Opinions on premade covers?

Most of those I've seen on the sites where they sell them look very good indeed, very professional. But I wonder whether "we won't sell it again" means that they will still design very similar covers and sell those, or that every design is completely different. I am guessing that it's somewhere in between. If every cover is completely different, then it seems to me that any stigma must be simple prejudice. If readers start recognizing the same cover art with only small changes on multiple books, then it would make sense that premade covers have a poor reputation.

"I designed it myself - completely original - drew the picture in my sleep, so I know it's mine and only mine!!"

"Wait, what that cover looks just like mine! Thief, Thief, someone stole my original artwork!!"

I've noticed whatever I do or don't do, someone else had a similar idea and similar talent - which led to similar cover. Also true with manuscript; so many people with same ideology. I read a sample page to a book that someone wrote - which I had to scratch my head. I had the exact - I mean identical idea. I could swear I never told anyone about it.

My opinion, if you see a pre-made cover design you like, use it. Tweak it a little, if you want to in order to make it your own.

Writers Choice said:

My opinion, if you see a pre-made cover design you like, use it. Tweak it a little, if you want to in order to make it your own.

Click to expand...

You might want to be very careful before doing this, though. You're confusing idea and actual product. You can't copyright an idea, but that expression of it sure is copyrighted (and no, it does not need to have a C symbol or anything). Check the licensing associated with the cover. If it's labelled for re-use with modification, as some (but not all) licensed under Creative Commons are, you can do that kind of modification.

If you take someone's art without permission (which is what the license is) and, say, re-colour it, or Photoshop someone's head off and replace it with a goat's head because that's your story's thing... you are entering a world of Copyright Hell and while IANAL, doing this seems like a very, very bad idea.

It's also completely unethical and will get you a reputation for the wrong kind of things. People notice and that reputation lasts a very long time.

If you select the right cover no one is going to know it is pre-made so there will be no stigma. I would challenge anyone to point out which of my covers are pre-made.

By similar I meant, for instance, using a photograph of the same person in the same pose, but changing something like the background behind him. Of course two people could have the same idea but it's likely they would execute it in such different ways that nobody else would think it was the same cover (although the artists themselves could be uncomfortably aware of even the tiniest similarities that no one else would notice). Premade covers often use photo manipulation, and if the artist recycles the same photos often, then eventually it might become obvious to readers (and I have no idea if many of the artists—or even if any of them—actually do that, but from a cost standpoint, if they are buying and using stock images, it would make sense).

Psychorase said:

Yeah, I'm going there.

Click to expand...

I went there twice. It was a matter of looking through the catalogue and finding one that fit the story without stretching the imagination too much. I found two covers for two separate books that did just that, although I would have paid the same artist to make cover specifically for my book if I could have raised the funds.

As long as the premade can't be used by anyone else when you have purchased it, I wouldn't worry about the stigmatism.

VeryBigBeard said:

You might want to be very careful before doing this, though. You're confusing idea and actual product. You can't copyright an idea, but that expression of it sure is copyrighted (and no, it does not need to have a C symbol or anything). Check the licensing associated with the cover. If it's labelled for re-use with modification, as some (but not all) licensed under Creative Commons are, you can do that kind of modification.

If you take someone's art without permission (which is what the license is) and, say, re-colour it, or Photoshop someone's head off and replace it with a goat's head because that's your story's thing... you are entering a world of Copyright Hell and while IANAL, doing this seems like a very, very bad idea.

It's also completely unethical and will get you a reputation for the wrong kind of things. People notice and that reputation lasts a very long time.

Click to expand...

Oops! What I meant to say was after you purchased and have the legal ownership and want to change the color - then that's up to you. I didn't mean to steal someone else's work, change it and make it your own. That would be highly unethical.

If they truly are never sold to any other book again, and they look right for your story, then cool. If you and someone else sport the same cover, or worse, a big portion of your genre does, then no. It's bad enough Fabio is on every other vintage erotica cover.

Psychorase said:

Thanks for all your contributions, guys.

I could spend $85 and have a pre-existing cover that looks almost exactly like the love interest in my WIP

Click to expand...

Is this for an e-book, or are you buying a cover for the print edition of your book?

There's a stigma?

If you have a college or high school nearby, consider reaching out to the art department and meeting with some students. Many/most of them would be thrilled to have a piece of their original art used for a book jacket. Then you get original art, help a budding artist, and have 100% "control" over the cover of your book.

I was studying covers and stumbled across a trad-published romance and a self-published romance, that just happened to use different photos from the same photo shoot (same models, same costumes, same background). Oops! Made me think that hiring a photographer or artist for a unique piece of art might be good. Fonts and layout were different though.

Forget his name, but the dude who designed the Jurassic Park cover (with the skeletal T-rex) was giving a talk (captured on video) about cover design. He said that as a designer you have two opportunities to communicate to the potential reader: your graphics and your text. He said don't repeat yourself. Make your show and your tell complementary, so they communicate two different aspects of your story.

I have seen where some self-published authors will buy one cover, then tweak the background color, but use the exact same graphic for later books in the same series. Seems kind of cheap to me, and potentially confusing. When Toffler's Future Shock came out the graphic design was simple, but the publisher used different background colors (I believe color choice was random). The danger of reusing the same cover for multiple books (the opposite of what Toffler's publisher did) is that a potential reader scanning through a web page full of thumbnails may see your new book, and thinking he already owned it, pass on by.

