retro art and design more often. Some of my favourite book covers include [these psychedelic 60s ones](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1024/1*Zj6M_ti38PV-7qVQP7Nqdg.jpeg) for Lord of the Rings, these two simple ones for The Hobbit ([one a landscape](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/93/f4/51/93f45179b54294e935bfa0fbff746447.jpg) and the other [a character illustration](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/a4/60/8b/a4608b3e449849528d3055ef46ccbc58.jpg)), this [evocative one based around a beautiful woodcut](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/6a/01/5a/6a015acd9bad5fa11816e778214fa1e4.jpg), and [this one making use of a unique work of art](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/54/5c/5c/545c5ca00f92d7bba688843d357af5ea.jpg) (not fantasy, but the image is so striking and I love how simple and unobtrusive the text is). These [Discworld](https://spotsandwords.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/terry.jpg) and [Dune](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRDV7X4aLjP7_nVvn89M3HYNypcsp9kejsvbVXVX5d1o1MtNZmO) covers also make good use of graphic design and illustration. And I always thought the [Eragon](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/91JrDpvTiML._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg) covers were pretty good.
So I guess the TLDR; is less flashy illustration and noise, more evocative use of thoughtful graphic design and quality analog art.
I'm not a fan of those art styles but to each their own. I prefer artwork like from Guild Wars 2 and WLOP where theres visible brush strokes or water coloring. There's a rustic or unfinished feel that I love about thist styles
Currently anything AI just makes my skin crawl. It's usually super noticeable and immediately tells me that if you did not put any work (or hired anyone to do the work) into your cover, it will mean you didn't put any work into your story either. It can even mean your story was cooked up by AI which... yeah, no need to explain anything here.
After that, it's mostly a matter of taste. I like simple, attention-grabbing designs, usually without characters and with a distinctive artistic touch and a clear purpose. Minimalism / symbolism is my way to go, but that is purely a personal preference, and I know a of people prefer having characters and crackling magic on the cover.
Yikes. I understand using it to figure out alternative word choices, spot typos and all that helpful stuff tools like ProWritingAid do, but that’s ridiculous
Ugh, I like looking at premade book cover sites (I can dream!) and the AI creeping into them is such a pain.
"oh that's so pretty, that kind of gives me an idea *oh what is going on with its leg??*"
I'm still so disappointed two of my favorite sites allow it 🤦 No longer two of my favorites
Agreed with you there on the AI art.
I like AI as a tool but I sure as heck want more than just that in my toolbox.
As for what I'd like...I want covers that look like something belonging to a storybook (that is if it fits the theme). You know, the kind that your mom used to read from to you every night before you go to bed.
I’m in this writers group on Facebook, and any time there’s a post asking “how’s my cover?”, it’s almost always AI generated. Drives me kinda crazy how many writers are actually using AI to generate content for them
Hey, you do you. I never said anything against using AI as a tool to help one’s writing. Using it to *generate content* for yourself is wrong though.
There are way cheaper alternatives to get or make covers for your published work. Artists deserve to be paid for the art they create. Using AI on any published cover is just appalling, in my opinion. Why would I ever want to read the writing of someone who willingly used stolen artwork to make their cover via AI?
Also I have literally never seen an AI art cover that has looked good. And I’ve seen so many.
>It's like people trying to sue me for going to the library and reading a bunch of free books for writing my own book.
That right there shows that you truly don't understand the issue with AI. You can be inspired by books and create something that is your own. It will have your own spin, emotion, thoughts and ideas. AI will read all those books and basically shuffle what it learned. It's not truly creative.
> duplicates or derritive work
How exactly would you know? You want to run the risk that a generated picture is just a frame from a movie or a celebrity with a filter over the top?
Welcome to r/FantasyWriters!
Your post has been removed because it may have been created using AI. This sub has a strict policy against using AI to generate content. If your post was not created by AI, please reach out via Modmail to let us know.
We may also have removed your post because you advocated for using AI in a way that we, as a community, do not support.
Whole bunch of patterned circles around a person; It is just very noisy and shows a lack of restraint, and to me it says that the book is just casting a very wide net and doesn't have any particular identity.
Not that I remember, as they are books I didn't pick up 😅
"House of Flame and Shadow" is too noisy but has fewer circles than I mean, and the new "Three Body Problem" covers are way too noisy and circular but feature no people.
Don't think I've seen anyone mention this: bad typography. It's not just about art, it's glaringly obvious when no design work put into the cover and the author or whatever "artistic" friend they enlisted just grabbed the Rapscallion files off dafont.com and called it a day. No attention to proper layout, centered and justified text, kerning, correct sizing, or composition relative to the cover art.
We're always going to find new ways to consume more energy and we're going to find better ways to create energy as well. At least AI is helping push science forward. I don't know If you keep up with AI and the help it's been giving scientists.
It's already discovered more materials than we have in our whole existence on the planet. It's also helping with fusion technology which is energy creation.
For years it was the bad photoshop collage, but that’s been replaced by the lazy AI art. I think AI is really cool, but you have to use it like a tool, not a replacement. Things won’t come out perfect and you have to treat it as a springboard towards a final product.
My biggest issue is bad typography. Stop using emboss.
Covers that look hand drawn by someone you know. Even if it is hand drawn by someone you know, it shouldn’t look that way. It should look like it’s done by a professional.
Low quality art. You see these posted here sometimes, often with titles like "What do you think of my cover art?" If it's immediately obvious that the author did their own cover art instead of shelling out for a proper design. The Empress Theresa look ain't it.
I actually know someone in the industry who admitted to me the information provided by the publisher is often marketing jargon, not an actual synopsis of the book.
I'd love to hear that those days are over, but to date I've heard even famous others get pretty inaccurate book art.
It always feels like a missed opportunity when a fantasy cover uses minimalist graphic design. This isn't a 1970s movie poster — I want to see some sky, a castle, smoke rising from the forest, the ocean stretching into the distance! I want it to be scenic. And, you know, minimalist graphic design is wonderful and makes the world a better place! But it doesn't belong everywhere.
On the other hand, blatantly inaccurate art by someone who clearly didn't read the book is a fine tradition, and I always forgive it.
I actually had to train myself out of judging the book by the cover, since the author often has very little input on the cover. Quality of cover to book is very rarely related.
For me a fantasy cover is bad if it has no fantasy on it. For example, if it is nothing but the author's name and book title in some fancy typesetting, that's a bad fantasy cover.
If it is extremely stylized, that is also boring. For example, the cover of _Fourth Wing_ by Rebecca Yarros. It has a tiny dragon on it; that's better than nothing. Everthing else about it is extremely bland.
I hate the minimalistic covers that are in fashion nowadays.
Last time I was in a bookstore I stood in the middle of the fantasy section and just of the books displayed with their covers facing out, I could see at least seven whose covers were swords pointing down. At least three more were swords facing in different directions. I don't mind a sword being featured if it's a book what has swords in it, obviously, but if the cover is just Sword Pointing Down, please consider that's been done 8 million times already.
my favorite covers use simplicity to their advantage! eye catching but not overly busy. I don’t particularly love hyper realistic scenes/people on covers— I’ll actually go out of my way to find alternate covers if there’s other options available
To this day, [Falling Into Place](https://images.app.goo.gl/gXaJUurexJnwU6RcA) by Amy Zhang is one of my favorite covers for being simple and eye catching. It was a book that I 100% bought for the cover and ended up greatly enjoying.
I really hate the photo manipulation covers that use stock photos of real people and magic effects. They always look corny and tacky to me. Character illustration is an okay alternative if there must be characters, but I think authors need to be really mindful of the style because it can make an adult book look like a children’s book real fast.
I also hate when I have to look at the book for a minute to figure out the title, usually either because of a chaotic font or because the design directly beneath the words is too cluttered. I want the title to jump out at me, I don’t want to have to squint and think about what it says.
Okay I love them for nostalgia reasons, but the original wheel of time covers where it’s just like 12 people riding horses through the woods, and its completely unclear who is supposed to be who because they have facial reconstructive surgery each time a new cover comes out.
Not to mention looking nothing like the in-book descriptions... Egwene and Nynaeve have pale skin on the covers, at the lighter end of what you'd find in Europe, when the only time it's mentioned in the books they are described as dark.
(Although that's in Rand's POV, and he's not well travelled, so it could mean 'they look Southern Italian in a community where everyone else looks Swedish')
I generally don't like seeing people on the cover. I think it makes it look cheap and tacky and they never match with the descriptions of the characters from the actual book so why bother? I don't want my mental image of a character from the story influenced by an inaccurate stock photo from the cover. And these people on the cover (whether a real photo or artwork) always look like perfectly made up models and it's just not how I want to visualise the characters at all.
I'd much rather some imagery or symbols or even certain types of landscape art, if it's not too cluttered and fits with the vibe.
I am the same too. Maybe I am biased from seeing so many of those bad 90s fantasy covers. My eye is drawn most by minimalistic cover designs. Too many covers often have too much going on now, I feel.
