Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
@philebus Welcome to the group. This is definitely the place if you want critiques on a book cover. I'm just getting my feet wet myself, but there are some great people on here that have been in the business awhile. They have lots of advice and great insight that has been very helpful to me and I'm sure they will pop in soon.
GREAT pulp cover! Nicely done.
I'm sure you know about pulpcovers.com. Anyone interested in this unique art form should study that site beginning to end.
If this is for a real book (I'm guessing not?) the only thing I'd do is offer a second version of the cover without the subtitle and kicker. These can be used for the "Amazon thumbnail" image, while the full cover can be used for everything else. I'm not sure if Amazon gives the option for indies to provide a thumbnail-only version of the cover. They do for the majors, or at least they used to..
Finally, I think I'd make the title just ever so slightly larger, just because it might better balance the three figures on the left. It might also help the read at thumbnail size (something the real pulps didn't have to worry about, of course).
Again, very nicely done. A+ work.
@philebus Very impressive work. I'm a HUGE fan of the pulps, including both originals and the pulp covers. In the latter category, the work of Bama, Steranko and even Frazetta (yeah, I'd lump him in that category, although his Burrough's work is kind of a step above pulp) really captured my attention when I was younger and first encountered them on the book spinner at my local corner stores.
It sounds like you did a great job analyzing the source material for your own work. As a professional graphic designer, I was always interested in the trends of the day. Things that look quant to us now -- like the type effects being utilized in the early 1900s -- were once cutting edge. And the trends of the 1960s are also something that were cutting edge at the time.
I'm definitely looking forward to seeing more of your work in the future!
Posted another superhero image. I think this one ties in nicely with the other images in the series. As always, comments and reactions are greatly appreciated.
http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/1011222#Comment_1011222 ;
I was hoping some of you could take a look at this other post of mine and see if you have any suggestions.
http://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/71956/seeking-help-shopping-for-pieces-to-a-v4-superhero-costume
And, since I probably will create a cover to a book, I guess it's kinda relavent to this forum. ;-)
I've added a quick suggesion on adapting the V4 bodysuit for the main part of your superhero's costume.
I haven't been able to get Poser 11 yet. Still using Poser 2014, but I have plans -- budget willing -- to get Poser 11 Pro by this summer. One of the things I'd like to try is the comic render. I'd love to see what you can come up with using V4.
Regarding Amazon- my distributor now wants ebook-covers with more pixels (2560 at one side at least) than I need for print with 300 dpi. Never did I see an ebook-cover on any sellers site which really needed such dimensions. But they don't accept smaller covers anymore.
The dpi requirement is probably for consistency across readers. At 2560 and 300 ppi, that's only 8.5", which would just a few hundred more pixels than needed for a mass market paperback (4x7, give or take on the trim). A trade paperback is roughly 5x8, so 2560 on the long side is about right, I think. For trade non-fiction and some fiction, 6x9 and 7x10 are common trim sizes, so it sounds like your distributor is splitting the difference.
Everything I do is at 600 ppi, and my covers are designed on a canvas larger than the final image, so I have leeway in the finished trim. I use guidelines to keep the composition in mind, and then at the final stage, I crop down to 300 ppi.
What were the pixels before? I've only looked at the sites where I intend to try and sell covers so I'm not sure what the standard is, if there is one. And that is all digital. I haven't even looked at what is required to print covers.
The problem with going with any kind of previous specifications is that most of the time they didn't take into account newer technology. Case in point is Apple's Retina displays, which have a screen resolution of up to 300 ppi, even more. The old specs called for ebook covers to be designed for 72, 96, or at most 150 ppi. These numbers might work for older devices, but can lead to blurry images on newer readers. It's always better to downsize than upsize, especially when there's text in the image.
The notion of producing ebook covers just for lowrez displays has come, and gone. Such a cover will look horrible on a modern iPad.
