Professional Book Cover Analysis

Rename and move at will.

I thought this might be helpful--please join in. This is to help the novices to graphic design rethink the way to approach their covers. It's kind of training you to think like a graphic designer.

Remember to not jam other people's sites' traffic. Move it to a photo storage site first.

I had to say that as a website designer.

Joy Luck Club
Description: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7763.The_Joy_Luck_Club

The one on the left first.
Concept: Chinese in a 1930's setting. This is achieved through the graphics, which say "Chinese" without overdoing it. Also the graphics themselves has a 1930's feel. (Towards the bottom of the text box has some overlap with Art Deco movement) The majority of the weight of "Chinese" is on the dragons and dominant red color scheme. While the 1930's is said through the type and supporting smaller elements that a viewer won't immediately see.

Color: Mostly triadic red, blue yellow as the dominant colors. Red is dominant because of the quote box at the bottom and the type. This shows a dominance. I'm pretty sure the red is because China considered red as lucky. Triadic is also a good color choice with red, because you get the primary colors with it, meaning a stronger color scheme. The softer (less saturated and lighter in value) colors in the background mean that the type takes precedence. Triadic has a habit of popping and is an easy color scheme to use. Analogous is a bit more difficult to tweak properly (for me).

Composition: The first dominant element is the type which roughly has a triangle to it without forcing it. (The top of Joy luck to the small author name, Amy Tan to the "what has she written previously" creates a triangle. This leads down to the box where the endorsements are. (Helped somewhat with the Art Decoish embellishment)

Typography: 1930's, art decoish font with small serifs. The line thickness of the font isn't that variable so it can size down well and be readable at smaller sizes. The font itself doesn't look like it was bolded, but naturally chosen to be that way.

The type setting is clean too. There are no major rivers in the title--and with art deco fonts that can be difficult.

Rules broken:
- The border lines on "the" which was used to fill the negative space because the composition needed a triangle.
- The background on the N in New York Bestseller list. It's not that important. Though, I can see how the clouds are supposed to lead the eye downward, I think it could have been done slightly better.
- Destroyed margin around the bottom mostly to make the person look *back up into the composition*. things that lead off the page or make the eye stop usually aren't good *in book covers* unless you are doing it on purpose.

The one on the right...

Concept: Softer, womenly. Flowers, 1930's. Chinese is said through the element behind the title. Also says that Amy Tan is more important than the title of the book. (Unlike the previous)

Composition:Notice all of the elements that are neatly cut off. The flower behind the title. The larger gold element. Yet the viewer can fill in the edges. This prevents nasty tangencies which draw attention to themselves. In this case, color is the strongest compositional element.

I really, really like they made the type small on the title. I can still read it at small sizes. Yet, the white and black on a midtone background (red is a midtone color in color theory--probably wrong jargon word though...) draws attention to itself. Despite the author name being made more important by size relationships, I still see the title first.

Colors: Lots of red and yellow, understated blue forces it into triadic.

Type: I like it because it's simple, understated and uses a san-serif art decoish font. It says 1930's without much else, but the simplicity and the size of it on a white background speaks to me. It follows the idea that *size* isn't the most important thing to type. It's the black dot on a white landscape principle.

I like this one a lot in pushing the boundaries of what a layman would expect of design.



Concept: I hate it. It's waaaayyyy too forced. Yes, it uses triadic color scheme, but it feels like they are bashing the viewer over the head and saying LOOK CHINA I'm using slangy buck-teeth Chinese font. It doesn't say anything else. And then it's doubly bashed with the dragon and totally random Chinese characters that have nothing to do with the book. (It's majong, so what? Yes, there was a majong scene, but that has *nothing* to do with the main concept of the book) And I hate the type setting a whole lot. (River in a title is inexcusable) *care about your type* grr *grumbles* I so can tell that they slapped it on and that really, really bugs me. Novice cover. Designer should be ashamed.



And as an aside to those who make cover art: Leave room for type setting. You can see the issues with that above. (I also hate a lot of other thing with that cover too... but that's not worth going over. It was the 1980's. 'nough said.)