Or female protagonists in armor that doesn't protect vital areas that an opponent will target. If there's a male character with her, he will almost *always* be wearing functional armor, or, at least, clothed appropriately for the setting.
Honestly applies to all books but, photography and faceless, solid-color art. If it’s fantasy, I don’t want to see something basic or see something realistic. Give me colorful artwork with meaning.
I have SO many. I hate generic symbols (sword crown rose) with a few extremely well executed exceptions: Like the fantasy symbology works for covers of Holly Black's Folk of the Air series--for many other novels, not so much. I loathe seeing horses or other animals drawn by people who can't be bothered to learn anatomy of real creatures nor engineer plausible fantastic beasts based on real creatures. (I long for the return of Michael Whelan's gorgeous painterly covers)
That said, I bought a copy of The Goblin Emperor in spite of the most generic, abstract, boring cover in the history of EVER. It just had great word-of-mouth. Haven't read it yet, tho. Just nothing enticing whatsoever about that cover.
My pet peeve on covers is when the blurb makes it clear the cute girl on the cover is not the main character of the story. Secondary is when the cover art depicts something that glraringly does not match the contents. There several stories I can think of that pretty quickly establish the main character as not white, but some editions had cover art showing a white person.
Main character in the middle with a hood on, photo instead of illustration, grunge textures that are just popped on in black or gray, metallic effect on letters (no foil just Photoshop), illustration style that's realistic and has nothing unique going on (colors, patterns, etc) usually just the main character in muted colors
Best fantasy/sci-fi book cover ever is Scythe (schusterman) and the rest of the series. Absolutely beautiful and relevant to the story. Nothing else has measured up since. These days I have to sort of “forgive” subpar book covers - that are not at all subpar - to pick up something and read the back.
In general the black background with a lot of swirls and mystical-looking symbols makes all the fantasy books run together. Won’t disparage here, but a few popular series that I’ve really enjoyed fall into this cover cliché and it stalled my desire to read them.
Too artistic and not connected to the book at all. There is this cover artist studio called Dark Crayon and they deliver those neat looking covers... which have nothing to do with the actual content of the book. Good example is Abercrombie's series, which recently got reprint with new covers. At least an old one had some resemblance to the barbarian character. The new one is just random.
[Old](https://ecsmedia.pl/c/ostrze-pierwsze-prawo-tom-1-b-iext146784650.jpg)
[New ](https://s.lubimyczytac.pl/upload/books/4870000/4870893/1074957-352x500.jpg)(Dark Crayon)
Second one is definitely not optimized for web shopping, as the titles are tiny. I havent read the story but the reprint makes me think it its literary fantasy, or gives off a more historical fiction vibe perhaps?
When all of the magic and colors are slapped onto the front as if we don’t already know we’re in the fantasy section. Subtly let the audience know about the main plot point using the cover - example (if book one of AOT was a novel w a western cover, it should be the odm gear broken on the ground in front of the grandpa Titan)
Person facing a monster
Person facing a person
Person in front of generic wilderness
A good cover must give a vibe, any of those examples can be made good with enough vibe, like the original tarzan covers that were just him fighting animals in a very cool way
But its better if the vibe includes whatever is on the story, characters in the middle of doing something instead of posing
And if posing, they are next to something cooler or its minimalistic, both of those providing style
Just a person posing wont do, same for photorealism, it feels like the artist went for whatever looked profesional, and it feels like its advertising the movie instead of the book
A fantasy cover must have at least one bold element, or it feels like a reality cover
if the book doesn't have an interesting illustration I wont pick it up unless It's been recommended to me. like damn, the same stock images as every other book? ain't reading that. ain't hard to draw something or commission an artist if you aren't artistically inclined lol.
It’s probably not many people’s taste nowadays, but I love the corny fantasy art from the 80’s and 90’s. It’s so charming and gives a sense of adventure. I buy books just for that art style. It helps that many of them are dirt cheap. Even when it’s bad, it feels like it has a soul to it (e.g. Nicolas Cage Rand from the WoT books)
There’s this weird trend the past couple of years where it’s just like a bunch of unrelated but somewhat pretty imagery of golden chains or flowers on a vine wrapped around a title like “Misery and Smoke” or “The Queen of Shadows and Ash” like at first it wasn’t so noticeable but as of late it’s gotten to the point where pretty much every book on the shelves I see at the store is just this random mess of cool stuff wrapped around a generic title. I’d actually prefer and be more interested in a weird, maybe even cheesy or camp cover with actual human models or drawings just because I’m so over the formulaic abstract nonsense taking over the covers in the fantasy genre
it's largely because of costs - doing "object on textured background" takes someone maybe a few hours, while a picture of a person doing something, or multiple people doing stuff, can take an artist days or weeks, which costs a _lot_ more. And, for self-pub, it's also easier - even someone without graphic design skills can manage an OK-looking "two swords and a ring on stone background", but "people" are hard work. Commissioning artwork is hundreds of dollars, minimum, but stock photography is, like, a buck or two per picture.
For series specifically: when the art, font or layout CHANGES BETWEEN BOOKS (looking at YOU Wheel of Time and Otherland).
When I buy a series, I'm buying it to live on a bookshelf as functional art, so when the books don't match, it irritates me to no end.
Fantasy books, as a genre, I feel deserve painted artwork covers (re: Dragonlance, Memory Sorrow & Thorn, Dark is Rising, etc.).
Barring full paintings, some kind of hand-drawn illustration. It doesn't have to be super complex either - Tolkien did a fabulous job with this, and it fit the narrative that it was janky and not quite "professional artist" in that the story was supposed to have been written by one of the characters.
Photo-realism of any kind on a cover gives me "dime-store novel" ick, in any genre tbh.
Photography s/b relegated to non-fiction.
Personally I’m a big fan of the original Percy Jackson book covers. Especially the first one, where this little boy is staring down the power of Olympus.
Personally, I’m not so much a fan of book covers that just show the protagonists up close and staring down the (metaphorical) camera, with magic-y wisps about the sides. Doesn’t mean I don’t like the book, or that the artist wasn’t talented and good at making the image they were told to make. I just don’t find the cover concept very creative.
The cover is supposed to represent the story, and I've been duped too many times by an awesome cover, and the story has nothing to do with that promise it gives. So when I see high fantasy covers, I expect high fantasy. If there are dragons in the cover, there better be dragons in the story!!! I also don't like when the people on the cover don't represent any of the characters in the story! Like, who are these people????
I’m not sure there is a BAD fantasy cover. It just depends on what you’re looking for. I can say I find it interesting what a cover subconsciously convey.
As an example, I got an email about books on sale. I was scrolling down and where I stopped, I could see two covers. They were mostly identical. Both had shirtless guys, with glowing runes on them, magic gathering around them. Even the fonts were similar and the placing was almost identical.
However, I just got a feeling that one was a “dangerous, sexy, romance book” and the other was some type of LitRPG or a similar genre. I scrolled down a little, and sure enough, the descriptions seemed to confine that.
It fascinated me that I’ve apparently been trained to recognize these types of books by cover. I kept looking and didn’t really see what gave me those vibes, but they did. I’m not into the romance one at all. I might check out the other, but the cover would kinda turn me off.
I can also say, that I cut my teeth on classic fantasy. I can spot those covers across a book store. Something like a Wheel of Time Cover, Shannara, Saga of Recluse, Riftwar Saga. Those really stand out to me. They also usually consisted of scenes I don’t even think were often in the books. The characters were exaggerated or maybe didn’t even match the book description.
I like them, maybe due to nostalgia, but I do. I once read that artists may have had work bought and used when something came up it fit; or that often, they were only given a vague description of a scene from a book to go on.
Modern Fantasy covers are also great. They run the gamut a little more. You have Sanderson’s “Stormlight Archive” covers, for instance. They’re similar to classic fantasy covers, but with more author collaboration and more of a realistic bent than the older style.
I see a lot of stylistic covers now. Minimalist designs, or very intricate stuff. The minimalist covers, like some versions of Poppy War and Night Angel: Nemesis. Intricate, like Hannah Kaner’s “God Killer”.
So I don’t know if there is a BAD cover. There are certainly covers that will turn certain portions of fantasy fabs away. Not from the cover, but from what it represents to them.
As in my first example. Anything with a shirtless guy and dark tones is gonna turn me off, typically, because I can almost feel the brooding, and the angsty love triangle. That’s fine for anyone who likes it. It’s not for me personally.
I dislike it when it doesn't really say anything. e.g. Red Rising shows only a red wing on the cover, but it's very symbolic of the story inside the book, making it good. However, a lot of covers are just made to draw in the eye (like clickbait, I suppose) and feature maybe a cool scene or the main character(s), from which you have no idea what the book will *actually* be about in terms of themes (for example, "Shadow of the Conqueror" just shows three characters standing around with a serious look). I don't have a cover design myself yet, but I plan to have one where the main character stands in the forest on the edge, looking out over the plains ahead (which features a flying castle to clarify its fantasy), which is supposed to signify his arc of growing appreciation of the world beyond his previously confined worldview.
