How important is the right cover image?

[crich70]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

When browsing, a good cover might get me to stop and read the description. A good cover is no guarantee that I will buy the eBook, but a bad cover is a guarantee that I won't be buying it.

I think that's why so many old SF books had pictures of rockets and such on the cover. An interesting cover will intrigue a potential reader so that they at least look at what is on offer. It's probably the basis for TV 'trailers' of up coming movies too I'd guess. Sometimes the trailers mislead you a little bit on what the story line is but I think they have to if they are to catch interest without giving away the plot.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

To my eye, covers do not sell me books but they can prevent a sale. What I mean is a well-done cover doesn't make me want to read a book any more than the title and description already do. But a poorly designed cover can put me off.

I'm the opposite. A great looking cover image just might tempt me to buy something I know nothing about, but a "bad" cover never makes me NOT buy a book that sounds interesting to me.

If I'm totally honest, a thumbnail-sized image of the cover-art is just about all I see these days anyway. I really don't go out of my way to find a more "appreciatable"-sized version. For me, " covers" are mostly just colorful little non-descript rectangles beside the book's description. Rarely a deal-maker, but never a deal-breaker.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm the opposite. A great looking cover image just might tempt me to buy something I know nothing about, but a "bad" cover never makes me NOT buy a book that sounds interesting to me.

For me, an absolutely terrible cover on a self-pubbed book will have me skimming over it. It tells me that the author hasn't bothered to learn about their industry or invest even a very modest amount of effort into presenting their product. I'd expect that if I picked it up I'd see typos everywhere, terrible grammar - no attention to basics. Not "bad" covers - actual bad covers. I'm not talking about a cover that's just nondescript. I'm talking about abysmal typography, badly Photoshopped images, that sort of thing. Basic, basic errors. It would take very extremely recommendations from people I trust to get me to pick up a book with a cover like that.

[zerofatzreturns]

its a funny thing right? Is the cover important? You could say the same thing about the keywords, the description, the intro, the whatever right? I think the bottom line is the cover matters to some people more than others. The thing about it is, you as the author and publisher of this book, your trying to get as much targeted traffic to your book as possible.

If you wrote a book about cats that rescue their owners, and you feel like you got a pretty good book, then you want to get that thing into the hands of every person who you think would enjoy it. Now some of them are really going to go for the cover when they are buying books. That might be the only thing they look at before they buy. Now on the other hand some of them might never even see the cover.

You are smart if you think, I will cater to both of these groups as well as all of the other little groups of people that love cat rescue books. How do you do it? It's easy, you treat every part of your book like it's very important. From the cover to the TOC to the call to action in the back. Treat everything like it matters because it will matter to some people. This will maximize your success.

Good luck brother!

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Covers for me are only helpful in a bricks and mortar store. When I'm browsing, a nice cover will get me to pick the book up. I don't browse ebooks-its not a nice experience like it is in a bookstore. I hear about books and then I search for them using the book store search engine. If I've heard that it's a good book then I buy it. I don't care what the cover looks like.

[Luffy]

For many movies, the poster(book cover for a book) released before a trailer(blurb of a book) are critical. A mega flop like John Carter had people whispering deep in their teacups as soon as the uninspiring poster was released.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Luffy

For many movies, the poster(book cover for a book) released before a trailer(blurb of a book) are critical. A mega flop like John Carter had people whispering deep in their teacups as soon as the uninspiring poster was released.

I think part of the problem with John Carter was that they wanted to make sure it came out 100 yrs after the books were published and they didn't perhaps take enough time to make sure things were just right. I enjoyed the movie myself but it isn't an easy story to bring to the screen as others who tried before found out.

Spoiler:

I mean they had to find a plausible way to get him from Earth to Mars (the 1st book as I recall doesn't go into much detail on how that worked) but there were primitive fax machine like devices in the real world back in the late 19th century so they went with something like that.

What they did do worked I think but some things are hard to get a grasp on at times. Batman is based more in reality than John Carter as it is more theoretically possible for a man to do some of what Batman does and he is set in a real world type setting (the big city) so it would be easier to draw a poster that reflects that I think.

[Luffy]

Originally Posted by crich70

I think part of the problem with John Carter was that they wanted to make sure it came out 100 yrs after the books were published and they didn't perhaps take enough time to make sure things were just right. I enjoyed the movie myself but it isn't an easy story to bring to the screen as others who tried before found out.

