Loading...
> >

Book Covers

1…3334363839…52

Comments

  • Tiffanie Gray - IDLMTiffanie Gray - IDLM Posts: 561

    This is awesome!  Thank you for lining it out! Just what I needed.

  • mmitchell_houstonmmitchell_houston Posts: 2,484
    tiffanie_gray_aceaa3bc71 said:

    Next art prompt turned ebook cover.

    Good start. The character design is okay -- I like the contrast in colors between the two goons and the girl. I'm also glad to see you're using shadows -- they can add drama. Now on to what I'm not happy about, and I'm sorry if this comes off as overly critical, but there are a lot of issues here that need to re resolved. Most of them come down to composition and storytelling. Let's start with the simple stuff:

    • Her hair is blending in to the redish sash on the green guy's outfit. You should always either change element colors to avoid conflicts like this, or change their positions. Swapping the positions of the two goons would solve this problem.
    • Her outfit isn't sexy. She's a redhead. She would probably look better in a green silk jacket with dark leggings and black boots (again, it's a matter of not having brown clothes on brown floor). 
    • Her pose needs work. The gun is getting lost in the black pants of the green goon, and her pose just isn't menacing.
    • The goons' poses need work, too. Raise the scimitar, and lose whatever that is in the gray guy's left hand. If I can't tell at glance what it is, then it is not servicing the story. Also, seriously think of making gray guy a leftie -- that is, move his gun to his left hand. It would greatly help create a classic composition by framing her between the two goons with arms outstretched on the far sides of her. And think about making them crouch a little, or do something with body language to make them seem menacing. It seems to me like you're trying to tell a story where she's cool and collected and her two goons are ready to explode in a fit of rage behind her. Tell it with a smug tilt of her head and more exagerated poses from the goons, as though they are ready to explode in action at any moment.
    • Finally, lose that picture on the wall. It is clutter that is purely a distraction. Either add TONS of junk to the background (so that it sets the scene and becomes "white noise" and we don't really see it, or pare the background down to the bare essentials. Or are they in a museum? If so, you need to add more stuff to sell that scene.
    • This is a preference of mine, but if I see a window in a scene, I always want to know what's outside. Are they in a seedy neighborhood? A fantasy kingdom? Some sort of future world? Either move the window more into the frame or more out. 
    • Finally, and this is a small point, but I think you should move the camera closer and lower, while playing with your focal length. It's an old trick, but looking up at someone makes them seem more intimidating. I think that would help tell your story.

    I hope this doesn't bum you out. I do like where you started. You have decent foundation blocks to build upon: Good characters and a simple scene. Just amping it up a bit will take it to a higher level. Good luck, and keep at it!

     

    PS: Sorry for the typos. My spellcheck is on the fritz and I'm in a hurry. :-)

  • mmitchell_houstonmmitchell_houston Posts: 2,484
    philebus said:
    mmitchell_houston said:

    More great covers for books I would LOVE to read. I do think the text in the upper part of The Trench should be the same yellow/green of the title, though. Right now it's a bit hard to read because it washes out.

    I think you're right. I've been getting lazy, which is not a good habbit, even if it is just for fun. I think I will go back and correct this and other mistake for the sake of a little pride :)

    I fully respect the desire to be lazy. :-)  It happens to the best of us. One of the problems with creating this type of art is that we can get myopic. We start with the overal vision of the piece and then drill down into the small details so much that, very often, we don't sit back and look at the total piece again as a whole. When I look at my S&S cover above, I am mentally breaking it down into the following blocks: Front Cover, Brown Spine, Top Back Cover (3D element) and Bottom Back Cover. I'm looking for consistency in capitalization, spacing and type placement. It took me a day or two of just looking at it as a whole to make sure I actually liked it. 

  • mmitchell_houstonmmitchell_houston Posts: 2,484
    philebus said:

        

    Thanks SO MUCH for the great tutorial. That was fantastic info. I really love your mock covers, and if I ever do a pulp-themed game, I'm either going to use your techniques or try to hire you! One thing I wanted to mention about your covers is that they work so well because you focus on storytelling. As I've read through this forum over the past few months, I keep coming across covers that work and that's almost always part of the reason: The cover tells a story. I'm definitely not positioning myself as an expert on cover design (I struggle with it each and every time), but I have published a few books (some for myself and some for others) and I always try to focus on composition and storytelling (the two usually go hand-in-hand). Looking at your covers, you can tell what's going to happen. Each of the three covers above have only a few elements (2 - 4) with a single central figure. These scenes are all existing in the pause of a single heartbeat right before all hell breaks loose. We know what's about to happen, and you make us want to read the book to find out what happens next. Even though these are mock covers (and based on a style that uses strong color blocking that isn't quite in line with modern tropes), you still nail the fundamentals of GREAT design.