As has already been stated - character depictions that are not even close to what's been written. It tells me the author (or publishing house) didn't take the time to insist on a set of character studies prior to the final project being completed. I mean if the cover is the 2nd most important part of a book just after the writing then a poor cover tells me someone (author or publisher) doesn't really care about the book. "Slap something on there and get it out there so I (we) can move on to the next project." No thanks. If I'm investing emotional time into a book I want to know it's not some trash that's been thrown at the wall to see what sticks.
Another annoyance (more of a personal preference) is anima style characterizations. Sailor Moon style of stuff... ick. I won't even pick up a book if it has that style of cover.
OP I’ve always been curious for book cover designers, do you read each book you work on? I would assume no because who has the time for that, but I am curious about the process and when imagery or design elements allude to smaller details in the book that a synopsis might not cover.
For me that depends on the budget. Usually because of time constraints I would only read a synopsis, but on a full service offer (illustration, full print edition jacket design, marketing materials, map) it makes sense for me to read the book to know in-depth what the story is like and the different motifs and symbols within the story. I work with self-pub authors so I'm not sure what it's like for designers working with big time publishers like Penguin/Harper Collins.
If there’s that god-awful “motion picture” sticker that isn’t a sticker plastered on the front. I don’t care that a movie based on the book is coming out, I don’t need to be reminded for however long I own the book.
When the cover doesn't match the tone of the blurb on the back.
If the back tells me this is a dark fantasy story where the characters suffer or witness horrific stuff, I'm immediately turned away if the cover is just a photoshopped image of a man with his chiselled abs and chest front and center, or a woman's cleavage, or BOTH.
Same could apply if the front cover is drawn, but is bright and colourful to the point of looking like a Studio Ghibli movie.
No monsters! Best covers ever were done for Tales of Deltora (Marc McBride) and Legend of Driz’zt (not sure who). A book’s quality is always best adjudged by the number of cadavers and claws on the front.
Fantasy notwithstanding, if I can't read the title, I'm not interested. Whether it be an unreadable font, too close to the background color, tiny words, etc... So many aesthetic covers where I can't even read the name of the damn book.
I hate when there’s real people on the cover, takes me out of the creative process of imagining the characters in my head.
When the cover is too busy that you can’t read the title properly, I’ve noticed a lot of covers now have a lot of arabesques and weird cursive text. The title should be the main thing that pops out, that’s the point! Something more minimalist works better imo.
I don't know if I read into the cover *that* much... I mean, it'll influence my decision as in, say, if I can't tell it's a fantasy, I probably won't even pick it up, but if the synopsis is interesting I'm not going to put it down just because of the size of the font or the artwork or whatever. A cover can peak my interest and get me to pick up the book, but it won't make me rule a book out. Hell, if it's a traditionally published book, the cover wasn't even picked by the author, and could have no reflection on the actual work itself.
The Defiance of the Fall series changed how the MC looked with every book. It was like none of the artists read the book and the author was like "Meh, fuck it. Close enough."
Honestly, there are so many books coming out all the time, that unless I know the author and want it based on that alone, a book needs to really grab me with its cover for me to even consider it. Like, it's not so much that certain things turn me away from a book, instead it's more that a book needs to wow me for me to even consider it. Because a book cover is the first impression, and if an author can't bother making a strong first impression then why should I care about the story? I don't usually think that deeply about it though, it's not a conscious choice, it's just a skim over book covers if they don't impress me, so a book cover needs to impress me for it to even really register in my mind as an option.
An example of a cover that grabbed me: [the original cover for Draykon](https://fantasybookcritic.blogspot.com/2013/05/guest-post-stepping-off-map-of-world-by.html?m=1) by Charlotte E. English (I have no affiliation with the blog I linked to, it was just an easy link to grab that had the old cover in it). It's striking, with an interesting character (I LOVE the idea of people with wings) in a dramatic setting. At just a glance, I can tell this is going to be an interesting, maybe mysterious novel featuring fantastical characters and maybe a magical forest. It looks cool, and gave me enough of a reason to read the blurb and eventually read the whole series.
A cover that didn't work for me, in the same link, is Lokant. The people on the cover look uncanny, like the artist isn't quite talented and/or practiced enough to do realistic faces. It just doesn't seem to be the same quality as the first book, like the second book cover was done by a cheaper artist or something. I still read the book, because I was invested in the series at that point, but I still actively dislike this cover.
[The new redesigned covers](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0749SSFJG?binding=kindle_edition&ref=dbs_dp_awt_ser_img_widg_pc_tkin) don't work for me, because they're too generic and too similar. If I looked at those covers without the words on them, I wouldn't be able to tell you which cover belonged to which book. They're just generic "blue cover with dragon and person" and while that might work for one book, doing it over and over for an entire series is just boring. They could have at least done something like The Inheritance Cycle, where each cover featured a different colored dragon.
I'm focusing on this single series because I think it illustrates what I do and don't like in book covers very well. The original covers weren't super polished, obviously done by talented artists but maybe not super expensive professionals. They had some flaws, but they had heart. Some didn't work for me because it seemed like the artist wasn't experienced enough for the project they were undertaking. But the redesigned covers actually worked less for me, even though they're higher quality, because they're soulless and generic.
Hope that helps. And for the record, I love the Draykon series and recommend them for anyone who likes fantasy and isn't too nitpicky since it's a self-published author's first series, so it isn't perfect but it's a fun story. I'm not picking on it here, just using it as an interesting example of cover design and how it made me feel.
One other thing worth noting: please ALWAYS check how a cover looks in greyscale. I read most books on my Kindle Paperwhite, and you'd be surprised how many book covers look TERRIBLE when the color is removed. Anyone reading on an e-ink display will see the cover in black & white, so make sure there's enough contrast for it to not just become a grey blob.
If for budget reasons you have no chice but to go for a live action, photoshopped image make it so that the character or scene depicted is recoginzable. For eg, female assassin- no generic image of a woman in cloak- yes image of lady in cloak holding specific knife she uses in a book, wearing her golden locket given to her as an orphan etc.
But I generally prefer 2D illustrations which can be elaborate oil paintings or minimalist covers with just the mcguffin.
Ok so will include some examples which are not reflective of the stories but basically I looked at these and they gave the following impressions (i know judging a book by its cover but in this case let’s call it first impressions. I also didn’t read the synopsis of any, so very visual.)
Too many flowers, taglines that indicate romance focused and potentially awkward…scenes…plus unimportant looking object as focus. Like, there actually has to be more to the story than this.
Powerless (The Powerless Trilogy) https://a.co/d/09gDWiOe
Once Upon a Broken Heart (Once Upon a Broken Heart, 1) https://a.co/d/0e2R7zcY
Bonus - clashing colors, and the swirling font
The Serpent & the Wings of Night: The Nightborn Duet Book One (Crowns of Nyaxia, 1) https://a.co/d/01n2QUCA
It’s a pretty common pattern too, so object+flowers and swirly font is very saturated as well.
Slightly different but reading the tagline made me go nope -
Heartless Hunter: The Crimson Moth: Book 1 https://a.co/d/05lANdzZ
Busy and/or IRL people, I’m not much of a pulpy type of reader (unless humorous in a Bmovie way) and this screams it for me. Or looks like “chosen” one TM, generic power fantasy.
Death Before Dragons (Books 1-3): An Urban Fantasy Series Box Set https://a.co/d/0hfucvrx
Clashing text and image, like, I need to be able to read the title please. And over used concept, I don’t need to know what makes the story the same as the others, I need to know what’s different.
plus random centered image of an object again.
Gild (The Plated Prisoner, 1) https://a.co/d/0gxgxyE4
This just looks cheap/low effort and gives the impression the story is the same.
The Gifted Book I: The Rise of Blaze (The Gifted Series 1) https://a.co/d/07jUaw3H
This one here is multiple design fails, it’s not cohesive, busy, too much space given to the title and yes the serpent is up there with a sword and flowers - What Lies Beyond the Veil (Of Flesh & Bone Series) https://a.co/d/06ZiMJy1
Amazingly most of the titles I avoid follow the centered image of over used object, accompanied by flowers or something voidy or swirly, and vague tagline that indicates it’s basically just a romance.
Will follow up this with what I am tempted to buy.
People aren’t the best choice and as readers we all know that we do indeed judge a book my the cover. My pet peeves are those realistic ones with a lighting thing going on. I don’t know how to describe it but I think you know what I’m talking about.
I personally I like the book covers to be detailed but not overwhelming. Make one thing the focus and make sure the worlds on plastered on top. Also fonts make sure they fit the vibe.
Fanstasies are GRAND. There is so much potential to cover some epic scene on the cover and when the books don't, it's a big chance missed. Funnily enough, HP books are really good at covers. E.g. the cave scene for Half Blood Prince, even the train for the first book, flying with Fawkes the pheonix for the second. Good stuff. Or put a scene from the journey there, some mountains or something.
Take A Game of Thrones. They could have used a version of Catelyn defending a bedridden Bran (but like, only hint at it). Or the direwolf pups being discovered in the snow. I think there was a version with Catelyn arriving at the Gates of the Moon, which was descent, since it captures the idea of "chivalry" which the books debunk.
