Comments on Best Book Cover Art - page 2

But this is a list about cover art. it's not about the books themselves. So that is why this list is no good. It's a popularity contest of the books themselves instead of what are good covers.

Yes, JSWolf, you're 100% spot-on. But complaining about people's taste in the third person will not change anyone's mind about what is or isn't good graphic design.

You're an adult, right? So you should know that you can't hold back a torrent of adolescent opinion with the force of condescending remarks alone. Start a thread or a group to educate people on the issue, and see who wants to join.

What would be best is to scrap the list and start over with a librarian monitoring the list so books that do not belong can be removed from the list.

JSWolf, librarians can't do that, and even if they could they wouldn't. It's a user voted list. Whether you agree with the selections or not does not matter. Whatever gets the most votes, goes to the top.

Personally I do not like the covers, but the fact remains that they are distinctive, and at least has some kind of justification for being on this list.

Is it possible to start a new best cover list so we can kinda put this one to rest?

You can't close this one, but you could start a new one and ask members to not add the Twilight books. I doubt it'll work, but you could try.

It's not just the Twilight books, but a lot of the books that do not have covers worthy of being on such a list.

Gee someones nice.

I chose those books because each of their cover art has something to do with the book, something little, maybe foreshadowing, or a symbol and they look appealing.

That's your opinion, and I'd like to point out that you are in the minority. Like I said, you can attempt to make a new list. You will not be able to exclude books from the list or have books deleted. The whole point of Listopia is that they are community interactive lists. If you want something more exclusive, you are going to have to check out Listmania on Amazon.

I'd also like to point out this is a very popular list, but there are many other lists out there with less exposure that have some great book compilations. You can find them by keyword search in listopia, or you can find them on book pages. When a book is on a list, it shows up on the book page. I have found some great lists this way.

JSWolf wrote: "But this is a list about cover art. it's not about the books themselves. So that is why this list is no good. It's a popularity contest of the books themselves instead of what are good covers.
"

Thats what I'm saying. They have great cover art, AND I have read them and enjoyed them.

Reed wrote: "that he has read, hes still young dude. he doesnt read books about drugs and high school afairs. hes only 14 man. i love the books he posted but i think hunger games and catching fire really catch ..."

Reed, why do u go around telling peeps that we r 14? we r 16!! duh

Thank you to whoever added my debut novel, "13 to Life: A Werewolf's Tale" to the list--I feel very fortunate to have gotten such a pretty cover for my first book. :-) The designer at St. Martin's Press did a lovely job (imho).

One thing that is disturbing about this list is how few covers are actually passable, let alone attractive. It's a good thing that few of us base our reading on the appearance of the cover; otherwise, few books would be read. What's up with these barely interesting designs?

Whew. It's lists like these that help me understand why Thomas Kinkade is a popular 'artist.'

You people probably have velvet Elvises and poker-playing dogs on your walls. Probably an overstuffed couch with cup-holders built into it too.

Oh, the humanity... This is a vulgar, vulgar nation...

arianna wrote: "Nicole wrote: "I can't even believe that Stephanie Meyer books are on this list."

they are on everylist"

Truly they are... I liked Twilight a lot more before it was popular, now I'm starting to get a bit annoyed by it being EVERYWHERE! I'm still a fan, but it's a bit much

Some people cannot differentiate between a good book and a nice cover art. And Twilight shouldn't be top in this list. What's so special about an Apple?

I would pick Daughter of the Flames. It has a lovely cover art. Bree Despain's The Dark Divine is pretty good too.

I really wish this stupid Twilight obsession would end. There is NOTHING good about the cover art for those books. I mean, a red ribbon? a flower? a chess piece? Those have been done many times before. If I knew nothing of the books and saw them in a store/library I'd pass them buy. A good book cover is one that can grab your attention and get you to read at least the description of the book. That crap on the Twilight books just screams, "PASS ME BY, I'M GENERIC!"

i really liked the cover art to kissed by an angel (UK and US version)

Some one made a comment saying TWILIGHT isnt so special.

Ive read them. The books are OK. THeir not atrocious like the films, but their not great either.