    Anyway, now that I read this, I think I'm coming off as a pompus know-it-all. But... we're all here to learn, so I'm going to take off my guest-lecturer's cap and make one final suggestion. If you want to study storytelling in illustrations, do a google search for the works of Norman Rockwell. That man was a MASTER storyteller. From each of his single illustrated covers, you can get the tale he's telling. Note how he uses body language and object placement to set a scene and give us a clue about how the people are reacting. I know that his images are quaint by today's standards, and he worked in a larger space than most of us have (he did full-size magazines and most of us work on smaller, paperback-sized covers), but the basics are there and definitely worth spending an hour or more exploring.

  • Jay Jay_1264499Jay Jay_1264499 Posts: 298
    Llynara said:

    I found this thread last December when I discovered DAZ3D and realized I could use it to design book covers. I had tried to work with a cover designer on another book who did not understand what I wanted. Being a techie, I decided to try it. It took me a while, but I finally have a cover that I love! This is the prequel to Black Kat, a dark romantic comedy series with superheroes. It's done almost entirely with DAZ3D products. Still learning Iray but happy with how this one came out. The book will be free on Amazon next week if anyone is interested.

    Black Kat Prequel: Unlucky Charm

     

    Sorry, I'm a little late to the thread. This cover Lynara is fantastic.!  Really jumps out at ya.  

  • KnittingmommyKnittingmommy Posts: 8,191

    @_manne_   Or anyone else who can answer this question.  I was watching the book cover webinar that _manne_ did and I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of rendering at 72 ppi inside DS and increasing the resolution to 300 ppi in a 2D program.  Let's say that the final image size I need is 10 inches by 13 inches and I set my render image to those dimensions and render at 72.  Do I understand correctly, then, that PS can increase the resolution to 300 ppi and that will work fine?  Or do I need to render larger at 72 ppi inside DS and then increase the resolution and then scale down the image?  How do you know that you have enough pixels to in an image size to increase the resolution like that?

    I'm not sure I'm explaining my confusion exactly.  But, I'd like any info on this that anyone can tell me.

  • mmitchell_houstonmmitchell_houston Posts: 2,484
    edited February 2017
    Knittingmommy said:

    @_manne_   Or anyone else who can answer this question.  I was watching the book cover webinar that _manne_ did and I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of rendering at 72 ppi inside DS and increasing the resolution to 300 ppi in a 2D program.  Let's say that the final image size I need is 10 inches by 13 inches and I set my render image to those dimensions and render at 72.  Do I understand correctly, then, that PS can increase the resolution to 300 ppi and that will work fine?  Or do I need to render larger at 72 ppi inside DS and then increase the resolution and then scale down the image?  How do you know that you have enough pixels to in an image size to increase the resolution like that?

    I'm not sure I'm explaining my confusion exactly.  But, I'd like any info on this that anyone can tell me.

    Sorry that this is complicated, but printing terminology doesn't really sync up with the terminology used in 3D. As I would tell my students (and this is a generalization that I know will annoy some people who would rather that I speak in more precise terms about screen resolution, the differences between dots and pixels and their relation to image resolutions), but, simply put: A pixel is a dot and a dot is a pixel. Don't worry so much about pixel-per-inch (ppi) or dots-per-inch (dpi). In very simple terms (and I don't mean to be insulting in any way), but at your technical level you can use those terms interchangeably. If you dive deeper into the topic, you can learn the distinctions later. But for now, I think that's information overload and would distract from the question at hand: Image Resizing.

    Now, here's what you need to concentrate on: Always focus on the final, printed size of your image. If you need an image to be 10 x 13 inches and you plan to print at 300 ppi, multiply those dimensions by 300. This will result in a final-target sized image of 3,000 x 3,900. Now, when you open Photoshop (GiMP, or whatever app you use), you are in for a shock. The image details might tell you that your image will print at 41.667 x 54.167 inches. Yeah. That's humongous. The reason it says that is simple: PNG and JPEG graphics do not automatically store the information needed to print the image. In other words, Daz Studio always outputs 72 dip. That's just the way it is (and Poser is the same way).