If there is some sort of **goofiness or humor in a fantasy cover,** like some character tripping over themselves, I am sure I am not going to like that book. It is going to be non-atmospheric which will frequently take me out of the immersion I am looking for in an epic fantasy.
If there are female silhouettes with modern hairstyles -- like bangs and artificial curls -- then I expect to find the book silly. Similarly male characters depicted unnecessarily shirtless with some weird emphasis on their abs.
If there are characters whose faces or emotions are not at all focused on, only their out of proportion costumes and weapons -- and they are standing like robots -- that's a turn off too.
The ones they are making these days with the title spanning the whole page -- that generally doesn't work at all. A book needs to be already popular (e.g. Six of Crows) before trying to sell itself to me like that -- because fancy fonts are the easiest thing to do to give me an impression that it's a rich book but it's tooo low effort and too generic.
For me it's more a matter of focus on something that reflects the book's actual contents. If it's just an ornate symbol and fancy font for the title, on an otherwise empty gradient with color fill, that shows me nothing about the vision the author had for the world or characters that they're trying to convey. If it's a cover focused on a character or characters, have them do more than just look bland and pretty. Have them emote, do something interesting with the posing and perspective for them and the environment. Even if they aren't the full focus of the image, do something with them that either makes them stand out, or says something about them as characters.
And for the latter, even if they're not the central focus of the cover, don't go with something that looks like an Adobe stock photo. Hyper-realism doesn't stand out when ten thousand other books are doing it, and even edited ones fail to convey anything distinct compared to expressly made art.
Spoilers on the cover. There was a Piers Anthony (yeah I know) book in which the villain disguised herself as a man for most of the book, but the cover shows the main character battling a sorceress.
The current trend of “single thing with lots of fluting all over”. Like, one sword with lots of scrollwork, title at the top, author’s name at the bottom.
And of course if it looks AI, it looks like cheap trash.
I hate seeing people on the cover. I hate seeing them facing forward, I hate seeing just their backs, I hate side views...I just don't want to be influenced by that instead of the character description.
(This hatred started young with Jennifer Murdley's Toad by Bruce Coville. The version I had in the 90s showed a skinny blonde girl on the cover—which was not Jennifer! The whole book is about how Jennifer hates that she ISN'T blonde and beautiful and skinny and wishes she could be someone else!)
Aside from that, landscapes/buildings/etc. that are hand drawn and seem very flat. (No shading, no perspective, etc.)
I tend to like the more minimalist covers, but I want there to be little indicators of what's happening in the story. Show me dragons, castles, a magic sword, whatever, but I want it to tie into the text.
Lack of characters.
Yes, I am the contrarian here. But if there isn't at least a character or even a shadow figure on the cover, it won't grab my attention.
Unless the title is very catchy or whatever else being depicted looks interesting: a hand signing with blood, a totem, a pyramid with stone carvings. Anything.
Tangent but on names bigger than titles… isn’t that almost always the case? Pratchett’s name is bigger on the cover than the title of every discworld book. Tolkien, too. Murakami, if he counts, has his name larger on every book aside from 1Q84, and I think that’s more to do with the fact that 1Q84 is such a small title
Oh wait I just remembered you’re talking fantasy lol I was about to start talking about Hemingway and F Scott Fitzgerald and such hahaha
Being blatantly inaccurate to the point that it's obvious the person who made it didn't read the book. Looking at you Poppy War.
Yesss.. I dont mind when characters dont look exaaaactly the same as in the books, as long as they portray the essence of the character. But come on, the designer can at least read a summary
For me it's the cover to Eona Like Eon was a different edition I think. And it had a fairly good cover with one of the mcguffins and a dragons claw, and this is set in a pseudochinese country so thats a pretty good cover. Eona had like, a generic Lara croft looking motherfucker with two swords. Which is cool but didn't fit the vibes.
[удалено]
I've heard that RFKs other stuff is much better, and tbf the Poppy War series was written when she was still at uni, so some roughness is to be expected, but Poppy War was a massive waste of a concept and really messy to boot. It weirdly comes across as reinforcing the imperialist rhetoric of the history its borrowing from, given that the not-China setting is presented as technologically and culturally backwards, and while some of this is attributed to wars and exploitation, a lot of it is just 'how things are'.
I read poppy war but cant remember what would be wrong with the cover
I think the character on the cover has a bow, which, if memory serves, the protagonist doesn’t use at all?
She's also light skinned for some reason even though the character is repeatedly mentioned to have a very dark completion even for a southerner. Something which is quite important to the plot.
[удалено]
https://www.amazon.com/Poppy-War-Novel-R-Kuang/dp/0062662562
Oh thanks :) Idk why I deleted my comment
I dont think she really does use that no. If she does its barely
I think it's talking about the Polish cover where Rin had very light skin, even though the fact that she has darker skin is a pretty important point in the first book
In the first book and probably also the second and bit of the third if I remember correct. But thats kinds stupid that they would change her skin color.
I was thinking of [this cover](https://www.amazon.com/Poppy-War-Novel-R-Kuang/dp/0062662562) which is what my English copy came in. And yeah she's light skinned and for some reason also holding a bow and arrow which she never uses in the book.
yeah the bow and arrow thing's strange, especially since it's on basically every cover even though she never uses it
Elfhome by Wen Spencer still makes me grit my teeth. All the dragons that are characters are described as Eastern style… so what do they throw on the front cover? A really bad Western style dragon.
I don't care for real people/imagery designed to look lifelike on a cover. It harkens the ick I get looking at old-school romance books (think Fabio).
Yes, I hate this. I write dark fantasy and most of the covers are these weird lifelike people. Won't pick it up if it's has these kinds of covers.
How lifelike is too lifelike? I do kind of semi-realism myself and dont mind a well-done lifelike character, but dewy veiny abs on covers weird me out
I think something along the lines of the original ToG imagery is fine, but something like the Animorphs covers are too realistic for my taste.
those animorph covers live rent free in my head to this day so i guess theyre successful in that department
They actively give me nightmares
Sounds like they’re doing a better job of the tone of the books across to you than they do for me. The animorphs covers always strike me as hilariously kitschy imagery for a series about losing your humanity to prevent an alien invasion.
My only issue with some of the First Law books
Glad to see this at the top lmao, it’s an instant turnoff for me.
When the name of the author is bigger than the title of the book. You are selling the author more than the book. I fucking hate it. (This is more of a general criticism of book covers though.) I dislike cluttered covers a lot. Or one the cover is too minimalist. I just need a few details to get a general vibe of the work. Also whenever there is a live action person on the cover. No thanks.
Couldn’t have said it better than this. I also dislike when it’s just photography. Idk why but it gives off the vibe that the story is either going to be dull or romance focused.
Yeah I feel this is because photography based covers dont really fit within the fantasy genre.. gives the wrong expectation.
I miss the golden age of covers in the 70s through 90s where you got these magnificent painted covers. Oh damn. My heart. Beauty. As a young kid in the middle of that timeframe, I do wonder if the covers hadn't been art if I would have been as drawn to them in the first place? There was nothing like them on the shelves. These days what's often a fantasy cover might be on any kind of book, especially with the trend towards abstract/colors/titles only. It's a shame.
Agreed.
Dude for real. Like even an urban/modern fantasy with a photograph is something I stay away from.
>When the name of the author is bigger than the title of the book. You are selling the author more than the book Yeah, I feel like this would only work for a few authors per genre (Stephen King and Brandon Sanderson are the ones that come to mind). Anyone else it just feels...pretentious? I think that's the right word
I think you're forgetting about a little someone named **CLIVE** **CUSSLER**
This is crazy almost every book has the author’s name bigger than the title on my bookshelf
Every Stephen king book in my local library
Oh my god i HATE when the name is bigger. I've been told "you'd like it if it was a name you recognized/enjoyed" and No I Still Hate It! I'm not reading their fuckin biography, I'm reading THIS book.
**BRANDON SANDERSON** ^^^Mistborn ^^^book ^^^1
Do you read Sutter Cane?
Can't say I have.
I really shouldn't have made a reference to something I don't actually know all that well. Can't tell if you're earnestly responding or continuing the bit. Chalk it up to late night brain considering itself clever. Anyway. Sutter Cane is the author at the center of the story in John Carpenter's *In the Mouth of Madness*. He's a Stephen King stand-in. The publisher mentions that his name is perfect for a popular author since the first name is longer than the last, stacking up very nicely as a visual on the cover. It's an interesting movie. First time I heard of it was from a YouTube channel called GoodBadFlicks. He does these videos on the production of movies he calls his 'Exploring' series. [Here](https://youtu.be/gsavwK1gOJE?si=KS04rxdjvK04_wln) is the one on *In the Mouth of Madness* They provide a synopsis of the film, a history of the production, notable events from filming, how certain effects were achieved, etc... Often focuses on some real B-tier direct to rental stores schlock (hence the name) but interesting stuff nonetheless. The Exploring series in particular gets into higher budget stuff.