Also for the love of God[dess], please quit putting women in mid-drift armor. It makes no F-ing sense. Quit it. Especially when you finally get a PoC on the cover.

And out in the cold wearing nothing and heels when the book is about a police officer and AIMED AT WOMEN. (Yeah, she's going to hunt criminals in *that* I sooo believe it.)

And then contrast it with men wearing full clothes.

Or at least make it equally nonsensical...

Please spare me. (though I found most of these at Barnes and Nobles originally, so I think that manager or Barnes and Nobles has issues... since my local Indie didn't have the same issues)

1Q84
In this case, the designer can do it better... The little designer in me is in euphoria.

http://knopf.knopfdoubleday.com/201...-for-haruki-murakamis-forthcoming-novel-1q84/

But notice how concept leaks and dictates the other things? Just take a little time to think the concept through and what you want each element to say.

Any covers people want to break down or have questions on why it works?

I thought I would do another one. Feel free to join in--other designers.

Concept: I haven't actually read this book, so keep that in mind. Not my type of book either... But I got the jist from reviews.

The tie, I think is supposed to represent bondage and dominance. SM idea is associated with it. Having it at an angle going from left to right, but not straight is also good as it doesn't completely divide the figure plane into half. This further serves the concept.

The first glance would give you an impression of normal, but I'm guessing as the book progresses, you get an impression of things not being normal, and the veneer falls away.

Composition: The tie doesn't split the figure plane into half,which is an easy temptation. Also notice that the negative space used by the tie makes the tie look bigger than it actually is. (emphasized by the shadows) Which means that the use of negative space was actually thought out *before* using the tie.

The use of the tie, itself, has loaded implications.

The diagonal is countered by another diagonal with the type. I'll get to the margin stuff when I get to the type.

I'm not a huge fan of either patterns of gradients on the covers, but it's subtle and used right--the gradient is used to make the type stand out and give a visual cue and the pattern is very, very understated, giving the impression of a briefcase.

Typography: Non-monospaced typewriter font. Marked particularly by the serifs having a straight line without tapers. Since I didn't read the book, I'm not sure if this adds or detracts from the concept. What I do like about the font is that it clearly says something *different* than the color or the image does.

The type setting, if you notice is right justified with the title. This is *not* the convention, which also talks about the contents of the book, which aren't conventional either. This also compositionally forces the eye back towards the tie and then back down the tie to the name of the author.

There is a subtle bold (probably a variation of the same font rather than the Photoshop bold, which typographers frown upon) on "Fifty shades" which I kind of like because this forces the "grey" to look more "grey"

The type setting is clean too. There are no major rivers in the title--and with art deco fonts that can be difficult.

The fact there are reduced margins, I think is mostly because it needs *less structure* given the subject matter of the book which is BDSM.

The adding on of #1 New York Times Bestseller is kind of cheated by using a larger space (kerning) between author name and the line because if they were closer together, it would be hell to type set. The space between the E and L would create a river with 1 and N of New York. The designer cheated their way through that part and cared more about the spacing of the title.

Rules broken:
- Lack of color. It's monochromatic. Not many covers dare to do this sort of thing. This is understandable given the title.
- Right justified font. (designed to resolve negative space issues, draw attention to itself and say "unconventional" in one go.
- broken margins (understandable given the subject manner.)
- while the figure plane isn't split in exact half, it still is split leading the eye off the page, and making one *struggle* to stay on the picture. This is a little designer sadism which fits. Usually designers say to make the design circular.

Even if you hate the guts out of the book, I have to concede that the cover was well done. The fabulous ordinary until you examine it closer and closer. I get that this is the impression of the book for most people who both hated and loved it.

Given that, this is a good cover in that the anal details were paid attention to and rules were broken properly and for a good reason.

Anyone want to add one? Anyone have a request? Go ahead and pitch.

Thanks fixed.

*sighs* Photobucket, stop caching the old sizes.

Gale Haut said:

While I really appreciate the 50 shades cover for its design, I feel the need to mention something. In terms of marketing, people tend to connect with photographs of other people--especially faces. There are studies showing that a photograph of a person's face is an extremely powerful marketing tool and it's going to help a ton for marketing a novel.

