Help Me, Obi-wan!
…Monday
You’re my only hope!
So here’s the thing. I’m putting these backlist works up for electronic availability, right? Short stories and then we’ll see.
On the one hand, it’s a blast.
On the other hand…Dammit, Jim, I’m a writer, not a marketing department! I’m a moonlighting graphic twiddler, not a design team! And I’m mixing up my nostalgic media references!
The spooky river. Ooooh...
And so I find myself faced with…
Decisions.
So guess what! Yes! I want you to make them FOR me! Yeah, that’s the ticket!
Sometimes I don’t have much choice with cover concepts or ideas–I’m working with stock photos, yes I am, even when I sometimes, er, twiddle with them. So when I started looking for a Deep River Reckoning cover–the short story from the Reckoners universe just now available on Kindle, and which I’ll actually talk more about on Wednesday–I went hunting a really spooky river.
And hunting. And hunting…
Well, I was really happy with the end result, but now that I’ve had a chance to ponder it–and get a bit of feedback…I wonder if it’s not just plain too…
Serene.
You know. Pretty, but not grabby. Maybe not quite the right balance for a fiction world that’s contemporary, smart-ass, full of ghosties, full of magical action, and yah…has quite the little romance thing going for it, too?
So I played with a couple of other things, and then I realized…wow. I have no idea what to do.
Which cover would make YOU think about “picking up the book”?
AKA, “Hellllp MEEEEEE!”
(PS yes, there are watermarks on the bottom two. These are comp versions of the images for now…)
Ahh, the haunted woman. Evocative!
Scary stuff happening here! Run away! No, pick me up!
Tags: adventures, Blue Hound Visions, e-fiction, kindle, The Reckoners
July 5th, 2010 at 04:31
I’m biased. I like #3.
July 5th, 2010 at 04:51
I’m not biased ;D I vote for #2 — that face of mystique. ~m
July 5th, 2010 at 04:53
I like them all but cover #1 will probably be the one that would call me to pick up the book.
July 5th, 2010 at 05:15
I like the eyes in the third cover.
July 5th, 2010 at 05:26
I like the first actual river scene – really does look spooky
July 5th, 2010 at 06:50
I’m for #2.
July 5th, 2010 at 07:24
#3 … I like them all, but #1 and #2 both have a more historical, gothic feel to me. Not smart-ass at all. And those red eyes and arched eyebrows would make me pick up a book.
July 5th, 2010 at 07:25
Okay, I bought it with the river on the cover, so that didn’t turn me away. But of the two “ladies” I love the red eyes on the bottom one.
July 5th, 2010 at 08:43
This astonishes me!
July 5th, 2010 at 08:43
Molly, thank you!
July 5th, 2010 at 08:44
Cindy, thanks for your help! I love #1, of course, but now…I just can’t see straight!
July 5th, 2010 at 08:44
Dru, thanks for your help! I did the eye thing–is it scary that I was good with evil?
July 5th, 2010 at 08:45
Linda, thank you! I’m glad I’m not the only one who iniitially spotted that river as spooky…
July 5th, 2010 at 08:45
Thanks, Adrianne!
July 5th, 2010 at 08:46
Wendy–can’t argue that…no smart-ass in those first two covers… ;>
July 5th, 2010 at 08:46
Heather, thanks! I think it’s probably different if you go with the intent to buy, as opposed to browsing, so I’m really glad to have your opinion.
July 5th, 2010 at 08:55
None of the above, I like illustration which tells me about the story, not the sorts of covers where there’s no clue or actual misdiretion on the cover about location, timeframe, social mores.. e.g., there’s a Susan Grant SFR set mostly onboard a spaceship, which the cover looks like some detective dick (non-sexual use of the word referring to detective…) with more or less contemporary pistol and contemporary offdutry clothes…. an SF/F cover artist looked the cover and said, “Sales meeting gone wrong.”
The art doesn’t imply paranormal/ghosties to me, it looks like generic turn-me-off stuff–again, no clue that the content isn’t contemporay no-genre-differentiation. Facial parts covers (and torsos with all or part of the head cut off) don’t attract me, they repell me, and it takes extra effort for me to NOT automatically bypass them.
Covers I like are more like the ones that Diana Pharoah Francis has been getting for the Crosspointe books [but apparently those work majorly better on me than a lot of other people, sigh] [and though they are original fantasy universe, not UF/PNR], the Ilona Andrew book that’s not one of the Kate Daniels books (can’t remember the title)….
One author remarked on a cover of a book the author cowrote that the denoting fantasy element on the cover, which had if I recall a Civil War era ship on the cover, were sparklies strewn about on the cover. Other indications of non-real-world/Otherness/Fantasy content, include ghostly images — transparent faces or larger amounts of see-through people indicating ghostly presences, etc.
July 5th, 2010 at 08:57
I like the river cover. I like #2 not at all. The third is okay, but not really compelling.
July 5th, 2010 at 09:07
Thanks, Liz! Not surprising we would both like a quiet space…
July 5th, 2010 at 09:09
Thanks, Paula! Unfortunately, stock photography rarely includes actual ghosts, so I’m working the conceptual side of things. I can only hope the covers aren’t too off-putting to those who feel as strongly as your words indicate.
