Requesting feedback on my covers for MY DEADLY PRINCE CHARMING

mrsmig said:

I was able to see them.

The figure in the first one seems really "off" to me, like it's been cut out and pasted onto the scene without regard for the laws of physics. The hem of the skirt, the hair which seems to be defying gravity, the weirdness of the fleshy folds at shoulder and breast, and the dark thumbnail which reads like an eye peering out of the hair - all distracted me from the emotion of the figure and the background, which I liked.

Click to expand...

I noticed the same issues with the hair (the hair in the original figure you linked looks a lot better, but there are still the other issues), interface, and skin folds and so on. Also, the texture/rendering of the gown is different than the rest of the image (which looks a bit like it was rendered in pastels or something of that nature, which isn't the usual choice for art for romances I've seen). The gown comes off as much brighter and shinier than anything else as a consequence. I don't think the concept itself is bad--a girl weeping by a fountain in a courtyard, but it's kind of off, as if separate images were spliced together. I'm not sure about the font either. Which one are you using?

The second is a little more pleasing to the eye, but I'm not a fan of "headless" figures, and the top half of the artwork seems super-busy. Also found the odd turquoise-colored nail polish distracting.

Click to expand...

I agree with this also. Headless figures are a thing with some romance covers, but I find them off putting personally. I get that if you're paying for the right to use stock art, it might be hard to find an image who looks like your protagonist, however, so that's more of a minor concern for me. I like the color of the dress and the way it meshes with the background images, but I agree with mrsmig about the nail polish. It seems out of place for the period and setting (as suggested by the gown and the manor house in the background, I'm assuming it's not modern). The little puffy things on the font with the title are distracting to me. There are a few places where I can see the pale lines where the figure of the woman in the dress was superimposed against the background also.

crossword said:

Thanks, everyone. Am mulling over your responses. This is the original pic for Book 1:



http://imgur.com/A2OURad


it was cropped and the hair made blond for the cover. Does the original pic look better? I actually wonder if I should not have cropped it. I read covers can be rectanglar. I like the entire background and did not want to crop it but I thought it should look the size of the real cover. Now I wonder if I should not use the original pic with no alternations but just put the title and my name on it.

Click to expand...

Editing the hair was a mistake. If your character is blond, I get it, but you might use an image specifically made for your character.

Here's a quick-and-dirty edit I did just by isolating her hair in Pixelmator (a Mac-only Photoshop clone) and changing the color balance and hue:



Basically, it solves the continuity problem if your character is blonde by at least making her hair yellowish. If you want the original image, it's here.

I don't think cropping was a mistake. If you're self-publishing, wrap the whole thing around to the back if you like it so much. But you're not losing anything by cropping it, because even though you love the image, the point of a cover is to sell your book, not the image.

I prefer the second to the first because it looks more modern, but (and maybe this is just me) it makes me think Mills & Boon, not YA PNR romance. It's something about the combination of cover style and use of the word "passionate" in the title I think. Neither cover gives me a YA vibe.

The first image has a texture on it, which means it's never going to match the image in the second one. The texture also looks a little too much like it's been scanned from a print. Even if it's the paper texture, it doesn't really have that paper look to me.

As others have said, the second is more paranormal romancey, so you'd be better off looking for another image that matches that one in feel.

I do like the second one best, so if they need to look similar, I'd try something in that style for the first one.

That said, I really like the cover art for the first one now that the weird hair is absent. I do not mind at all that the figure is a realistic picture on an art background. That's what makes the figure pop and not get lost, in my opinion. the tiny fold in the lace of the sleeve and the shininess of the dress compared to the background doesn't bother me at all.

I'm with be frank on this, neither look like YA. And I think that's actually a really important issue you need to address as opposed to going back and tweaking the covers you already have. There are certain jobs a cover has and if a cover isn't doing those jobs then it's not a good cover regardless of how nice it looks or how professional it looks.

Job 1 - be eye catching. This seems obvious and is obvious. It needs to be something that will catch a reader's attention and make them stop and read the cover copy.

Job 2 - accurately reflect the market and kind of book.

Both jobs are about getting customers to buy your books. You want a) people to notice it in the first place, but b) the RIGHT people to notice it. You want to attract the readers who will enjoy this book.

So there is a reason why there are trends with various genres and markets. It's not that publishing houses are copying each other, it's that they know that for a certain kind of book readers look for certain clues on the cover. The more obvious you can make those clues the more easily readers who like a certain kind of book can find them.

Right now you aren't appealing to YA readers at all. They will have no idea that your books are meant for them. And that is a big problem. I would highly recommend looking at some YA PNR covers and seeing where you could copy elements into your own.

Then there's the issue of Job 3. Yes there is a Job 3. And that's branding. Right now your covers look like they are from completely different series and completely different genres. You need uniformity if you want readers to understand that they are meant to be read together.

Ultimately covers are about communication. What are you communicating to the readers. They are a marketing tool. And while they can be works of art, that's a happy by-product, not the goal. A cover is advertising. Make sure you are advertising the right message to the right people.

I agree with Toothpaste that they don't look like YA covers. That might be more important for the first one since readers will already be familiar with the series by the time they see Book #2.

Personally, I prefer the second one. It's more pleasing to the eye and the color scheme really entices the reader. The problem, I think, is #2 looks like the cover of a romance novel, not so much a YA book. If you're planning to self-publish, why not head to the bookstore and check out the latest YA bestsellers to get some ideas? That's half the fun of self-pub: designing a book that looks as good (even better!) as the others.

Firstly, you need to look at unifying these covers. They look so disparate from each other that they look like they're from different authors. You have very similar titles and an author name, and no other text. So set the titles in the same type and with the same layout on each, same with the author name. That way you're creating a link between covers, regardless of imagery.

The second image is a little too different from the first. Add to that the weird cut-out girl (complete with white border and jagged cutting lines) and you've got cover images that just aren't working. I would go back to the drawing board completely. You have two books in a series, put together covers concurrently, not separately. Both covers feature a girl, so why not commission some artwork of a girl, and play around with the positioning? Maybe look at creating very similar covers, but with different image colours. Also, don't give your type drop shadows. They never work, and if you have to use them it is because you have not selected a striking enough typeface or you've made the image too busy.

1st one is way too grainy for my taste. A subtle film grain can look good, but rarely does, much less on book covers. And, subtle.

2nd one is nice, I'd just get rid of the top left ornament to de-clutter it some. Not sure about the lettering, I'd rearrange it a bit, but wouldn't know how exactly. I like the font choices, but the 2 lines (in the title) look kind of just plunked above each other.

I wonder if it might be better to find your own artist, show them the image for Book 1, and ask them to create something similar, with a blonde woman of YA age. Also, since your book is set in current time, perhaps she should be dressed to match? (Unless she changes clothes during the story, of course.)

The second image is much better. It's clear, and it looks appropriate for the genre, although you're getting Romance much more strongly than YA.

I think number 2 is better. However, there are little bits of white around the model, which makes the cover look unprofessional.

If your designer can't clip out the white bits, ask her to put an outer glow on the image. It will hide the white bits and it will look much better!