    You can actually ignore this, if you want. It has no bearing on anything, other than your sanity. All that matters here is the Pixel Dimensions. So, if you want to change the printed size to your graphic (thus returning it to the realm of the reasonably sized graphics that will help keep you sane), you may do so by opening the Image > Image Size... menu in Photoshop (I know this is also in GiMP, but don't recall where – will someone out there look it up for us?). You will see the following dialog.

     

    This is where you will change the Document size.

    1. Make ABSOLUTELY SURE the "Resample Image" box is NOT CHECKED.
    2. Then change the 72 to 300.
    3. You will see that the Pixel Dimensions do not change, but that the Document Size does (see image below). 
    4. The save your image again (probably as a PSD or TIF).

    And that's it. I cannot stress how important it is NOT to resample the image. You can destroy your work by resampling at this stage (it's okay to do it later, but not here in terms of this discussion). I hope this makes sense. And also, I hope you don't mind that I turned this into a blog post (I deleted your name).

    Resized_Images_01.jpg
    563 x 674 - 68K
    Resized_Images_02.jpg
    563 x 674 - 68K
    Post edited by mmitchell_houston on
  • ToborTobor Posts: 2,300

    PPI and DPI are display metrics. D|S doesn't render with any notion of pixels per inch, just pixels. An image that's 1000 by 1000 pixels is the same image whether it's displayed at 72 DPI or printed at 300. The display/print device uses the PPI/DPI information to know how large to make the image. 

    Therefore, a 1000 by 1000 image will display at almost 14 inches on screen, but print at only 3.3 inches on paper. Same image, different size.

    If you need an image that's 10x13 inches, you need to first determine how that image will be displayed or printed. Most printing is done at 300 PPI, so you simply multiply 10*300 and 13*300 to arrive at the pixel dimensions. D|S will also do this for you when you set the height and width sizes. Just type in 10*300, and it'll magically convert to 3000 pixels.

    Now here's where it gets tricky: There is no DPI/PPI information stored when D|S saves the image. To make sure the printer sees it correctly, open it in a graphics program and change the DPI. Make sure the pixel dimensions don't change, just the overall size.

  • KnittingmommyKnittingmommy Posts: 8,191

    See, what you guys just explained is exactly what I thought was the proper way to do it.  To get an image that I wanted to be at a certain final size I need to render larger (multiplying by 300) because DS only renders at 72 ppi.  However, when I was watching the video of Esther's webinar, she seemed to indicate that she doesn't render larger, but renders at the size needed for the final image and then changes the resolution inside PS by increasing the number of pixels.  This had me confused and maybe I misunderstood, but I was under the impression that it had to be done the way the two of you just said.  

    I'm confused how Esther can render in DS at the size needed and then change the resolution to 300 inside PS.

    Oh, in Gimp, Image>Print Size seems to be the same thing as in Image>Image Size in PS.  However, Gimp doesn't seem to have the resampling option.  I don't know if this is because Gimp never resamples when changing print size or if it always does.

    When I was looking for a way to do what I thought Esther mentioned doing in the webinar, I found a way of doing it in Gimp from a question someone asked on some other website.  The process, while a little more complicated in Gimp, seemed to be what Esther indicated she did in PS to increase the resolution, but I'm not sure.  There does seem to be a way of increasing resolution size without changing the image size by increasing the number of pixels the image has without distortion, but I'm unsure exactly if I'm understanding this process.

    In Gimp, the answer I found for doing what Esther seemed to be doing or something similar is to scale the image up to the desired resolution with Interpolation set at none and then scale again to the desired size with Interpolation set at cubic.  Frankly, I tried that and ran out of memory to the point that my computer locked up.  Apparently, one should try that while also running a render in the background.  I lost the render and I still don't know if that would have worked.  I'm a little leery of trying that again.  

    Really hoping that @_manne_ pops in and clarifies exactly what she meant in the video.

  • mmitchell_houstonmmitchell_houston Posts: 2,484
    Knittingmommy said:

    See, what you guys just explained is exactly what I thought was the proper way to do it.  To get an image that I wanted to be at a certain final size I need to render larger (multiplying by 300) because DS only renders at 72 ppi.  However, when I was watching the video of Esther's webinar, she seemed to indicate that she doesn't render larger, but renders at the size needed for the final image and then changes the resolution inside PS by increasing the number of pixels.  This had me confused and maybe I misunderstood, but I was under the impression that it had to be done the way the two of you just said.  

    I'm confused how Esther can render in DS at the size needed and then change the resolution to 300 inside PS.

    Oh, in Gimp, Image>Print Size seems to be the same thing as in Image>Image Size in PS.  However, Gimp doesn't seem to have the resampling option.  I don't know if this is because Gimp never resamples when changing print size or if it always does.