But the covers are pretty snazy. Well, i only like ECLISPE and TWILIGHT covers of the series.

Brindle wrote: ""

I know I'm biased, but the cover Christine Griffin did for my book is absolutely stunning.

It may be very good but doesn't show up here at all. I think a very plain cover with something dramatic centered works best. I have a BA in fine art and I am very sensitive to colors, form, etc and have bought books due to their covers! I have taken much flack over this over the years but we are all different. Years ago I read a book on marketing that told what colors to use depending on what group you were trying to reach. This was geared toward impulse buyers. Usually books are different as people tend to browse in book stores.

I will try to see if I can enlarge your cover so I can see it better.

No, in fact this cover would turn me off. It has too much the "bodice ripper" look which usually means a cheap romance. Very sorry! Hope you do better next time.

I like covers that are exceptional or eyecatching. Different type books covers excell in catching others eyes. Some ones I like (probobly reflects my tastes in books more than anything else) are:

I just wanna know whats up this this witchy women

OK, nothing but sexy but still, it so nicely reflects my Ideal of dangerous hotty!

Its just fabulous IMO


Just cuz

Love the dude--and the monsters!



I know there are more but these are a few that come to my mind.

Why dont you list some of your ideas of great cover art.

David wrote: "Whew. It's lists like these that help me understand why Thomas Kinkade is a popular 'artist.'

You people probably have velvet Elvises and poker-playing dogs on your walls. Probably an overstuffed..."

Readers would no doubt enjoy the huge collection of online book cover artwork and illustrations by illustrator Duncan Long at http://DuncanLong.com/art.html

Included are covers he's done for HarperCollins, PS Publishing, Pocket Books, Solomon Press, Fort Ross, Asimov's Science Fiction, ILEX and many other publishers and self-publishing authors.

some of these are sooooooo cheesy omg

I don't know if people understand that the list is for best cover art, not how much they like the story inside. Most of the highly rated books here have horrible covers. A pair of hand holding an apple is one of the weakest images I've ever seen.

Great list for sure!

I voted for a bunch of covers including Twilight and Eclipse. Not because I love those books (even though I do like them) but because I think the covers are very, very stylish and beautiful in their simplicity. So I don't at all agree with those of you who think they're an abomination to the list or anything of the like. They're great covers and there's a thought behind them, stemming from the author. New Moon and Breaking Dawn, however, have boring and cheesy covers in my opinion and do NOT have an actual thought/idea behind them (at least I know this is the case with New Moon, not sure about Breaking Dawn).

I definitely vote for those books with interesting and unique style. I especially voted for the books(manga) from the Clamp series. :D

Wth ?
Twilight ?
Don`t get me wrong, I LOVE Twilight. Its amazing.
But its just a pair of arms.
And an apple.

And Harry Potter ?!
The cover is hideous.
Eugghh. :/

While I am no fan of the "Twilight" franchise (the books are awful & the movies are worse) I have no problem admitting that I think the covers for each book are intriguing in their simplicity and are actually quite nice. You can't judge a book by it's cover, especially in this case.

I would love to know the artists who did these covers. Is there a way to add that?

i'm no artist but, to me, most of the books on this list lack any sort of imaginative cover "art". i'm willing to admit that i always judge a book by it's cover...and i'd probably never buy 3/4 of the books listed here.

i am a twilight and hunger games fan but, honestly, a single picture does not a good cover make. they may be good covers for those books but, in the grand scheme of things, they are not incredibly artistic. i also completely disagree with all the "series" books listed on here...it's not very imaginative to put a scantily clad girl or some vampire dude, in different poses, on every single cover. boo.

This list is a fine list as is. It should not be deleted as some have suggested, but it should be monitored by librarians who should then delete idiotic comments that include flaming other people for inputting their opinion...which is completely covered by the first amendment. It encourages debate; debate is a good thing.

Art is completely interpretive. Whether or not something can be deemed as not just "best" but also "good" art cannot be confined to one simple definition. So you like some covers, hate others. Not everyone is going to agree with you and not everyone should. Just accept that and try not to force your opinion onto others.