The Bearded Lady and Bossypants come to mind for having solid design concepts with a clear marketing strategy and a strong grasp on their respective demographics.

Click to expand...

Faces do connect, but for the subject matter of the book I can entirely see why a tie was used without faces.

BTW, the typography on Bearded Lady is ugly. (and the gradient wasn't nearly as well thought out as it was in Bossy Pants)

What the 50 Shades cover did was unification of elements in an unconventional way.

It's *easy* to just slap on a picture of a human and then put the type wherever it fits. It's a lot harder to think through the concept and then get the elements to fit with it.

The reason Bossy Pants uses Tina Fey is mostly the star power she holds. Notice her name is bigger too. Also that the gradient uses the rule of thirds. (Bearded Lady splits the figure plane in half with its gradient. NO. and tries to make the title font bigger.)

The image on the cover should connect the viewer (eventually and hopefully reader) to the contents of the book. Michael Whelan often drew people on the cover, but he did it so very well because it wasn't just the person that made one connect, it was the entire scene was an expression of the book itself, so it blooms as one reads the book. (You'll hear Fantasy/Science fiction authors drool over his work. Brandon Sanderson, for example.) I'm itching to do a break down of a Michael Whelan cover, but I'm not sure which one yet.

Don't always go for easy--go with what fits the concept of the book because ultimately the cover is an illustration and hint of the contents. <-- that's advice from my graphic design professor. He says break convention and do it well.

kaitie said:

I'm not understanding what you mean by making a "river" in the title.

Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_(typography)

That should help. You can also google it to see a working example. Lake is a large pool created with the type.

I loosely covered it in the typography tutorial.

This cover breaks all the rules... but I love it so much.



Concept: Wallflower--everything in this cover bends to the concept of being a wall flower--which means blending in and not being noticeable. For that, it broke most of the rules.

Composition: Most of the composition rules were thrown out the window. Little to no margins. the most important things are the smallest, yet, the exact use of negative space and using the psychological concepts of small things in a plain background gather attention to themselves is why this cover works beautifully. Instead of being an exercise in ranking by size where large things are important, it uses color.

The photo has no faces but has shoes (as if someone is staring at their shoes or someone else's--a submissive sign.) Plus there is a pattern that vaguely looks like flowers in the background, subtle.

The title has a margin at the top and is seen first because it's darker and next to the photo, despite the author name being bigger.

Colors: Brown and green. Earthtones. The brown is on the title. The green is what catches the viewer's attention, but it's hard to keep staring at the green, so the eye rests on the safe haven of both text and picture. The photo is a tinted brown, black and white photo.

Ranking, unlike most compositions is done on color choices alone rather than size.

Type:
There are no caps. You have to struggle to read the white type. The brown type, therefore draws attention in a way, but the smallness of the type is a bit of a struggle--which fits with the concept. Yet, the type setting despite breaking the rules is clean in of itself. The san-serif font seems very informal the way it was done.

Rules broken:

- type is white set on a medium value color, making the type blend in.
- the type has absolutely no margin (so it's amazing that it reads so well)
- There are no capitals in the text.
- It's the author's first novel, yet the author's name is bigger than the title.
- The image is pushed into the corner with no margin and very, very small.
- The text is tiny on the title.

I believe this cover won an award...but I might be remembering wrong.I really like this cover because it really demonstrates what breaking rules to concept really means. It shows what a strong concept with a strong execution can do. It also shows that text is readable at small sizes. Notice this is only 200x 282, yet the text of the title is readable. It takes a little effort, but it buys into the concept.

Plus the concept isn't "easy" to think up right away--there is a thought process that comes with this... which is why I like it. The more one examines it, the more it grows in small ways.

Thanks Kalen O.

No one else wants to play?

Cindy Pon's Silver Phoenix

This time around I'd like to do AWer's Cindy Pon's book cover Silver Phoenix. *waves*

I did read this book, so I do know the contents.

A little about the history of her book before I launch so I can tell you about my biases...

