Nov 4, 2009
A note to graphic designers: People judge books by (thumbnails of) their covers.
Like this post?
Millions of consumers first see new books online.
So a book’s full-size appearance is less important than its appearance at 75 pixels.
* * * * *
Which raises the question: do you design the cover only to sell the book? There’s got to be more to it than just that.
Not just to sell, but to be appealing, right?
That includes appealing to buy, but also appealing to read, have on your shelf, etc.
At the very least, the design has to give a good first impression. And nowadays you have about 7,000 square pixels to do that rather than, say, 700,000.
Isn’t this true of most any graphic design? Good photos and layouts should look good even when reduced to very small sizes.
Not only do we designers have fewer pixels to work with, but we have fewer “special effects” to work with too (matte vs. glossy, embossing, spot gloss, etc).
But hey, I’m just thankful books still have covers (just say NO to the KINDLE!). :)
This is definitely true for more than just books. The trick is having a good amount of contrast and color, and not making it so busy that it just looks like someone technicolor-yawned all over the image.
I’ve only ever made one book cover, and it was a joke.
I can’t imagine books looking more appealing to me than these. I can’t get enough.
I even want to buy the books I don’t like because they look so cool. I wonder what that says about me.
Album covers are now being designed the same way.
Sometimes I just want out.
I do note, however, the difference between the TOTAL CHURCH add in your sidebar and the ESV.
Exactly.
Huh! Astute observation. Thanks for it!
Maybe the industry will shift so that…there will be the actual cover of the book, and a separate electronic thumbnail image for the book.
The two could be related in theme, but not identical.