Subtitles can be hot. There's this website (Pulp-o-Mizer) where you can fiddle with cover design in the style of old pulp sci-fi. While the art is limited to pulp sci-fi themes, and there's this magazine title across the top, playing with text, fonts, and position is fun and inspirational. While daydreaming about my potential cover I came up with this design. Before Pulp-o-Mizer I'd never even considered a subtitle or a tagline. I think they add a certain sensational luridness.

I don't really think anyone's being exploited when they consent knowing they're not getting paid for a commercial project....

Pre-mades are almost always exclusive. Once sold they are removed from the site.

Ravioli said:

I don't really think anyone's being exploited when they consent knowing they're not getting paid for a commercial project....

Click to expand...

Sometimes not, but sometimes they are. Sometimes thinking you have no other choice allows others to convince you that giving them your work for free makes good business sense when it very rarely does. Sometimes desperation just to have your work out there, makes someone undervalue what they've created.

Sometimes you are young and naive and hopeful.

Sometimes people take advantage of that.

It happens a lot here with writers. People think they have to give stories away for free before places that pay will look at their work. They don't see it as a choice. It's how they've been told the industry works. They've been told they need the exposure it'll bring (and no one has mentioned these free projects rarely bring any exposure at all). The people who've told them this are the ones who want the free work. It's not for the benefit of the writers at all. The same thing happens with artists.

Sure, someone who knows the industry and decides to do someone a favour is not being exploited. But that's not what's going down if you contact a school or any other non-pro artist in the hopes of a deal below normal market rates. You're relying on them not knowing the value of their work.

I used a pre-made cover. It was $45 and it was taken off the site when I paid for it. There's a stigma?

Alessandra Kelley said:

If you want cheap art admit it to yourself. Don't try to pretend you're "helping" an artist, budding or not, by exploiting their labor.

Click to expand...

Wasn't suggesting anyone be "exploited" Alessaandra. Not sure where you got that idea from my post.

Toothpaste said:

Sometimes not, but sometimes they are. Sometimes thinking you have no other choice allows others to convince you that giving them your work for free makes good business sense when it very rarely does. Sometimes desperation just to have your work out there, makes someone undervalue what they've created.

Sometimes you are young and naive and hopeful.

Sometimes people take advantage of that.

Click to expand...

I disagree. You ALWAYS have the option to google a prospective client's name and reputation. If Google tells you that person is a Nobody or an Aspiring Somebody at best, that's your cue to make an informed decision. The same option is available for rates and royalties. You know what you're studying, so you know what to look for.

Plus, students aren't getting paid for assignments either. And school will use those assignments in exhibitions and promotional material the student isn't getting anything out of. But refusing to do those assignments that will lure new paying students, will get them a fail grade. As if anyone of importance would ever go to a school exhibition, see your work there, and make you huge. Every day you're in art school, you're being exploited - you're paying to boost the school's name and may still fail to get at least a degree out of it.

And how can they think they got no choice when they're not even holding their diploma yet? When they haven't opened their own business and failing to pay bills? Every person has the option of asking questions. If they fail to do so, they're not being exploited, they're failing themselves. They can just not take commissions like so many other perfectly happy students. Or they can set their own terms and enforce them. Choice.

I've done a book illustration job for a guy who sounds like he could afford to pay me way more than we agreed (an amount I offered for fear he might look for someone else). He's also going to publish the book, though I don't know through what route yet. Looking at similar art commissionable through deviantART members, I know I'm being a heaux.
But am I being exploited? No. I decided this project sounds fun (and it is!), could be a good route to exposure, so let's not scare him away with the rates I'd really like to charge. He knows he's getting off cheap. But God have mercy on my soul if he ever gets huge with that book and I throw a tantrum that I didn't get paid enough. I had a choice. I made it. He liked it. The end.

desperation just to have your work out there

Click to expand...

This is what I have the least compassion for. If you're so full of yourself that you think your work needs to go public at any cost, then you and a stingy writer are a perfect match.

Art is not a choice career if you want to make a living, it's not McDonald's where you apply in the urge to make ends meat. Art, from drawing over writing (fiction) to acting, is non-essential. You can't eat it, you can't heat with it, you can't drive in it, you can't cure disease with it. Which is why more people in any artistic/craft endeavor fail than succeed. So if you really think YOUR art is essential, well, don't fly too high with those wax wings and better take whatever exposure your ever so game-changing art is promised...
Artistic ambitions come from passion, or ego, or both. And if your ego is worth your working for free for a dude who may make millions off your work, then that's your problem and no client needs to feel bad for you having your Icarus moment. Hardly any young, aspiring artist will do commissions reluctantly, but rather fly head-first into them with enthusiasm. I think any client should be able to safely assume that the artist knows what they're doing, because the latter should be smart enough to know their trade of choice.

Ultimately, artists who aren't depending on their art for money, do it for enthusiasm (or ego). If the artist is thrilled about the project and aware they're doing commercial work for free, why should the client feel bad? The artist had all the freedom in the world to explore what their options are.
Basically, it isn't any client's job to inform the artist about average rates and the like. The artist should be expected to know THEIR OWN TRADE and what THEIR OWN WORK is worth. If they do it for free without even thinking, then that's exactly what it's worth.

Art school isn't kindergarten. You're old and smart enough to make choices and inform yourself. Any decent art or design institution will also teach you about protecting your work, representation, and how to deal with clients.