The screen on a regular retina iPad is 2048 x 1536, and the iPad Pro is 2732 x 2048, both of which run Kindle apps. So it's not that unreasonable a cover requirement. The in-house Kindle Fire is comparitively low resoluthion (1280 x 800, 149 dpi), but there's no reason that will always be so.
I think also publishers and distributors don't want to keep so many assets around. Instead of having to rely on a medium-rez ebook cover -- that most certainly won't look good when printed (and likely fare poorly on higher density screens), it's just easier to keep a consistent "master" and produce the supporting files from that.
It often helps sales to say your covers can be used for ebook or printed, and/or the larger print version can be an extra add-on and charge. So it's generally to the benefit of artists to design with the higher resolution in mind anyway. For quality and consistency, it's better to start big and go low.
Coming late to the party.... I'd definitely work with DOF on that one. And at the moment, your picture is a bit off balance, with the important bits in the lower half and mostly unimportant bits in the upper half. I'd focus more on the foreground items and have them fill out a bigger part of the cover - this would have the added bonus that the items are easier to recognize in thumbnail size (I assume this is going to be a cover for an e-book).
Love this version! It looks great!
I really like the pulp paperback style - especially the second version of the picture where the creases really add to the style. The title is just big enough to be readable in thumbnail, which is good, and if you plan to use the yellow band and logo on all books in that series, it's indeed good branding. That all said, the picture itself is very dark and lacks contrast, imo. Even in full size, it's a bit blurry. In thumbnail size you can just about recognize that there's a guy in the middle, but that's about it. This is a potential problem when you think of people browsing the online retailers' sites, looking primarily at thumbnails. (I assume that this cover is for an e-book.)
Even though it takes longer to render, I have come to the conclusion that it does pay to render larger than I think I will need. If for nothing else, I tend to find more mistakes when the render is larger. I did a render as a gift for someone and when I took it up to 6000 px by 4800 px for printing on a poster, I found a lot of mistakes and poke thru that just didn't catch my eye at around 2000 px by 1600 px. So yes, I can see the wisdom of going larger and then scaling down to the size actually needed, but having that larger master size for the files.
Yes, it is a cover I've been working on just to sort of get my feet wet. I'm hoping to sell it with an online distributor for Indie Authors. I got some really great feedback and I'm working on a new version, but had to put it aside until the end of the month as I have some self imposed deadlines for my book and I need to finish that up. Justing finishing up a couple of chapters I decided to add and then I need to go back through and fix some continuity issues with newly added content and then an editing pass before sending it off to an editor.
I got a cool kudo this week! Renderosity has chosed the Strata 3D Gallery as their "Gallery of the Week." For this, they chose 14 images to represent the gallery, and three of them (including #1) are by ME.
You can check it out here, if you're so inclined: https://www.renderosity.com/gallery-of-the-week---strata3d-gallery-cms-18137 ;
I like the yellow, it pops. Composition looks fine to me. Love the style!
Looks great and took me back to childhood
All great renders, but, yeah, that Sawbones Game was my favorite. I can see why it was number 1. Nice!
KM: Thanks! I like that one, too (although the bottle of whiskey is actually my favorite -- I really like the way the glass interacted with the light dome). A few people were actually surprised that it was not a photo. And, of course, photo realism isn't always my goal, but when it is, it's nice to nail it like that image did.
The sad thing is, though, Strata3D seems to have abandoned development for the Windows OS. They are focused almost entirely on Macs now, so that means my current version of the software (ver 7.5) may be my last. :-(
When you guys create book covers, what do you think is more important, the thumbnail (which is what people are going to see in the Amazon listings), or the full sized / larger image, (which the people will see once they go into your page?)
The reason I ask is that I have two images for my novel. The one looks better large, and the other looks better small, so I'm a bit conflicted over which to use.
A thumbnail view isn't necessarily what potential readers first see. It depends on how they find your book. For many indy authors, it's their own marketing from sites and social media that drive the most customers to Amazon, and because of this, larger thumbnail sizes are possible on these non-Amazon pages. Go with what looks good for these pages. It isn't just a matter of two sizes.
