What do you think of this working cover?

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Try a creamy-milk-white with a tint of yellow for the titling.

Hitch

OK, I'll give this color combination a try, along with issybird's suggestion.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

OK, I'll give this color combination a try, along with issybird's suggestion.

Before you do:

May I gently suggest--truly, I am not trying to be a d*ck here--that you think about what the book is about? And your PERFECT READER?

When you envisioned your perfect reader, whilst writing this, who was s/he? What does s/he read? How does s/he find those books? And why--why--does s/he want to read THIS book?

And what can you put on the cover, that will signal that to him/her? What elements, or text, or anything, can you do, to say to that perfect reader "this book is for YOU."

Not what images you have, what images YOU like (you actually no longer matter, sorry, it sucks, but there you go); what images will catch the eye of the clicker. Not the clickee.

And while you're at it, find 10-20 books, in the same arena of LitFic--similar topics or themes or concepts or ideas, and look at THEIR covers. What are they using? Is there a particular font, or coloration, or anything, that conveys "this is XXXX LitFic?" Something you can use to good effect?

And you know, you are always welcome over at CoverCritics.com, to submit (and submit and submit and submit, if you wish) for feedback. In fact, your sort of dilemma is really the kind of thing for which it was formed. Not trying to "steal" MR traffic at all, but...it's a thought.

Hitch

[Dr. Drib]

^

These are all good suggestions that certainly need to be considered. -- Thanks, Hitch.

I'll also check CoverCritics.com

(Don't worry about Mobileread. It's in the capable hands of issybird and those who are assisting her.)

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

^

These are all good suggestions that certainly need to be considered. -- Thanks, Hitch.

I'll also check CoverCritics.com

(Don't worry about Mobileread. It's in the capable hands of issybird and those who are assisting her.)

Yes, I knew that ^ part (Issybird, etc.). I was simply being diplomatic. :-) I always think it's a bit rude (?) to tell people, "oh, leave this website and go some other spot," or the like. After all, lots of folks out there earning their daily bread through traffic and I for one should not like to take even a crumb from their mouths. :-)

ヾ(◍’౪`◍)ﾉﾞ♡

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

BUT, Jon--don't forget--the average bear ain't lookin' at the cover once it's ON the eink, as I mentioned above.

Hitch

We do see the covers on the home screen and if the Reader goes to sleep while the cover is open.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

We do see the covers on the home screen and if the Reader goes to sleep while the cover is open.

You must have yours set up to do that. I never do. I get the SSDD screensavers.

Drib: You know, I simply want to emphasize--I want you to be successful. That's my only goal here. I know I can be a bit...brusque. Sorry.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

You must have yours set up to do that. I never do. I get the SSDD screensavers.

Drib: You know, I simply want to emphasize--I want you to be successful. That's my only goal here. I know I can be a bit...brusque. Sorry.

Hitch

Welcome to club curmudgeon.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Welcome to club curmudgeon.

Founding member since 1955.

Hitch

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Hitch

You must have yours set up to do that. I never do. I get the SSDD screensavers.

Drib: You know, I simply want to emphasize--I want you to be successful. That's my only goal here. I know I can be a bit...brusque. Sorry.

Hitch

No need to apologize, Hitch. We've talked before (writing software, etc.), and I respect your opinions. And your suggestions.

[Dr. Drib]

Testing, Testing. 1-2-3. There is nothing wrong with your television set. Should something be wrong, I will personally destroy it!

Getting there?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Testing, Testing. 1-2-3. There is nothing wrong with your television set. Should something be wrong, I will personally destroy it!

Getting there?

I like the new cover except....

The text color doesn't work in B&W. Not enough contrast. That will need to be changed so it works in B&W.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Testing, Testing. 1-2-3. There is nothing wrong with your television set. Should something be wrong, I will personally destroy it!

Getting there?

Don, my concern with it is, I'm not sure it appears intentional. If you rummage around Kindle's shelves, and it doesn't take too long, you'll see a lot of quite serious covers like that. It's one thing for a trade pub to get away with it--tongue-in-cheek, wink-and-a-nod thing; it's another for an Indy.

We do a fair number of kids' books, at my shop, and we see covers like that all the time, as "serious contenders," (the intent, I mean, not the actual effect).

Also, why is the title being cited/quoted?

ETA: may I suggest Two Fingers Bodoni Regular, to replace that font? Or...hell, if you want something fattish, Childwood Normal, or...for easier-to-read, maybe HankBT Roman or Infant?

Hitch

[Quoth]

I saw a book this week with "Warning Explicit Content" printed as part of the cover in my local bookshop.
I didn't lift it to see if it was true.

Perhaps something like that would address Hitch's comment.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I saw a book this week with "Warning Explicit Content" printed as part of the cover in my local bookshop.
I didn't lift it to see if it was true.

Perhaps something like that would address Hitch's comment.

What, like "childlike on purpose?"

Seriously, I'm not snarking, I'm asking?

Hitch

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I saw a book this week with "Warning Explicit Content" printed as part of the cover in my local bookshop.
I didn't lift it to see if it was true.

Perhaps something like that would address Hitch's comment.

But there isn't any explicit content (in my opinion), unless you have a child of 2-3 years old writing about his same-age 'writer' friend's 'Wee-wee' ['his' words], as the biographer attempts to make his case that a small Wee-wee proves a correlation between a writer's anatomical size and the length of his friend's writing.

If you mean that using Hitch's comment would show potential readers that it's not a children's book, then that would be something to consider: A kind of disclaimer.