    When I was looking for a way to do what I thought Esther mentioned doing in the webinar, I found a way of doing it in Gimp from a question someone asked on some other website.  The process, while a little more complicated in Gimp, seemed to be what Esther indicated she did in PS to increase the resolution, but I'm not sure.  There does seem to be a way of increasing resolution size without changing the image size by increasing the number of pixels the image has without distortion, but I'm unsure exactly if I'm understanding this process.

    In Gimp, the answer I found for doing what Esther seemed to be doing or something similar is to scale the image up to the desired resolution with Interpolation set at none and then scale again to the desired size with Interpolation set at cubic.  Frankly, I tried that and ran out of memory to the point that my computer locked up.  Apparently, one should try that while also running a render in the background.  I lost the render and I still don't know if that would have worked.  I'm a little leery of trying that again.  

    Really hoping that @_manne_ pops in and clarifies exactly what she meant in the video.

    I think you should just render at the size you will be working at. Like you said, if you need a 10 x 13 inch image, just set DS to render out an image that is 3000 x 3900. Don't worry about the Print Size. As long as you have the pixels, the other stuff doesn't matter.

  • ToborTobor Posts: 2,300
    Knittingmommy said:

    because DS only renders at 72 ppi.  

    This notion will still mess you up. D|S doesn't render at *any* PPI. It's just a series of pixels horizontally and vertically. The file it saves lacks the PPI metadata, which is used to instruct other software what size to reproduce the image at. Most software defaults to 72 DPI/PPI to display or print it, but that's not the same as D|S rendering at any specific resolution.

    I don't use Gimp so I don't know how it works, but Photoshop defaults to resampling on, thinking that if you change the PPI resolution, you want to keep the same physical dimensions. This causes the program to maintain the same output size. That's unnecessary for what we do, and it results in some serious loss of quality as the image is blown up. If the graphics software you use doesn't have a resample option, just change the resolution but keep the physical size the same. Verify by checking the image has the same # of pixels before and after. That's your target goal.

  • mmitchell_houstonmmitchell_houston Posts: 2,484
    mmitchell_houston said:
    philebus said:

        

    Thanks SO MUCH for the great tutorial...

    I am so impressed by your technique and tutorial, I actually took advantage of the sale over at ArtRage.com and bought the latest version, ArtRage 4.5. For only $24.90, this seems like a good deal to get started with some natural media painting tools. I'm looking forward to giving it a try in the next week or so.

  • philebusphilebus Posts: 242
    edited November 2017
    mmitchell_houston said:

    I am so impressed by your technique and tutorial, I actually took advantage of the sale over at ArtRage.com and bought the latest version, ArtRage 4.5. For only $24.90, this seems like a good deal to get started with some natural media painting tools. I'm looking forward to giving it a try in the next week or so.

    I honestly believe you will love ArtRage - what I'm doing hardly scratches the surface of what it can do but it has been worth its price to me for that alone.

    I will get around to doing some more in depth tuturials but I'm afraid that sleep has become a problem for me again, so I'm non too active just now. I plan to make a blog for them and to include some tutorials on formatting ebooks as well, perhaps with blog posts reviewing useful models and fonts. I'm also wondering once more about the pre-made book cover market but I'm still not quite confident of myself for that - or certain that there would be a demand for this sort of thing.

    Anyway, I needed a break from monsters for a while.

     

    Post edited by philebus on
  • Tiffanie Gray - IDLMTiffanie Gray - IDLM Posts: 561
    mmitchell_houston said:
    tiffanie_gray_aceaa3bc71 said:

    Next art prompt turned ebook cover.

    Good start. The character design is okay -- I like the contrast in colors between the two goons and the girl. I'm also glad to see you're using shadows -- they can add drama. Now on to what I'm not happy about, and I'm sorry if this comes off as overly critical, but there are a lot of issues here that need to re resolved. Most of them come down to composition and storytelling. Let's start with the simple stuff:

