Who picks cover art?

Count on having diddly-squat. That way, if you get any at all, it'll come as a pleasant surprise. Typically, you get very little, if any, say.

When I published with a smaller press, they asked me for a few ideas, and I even ended up chatting with the artist. (Which annoyed the artist, mostly because he didn't want someone else telling him how to do the cover, any more than we would want some artist telling us how to write the story. Mostly he was annoyed with the publisher, not me.) He used one of my ideas, and I was able to provide feedback on the rough sketch, pointing out errors like the stalagmites in the cave (my caves were lava tubes, which wouldn't have stalagmites.)

With the latest book, which sold to a larger publisher (DAW), the first I heard anything about the cover art was when my editor e-mailed me a copy of the finished painting.

I do know another author at DAW chatted with his editor about the cover art, but I don't know how much input he actually had. My book was on a fast track for a November slot, so that may be part of the reason they didn't want me involved, mucking up the process.

Part of the problem is that, as writers, we have very specific and strong ideas about how our work should be presented. "They got the goblin's ears wrong!" and "He's standing too defiantly. The character's a coward!" or, in extreme cases, "My characters are black; who are all these white folks on the cover???"

The artist and publisher, on the other hand, want to create a cover that sells the book. Keeping it true to your vision is nice, but making a reader pluck the book from the shelves is better. Different priorities mean potential conflicts between author and artist, conflicts which can be avoided by cutting the author out of the process.

As a totally self-serving afterthought, here's the art DAW came up with:

http://www.awfulagent.com/images/goblinart.html

The goblin's skin tone is too bright, the pose is wrong (he really is a coward), and nowhere in the book does he confront the dragon with his kitchen knife. But the important thing is, it's a funny picture, it captures the feel of the book, and it should catch people's attention.

The trade papetback for my first book was a pleasant surrise; I loved it. They used the same cover for the mass market version, but distorted it. They put my name in huge embossed letters across the cover, wich I absolutely hated. It made the whole thing look cheap and tacky, whereas the trade cover was elegant.

The second book had a beautiful, very tasteful cover of a peacock; again, the mass market version looked tacky. It was a pinkish background (and I hate pink!) with a faint outline of a woman's face, with some black figures sillohuetted against the back.

My editor asked me for suggestions for the hardback of my third book. I suggested a woman in a sari standing in water, with a Hindu temple in the background.
They produced this monstrosity:
http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/000712385X.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Everybody hated it.
But when the paperback came out, it was perfect: exactly what I had suggested in the first place, except that instead of a Hindu temple they used the Taj Mahal, which is a mosque and totally unfitting, but i suppose most Westerners can't tell the difference anyway.

My foreign covers have all been done without my input. My French editor showed me two covers for the first book and I was allowed to choose one.

The Danes produced the most beautiful, artistic covers of all, real works of art.

The German cover for my first book was utterly horrible. The second was much better - they just used the British cover again. The German paperback for my second book was horrendous - shocking pink with a lotus stuck in the middle.

They just produced a Book Club edtion in Germany and its beautiful - but they made no effort. Just a stock photo of the Taj Mahal again, but a nice one.

The cover artist contacted me first for ideas, then forwarded three "concept" versions. I counterd with further suggestions to modify one of those, and with one more round, we agreed on the final version. It was painless, actually rather fun.

jchines said:

As a totally self-serving afterthought, here's the art DAW came up with:

http://www.awfulagent.com/images/goblinart.html

The goblin's skin tone is too bright, the pose is wrong (he really is a coward), and nowhere in the book does he confront the dragon with his kitchen knife. But the important thing is, it's a funny picture, it captures the feel of the book, and it should catch people's attention.

Click to expand...

Regardless of how accurately it reflects your written description, it's a fine work of art in its own right.

I took the trouble to look up artist Mel Grant. As it turns out, he has a website, showcasing some of his excellent work:

http://www.melgrant.com/

I'd have no trouble at all letting him illustrate any of my books. Of course, that'd require someone to actually buy and publish them...

Mel Grant is a kick-*** artist, and a nice guy to boot. He gave me permission to use that artwork in my web page banner, and I'm hoping to work with him on a book promo contest later this year, giving away a print of the art. Thanks for adding that link, arkady. I've got him linked from my site, but didn't think to do it here...

aruna -- I don't think that's such a horrible cover, though I do like the paperback cover better.

Well, what does your contract say you get as regards the cover?

Mine says I get to consult, but have no final say.

Which, I suspect, means I get to practice my polemics on an artist I've never met who doesn't want my help, and on an editor that probably would think my ideas are way off-base.

My ideas are totally off-base, and I'm the first to admit it. However, so's my book!

I've already accepted that the cover art is going to disappoint me, and I just need to keep writing and worry about the things I can control.

Like my next book.

It depends on the publisher and the type of book. Sometimes the author is not consulted at all. Good luck. But I'd say in most cases, the author's input is at least considered, if not taken seriously. Many authors don't know anything about cover design and marketing, so the publisher would rather rely on their experts in the art and marketing department. They might solicit the author's idea or discuss concepts, but the final design decision lies with the publisher -- even if you're with a small press.

The covers of my first series made it look YA--which it was not, and it put off a lot of readers. They consistantly told me they'd not tried my stuff until there was nothing else left to read in the genre. THEN they would be pleasantly surprised and read all the rest. I passed this on to my editor, but she'd just shrug it off as unimportant. (No one likes to admit when they're dreadfully wrong about something.)