If your book gets good placement in the top-100 lists or in searches, then obviously you want a thumbnail size image that will encourage clicks. Overall looks matter less than what will induce readers to click in.
You can contact seller support at Amazon to see about using a separate image for the product listing page from the thumbnail. As you know, you can upload multiple images.
Personally, I think many designers go too far the other way and produce bland covers that just aren't all that interesting for the product page or, especially, the finished book. For example, it's acceptable to still use kicker, series names, or subtitle text that is not readable in the thumb view. It's too small to read, but as long as the image, title, and/or author name spark interest, the odd smaller text elements here and there won't hurt anything, and makes the cover all that more interesting in the product page and on the finished product.
Thanks Tobar, you make some good points. Ads on other sites may be a lot bigger, which I didn't take into consideration. I'll go with the cover I prefer, and just make sure the title is legible at a thumbnail size.
For me, the two most important things for the thumbnail:
1. A compelling graphic or other image treatment that catches your attention, and
2. A fully legible title OR author name. (Doesn't have to be both.)
The author name can take precedent if that's the primary selling point, as it would be for a JK Rowling or Stephen King, for example. This can also apply to indy authors who have acquired a faithful following.
Hi, I'm afraid that real life took me away from forums and such for longer than expected. I just wanted to pop back though and thank everyone for their generous comments. I have taken them on board and am working through all my covers to improve the title sizes and positioning. Unfortunately, I found my monitor had been in need of some calibration, so I have also been working on improving the brightness of some of the images.
I'm now looking to try out some some other styles of cover pulp cover. After updating ArtRage, I found myself rediscovering just how well it handles paint effects and how I could use that for a style common to some of the mystery thrillers.
Looking real good, Philebus.
Do you find it's more helpful to do a trace draw, redraw over the original (using paint pickup), apply a sketch filter first then paint over, or...? How was the scientist done?
Are the Yellow Jacket covers yours? I think I've seen them somewhere.
Hi. I came up with the Yellow Jacket when browsing my runtime for a logo candidate - Noggin's wasp was ideal, with bold colours and I liked the idea of having a yellow spine and back. It was a very simple render with a Cutout filter applied. I have posted some covers at a couple of the other galleries, so you might have seen them there.
To be honest, I don't always find the trace feature all that useful (I think Painter used to call it Cloning - but I haven't used it since version 9.5 which I picked up on a half price offer on it's launch). One method in PSE8 and in GIMP is to simply use the smudge tool with a bristle brush, however, all these, including the scientist, were done in ArtRage. I loaded the image as a tracing layer and then used the option to turn it into paint, this creates a new layer which I merge with the painted gradient I paint under it. I can then apply the palette knife as if the whole thing were oil paint, blending the details as I please. After the first go at it, I use an oil brush to put in some details and tints, which I blend in again with the knife. I find this method a lot faster than using the trace feature and a gets me that rough and ready look of some of the cheap paperbacks.
I'm still having fun with ArtRage and will continue with this style for a while.
I'm really likin' these retro Yellow Jacket cover of yours! Especially this one, the composition, the font, the color choices, the "artstyle" filters f/x, and the postwork deterioration, all work to produce a cohesive whole. Makes you want to pickup the book and start reading, what more can you ask for.
Hi, and thank your for your comments. I'm not really using filters here, just Cutout layered for a little blocking of the colour - but that's actually optional. It really is just using the palette knife and oil brush in ArtRage, which really is amazing. After that, a layer of grain just helps break up the colour as this was never very even in those cheap printings. The wear and tear is just a combination of scanned images of some old books of mine and some brushes purchased here (I think Ron's Cracks and one of his Stains brush sets).
One more pic for now. This time there's not too much going but I like the colours and I feel that I'm really getting the hang of using this font - though getting the most out of it really does take quite a bit more time I think it's worth the effort (I'm planning to go back through my previous covers that use it to make the changes from what I've learnt through trial and error).