Spoiler:

I mean they had to find a plausible way to get him from Earth to Mars (the 1st book as I recall doesn't go into much detail on how that worked) but there were primitive fax machine like devices in the real world back in the late 19th century so they went with something like that.

What they did do worked I think but some things are hard to get a grasp on at times. Batman is based more in reality than John Carter as it is more theoretically possible for a man to do some of what Batman does and he is set in a real world type setting (the big city) so it would be easier to draw a poster that reflects that I think.

Yeah Batman is not the most popular (ahead of Superman) superhero by coincidence. He has no superpowers, something that makes reading and writing his comic books intriguing.

As for John Carter, it went over budget, because the director Andrew Stanton, of Finding Nemo fame, used expensive means to shoot the movie.

[cromag]

I liked the John Carter movie as well, but I thought they tried to stuff too much of the story into the movie and it came off a bit rushed at times. A half hour after seeing it (on DVD) I would have had a hard time describing some of the sequences, and putting them in order.

Also, I had some problems with the cast. Taylor Kitsch, as John Carter, struck me as (far) too young for the story and too "slight" for John Carter's life and experiences. I had the feeling that he was chosen to appeal to the female half of the Teen/Young Adult market.

There wasn't anything really "wrong" with Lynn Collins as Dejah Thoris, but every time I saw her I was struck by her resemblance to Megan Fox. I began to wonder if she was cast simply because she did look like Megan Fox.

Anyway, I liked the movie, but didn't regret waiting for the DVD.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by cromag

I liked the John Carter movie as well, but I thought they tried to stuff too much of the story into the movie and it came off a bit rushed at times. A half hour after seeing it (on DVD) I would have had a hard time describing some of the sequences, and putting them in order.

Also, I had some problems with the cast. Taylor Kitsch, as John Carter, struck me as (far) too young for the story and too "slight" for John Carter's life and experiences. I had the feeling that he was chosen to appeal to the female half of the Teen/Young Adult market.

There wasn't anything really "wrong" with Lynn Collins as Dejah Thoris, but every time I saw her I was struck by her resemblance to Megan Fox. I began to wonder if she was cast simply because she did look like Megan Fox.

Anyway, I liked the movie, but didn't regret waiting for the DVD.

I often wait for the DVD of a movie to come out as well. Around here by time you get your ticket and buy your popcorn and pop you're spending right around $15.00 just for one viewing and you have to rely on your neighbors to not create a disturbance in the theater as well. Kids can be especially noisy at times. The DVD on the other hand is a $15.00 or so investment that allows you to view it as many times as you wish without potential noise. And if you have a projection device of some sort you can have almost as big a picture at home as in the theater.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by crich70

I often wait for the DVD of a movie to come out as well. Around here by time you get your ticket and buy your popcorn and pop you're spending right around $15.00 just for one viewing and you have to rely on your neighbors to not create a disturbance in the theater as well. Kids can be especially noisy at times. The DVD on the other hand is a $15.00 or so investment that allows you to view it as many times as you wish without potential noise. And if you have a projection device of some sort you can have almost as big a picture at home as in the theater.

Same here. And that's $15.00 (more, here if you add popcorn, I take my own water) per person. With my family of three, you've thoroughly blown the budget. And the wheelchair spaces are right up the back tucked in the corner in our local theatre, not conducive to comfortable viewing.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by meeera

Same here. And that's $15.00 (more, here if you add popcorn, I take my own water) per person. With my family of three, you've thoroughly blown the budget. And the wheelchair spaces are right up the back tucked in the corner in our local theatre, not conducive to comfortable viewing.

I can imagine. I have a friend who is in a wheelchair (spina bifida) and she finds getting in some places difficult at times too.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by crich70

I can imagine. I have a friend who is in a wheelchair (spina bifida) and she finds getting in some places difficult at times too.

I've no trouble at all getting to anywhere that complies with the relevant accessibility codes. It's just that having only one place for wheelchair users to sit in a cinema, and having that one of the worst spots in the theatre, is a pretty rubbish thing to do to your customers. I don't see why I should pay them a fortune for it.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm the opposite. A great looking cover image just might tempt me to buy something I know nothing about, but a "bad" cover never makes me NOT buy a book that sounds interesting to me.

But if you know nothing about the book and nothing about the author, would you even get to reading the description of the book if it has a bad cover? That's where a bad cover fails to sell the book.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But if you know nothing about the book and nothing about the author, would you even get to reading the description of the book if it has a bad cover? That's where a bad cover fails to sell the book.

True. And even a good cover won't make up for a badly written story.