She was told by an editor that "Chinese Fantasy stories don't sell" thus to give up. She didn't give up and found an agent and a publisher after about 104 rejections?

Because of the cover, the book distributors of Borders and Barnes and Noble in 2010 both refused to properly stock the book. (I did look for it... and ended up having to buy it online). This meant that the publisher had to make a new cover for the book illustrating the cover with what pretty much looks like a white person. (Also the Asian on the cover is not sexualized. I know... because that would have made it so much better for the dudes--I'm saying this based on the covers I saw at Barnes and Nobles versus my local indie book shop *shakes fist*) They took the new white-washed cover. (Even though page 1 says, "Ai Ling" which is clearly Chinese on it. (If someone is going to get offended, they'll get offended on page 1)

Yes, yes, long, long rant on how unfair this is. And probably something about white males in a position of power need to get their heads... well, you get the picture.

That given, I'll give you the first and second cover and do a review of each.

And revenge of the Phoenix. (Making a joke) on her website she has some really pretty pictures of the fact her main characters are Chinese shortly after the release of the second cover... so you can't get past it. (Though she's too graceful to say that)

Original cover:

Concept: Clearly, that is Ai Ling on the cover. Cindy Pon said that she worked to make sure that some of the details were right and worked with the cover artist who also worked to get the details right. Ai Ling is in Hanfu (a type of Chinese clothing), and properly dressed since she is only 16 (IIRC)

Composition: The type needs a little work, composition-wise, however, the original image has tip offs that this is Chinese besides the obviously Chinese girl, such as the small dragon motif in the corner and the Phoenix below the arm.

I do like that the artist clearly knew what they were doing and ran the elbow off the page avoiding a tangency. You can also see that the image splits into the rule of thirds very, very well and the plane doesn't split in half. the up angle of the arms forces the eye down towards the character and towards the pendant, which as I said, is an important element in the story. The background is also accurate yet subtle. (There is a Chinese house in the distance)

The little details make this cover rewarding, especially as one is reading the book.

Colors: For those who are paying attention, it is triadic. (red Blue Yellow). The green stands out on the pink hanfu (complementary), which is good since it's critical to the story (I read it) Triadic is a good color scheme because it's easy, recognizable and very, very forgiving most of the time. It's great for YA covers.

Type: It's not the best, but it's not the worst either. I would have liked a better font rather than a fancy font treatment. I think a larger margin would have served the title better and probably a thicker font. I do like the font on the author name simply because it kinda has that stroke feeling that brush work has without being too obvious. Subtle is definitely something that type should do and do well. The type does bend and blend with the original image, without blending in so one can't see it. It's also clear what is important.

Rules broken:
- Margin a little... most issues are resolved. I do like the broken line on the type. However, there isn't a reason to encroach on the margin so closelky in the book since the book has structure and isn't wildly out of place.

Second Cover

Concept: White girl. This looks like a photograph trying to wash out the fact that the girl is Asian. Which is distrubing, and all of the ranty stuff that comes with it. Blame Barnes and Nobles and the former Borders for this stunt. (I bought the hard cover in 2009) The pendant from the first does show up, but this girl is clearly is in Western clothes. *Still feeling the rant) Cindy Pon can't say much since she has to go with it... (from her blog posts on her website) so I'll say it. It sucks that this happened.

I kinda feel it's generic, but considering that it was done in a rush it's not bad. The Chinese elements were dumbed down. There are no Chinese dragons, Feng Huang, Chinese house, etc. It really doesn't tell much about the book itself. But in this revision, that was the case.

Some people comforted themselves with the idea that the model is Asian on Good reads... but I don't buy it...

Composition: There is nothing really outstanding in the composition. I do disagree with the font and margin choices...

Also the hierarchy in the graphics doesn't stand out that much. What the important thing is lost.

Colors: The color choice is roughly complementary, but a very muted complementary. The red doesn't show and the green stands out. I do miss the vibrancy of the original which felt more YA.

Type: Personally, I think it's the wrong type choice on the type. I mean it feels like Art Deco, but there is nothing art Deco about the book. It's almost as if in a rush the person looked at Amy Tan's books because that was the only other Chinese book around and went with that. The first type choice, though not ideal, was better than this.