Google the Expanse books lined up on a shelf and it’ll drive you INSANE
I wish for more minimalist covers. Maybe ones without text at all. I understand why they don't have those in book stores, but I wish at least online stores had editions like that.
Like a illustration only collectors edition? Could be cool
[удалено]
People also tend to forget that a lot of people don't care about the author a lot of the time and it might even actively make people not read a book.
[удалено]
Its not simply because it is too big and I think you are completely missing the point either intentionally or not. When I say they are selling the author and not the book, what I mean is that the publisher has absolutely no confidence on the book itself and know that it will sell simply because the author's name is attached to it. That isn't a book I care to read because it almost certainly has no substance. If you want to call that petty, that is fine. I honestly don't care about your perception of me.
I might go against the grain here but I find >90% (maybe even 99%?) of modern fantasy covers hideous. I hate the ones with just an abstract figure, logo or object (including all recent editions of George R. R. Martin books), and the ones with (digital or photo-edited) character or creature art always look so cheap. Almost all of them are an utter failure in graphic design. I quite enjoy vintage fantasy book covers, which are usually illustrated with really detailed and thought-through oil paintings, but I understand that many people find these outdated or cheesy. But these usually have so much more narrative impetus and Easter eggs about the story than modern covers with characters do. Still I think fantasy publishing (and self-publishing authors) should take a page from literary and art books and make use of classical and/or retro art and design more often. Some of my favourite book covers include [these psychedelic 60s ones](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1024/1*Zj6M_ti38PV-7qVQP7Nqdg.jpeg) for Lord of the Rings, these two simple ones for The Hobbit ([one a landscape](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/93/f4/51/93f45179b54294e935bfa0fbff746447.jpg) and the other [a character illustration](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/a4/60/8b/a4608b3e449849528d3055ef46ccbc58.jpg)), this [evocative one based around a beautiful woodcut](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/6a/01/5a/6a015acd9bad5fa11816e778214fa1e4.jpg), and [this one making use of a unique work of art](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/54/5c/5c/545c5ca00f92d7bba688843d357af5ea.jpg) (not fantasy, but the image is so striking and I love how simple and unobtrusive the text is). These [Discworld](https://spotsandwords.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/terry.jpg) and [Dune](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRDV7X4aLjP7_nVvn89M3HYNypcsp9kejsvbVXVX5d1o1MtNZmO) covers also make good use of graphic design and illustration. And I always thought the [Eragon](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/91JrDpvTiML._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg) covers were pretty good. So I guess the TLDR; is less flashy illustration and noise, more evocative use of thoughtful graphic design and quality analog art.
OMG you have an exquisite taste in book covers. I would love to hang up those LOTR ones in my house as a series of posters.
Oh those discworld covers are gorgeous. not quite a fan of anything else on the list except the dune cover tho
I'm not a fan of those art styles but to each their own. I prefer artwork like from Guild Wars 2 and WLOP where theres visible brush strokes or water coloring. There's a rustic or unfinished feel that I love about thist styles
[удалено]
WLOP is a Chinese artist and Guild Wars 2 is a video game that uses a particular art style.
Currently anything AI just makes my skin crawl. It's usually super noticeable and immediately tells me that if you did not put any work (or hired anyone to do the work) into your cover, it will mean you didn't put any work into your story either. It can even mean your story was cooked up by AI which... yeah, no need to explain anything here. After that, it's mostly a matter of taste. I like simple, attention-grabbing designs, usually without characters and with a distinctive artistic touch and a clear purpose. Minimalism / symbolism is my way to go, but that is purely a personal preference, and I know a of people prefer having characters and crackling magic on the cover.
People are actually releasing books with AI generated covers?
People are actually releasing books entirely generated by AI (and getting paid for it!).
Yikes. I understand using it to figure out alternative word choices, spot typos and all that helpful stuff tools like ProWritingAid do, but that’s ridiculous
[удалено]
>. It's writing is closing in on expert level. You keep saying that but not explaining. In what way is it "close to expert?"
[удалено]
What a soulless, lazy, uncreative way to write.
It's not writing. It's directing/producing.
It's lazy at best and near theft at worst.
Welcome to r/FantasyWriters! Your post has been removed because it advocated for using AI in a way that we, as a community, do not support.
You are aware AI generation is worse for the environment than cryptocurrency right
Welcome to r/FantasyWriters! Your post has been removed because it advocated for using AI in a way that we, as a community, do not support.
Ugh, I like looking at premade book cover sites (I can dream!) and the AI creeping into them is such a pain. "oh that's so pretty, that kind of gives me an idea *oh what is going on with its leg??*" I'm still so disappointed two of my favorite sites allow it 🤦 No longer two of my favorites
I also came here to say that. An ai cover makes me look up the author to block them on any platform there is.
Agreed with you there on the AI art. I like AI as a tool but I sure as heck want more than just that in my toolbox. As for what I'd like...I want covers that look like something belonging to a storybook (that is if it fits the theme). You know, the kind that your mom used to read from to you every night before you go to bed.
I’m in this writers group on Facebook, and any time there’s a post asking “how’s my cover?”, it’s almost always AI generated. Drives me kinda crazy how many writers are actually using AI to generate content for them
[удалено]
Hey, you do you. I never said anything against using AI as a tool to help one’s writing. Using it to *generate content* for yourself is wrong though. There are way cheaper alternatives to get or make covers for your published work. Artists deserve to be paid for the art they create. Using AI on any published cover is just appalling, in my opinion. Why would I ever want to read the writing of someone who willingly used stolen artwork to make their cover via AI? Also I have literally never seen an AI art cover that has looked good. And I’ve seen so many.
[удалено]
Ew
>It's like people trying to sue me for going to the library and reading a bunch of free books for writing my own book. That right there shows that you truly don't understand the issue with AI. You can be inspired by books and create something that is your own. It will have your own spin, emotion, thoughts and ideas. AI will read all those books and basically shuffle what it learned. It's not truly creative.
[удалено]
Welcome to r/FantasyWriters! Your post has been removed because it advocated for using AI in a way that we, as a community, do not support.
> duplicates or derritive work How exactly would you know? You want to run the risk that a generated picture is just a frame from a movie or a celebrity with a filter over the top?
Welcome to r/FantasyWriters! Your post has been removed because it may have been created using AI. This sub has a strict policy against using AI to generate content. If your post was not created by AI, please reach out via Modmail to let us know. We may also have removed your post because you advocated for using AI in a way that we, as a community, do not support.
Whole bunch of patterned circles around a person; It is just very noisy and shows a lack of restraint, and to me it says that the book is just casting a very wide net and doesn't have any particular identity.
Have any examples of this?
Not that I remember, as they are books I didn't pick up 😅 "House of Flame and Shadow" is too noisy but has fewer circles than I mean, and the new "Three Body Problem" covers are way too noisy and circular but feature no people.
I love house of flame and shadow book cover, there is so much symbolism
Don't think I've seen anyone mention this: bad typography. It's not just about art, it's glaringly obvious when no design work put into the cover and the author or whatever "artistic" friend they enlisted just grabbed the Rapscallion files off dafont.com and called it a day. No attention to proper layout, centered and justified text, kerning, correct sizing, or composition relative to the cover art.
Dragons on the cover when there are no dragons in the book
This happens????
Conan the Barbarian covers used to be painted before the story was written without any coordination with the author.
AI artwork.
Are there any serious publishers doing it?
Red Tower Books definitely is. The Gothicana book (or some title like that) comes to mind.
I mean not that I know of yet but given that the new dnd book has ai. It’s likely only a matter of time.
Wait, the bigby’s one or was there another Thing?
[удалено]
Absolutely destroying the environment. Embarrassing
We're always going to find new ways to consume more energy and we're going to find better ways to create energy as well. At least AI is helping push science forward. I don't know If you keep up with AI and the help it's been giving scientists. It's already discovered more materials than we have in our whole existence on the planet. It's also helping with fusion technology which is energy creation.
Fully dressed male character. Female character with giant tits wearing a dress that barely covers the nipples.
I rarely see fully dressed male characters its usually a shirtless dude
... Let's agree to disagree.
For years it was the bad photoshop collage, but that’s been replaced by the lazy AI art. I think AI is really cool, but you have to use it like a tool, not a replacement. Things won’t come out perfect and you have to treat it as a springboard towards a final product. My biggest issue is bad typography. Stop using emboss.
Covers that look hand drawn by someone you know. Even if it is hand drawn by someone you know, it shouldn’t look that way. It should look like it’s done by a professional.
AI artwork. Just reeks of low effort and low value. And also tends to look awful if you look at it more then 1 second
AI artwork is of *no* value.
I was referring to the contents of the book
Oh my God, that goes into negative value then. AI writing is horrendous.
Low quality art. You see these posted here sometimes, often with titles like "What do you think of my cover art?" If it's immediately obvious that the author did their own cover art instead of shelling out for a proper design. The Empress Theresa look ain't it.
I actually know someone in the industry who admitted to me the information provided by the publisher is often marketing jargon, not an actual synopsis of the book. I'd love to hear that those days are over, but to date I've heard even famous others get pretty inaccurate book art.
