Children's Books discussion
Themes, Topics & Categories
>
Precision in picture book
date
newest »


Hmm. Still I don't really understand your question.
Most picture-books rely on the pictures to help tell the story. At the very least the pictures are meant to set the tone of the story. Often they are indispensable to understanding the action & themes, also.
Most picture-books rely on the pictures to help tell the story. At the very least the pictures are meant to set the tone of the story. Often they are indispensable to understanding the action & themes, also.

1- The writer wrote the text.
2- The illustrator made a text afterwards.
3- Än empty space" was found for the text.
in "The giving tree" u can see how it"s altogether. It's common in books that the author is also the illustrator. like the little prince for example.

??
Sometimes it's just a style thing.
There is no rule that says the illustration has to flow into/ around the writing or visa versa.
Another reason might be money.
If an author hires an artist to do simple drawings or more involved, gets you a very different presentation.
:-)
As an artist myself, I would prefer to to know the whole story and work closely with a writer. This would definitely be a more costly way, but ultimately lead to more polished final product.
IMO

If it's helpful, I can comment a little on the process I experienced as a writer who does not illustrate. My text was laid out in page spreads by my editor at Random House. Then the illustrator was selected by the publisher, and she submitted sketches that showed where the words would go. The art director and editor worked with the illustrator on layout.
While picture book artists and writers are not usually in communication about a project, I think editors and art directors do a remarkable job of making beautiful books. I was delighted by how the emotion of my story was conveyed by the illustrator.
I really like to ask u what is the place of precision in "picture books art"?