I also have a thing against stript fonts... I definitely prefer the type on the first cover for the author name.

Rules broken:
- No major rules I can spot. It's just bleh to me, mostly because of the first being so gorgeous.

Indonesian cover:

Concept:
The pendant isn't front lined like in the American covers and the Chinese elements are back. Including "Silver Phoenix" in Chinese. I have to wonder if Barnes and Nobles would have liked to stock this cover since she's not in your face Chinese. (Though for the PoCs watching this, I am for in-your-face-PoC almost as saying you can buzz off if you don't like the fact this book has a PoC character.) The umbrella does disturb me a little... 'cause it isn't in the story itself...

There is a Chinese dragon.

I'm not quite sure why they went with a dragon over a Feng Huang. You can do the same sort of thing they did with the dragon with a Feng Huang with little trouble and get it to read. Maybe because it is Chinese... though Indonesia also has a version of both. *shrugs*

Chinese house is back, the water is back too.

I do wonder if that is Ai Ling or supposed to be her soul waiting to get reborn. If it is her soul waiting to get reborn, then the concept is on a new level.

Composition: Figure plane is split in half, but it's not that noticeable (Silver Phoenix title splits the plane in half)

Colors: Very muted. I think they were trying for "Silver" to imitate the concept Silver Phoenix. It is basically Monochromatic red.

Type: The biggest plus of this cover is the typography. I *love* the title font a whole bunch because it feels like the tail of a Feng Huang. It's not over the top and it has structure like the book does. (It's so good I'd like that font for myself if I found it). There is a lot of thought in the font selection. It's neither bash you over the head, but it's not side lining itself either. I'd love to have seen this font on the original cover as the title font with a little less decoration and more margin. I think it fits the book the best of the three.

And the author name is also done well. The margins are also selected well.

I'm not quite sure on the Chinese characters. I might have gone with a tapering font that does brush work imitation. (In Japanese font terms the font is a Gothic (equivalent to a sanserif) where you need a Mincho (equivalent to a Serif). I'm not familiar with the Chinese/Indonesian terms.) But the muted font work really does work out. Brush work is an important part of the book, which is why I say this. It might have been decided it was too much or not readable, but I would have liked to see it for the sake of it.

Rules broken:
- For a YA cover it's kinda muted, but I'm not completely familiar with Indonesian aesthetics.
- No major rules were broken.

The details on this one, like the first one do work with the book. Maybe the figure in shadow is Ai Ling, maybe it is her previous incarnation waiting to be reborn. I do like that idea. Even if it was by mistake.

*Rant Mode*
http://shuangwen.deviantart.com/art/SILVER-PHOENIX-172275664
http://cindypon.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/for-cindy-v2b.jpg

Anyway, that given, and the fact you can't take revenge on Barnes and Noble *grumble* (though Borders had Fury taken out on it by going bankrupt soon after...) and the fight is over... I wish to say that if you are a book store, please, please don't pull stunts like this. It's really bad PR. And besides, I think the issue they had was that the girl wasn't sexualized considering the (crappy) covers I did see. (Jay Lake up top, though he's white male.)

This is because around the same time I saw on a cover a male Chinese person, full face in the YA section which was also fantasy. So clearly whomever is running the joint is making decisions based on really old timey ideals. What? Barnes and Nobles, does the person have to be half naked if a female and a PoC or an Escher shot? Or are they against PoC writers who write fully-clothed females, but will stock books that have Asian females wearing a hakama with nothing underneath?

How dare a PoC author have a full faced PoC and write a PoC in the first try?

*grumbles* The double standard is disgusting... and while I applaud the publisher for trying to rescue her book, I really am upset at Barnes and Noble for being so shallow. You can see the first cover represents it much, much better.

Anyway, I like the book itself a lot. If I was a kid, this would have been an auto pick up for me, since I sooo wanted a book like this (though I'm Korean) when I was a kid.

Bumping by doing another analysis.