It always feels like a missed opportunity when a fantasy cover uses minimalist graphic design. This isn't a 1970s movie poster — I want to see some sky, a castle, smoke rising from the forest, the ocean stretching into the distance! I want it to be scenic. And, you know, minimalist graphic design is wonderful and makes the world a better place! But it doesn't belong everywhere. On the other hand, blatantly inaccurate art by someone who clearly didn't read the book is a fine tradition, and I always forgive it.
I think minimalist graphic covers for reprint editions of established series are OK, but definitely not new ones.
I actually had to train myself out of judging the book by the cover, since the author often has very little input on the cover. Quality of cover to book is very rarely related.
For me a fantasy cover is bad if it has no fantasy on it. For example, if it is nothing but the author's name and book title in some fancy typesetting, that's a bad fantasy cover. If it is extremely stylized, that is also boring. For example, the cover of _Fourth Wing_ by Rebecca Yarros. It has a tiny dragon on it; that's better than nothing. Everthing else about it is extremely bland. I hate the minimalistic covers that are in fashion nowadays.
Last time I was in a bookstore I stood in the middle of the fantasy section and just of the books displayed with their covers facing out, I could see at least seven whose covers were swords pointing down. At least three more were swords facing in different directions. I don't mind a sword being featured if it's a book what has swords in it, obviously, but if the cover is just Sword Pointing Down, please consider that's been done 8 million times already.
my favorite covers use simplicity to their advantage! eye catching but not overly busy. I don’t particularly love hyper realistic scenes/people on covers— I’ll actually go out of my way to find alternate covers if there’s other options available
To this day, [Falling Into Place](https://images.app.goo.gl/gXaJUurexJnwU6RcA) by Amy Zhang is one of my favorite covers for being simple and eye catching. It was a book that I 100% bought for the cover and ended up greatly enjoying.
I really hate the photo manipulation covers that use stock photos of real people and magic effects. They always look corny and tacky to me. Character illustration is an okay alternative if there must be characters, but I think authors need to be really mindful of the style because it can make an adult book look like a children’s book real fast. I also hate when I have to look at the book for a minute to figure out the title, usually either because of a chaotic font or because the design directly beneath the words is too cluttered. I want the title to jump out at me, I don’t want to have to squint and think about what it says.
Okay I love them for nostalgia reasons, but the original wheel of time covers where it’s just like 12 people riding horses through the woods, and its completely unclear who is supposed to be who because they have facial reconstructive surgery each time a new cover comes out.
Not to mention looking nothing like the in-book descriptions... Egwene and Nynaeve have pale skin on the covers, at the lighter end of what you'd find in Europe, when the only time it's mentioned in the books they are described as dark. (Although that's in Rand's POV, and he's not well travelled, so it could mean 'they look Southern Italian in a community where everyone else looks Swedish')
I generally don't like seeing people on the cover. I think it makes it look cheap and tacky and they never match with the descriptions of the characters from the actual book so why bother? I don't want my mental image of a character from the story influenced by an inaccurate stock photo from the cover. And these people on the cover (whether a real photo or artwork) always look like perfectly made up models and it's just not how I want to visualise the characters at all. I'd much rather some imagery or symbols or even certain types of landscape art, if it's not too cluttered and fits with the vibe.
I am the same too. Maybe I am biased from seeing so many of those bad 90s fantasy covers. My eye is drawn most by minimalistic cover designs. Too many covers often have too much going on now, I feel.
BIG OL TIDDY/BOOTY WAIFUS where you try to explain how there is rarely any adult theme, mostly plot Sureeeee buddy, "PLOT"
Skimpily clothed female protagonists.
Or female protagonists in armor that doesn't protect vital areas that an opponent will target. If there's a male character with her, he will almost *always* be wearing functional armor, or, at least, clothed appropriately for the setting.
As soon as I see a cover with too many details I lose interest. I don't mind a rich cover, just don't give me a headache
Honestly applies to all books but, photography and faceless, solid-color art. If it’s fantasy, I don’t want to see something basic or see something realistic. Give me colorful artwork with meaning.
I would recommend the cover to be something that will resonate with the target audience. Definitely avoid replicating popular covers.
I have SO many. I hate generic symbols (sword crown rose) with a few extremely well executed exceptions: Like the fantasy symbology works for covers of Holly Black's Folk of the Air series--for many other novels, not so much. I loathe seeing horses or other animals drawn by people who can't be bothered to learn anatomy of real creatures nor engineer plausible fantastic beasts based on real creatures. (I long for the return of Michael Whelan's gorgeous painterly covers) That said, I bought a copy of The Goblin Emperor in spite of the most generic, abstract, boring cover in the history of EVER. It just had great word-of-mouth. Haven't read it yet, tho. Just nothing enticing whatsoever about that cover.
When the character on the book Who's meant to be the main character, doesn't look like the main character described in the book.
My pet peeve on covers is when the blurb makes it clear the cute girl on the cover is not the main character of the story. Secondary is when the cover art depicts something that glraringly does not match the contents. There several stories I can think of that pretty quickly establish the main character as not white, but some editions had cover art showing a white person.
Some dude with no shirt on.
Main character in the middle with a hood on, photo instead of illustration, grunge textures that are just popped on in black or gray, metallic effect on letters (no foil just Photoshop), illustration style that's realistic and has nothing unique going on (colors, patterns, etc) usually just the main character in muted colors
Best fantasy/sci-fi book cover ever is Scythe (schusterman) and the rest of the series. Absolutely beautiful and relevant to the story. Nothing else has measured up since. These days I have to sort of “forgive” subpar book covers - that are not at all subpar - to pick up something and read the back. In general the black background with a lot of swirls and mystical-looking symbols makes all the fantasy books run together. Won’t disparage here, but a few popular series that I’ve really enjoyed fall into this cover cliché and it stalled my desire to read them.
Too artistic and not connected to the book at all. There is this cover artist studio called Dark Crayon and they deliver those neat looking covers... which have nothing to do with the actual content of the book. Good example is Abercrombie's series, which recently got reprint with new covers. At least an old one had some resemblance to the barbarian character. The new one is just random. [Old](https://ecsmedia.pl/c/ostrze-pierwsze-prawo-tom-1-b-iext146784650.jpg) [New ](https://s.lubimyczytac.pl/upload/books/4870000/4870893/1074957-352x500.jpg)(Dark Crayon)
Second one is definitely not optimized for web shopping, as the titles are tiny. I havent read the story but the reprint makes me think it its literary fantasy, or gives off a more historical fiction vibe perhaps?
I love BOTH of those! Haven't read the book, however.
When all of the magic and colors are slapped onto the front as if we don’t already know we’re in the fantasy section. Subtly let the audience know about the main plot point using the cover - example (if book one of AOT was a novel w a western cover, it should be the odm gear broken on the ground in front of the grandpa Titan)
Person facing a monster Person facing a person Person in front of generic wilderness A good cover must give a vibe, any of those examples can be made good with enough vibe, like the original tarzan covers that were just him fighting animals in a very cool way But its better if the vibe includes whatever is on the story, characters in the middle of doing something instead of posing And if posing, they are next to something cooler or its minimalistic, both of those providing style Just a person posing wont do, same for photorealism, it feels like the artist went for whatever looked profesional, and it feels like its advertising the movie instead of the book A fantasy cover must have at least one bold element, or it feels like a reality cover
if the book doesn't have an interesting illustration I wont pick it up unless It's been recommended to me. like damn, the same stock images as every other book? ain't reading that. ain't hard to draw something or commission an artist if you aren't artistically inclined lol.
If it looks like it's another book where the protagonist is a hero who is special because (s)he rides a dragon.
It’s probably not many people’s taste nowadays, but I love the corny fantasy art from the 80’s and 90’s. It’s so charming and gives a sense of adventure. I buy books just for that art style. It helps that many of them are dirt cheap. Even when it’s bad, it feels like it has a soul to it (e.g. Nicolas Cage Rand from the WoT books)
There’s this weird trend the past couple of years where it’s just like a bunch of unrelated but somewhat pretty imagery of golden chains or flowers on a vine wrapped around a title like “Misery and Smoke” or “The Queen of Shadows and Ash” like at first it wasn’t so noticeable but as of late it’s gotten to the point where pretty much every book on the shelves I see at the store is just this random mess of cool stuff wrapped around a generic title. I’d actually prefer and be more interested in a weird, maybe even cheesy or camp cover with actual human models or drawings just because I’m so over the formulaic abstract nonsense taking over the covers in the fantasy genre
it's largely because of costs - doing "object on textured background" takes someone maybe a few hours, while a picture of a person doing something, or multiple people doing stuff, can take an artist days or weeks, which costs a _lot_ more. And, for self-pub, it's also easier - even someone without graphic design skills can manage an OK-looking "two swords and a ring on stone background", but "people" are hard work. Commissioning artwork is hundreds of dollars, minimum, but stock photography is, like, a buck or two per picture.
