The picture of the dog is an interior, flash-lit photo; it looks terribly artificial superimposed on the exterior shot.
The main image is confined to a little box, and the rest of the cover is nothing but filler.
The font is more appropriate to a grade school term paper than a book cover.
Crediting the dog as co-author is unbearably cutesy, the kind of thing that authors who don’t realize it’s been done a billion times think is “clever.”
I know this is a bad cover, but that dog is cute AF.
I want to give poor Mr. Pish a hug and some cuddles and a better name.
I agree the dog is adorable. What is it about the cover that is so awful?
The picture of the dog is an interior, flash-lit photo; it looks terribly artificial superimposed on the exterior shot.
The main image is confined to a little box, and the rest of the cover is nothing but filler.
The font is more appropriate to a grade school term paper than a book cover.
Crediting the dog as co-author is unbearably cutesy, the kind of thing that authors who don’t realize it’s been done a billion times think is “clever.”
Thanks for answering!