Concept: The original book is about a racial dystopia where the roles of white and black are reversed. Unlike Victoria Foyt, this one is well-acclaimed. There are four books in the series and it's Young adult. Whites are the ones who are slaves while blacks are the ones who are in power.

Conceptually, it reads as a halfway dividing line so that the eye keeps moving back and forth between the two, which is usually frowned upon, but in this case works. The halfway works because within the book both the noughts and crosses are treated equally, though the world they live in may not.

Personally, I also like the free flowing calligraphy of the o and the X.

Composition: It is a mostly balanced composition, using stark contrasts to communicate. Where the X is, the O is also. Where the words are, there is also. Notice, though that they put the author name with the "X" side which gives it more subtle weight, which fits the concept of the book. (X has more things) Good use of margins.

Color: Monochromatic, black and white. There is a version where the Nought has color to it, but I disagree with that conceptually since that attracts attention first. And that's exactly not what one wants to do with a cover where one side has more "things" and garners more attention.

Type: San Serif, heavy-weight type. However, added with some "dirt" around it. Maybe trying to say at the same time as "Black and white" that it's not as easy as black and white withoug having to introduce gray. It does subtlely make it a bit hard to read the type initially. I do like the fact they only did it for the title and subtitles, rather than the author name, which is smart in terms of branding. I disagree a bit that it should have been continued on the smaller type.

Also, it may be trying to continue the element of the texture in calligraphy.

Rules Broken:

- Split the plane in half.
But it works here.

- Added grit to the type.
I'm on the fence about this one.

- Monochromatic on a YA book.
This one I don't mind broken. It works, it's eye catching.

Notice, though overall, that this cover doesn't have a fancy image. (The calligraphy probably was done by the graphic designer though--It's well done, but I'm geeking.) It's not that hard to do, but conceptually, it's thought out very, very carefully and executed mostly through composition rather than color.

Torgo said:

Rachel, I thought it might be interesting to show that recent new version that adds a colour element:

I agree that it seems to break the black/white concept. (My first reaction was "Black, white and orange? Is it set in Essex now?")

Click to expand...

It breaks concept, which is why I like it less. Not only the breaking of the black and white black and white, but they stuck in the "Callum short story" on the Nought side, which breaks what the original concept was. It was almost as if a second graphic designers was brought in and they said, "Stick this in and make sure it has color" and the graphic designer didn't sit down and think about the concept being conveyed first. That or you got one of those idiot bosses who thinks they know all about art and conveying message. ^.~ More stuff on the Cross side is better for concept... This one is dare I say it, is too balanced. I kinda like the subtle balanced, but disbalance of the other one. (Almost like same, but different)

WriterTrek said:

Enjoying reading this thread. Good analyses.

I tend to prefer covers that don't use pictures of people. Art is alright, though even then... sometimes if the art is too detailed it bugs me. I think I'm strange like that. I prefer to imagine the character myself rather than have too clear a picture painted for me. For example, the pictures of Harry Dresden on the covers of the Dresden Files are vague enough that I really like them, but an actual photograph would turn me off (I'd still read the books though).

Click to expand...

Universal Principals of Design says that people automatically relate to people-shaped objects, particularly faces. This accounts for the majority of covers having faces on them and bodies. (though I hate the cut off heads) It's mostly a marketing ploy.

My biggest problem is finding good images to use since I can't draw all that well. My best bets are free ones in public domain that I can edit/alter, but specific images are difficult (I want a pair of bloody gardening shears, dadgumit!).

Click to expand...

Bloody is easy. Drippy blood, as in congealing, may be difficult, but even for that I made an action--so there must be other actions out there/brushes. But just messy bloody is easy. Use overlay blending layer and some "blood" brushes in photoshop.

Again, great thread. Thanks for all the analyses.

Click to expand...

Don't be afraid to chime in. Makes it easier on me. =P I don't feel so alone in this thread. =P Other people did analyses too... but I'd like to see other opinions and expertise. It'll help people to get a sense of the range of opinions and see why things work or fail.

You can even post covers you dislike and break it down. I'm tempted to do some with a Fabio-esque over-the-top romance with the bodice half torn with ugly copperplate font just to make a point. XD.