While I do think that simplistic images can be seen as somewhat "weak"...I was drawn by the cover of Twilight. It was the pure simplicity of it that made me want to read the story to find out more. Sometimes less is more.

I personally prefer more of an artistic or painterly image on the cover. Something that looks like it took more effort than snapping a camera and editing the photograph with some airbrushing program. That is why I am recommending Hilary Knight's "Cinderella". I have never been able to get those images out of my mind, and I am so glad to have finally found the proper name of the artist who has been ingrained on my brain since childhood.

Although the Twilight books were trash, I thought the covers were okay, but they had absolutely nothing to do with the books.

Agreed

Eh, I don't know if it is a glitch but the Great Gatsby needs to be swapped back to its original cover, you know the one that he actually wrote into the book because he liked it so much.

Well I didn't vote for any Twilight series, but I still find good cover art which were voted only once or twice. For example Deadly Dreams by Sarah Dieng and Blood of Gold by B.V. Larson which I would surely buy just because of the cover art. I don't believe that a photograph doesn't make a good cover than a graphic desing. It all depends on the Publisher, Author or the public. I voted only for those books that I loved the cover. If someone doesn't like my list that doesn't mean I should be banned.
Some people voted for the most popular because they didn't understand the words for this list. Some consider popularity=best cover art.

I'm sorry, but this list looks at a very narrow category of books.
Look at The Way of Kings, or the original Mistborn covers. Let's see what's another good example...

Maybe I should make my own list. :)

Dang it Twilight! D:

JSWolf wrote: "Adam has no idea what good cover art is.
"

Totally

Is it just me or did practically every book that appeared on this list have a different cover then the one I read?

My 'Hunger Games' book had Katniss and Peeta on the cover as illustrations, with Katniss in fire and Peeta in blue woods/ water. It's a really rare edition though--I think-- cause I bought it in like...2008.

My Twilight cover had a girl on the front with a bob cut running down a school hallway. I hardly EVER see them anymore.

My 'The Giver' had a boy going through a blackhole.

My Gemma Doyle series had just faces of girls.

My 'Graceling' had a girl with a sword and red hair.

My 'Coraline' was completley different in every way.

My 'Harry Potters' were minimilistic with just a little gold writing.

My 'Graveyard book' had a boy and a tall vamp dude in a gravyard in stylized drawing.

Hmmmm....I'm buying from a weird bookshop.

Sue wrote: "While I am no fan of the "Twilight" franchise (the books are awful & the movies are worse) I have no problem admitting that I think the covers for each book are intriguing in their simplicity and a..."

We aren't judging a book by the cover. We are judging the cover by the cover and finding that most covers in the list are just voted on based on the book and not the cover. It's fan wank for the books and nothing really to do with most of the covers.

JSWolf, disagreeing with someone else's subjective opinion or suspecting their motives in adding or voting for a book are not valid reasons for removing books from a Listopia list. Reading through the comments, several people have said they like covers on this list, and you've discounted their opinions simply because you disagree.

Librarians cannot just remove books from Listopia lists because they feel like it or they disagree with a book being on the list. It has to legitimately be an inappropriate addition to the list. If this were a list for books released in 2009 and a book that was released in 2002 appeared, that would be valid reason to remove the book, because that is a fact that can be verified. Opinion as to what "best" is, is not. The Twilight books have covers, therefore they are eligible to be on this list if people like them.

I'm not saying to remove any books. But I am disappointed that most books in this list are voted on based on the book and not the cover. That's not what this list is about.

JSWolf wrote: "What would be best is to scrap the list and start over with a librarian monitoring the list so books that do not belong can be removed from the list."

JSWolf wrote: "I'm not saying to remove any books. But I am disappointed that most books in this list are voted on based on the book and not the cover. That's not what this list is about."

Whether you're talking about removing books from this list, or starting a new one and having librarians "policing" it, you're saying the same thing: that books that "do not belong" (IE: are not up to your standards) should not be allowed on it. And that's not how these lists work.

I'm not sure why it matters to you whether there are books on here that you don't think should be, but it's not likely to change, since it is based on opinion. You've been saying the same thing since 2009. It's just a list...

Where did you get that I want books removed or policed by librarians or to start a new list? I never said any of that.