    • Her hair is blending in to the redish sash on the green guy's outfit. You should always either change element colors to avoid conflicts like this, or change their positions. Swapping the positions of the two goons would solve this problem.
    • Her outfit isn't sexy. She's a redhead. She would probably look better in a green silk jacket with dark leggings and black boots (again, it's a matter of not having brown clothes on brown floor). 
    • Her pose needs work. The gun is getting lost in the black pants of the green goon, and her pose just isn't menacing.
    • The goons' poses need work, too. Raise the scimitar, and lose whatever that is in the gray guy's left hand. If I can't tell at glance what it is, then it is not servicing the story. Also, seriously think of making gray guy a leftie -- that is, move his gun to his left hand. It would greatly help create a classic composition by framing her between the two goons with arms outstretched on the far sides of her. And think about making them crouch a little, or do something with body language to make them seem menacing. It seems to me like you're trying to tell a story where she's cool and collected and her two goons are ready to explode in a fit of rage behind her. Tell it with a smug tilt of her head and more exagerated poses from the goons, as though they are ready to explode in action at any moment.
    • Finally, lose that picture on the wall. It is clutter that is purely a distraction. Either add TONS of junk to the background (so that it sets the scene and becomes "white noise" and we don't really see it, or pare the background down to the bare essentials. Or are they in a museum? If so, you need to add more stuff to sell that scene.
    • This is a preference of mine, but if I see a window in a scene, I always want to know what's outside. Are they in a seedy neighborhood? A fantasy kingdom? Some sort of future world? Either move the window more into the frame or more out. 
    • Finally, and this is a small point, but I think you should move the camera closer and lower, while playing with your focal length. It's an old trick, but looking up at someone makes them seem more intimidating. I think that would help tell your story.

    I hope this doesn't bum you out. I do like where you started. You have decent foundation blocks to build upon: Good characters and a simple scene. Just amping it up a bit will take it to a higher level. Good luck, and keep at it!

     

    PS: Sorry for the typos. My spellcheck is on the fritz and I'm in a hurry. :-)

    Thank you for taking the time to add your critique. No, it doesn't bum me out, I have nothing invested in the cover except time. I'm trying to improve, so I'm just using these as stock ebook covers and practice. You made some really good points, and if I was critiquing it, I would have made some of the same ones!  We are blind to our own faults much of the time!

    I think I might do some redo on this at a later time, as right now I'm in the middle of testing for Products, and writing and creating products for sale. (not ebooks for that). But, it's concrete examples and I really appreciate that.

     

  • Tiffanie Gray - IDLMTiffanie Gray - IDLM Posts: 561

    For natural media painting, PD Artist and PD Howler are also excellent, they are what I use for my work, in 2d and post process 3D and is sold here and at: thebest3d.com, as well. There is a long thread over in the Carrerra forum about PD Howler (also called Dogwaffle in the older versions)

  • Xavier LeggettXavier Leggett Posts: 60

    Great cover.

    Looking forward to your tutorials.

    b10d1ec0644936e813a282d50d3712.jpg
    500 x 800 - 513K
  • Jay Jay_1264499Jay Jay_1264499 Posts: 298

    Very sorry for the shameless plug but i just wanted to share the new cover for issue 4 of my new comic book that is available on Amazon!  Every element was rendered individually and then composited in PS.  Used Hitfilm 2 Ultimate for the lettering etc.

     Very much enjoying this thread and am picking up some awesome tips 

     

    Issue4Cover.jpg
    1563 x 2500 - 1M
  • BradCarstenBradCarsten Posts: 856
    Jay Jay said:

    Very sorry for the shameless plug but i just wanted to share the new cover for issue 4 of my new comic book that is available on Amazon!  Every element was rendered individually and then composited in PS.  Used Hitfilm 2 Ultimate for the lettering etc.

     Very much enjoying this thread and am picking up some awesome tips 

     

    do you have a link to the comic?

  • Jay Jay_1264499Jay Jay_1264499 Posts: 298
    edited February 2017
    bradrg said:
    Jay Jay said:

    Very sorry for the shameless plug but i just wanted to share the new cover for issue 4 of my new comic book that is available on Amazon!  Every element was rendered individually and then composited in PS.  Used Hitfilm 2 Ultimate for the lettering etc.

     Very much enjoying this thread and am picking up some awesome tips 

     

    do you have a link to the comic?

    Hi Bradrg, thanks for the interest.  Here's link to issue 1.  If you're a Kindle Unlimited customer you can read the whole series for free.  If not we've just lowered the pricing structure to make it a little more palatable!!!  We used Daz extensively on this along with Photoshop and Vue.  Been a heck of a project but an awesome challenge.  This is only a small part of a wider story we have planned for the next couple of years! 

    We plan on running another free promotion on an issue very soon

    Thanks again for your interest

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Twilight-Gods-Medusa-Issue-1-ebook/dp/B01MAWJRWG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1487072908&sr=8-2&keywords=twilight+of+the+gods+medusa

     

    Jay 

    Post edited by Jay Jay_1264499 on
  • NovicaNovica Posts: 23,895
    Jay Jay said:

    Hi Bradrg, thanks for the interest.  