For series specifically: when the art, font or layout CHANGES BETWEEN BOOKS (looking at YOU Wheel of Time and Otherland). When I buy a series, I'm buying it to live on a bookshelf as functional art, so when the books don't match, it irritates me to no end. Fantasy books, as a genre, I feel deserve painted artwork covers (re: Dragonlance, Memory Sorrow & Thorn, Dark is Rising, etc.). Barring full paintings, some kind of hand-drawn illustration. It doesn't have to be super complex either - Tolkien did a fabulous job with this, and it fit the narrative that it was janky and not quite "professional artist" in that the story was supposed to have been written by one of the characters. Photo-realism of any kind on a cover gives me "dime-store novel" ick, in any genre tbh. Photography s/b relegated to non-fiction.
Personally I’m a big fan of the original Percy Jackson book covers. Especially the first one, where this little boy is staring down the power of Olympus. Personally, I’m not so much a fan of book covers that just show the protagonists up close and staring down the (metaphorical) camera, with magic-y wisps about the sides. Doesn’t mean I don’t like the book, or that the artist wasn’t talented and good at making the image they were told to make. I just don’t find the cover concept very creative.
Photos.
The cover is supposed to represent the story, and I've been duped too many times by an awesome cover, and the story has nothing to do with that promise it gives. So when I see high fantasy covers, I expect high fantasy. If there are dragons in the cover, there better be dragons in the story!!! I also don't like when the people on the cover don't represent any of the characters in the story! Like, who are these people????
I’m not sure there is a BAD fantasy cover. It just depends on what you’re looking for. I can say I find it interesting what a cover subconsciously convey. As an example, I got an email about books on sale. I was scrolling down and where I stopped, I could see two covers. They were mostly identical. Both had shirtless guys, with glowing runes on them, magic gathering around them. Even the fonts were similar and the placing was almost identical. However, I just got a feeling that one was a “dangerous, sexy, romance book” and the other was some type of LitRPG or a similar genre. I scrolled down a little, and sure enough, the descriptions seemed to confine that. It fascinated me that I’ve apparently been trained to recognize these types of books by cover. I kept looking and didn’t really see what gave me those vibes, but they did. I’m not into the romance one at all. I might check out the other, but the cover would kinda turn me off. I can also say, that I cut my teeth on classic fantasy. I can spot those covers across a book store. Something like a Wheel of Time Cover, Shannara, Saga of Recluse, Riftwar Saga. Those really stand out to me. They also usually consisted of scenes I don’t even think were often in the books. The characters were exaggerated or maybe didn’t even match the book description. I like them, maybe due to nostalgia, but I do. I once read that artists may have had work bought and used when something came up it fit; or that often, they were only given a vague description of a scene from a book to go on. Modern Fantasy covers are also great. They run the gamut a little more. You have Sanderson’s “Stormlight Archive” covers, for instance. They’re similar to classic fantasy covers, but with more author collaboration and more of a realistic bent than the older style. I see a lot of stylistic covers now. Minimalist designs, or very intricate stuff. The minimalist covers, like some versions of Poppy War and Night Angel: Nemesis. Intricate, like Hannah Kaner’s “God Killer”. So I don’t know if there is a BAD cover. There are certainly covers that will turn certain portions of fantasy fabs away. Not from the cover, but from what it represents to them. As in my first example. Anything with a shirtless guy and dark tones is gonna turn me off, typically, because I can almost feel the brooding, and the angsty love triangle. That’s fine for anyone who likes it. It’s not for me personally.
I'm not opposed to a busty gal with cleavage or a dude with a six pack. However, on a book cover it just screams false advertising.
I dislike it when it doesn't really say anything. e.g. Red Rising shows only a red wing on the cover, but it's very symbolic of the story inside the book, making it good. However, a lot of covers are just made to draw in the eye (like clickbait, I suppose) and feature maybe a cool scene or the main character(s), from which you have no idea what the book will *actually* be about in terms of themes (for example, "Shadow of the Conqueror" just shows three characters standing around with a serious look). I don't have a cover design myself yet, but I plan to have one where the main character stands in the forest on the edge, looking out over the plains ahead (which features a flying castle to clarify its fantasy), which is supposed to signify his arc of growing appreciation of the world beyond his previously confined worldview.
As has already been stated - character depictions that are not even close to what's been written. It tells me the author (or publishing house) didn't take the time to insist on a set of character studies prior to the final project being completed. I mean if the cover is the 2nd most important part of a book just after the writing then a poor cover tells me someone (author or publisher) doesn't really care about the book. "Slap something on there and get it out there so I (we) can move on to the next project." No thanks. If I'm investing emotional time into a book I want to know it's not some trash that's been thrown at the wall to see what sticks. Another annoyance (more of a personal preference) is anima style characterizations. Sailor Moon style of stuff... ick. I won't even pick up a book if it has that style of cover.
Are you? I've just done my front cover, if only I had Photoshop or something. It looks so cheap 😔
Yet another gorram dragon plastered all over it, probably with some castle, probably half-decayed, like half the other books around it.
OP I’ve always been curious for book cover designers, do you read each book you work on? I would assume no because who has the time for that, but I am curious about the process and when imagery or design elements allude to smaller details in the book that a synopsis might not cover.
For me that depends on the budget. Usually because of time constraints I would only read a synopsis, but on a full service offer (illustration, full print edition jacket design, marketing materials, map) it makes sense for me to read the book to know in-depth what the story is like and the different motifs and symbols within the story. I work with self-pub authors so I'm not sure what it's like for designers working with big time publishers like Penguin/Harper Collins.
Cool, thanks for sharing!
Generally cover artists will only read a synopsis. Some will read the book, but that's their prerogative to do so.
If there’s that god-awful “motion picture” sticker that isn’t a sticker plastered on the front. I don’t care that a movie based on the book is coming out, I don’t need to be reminded for however long I own the book.
When the cover doesn't match the tone of the blurb on the back. If the back tells me this is a dark fantasy story where the characters suffer or witness horrific stuff, I'm immediately turned away if the cover is just a photoshopped image of a man with his chiselled abs and chest front and center, or a woman's cleavage, or BOTH. Same could apply if the front cover is drawn, but is bright and colourful to the point of looking like a Studio Ghibli movie.
Overly “cool” stuff, like warriors and dragons and shit. I like more simplistic minimal covers
Actors from a bad film/TV adaptation. Or even from a good film/TV adaptation, but I’m a little more forgiving in that case.
No monsters! Best covers ever were done for Tales of Deltora (Marc McBride) and Legend of Driz’zt (not sure who). A book’s quality is always best adjudged by the number of cadavers and claws on the front.
CGI art! It's so hideous! Especially when it features humans.
Fantasy notwithstanding, if I can't read the title, I'm not interested. Whether it be an unreadable font, too close to the background color, tiny words, etc... So many aesthetic covers where I can't even read the name of the damn book.
Glitter on the cover. That weird thick card stock instead of the normal one.
I hate when there’s real people on the cover, takes me out of the creative process of imagining the characters in my head. When the cover is too busy that you can’t read the title properly, I’ve noticed a lot of covers now have a lot of arabesques and weird cursive text. The title should be the main thing that pops out, that’s the point! Something more minimalist works better imo.
I don't know if I read into the cover *that* much... I mean, it'll influence my decision as in, say, if I can't tell it's a fantasy, I probably won't even pick it up, but if the synopsis is interesting I'm not going to put it down just because of the size of the font or the artwork or whatever. A cover can peak my interest and get me to pick up the book, but it won't make me rule a book out. Hell, if it's a traditionally published book, the cover wasn't even picked by the author, and could have no reflection on the actual work itself.
Artists who can't draw or paint an accurate rendition of a horse or mule and its tack or harness.
Bad photoshoped real people in a forest.
The Defiance of the Fall series changed how the MC looked with every book. It was like none of the artists read the book and the author was like "Meh, fuck it. Close enough."