My next series had better covers. The new ones are better than than the others, but still not quite right.

The covers of the German editions are wonderful, so sales are great in Europe.

I lucked out with a different publisher on another series. They took a look at work by an artist friend of mine and gave him a break. He's done a great job.

But a Work For Hire cover I have is absolultely the worse piece of c*** I've yet to see. It gives the totally wrong impression of what's inside, and I know the readers are going to be PO'd with me. (It's less WFH than a WTF.) The editor said some guff about "we wanted to show a different aspect of the character than the usual cliche."

I rather think they had the art on hand, paid for, and figured "It's close enough, sort of" and slapped it on. They will regret that when sales don't meet expectations.

Now I did write in to Ellora's Cave, (the only e-site I'd send anything to) and they said they would be glad to check out any artist I pointed their way. That was a year or so back so it might have changed.

But nearly always the publisher's marketing department picks the art and the writer has to just lump it. In some cases they don't want the writers anywhere near the artists.

One more--I did hear a story of a young writer who refused to let her book be published until and unless they used the cover her brother had done for it.

She never saw print.

Are any of our authors here artists in their own right? If so, how frustrating is it to have that ignored in lieu of editors using their own stables?

I ask because I am an artist fully capable of doing my own covers to an editor's specifications and am resigned to having that fact ignored should I ever reach that stage of the process.

I wouldn't kick about it; presumably their stable knows how to sell books or they wouldn't still be in business.

BardSkye said:

Are any of our authors here artists in their own right? If so, how frustrating is it to have that ignored in lieu of editors using their own stables?

I ask because I am an artist fully capable of doing my own covers to an editor's specifications and am resigned to having that fact ignored should I ever reach that stage of the process.

I wouldn't kick about it; presumably their stable knows how to sell books or they wouldn't still be in business.

Click to expand...

It usually isn't the editor who picks the cover, it's the marketing department. The purpose is to sell books, not to have a cover that writers like or don't like. Market research supposedly tells marketing what sorts of covers sell, and what sort don't.

By and large, publishers won't use an outside artist anymore than they would use an outside editor, though there are always exceptions, and if you can prove you're up to the job, there may well come a time when you're allowed to do your own covers. But I wouldn't count on it.

Personally, I think it's all a crapshoot, but this is why marketing is paid the big bucks.

Jamesaritchie said:

It usually isn't the editor who picks the cover, it's the marketing department. The purpose is to sell books, not to have a cover that writers like or don't like. Market research supposedly tells marketing what sorts of covers sell, and what sort don't.

By and large, publishers won't use an outside artist anymore than they would use an outside editor, though there are always exceptions, and if you can prove you're up to the job, there may well come a time when you're allowed to do your own covers. But I wouldn't count on it.

Personally, I think it's all a crapshoot, but this is why marketing is paid the big bucks.

Click to expand...

Gunter Grass did many of his own covers. Of course, he's in a much different publishing world (Germany).

scfirenice said:

I was wondering how much say I'll have on picking the cover artist/ design for my novel? Anyone have any ideas?

Click to expand...

Scfirenice:
My dad is an artist and he painted two pictures for my novel; ideas that I conceptualized and he brought to life. I would like to use one of those paintings as my front cover, but I am uncertain about how the process works. So I have been wondering the same thing myself. I would have to think that if you had your own artwork and it was a copy, they would at least consider it, right? I mean it would be free that way, and the Publisher would not have to hire an artist to do the cover. I was an artist before I was a writer and the idea of painting my own book covers has been Pinnacle at the Ivory Tower of my Dreams ever since I first fell in love with the craft of writing...the art of writing...

All I care about is having my full name in kick-@rse embossed gold, in something close to 72pt text.

I am low level semi-pro as both a writer and an artist, but separately. I find writing is complicated enough without adding my illustration ego to it and frankly I write better than I paint. I will put a protest on record about anything glaringly off base in content or using poser/Bryse but the publisher does have final say.

I am glowing about covers I like, As I am paddling aroudn the epublishing world I think a good cover gets the click-and-buy more than any other factor except author name recognition...

i was interested to see how many different covers maonstream books get between editions and national markets. In general I like the British covers far more than the American ones--they tend to use more detailed traditional illustration--especially with fantasy genre.

On a final meandering point--I was browsing some fiction magazines in borders. Ones with fiction i general like a lot, but naming no particular names, the illustrations was average at best and sometimes absolutely awful. I mean I am a better writer than an illustrator but my main thought was that I shoudl apply to them as an artist--what gives with that? Do they not know good illustration when they see it, not care?

badducky said:

This post by:Scarletpeaches

Click to expand...

HAH!

on the topic of making your own cover; illustration is a funny business, and a very very small world.

For fantasy novels, for example, there's an old history of the cover artist being the name that actually sells the book, NOT the writer (this was particularly true of Frazetta). I don't think that's true anymore, but you still have the Donato Gionacolas and Jeff Jones calibre artists out there. I believe that unless someone's illustration is nearing that level, they should focus on just the writing and let their art mature seperately.

But if you're keen on that focusing on the art avenue, there's whole web cultures devoted to the craft.

Try www.conceptart.org and have a look see through the "best of" sub-forum on their messageboards.