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Twilight-Gods-Medusa-Issue-1-ebook/dp/B01MAWJRWG/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1487072908&sr=8-2&keywords=twilight+of+the+gods+medusa

    I looked inside it and it's very nicely done. Kudos! Nice action, variety of lighting, good storyline that flows. 

  • Jay Jay_1264499Jay Jay_1264499 Posts: 298
    Novica said:
    Jay Jay said:

     

    I looked inside it and it's very nicely done. Kudos! Nice action, variety of lighting, good storyline that flows. 

    Thank you Novica.  We made it also available free for Kindle Unlimited subscribers to take out some of the risk on taking a punt on an unknown product!!  It's been a heck of a fun ride making this story and my writing buddy has done a great job in making a narrative flow and characters have a good sense of purpose.  Can't wait for people to see the 5th issue later this month and then the concluding 6th issue after that which will be a decent double sized issue. 

  • LlynaraLlynara Posts: 4,770
    edited February 2017
    Jay Jay said:
    Llynara said:

    I found this thread last December when I discovered DAZ3D and realized I could use it to design book covers. I had tried to work with a cover designer on another book who did not understand what I wanted. Being a techie, I decided to try it. It took me a while, but I finally have a cover that I love! This is the prequel to Black Kat, a dark romantic comedy series with superheroes. It's done almost entirely with DAZ3D products. Still learning Iray but happy with how this one came out. The book will be free on Amazon next week if anyone is interested.

     

    Sorry, I'm a little late to the thread. This cover Lynara is fantastic.!  Really jumps out at ya.  

    @JayJay - thanks! I actually tweaked it with input from people here and the final came out even better (click for bigger size):

     

    I'm catching up here too. Been behind, as I'm trying to balance work and writing. I'm finishing up the second Black Kat book and working on the cover, plus a few covers for friends. I really want to get my graphic design skills up to the point where I do can do these professionally and work from home. Family issues are pretty much making that a necessity. I know I could do it, but need a LOT of practice. All in good time! 

    @philebus Thanks for the great information, that effect looks great

    @tiffanie_gray_aceaa3bc71 - I keep running into you on the DAZ FB groups! LOL! Keep up the good work with the covers! 

    @mmitchell_houston - The book covers look great! 

    @warloc Love your cover. Gorgeous! I think that picture you posted recently in one of the DAZ FB groups would also make an great book cover. I think you called it "Defeated." Amazing render.

    I'm sure I've missed someone or something, somewhere. Sorry!

    Post edited by Llynara on
  • Xavier LeggettXavier Leggett Posts: 60

    Llynara:

    I'm catching up here too. Been behind, as I'm trying to balance work and writing. I'm finishing up the second Black Kat book and working on the cover, plus a few covers for friends. I really want to get my graphic design skills up to the point where I do can do these professionally and work from home. Family issues are pretty much making that a necessity. I know I could do it, but need a LOT of practice. All in good time! 

    How do you do it?  How do you manage a hectic life between your 'day job,' writing, making covers, marketing, maintaining a thoughtful and inspiring presence on the DAZ3D forums, and family?  Caffiene, high fructose corn syrup, Dos Equis . . . How do you do it?

     

  • LlynaraLlynara Posts: 4,770
    edited February 2017

    Aww, Xavier, you are too sweet! The answer is I don't do any of it well, but I'm Scottish so I'm insanely stubborn and keep trying. I also drink plenty of coffee and try to laugh. Valentine's Day was so comically bad here, but total fodder for my zany books. I cannot make up half the crazy stuff that happens to me in the real world. So I write about it. I figure that's what it's there for. If it makes others laugh and inspires them, great! Maybe I'm doing something right. I hope! 

    I also get up early to write, usually around 4 am. I use the Miracle Morning routine by Hal Elrod. That's a great book and concept. There's a follow-up book called "Miracle Morning for Writers" which is excellent. I'd recommend reading Miracle Morning first, getting used to the routine, and then doing Miracle Morning for Writers.

    Even if you don't think you're a morning person, these books are amazing and inspiring. I used the first one to find the time to finish Crazy in the Heart, which sat untouched for 10 years while my life fell apart (be careful what you write about, sometimes it comes true!) Took me 14 years total to write that one. I used Miracle Morning for Writers to write Unlucky Charm- in four months! My third book is taking longer, somewhere in between, HA HA! Hoping to have Kat & Mouse out in May.