July 5th, 2010 at 09:24
I like #2 — looks mysterious and provocative. (I think you’ll find as many opinions here as you have book covers — maybe more!) When I’m buying online, I really rely on the synopsis more than the cover, which is a little different than buying off the shelf. Good luck!
July 5th, 2010 at 09:24
Why not combine 1 and 3….like make the eyes misty/ghostly over the river?
July 5th, 2010 at 09:28
I was going to vote for #3, but I like Lady Jade’s idea best.
July 5th, 2010 at 09:34
Thanks, Sarah–I probably need to work at my synopsis, too. ;> I can see you’re right about as many opinions as posters, but in a way that says something, too!
July 5th, 2010 at 09:35
Thanks, Lady Jade! I’ll give that a try here behind the scenes. My sense is that it’ll be a little too cluttered for as large as these images can be–so, just a murky mess on the screen at that size–but it’s a neat concept!
July 5th, 2010 at 09:36
Thanks, Gabi! It’s a cool idea, isn’t it? Not sure if I can pull it off, but I like thinking about it. (Thanks for letting me know about #3, also–I have the feeling I’ll have to rely on one of the current options…)
July 5th, 2010 at 10:12
Hey Doranna! Cover #1 feels spooky to me, and #3 brings in a paranormal aspect to the book, though it doesn’t say ghost to me, more demon/vampire presence with the red glowing eyes. Although I like #3, I’m leaning more toward #1.
July 5th, 2010 at 10:17
Hi, Shea! And thank you! I’m glad to know it’s not just me with the spooky in #1.
The ghost in the story does get red-eyed now and then, so that would hopefully resonate, but not until after the story is read…
July 5th, 2010 at 10:33
Could you go with #1 and superimpose a ghostly image in it somewhere?
July 5th, 2010 at 10:36
I like the river scene. If the title were “Down by the Riverside” or “Home on Easy River” and advertised as “family memoir” it might look serene, but the colors and layout make it look sinister or at least suspenseful to me. “Reckoning” suggests price…”Deep River” suggests things in the river that may rise, or a place to throw bodies.
And “Deep River Reckoning” with that scene means I’m intrigued and want more.
The faces–not so much. Certainly not the pair of red eyes dominating the cover.
But I don’t have a Kindle. If this were in paper form, I’d definitely pick up a book with that title and that river shot over the same title on the others.
July 5th, 2010 at 12:13
Of the three I would first be drawn to #3 and pick it up. However the blurb is always the thing to pull me into buying it
July 5th, 2010 at 12:22
Thanks, Ilona! Given the variety of tastes in covers, I’m glad to see the blurb is an important part.
Of course, now I have to go obsess over the blurb… ;>
July 5th, 2010 at 14:00
Okay, while I like #1 okay, I wouldn’t pick it up, but that’s just me. I would only pick that up if someone said, “That is the best book ever!” Personally, I love #2. #3 looks like a vampire book. JMHO.
July 5th, 2010 at 14:33
Darynda, LOL! It’s a pretty evil look, that’s for sure. Thanks for stopping by!
July 5th, 2010 at 15:03
I like #2 — #3 looks like the witch from Bell, Book and Candle with Jimmy Stewart.
For me, I’d buy off your name. I’m not sure enough of the genre of the story to know which cover, but if it’s the same suspense/horror as the first book, then I like #2 as it conveys mystery and ghosts to me. The river looks…serene.
July 5th, 2010 at 15:03
I like #3. Is the brown frame mandatory? It makes it look slightly old fashioned.
July 5th, 2010 at 15:19
Hi, Caryn! IThe river might not look so serene once I add Kada’s idea to it…mwah ha ha!
July 5th, 2010 at 15:20
Alex–For the moment, let’s call the brown frame mandatory.
We have to save my sanity somehow…
July 5th, 2010 at 17:44
# 2 didn’t strike me as spooky at all. #1 looks spooky enough and “river” is in the title. #3 was creepy enough…I would also read the synopsis. I guess #1 would make me pick it up….Not all that helpful! But it was interesting to see them!
July 5th, 2010 at 21:02
Liking number 1, here.
July 5th, 2010 at 21:18
Thanks, Ross!
July 6th, 2010 at 07:58
I don[t think much of the half-cover graphic design, in the first place, much preferring full cover illos with title and author overlain (overlaid? whichever). That said, the cover which might attract me would be the spooky river.
July 6th, 2010 at 09:13
I like the river, but I’m not convinced it’s quite spooky enough. I love the red-eyed lady.
July 6th, 2010 at 10:03
Thanks, Morgan! I hope you like the new version, which combines both elements… (I’m still not sure it’ll really come through at Amazon size, but…)
July 6th, 2010 at 10:04
Yup, I hear you, Pete. I made the decision to go with this “look” due to logistics and cost…I think, given my resources, it was the beset way to deal with the challenge. One of these days I’ll try to be a whole art department, but so far…not quite.