I don’t think we really need to take the opinion of someone who labels him/herself “AlphaBitch” seriously. It’s objectively NOT a great looking cover, unless it’s your grandpa who wrote it.
Dear, you may well know that it says “Ho Bo Woods,” but you have to bury your nose in the cover to discern it. Let’s face it–a casual browser, looking for a book to read, in thumbnail, let’s not forget–isn’t going to do that, now, are they? Nope. So, even if the rest of the cover was a top-notch design, which it truly is not–the cover would fail on that alone. If an important element for the cover’s success is not discernible at thumbnail size, that’s a fail.
The Double Fail, The Uber-Double-Secret-Probation Fail, is that even when I open this cover in a new tag and zoom the holy HELL out of it, I can barely make out the “ods” at the end of “Bo Ho Wo,” which is actually what’s visible, even at near-full size.
So sorry, but I think you’d have to travel far afield to find anyone honest who would agree with you that that’s a “great looking cover actually.” It’s not. It’s hard to read; it has bizarre-looking elements that are in a near-hidden layer (like the famous Asian director, Bo Ho Wo!), and it’s not viable at thumbnail size.
I assume you designed it or it’s the cover for a family member. Good luck with it.
Naaman Brown
4 years ago
Shrinking the cover to thumbnail size the average bookbrowser might see, the good points are:
_ the title and author are legible,
_ it is clearer there are two soldiers in a jungle, and
_ the contentious gray lines are invisible.
Zooming into the 751 x 1162 pixel version on my laptop, the gray lines are visible but potential readers/buyers on the internet with a phone are not going to see them at normal display sizes.
This is a potentially good cover but it is not perfect.
Naaman–the “contentious gray lines” are meant to be PART of the cover design. Ya know? If they were an older design, being overwritten, with design ineptitude, I’m pretty sure that the amusingly-named “AlphaBitch” would have said something along those lines. But she asserts that it’s a GREAT cover design…so, presumably, “Ho Bo Wo”(ods) is intentionally like that. Just sayin’.
Wow! That Vietnam-era camo was damn near invisible.
And so too, apparently, were the original words of this book’s title and byline…who’s Ho Bo Woo?
You’re either blind or stupid. It says Ho Bo Woods. That’s a great looking cover actually.
I don’t think we really need to take the opinion of someone who labels him/herself “AlphaBitch” seriously. It’s objectively NOT a great looking cover, unless it’s your grandpa who wrote it.
Dear, you may well know that it says “Ho Bo Woods,” but you have to bury your nose in the cover to discern it. Let’s face it–a casual browser, looking for a book to read, in thumbnail, let’s not forget–isn’t going to do that, now, are they? Nope. So, even if the rest of the cover was a top-notch design, which it truly is not–the cover would fail on that alone. If an important element for the cover’s success is not discernible at thumbnail size, that’s a fail.
The Double Fail, The Uber-Double-Secret-Probation Fail, is that even when I open this cover in a new tag and zoom the holy HELL out of it, I can barely make out the “ods” at the end of “Bo Ho Wo,” which is actually what’s visible, even at near-full size.
So sorry, but I think you’d have to travel far afield to find anyone honest who would agree with you that that’s a “great looking cover actually.” It’s not. It’s hard to read; it has bizarre-looking elements that are in a near-hidden layer (like the famous Asian director, Bo Ho Wo!), and it’s not viable at thumbnail size.
I assume you designed it or it’s the cover for a family member. Good luck with it.
Shrinking the cover to thumbnail size the average bookbrowser might see, the good points are:
_ the title and author are legible,
_ it is clearer there are two soldiers in a jungle, and
_ the contentious gray lines are invisible.
Zooming into the 751 x 1162 pixel version on my laptop, the gray lines are visible but potential readers/buyers on the internet with a phone are not going to see them at normal display sizes.
This is a potentially good cover but it is not perfect.
Naaman–the “contentious gray lines” are meant to be PART of the cover design. Ya know? If they were an older design, being overwritten, with design ineptitude, I’m pretty sure that the amusingly-named “AlphaBitch” would have said something along those lines. But she asserts that it’s a GREAT cover design…so, presumably, “Ho Bo Wo”(ods) is intentionally like that. Just sayin’.