    Post edited by Llynara on
  • Xavier LeggettXavier Leggett Posts: 60
    Llynara said:

    Aww, Xavier, you are too sweet! The answer is I don't do any of it well, but I'm Scottish so I'm insanely stubborn and keep trying. I also drink plenty of coffee and try to laugh. Valentine's Day was so comically bad here, but total fodder for my zany books. I cannot make up half the crazy stuff that happens to me in the real world. So I write about it. I figure that's what it's there for. If it makes others laugh and inspires them, great! Maybe I'm doing something right. I hope! 

    I also get up early to write, usually around 4 am. I use the Miracle Morning routine by Hal Elrod. That's a great book and concept. There's a follow-up book called "Miracle Morning for Writers" which is excellent. I'd recommend reading Miracle Morning first, getting used to the routine, and then doing Miracle Morning for Writers.

    Even if you don't think you're a morning person, these books are amazing and inspiring. I used the first one to find the time to finish Crazy in the Heart, which sat untouched for 10 years while my life fell apart (be careful what you write about, sometimes it comes true!) Took me 14 years total to write that one. I used Miracle Morning for Writers to write Unlucky Charm- in four months! My third book is taking longer, somewhere in between, HA HA! Hoping to have Kat & Mouse out in May.

    Thanks Llynara! 

    I thought about picking up Miracle Morning last month, but didn't--there were too many fun things here to buy.  But I think I'm gonna have to just download it onto my Kindle, before March Madness hits and "shopping cart Jenga" starts eating away at my time.

    I wish you continued success in your writing career and keep those funny and inspiring posts coming!

    X

  • Jay Jay_1264499Jay Jay_1264499 Posts: 298

    I'm going to have to check out this Miracle Morning thing....I could do with being a little more productive before I have to go to work. At the moment I'm cramming all the artwork into evenings and weekends which although doable and really enjoyable leaves little tome for anything else especially when trying to fit in some time with the mrs and a little DDP Yoga!

  • LlynaraLlynara Posts: 4,770
    edited February 2017

    You're welcome! For me, I find it easier to do the more mentally taxing things (like writing) early in the morning, when everything is fresh and nothing crazy has happened yet. Because it will! But then my writing is done for the day- or so I think. I continue to tinker with it in my brain while commuting and over lunch. I catch those ideas in Evernote with audio and text notes. Audio notes are great while driving. I transcribe them later. Some of my best ideas have come this way. 

    In the evenings, I like doing DAZ and Photoshop. I'm usually too tired by then to string words together in any meaningful fashion. Plus I know I'm going to be interrupted a lot because family members need me, so I don't even try to do anything that requires a lot of concentration. I just play, and they play alongside me. My six year old often helps me in DAZ and makes suggestions. It's like having a backseat driver some days, LOL. We also do toons together sometimes, it's fun. 

    Post edited by Llynara on
  • BradCarstenBradCarsten Posts: 856

    So after reading Llynara's post I was wondering how long it takes everyone else here to write a novel? I look at people like Jake bible who can churn out a book from start to finished in 3 weeks, and my jaw falls open. I've been writing for 7 years now, (almost full time) and have only managed 3. That said my first book was 300,000 words long, so that would probably count as 3 lol. I think now I could get one out in about 9 months if I really pushed myself, but I would love to be able to eventually cut that down to 6 months and then even 4. 

  • LlynaraLlynara Posts: 4,770
    edited February 2017

    I think you get better as you go and as you find a good workflow. My mother has published 6 books, and it seemed like with the first few, she was able to cut her writing time in half as she improved. First one took 4 years, second took 2, third took 1. The others also seemed to take about a year for her, because she writes deep, richly developed books that are highly polished. She can't rush it. I'm in awe of her talent. She's writing historical romance with a lot of research involved too.

    I write mostly contemporary settings, but I have to do world building, which can take a while. That's why I love writing series. Once you have your world and rules set up, you can continue to develop it, but it's not as time consuming. Black Kat is a huge world build with multiple series in it. The first series has 13 books. I'll be working on those for a few years. I plan on releasing three superhero books this year, hoping to take about 4 months each. That may or may not be possible. I won't know until I'm knee deep in it.

    My Midwest series is more emotionally draining for me to write and I seem to need 12-18 months on each one. I pushed the next book (Wilde in the Heart) back to a December release because I need more time to work on it. It's also connected to the Black Kat series, so releasing them in tandem is a good idea.