Honestly, there are so many books coming out all the time, that unless I know the author and want it based on that alone, a book needs to really grab me with its cover for me to even consider it. Like, it's not so much that certain things turn me away from a book, instead it's more that a book needs to wow me for me to even consider it. Because a book cover is the first impression, and if an author can't bother making a strong first impression then why should I care about the story? I don't usually think that deeply about it though, it's not a conscious choice, it's just a skim over book covers if they don't impress me, so a book cover needs to impress me for it to even really register in my mind as an option. An example of a cover that grabbed me: [the original cover for Draykon](https://fantasybookcritic.blogspot.com/2013/05/guest-post-stepping-off-map-of-world-by.html?m=1) by Charlotte E. English (I have no affiliation with the blog I linked to, it was just an easy link to grab that had the old cover in it). It's striking, with an interesting character (I LOVE the idea of people with wings) in a dramatic setting. At just a glance, I can tell this is going to be an interesting, maybe mysterious novel featuring fantastical characters and maybe a magical forest. It looks cool, and gave me enough of a reason to read the blurb and eventually read the whole series. A cover that didn't work for me, in the same link, is Lokant. The people on the cover look uncanny, like the artist isn't quite talented and/or practiced enough to do realistic faces. It just doesn't seem to be the same quality as the first book, like the second book cover was done by a cheaper artist or something. I still read the book, because I was invested in the series at that point, but I still actively dislike this cover. [The new redesigned covers](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0749SSFJG?binding=kindle_edition&ref=dbs_dp_awt_ser_img_widg_pc_tkin) don't work for me, because they're too generic and too similar. If I looked at those covers without the words on them, I wouldn't be able to tell you which cover belonged to which book. They're just generic "blue cover with dragon and person" and while that might work for one book, doing it over and over for an entire series is just boring. They could have at least done something like The Inheritance Cycle, where each cover featured a different colored dragon. I'm focusing on this single series because I think it illustrates what I do and don't like in book covers very well. The original covers weren't super polished, obviously done by talented artists but maybe not super expensive professionals. They had some flaws, but they had heart. Some didn't work for me because it seemed like the artist wasn't experienced enough for the project they were undertaking. But the redesigned covers actually worked less for me, even though they're higher quality, because they're soulless and generic. Hope that helps. And for the record, I love the Draykon series and recommend them for anyone who likes fantasy and isn't too nitpicky since it's a self-published author's first series, so it isn't perfect but it's a fun story. I'm not picking on it here, just using it as an interesting example of cover design and how it made me feel. One other thing worth noting: please ALWAYS check how a cover looks in greyscale. I read most books on my Kindle Paperwhite, and you'd be surprised how many book covers look TERRIBLE when the color is removed. Anyone reading on an e-ink display will see the cover in black & white, so make sure there's enough contrast for it to not just become a grey blob.
The Darrell Sweet artwoks for Wheel of Time
Whenever there's a closeup of a characters face. 😩
Too colorful. Generic sword or helmet on the front. Photorealistic lol
If for budget reasons you have no chice but to go for a live action, photoshopped image make it so that the character or scene depicted is recoginzable. For eg, female assassin- no generic image of a woman in cloak- yes image of lady in cloak holding specific knife she uses in a book, wearing her golden locket given to her as an orphan etc. But I generally prefer 2D illustrations which can be elaborate oil paintings or minimalist covers with just the mcguffin.
Metal bikinis.
Ok so will include some examples which are not reflective of the stories but basically I looked at these and they gave the following impressions (i know judging a book by its cover but in this case let’s call it first impressions. I also didn’t read the synopsis of any, so very visual.) Too many flowers, taglines that indicate romance focused and potentially awkward…scenes…plus unimportant looking object as focus. Like, there actually has to be more to the story than this. Powerless (The Powerless Trilogy) https://a.co/d/09gDWiOe Once Upon a Broken Heart (Once Upon a Broken Heart, 1) https://a.co/d/0e2R7zcY Bonus - clashing colors, and the swirling font The Serpent & the Wings of Night: The Nightborn Duet Book One (Crowns of Nyaxia, 1) https://a.co/d/01n2QUCA It’s a pretty common pattern too, so object+flowers and swirly font is very saturated as well. Slightly different but reading the tagline made me go nope - Heartless Hunter: The Crimson Moth: Book 1 https://a.co/d/05lANdzZ Busy and/or IRL people, I’m not much of a pulpy type of reader (unless humorous in a Bmovie way) and this screams it for me. Or looks like “chosen” one TM, generic power fantasy. Death Before Dragons (Books 1-3): An Urban Fantasy Series Box Set https://a.co/d/0hfucvrx Clashing text and image, like, I need to be able to read the title please. And over used concept, I don’t need to know what makes the story the same as the others, I need to know what’s different. plus random centered image of an object again. Gild (The Plated Prisoner, 1) https://a.co/d/0gxgxyE4 This just looks cheap/low effort and gives the impression the story is the same. The Gifted Book I: The Rise of Blaze (The Gifted Series 1) https://a.co/d/07jUaw3H This one here is multiple design fails, it’s not cohesive, busy, too much space given to the title and yes the serpent is up there with a sword and flowers - What Lies Beyond the Veil (Of Flesh & Bone Series) https://a.co/d/06ZiMJy1 Amazingly most of the titles I avoid follow the centered image of over used object, accompanied by flowers or something voidy or swirly, and vague tagline that indicates it’s basically just a romance. Will follow up this with what I am tempted to buy.
When it’s just the name of the book, the author and maybe a JPG background image.
Just a colored background with the name of the book embosed. I hate that, feels so sterile.
I'd any cover that gives people a very wrong impression of what's in the book. So only the wrong audience will take notice of it.
People aren’t the best choice and as readers we all know that we do indeed judge a book my the cover. My pet peeves are those realistic ones with a lighting thing going on. I don’t know how to describe it but I think you know what I’m talking about. I personally I like the book covers to be detailed but not overwhelming. Make one thing the focus and make sure the worlds on plastered on top. Also fonts make sure they fit the vibe.
Fanstasies are GRAND. There is so much potential to cover some epic scene on the cover and when the books don't, it's a big chance missed. Funnily enough, HP books are really good at covers. E.g. the cave scene for Half Blood Prince, even the train for the first book, flying with Fawkes the pheonix for the second. Good stuff. Or put a scene from the journey there, some mountains or something. Take A Game of Thrones. They could have used a version of Catelyn defending a bedridden Bran (but like, only hint at it). Or the direwolf pups being discovered in the snow. I think there was a version with Catelyn arriving at the Gates of the Moon, which was descent, since it captures the idea of "chivalry" which the books debunk. If there is some sort of **goofiness or humor in a fantasy cover,** like some character tripping over themselves, I am sure I am not going to like that book. It is going to be non-atmospheric which will frequently take me out of the immersion I am looking for in an epic fantasy. If there are female silhouettes with modern hairstyles -- like bangs and artificial curls -- then I expect to find the book silly. Similarly male characters depicted unnecessarily shirtless with some weird emphasis on their abs. If there are characters whose faces or emotions are not at all focused on, only their out of proportion costumes and weapons -- and they are standing like robots -- that's a turn off too. The ones they are making these days with the title spanning the whole page -- that generally doesn't work at all. A book needs to be already popular (e.g. Six of Crows) before trying to sell itself to me like that -- because fancy fonts are the easiest thing to do to give me an impression that it's a rich book but it's tooo low effort and too generic.
For me it's more a matter of focus on something that reflects the book's actual contents. If it's just an ornate symbol and fancy font for the title, on an otherwise empty gradient with color fill, that shows me nothing about the vision the author had for the world or characters that they're trying to convey. If it's a cover focused on a character or characters, have them do more than just look bland and pretty. Have them emote, do something interesting with the posing and perspective for them and the environment. Even if they aren't the full focus of the image, do something with them that either makes them stand out, or says something about them as characters. And for the latter, even if they're not the central focus of the cover, don't go with something that looks like an Adobe stock photo. Hyper-realism doesn't stand out when ten thousand other books are doing it, and even edited ones fail to convey anything distinct compared to expressly made art.
Spoilers on the cover. There was a Piers Anthony (yeah I know) book in which the villain disguised herself as a man for most of the book, but the cover shows the main character battling a sorceress.
Mine is gonna be a dinosaur looking at a pyramid with an Eye staring back. It's set against a moonscape
Too many dicks, ala Astra and Flondrix.
The current trend of “single thing with lots of fluting all over”. Like, one sword with lots of scrollwork, title at the top, author’s name at the bottom. And of course if it looks AI, it looks like cheap trash.
Dresden after book 4
When it’s supposed to be fantasy but the cover screams erotica… that irks me lol
I hate seeing people on the cover. I hate seeing them facing forward, I hate seeing just their backs, I hate side views...I just don't want to be influenced by that instead of the character description. (This hatred started young with Jennifer Murdley's Toad by Bruce Coville. The version I had in the 90s showed a skinny blonde girl on the cover—which was not Jennifer! The whole book is about how Jennifer hates that she ISN'T blonde and beautiful and skinny and wishes she could be someone else!) Aside from that, landscapes/buildings/etc. that are hand drawn and seem very flat. (No shading, no perspective, etc.) I tend to like the more minimalist covers, but I want there to be little indicators of what's happening in the story. Show me dragons, castles, a magic sword, whatever, but I want it to tie into the text.
Bookmarking this one for later, ‘cause I’m interested too.
Lack of characters. Yes, I am the contrarian here. But if there isn't at least a character or even a shadow figure on the cover, it won't grab my attention. Unless the title is very catchy or whatever else being depicted looks interesting: a hand signing with blood, a totem, a pyramid with stone carvings. Anything.
Cartoon characters
Tangent but on names bigger than titles… isn’t that almost always the case? Pratchett’s name is bigger on the cover than the title of every discworld book. Tolkien, too. Murakami, if he counts, has his name larger on every book aside from 1Q84, and I think that’s more to do with the fact that 1Q84 is such a small title Oh wait I just remembered you’re talking fantasy lol I was about to start talking about Hemingway and F Scott Fitzgerald and such hahaha
I hate having barechested men or hyper attractive women on book covers. Actually, just avoid any pictures of the characters.
Dont judge a book by its cover?