    I don't think I could ever write anything in 3 weeks and have it be any good, but then again, I never thought I could do NanoWriMo either. November isn't a good month for me to power write, but the Camp Nanos in April and July are great. I tend to be more productive when the weather is good and there's lots of sunshine. I wrote three books last summer, back to back. I did 60k on Kat & Mouse in 3 weeks and 70k words on Wilde in 2 weeks. I went to edit Kat & Mouse and realized I had another book in there, so I broke off the beginning and made it into the prequel, Unlucky Charm, which is 50k words (about 3 weeks.) 

    I can't maintain that pace forever but I seem to be able to do it in spurts. Editing is what takes me forever. That's what I'm hung up on now with Kat & Mouse. 

    Hope this helps- it's only my experience, and every writer is different.

    Post edited by Llynara on
  • Xavier LeggettXavier Leggett Posts: 60
    bradrg said:

    So after reading Llynara's post I was wondering how long it takes everyone else here to write a novel? I look at people like Jake bible who can churn out a book from start to finished in 3 weeks, and my jaw falls open. I've been writing for 7 years now, (almost full time) and have only managed 3. That said my first book was 300,000 words long, so that would probably count as 3 lol. I think now I could get one out in about 9 months if I really pushed myself, but I would love to be able to eventually cut that down to 6 months and then even 4. 

     

    This is great stuff.  I'm finding out so many new things here today.  A while ago I heard on NPR that author Lawrence Block would be playing poker at a friend's house on a Friday evening, before excusing himself because he had a novel that was due on Monday morning.  Whenever I hear stuff like that--it's staggering.  It's mind-blowing.  But Block is writing crime and mystery novels and not, for example, The Lord of the Rings.  And make no mistake, writing quality work is time consuming.  Wiriting a 300,000 masterpiece is time consuming.  And doing all of that while working a 'day job,' having family, and more is just tremendous.  Not that writing full time is any easier.  Well, it is, but it isn't--because all of a sudden you have other demands on your time and attention.  I'm working on a novel right now that I hope to have completed by May--we'll see how it goes.

    Llynara said:

    I think you get better as you go and as you find a good workflow. My mother has published 6 books, and it seemed like with the first few, she was able to cut her writing time in half as she improved. First one took 4 years, second took 2, third took 1. The others also seemed to take about a year for her, because she writes deep, richly developed books that are highly polished. She can't rush it. I'm in awe of her talent. She's writing historical romance with a lot of research involved too.

    I write mostly contemporary settings, but I have to do world building, which can take a while. That's why I love writing series. Once you have your world and rules set up, you can continue to develop it, but it's not time consuming. Black Kat is a huge world build with multiple series in it. The first series has 13 books. I'll be working on those for a few years. I plan on releasing three superhero books this year, hoping to take about 4 months each. That may or may not be possible. I won't know until I'm knee deep in it.

    My Midwest series is more emotionally draining for me to write and I seem to need 12-18 months on each one. I pushed the next book (Wilde in the Heart) back to a December release because I need more time to work on it. It's also connected to the Black Kat series, so releasing them in tandem is a good idea.

    I don't think I could ever write anything in 3 weeks and have it be any good, but then again, I never thought I could do NanoWriMo either. November isn't a good month for me to power write, but the Camp Nanos in April and July are great. I tend to be more productive when the weather is good and there's lots of sunshine. I wrote three books last summer, back to back. I did 60k on Kat & Mouse in 3 weeks and 70k words on Wilde in 2 weeks. I went to edit Kat & Mouse and realized I had another book in there, so I broke off the beginning and made it Unlucky Charm, which is 50k words (about 3 weeks.) 

    I can't maintain that pace forever but I seem to be able to do it in spurts. Editing is what takes me forever. That's what I'm hung up on now with Kat & Mouse. 

    Hope this helps- it's only my experience, and every writer is different.

     

    This is why I simply love coming these forums.  Who would've thought that there were so many writers at a 3D art site?  When people share their experiences--it's like, yes!  This is awesome.  I write science fiction and came here years ago just to find a way to make simple avatars for my characters.  That's it.  I didn't realize that it would explode into a full blown hobby that sometimes steals time from writing.  But I simply love making book covers and rendering action scenes with my characters.  But writing is my first love and sometimes I can write all day for several days . . . then the exhaustion hits me like a sledgehammer to the face.  And I have to throttle back before picking up the pace again.  And hearing stories about the great Stephen King being addicted to cocaine at one point during his career . . . it's scary.  But I don't consume anything stronger than caffiene!  I swear!   Well maybe Corona or Dos Equis on Friday night--but that's it.

    Hearing about everyone's experiences and struggles makes this vocation/hobby more enjoyable.

     

    X

Sign In or Register to comment.