# Goddess Project cover concept redux



## HareBrain (Jul 9, 2015)

I had an idea for a cover that I liked, and I had someone rough it out in pencil. This is the basis for the grey-ish image. Originally I was going to have it coloured like the super-rough mock-up, but I quite like the near-monotone one. However, it doesn't work at present as a thumbnail because all the snake outlines blend into a mess. I'd be grateful for people's opinions on whether the idea works well as a cover, and what maybe I should do with it. (Ignore the lettering, it's just a placeholder font.)


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 9, 2015)

The left one works (but needs refined only slightly)
The right could be seaweed on a porthole, or I don't know what! The figures on the right one look out of place.  The face doesn't quite work.
If I didn't know anything about the book, and the white figures didn't exist, then in general the right cover nearly works, but the wormy shapes too blurred.
Just my own reaction.


----------



## Cat's Cradle (Jul 9, 2015)

Hey HB! I asked my wife to help, as she is much wiser than I am.  I gave her a blurb-like explanation of the story (as you might find on the back cover of the book), and asked for her opinion on the covers. She and I both agreed that if we were looking at books in a bookstore, the right cover would more effectively draw our attention (these are, or course, mock-ups, and we agreed that if the right was finished..polished..it would have us both very interested in the book).

I also went through and found the old cover mock-ups from your thread of last year, an she prefers the cover on the right here, just above, to the older ones, as well. Good luck! CC


----------



## J Riff (Jul 9, 2015)

Maybe a few less tentacles, larger ones, would show up better. The grey one is the best of these two because the dark one looks... too dark. But the eyes, if you could put them on the monotone one, might be it.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jul 9, 2015)

The one on the left seems to have a clearer focus - if the tentacles around it were less even and more varied in length and thickness, IMO that would work even better.


----------



## alchemist (Jul 9, 2015)

I think the general concept here is your best bet yet. My gut says the one on the right -- the aquamarine of the face conveys so much. But the tentacles do look like seaweed. As is, it's nicely claustrophobic, but if you got them more ... tentacley ... even you might be happy


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 9, 2015)

Thanks for the comments.



Ray McCarthy said:


> The right could be seaweed on a porthole





alchemist said:


> But the tentacles do look like seaweed



I DREW IT WITH A MOUSE!!!



J Riff said:


> Maybe a few less tentacles, larger ones, would show up better





Brian Turner said:


> if the tentacles around it were less even and more varied in length and thickness, IMO that would work even better



Thanks -- that was what I originally had in mind, but the artist went with a swarm effect (the ones at the top are snakes, by the way). I like the swarm at full-size, but I think it needs some big specimens to be effective as a thumbnail.

I'll see if I can get some shade and colour into the snakes and try to transfer the blue face to the more polished version and see how that works. It seems that most people like the face in the background -- is that a fair assessment?


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jul 9, 2015)

I really like the face on the right and think you should include it, but I much prefer the way the snakes and tentacles are rendered on the left.  I think the picture on the left would be boring unless the figures of Orc and Cass were significantly larger.  If you are going to do the face, the figures, and the snakes and tentacles, I think you need fewer snakes and tentacles, or the effect will be too busy.


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 10, 2015)

OK, here's my attempt to merge the two. As a rough, does it work? I accept the comments about needing fewer and larger squirming things. Would it be better or worse if the face looked less obviously like a face and more a suggestion of a face made by things on the sea floor?


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 10, 2015)

That's much better. 
The face is fine.
The squirmy things nearly fine.
The swimmers (Orc and Cass?) maybe slightly larger and not just white silhouettes


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 10, 2015)

Ray McCarthy said:


> The swimmers (Orc and Cass?) maybe slightly larger



I did try making them bigger (see below), but I think it makes them look less threatened. What do others think?



Ray McCarthy said:


> and not just white silhouettes



Were you thinking full-on realistic colour, or something else? I think the white silhouettes contrast well with the background (esp at small size) but I'm happy to hear others' opinions on this.


----------



## Cat's Cradle (Jul 10, 2015)

I think this shows real potential, HB. Just a few thoughts/opinions...
--I love the tentacles in this newest version of the cover--the suckers are clearly drawn in, and make it clear that these are tentacles; I hope with a more finished version of the cover that the creatures on top are very clearly drawn as snakes...I think otherwise people may just assume they are more tentacles.
--I think I prefer the smaller divers in the picture posted at 12:06pm.
--about the face; my personal preference would be for a more stone-like/hag-like, threatening visage; something more like the face from this earlier sketch:






.

That's actually a beautiful face in the current version of the cover, and I'm not sure that best suits the story. Just my 2 cents...but it's potentially a very exciting cover! CC


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 10, 2015)

The face is lovely now.
The swimmers good size. Maybe a slight grey / blue tint darker than cheeks of face so they seem more underwater instead of looking as if part of the title on top of page.


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jul 10, 2015)

I assumed that in the final version the figures of the divers would be more realistic and in realistic colors.  As it is now, we only know what they are because we already knew who they are.  To me they look like rag dolls.


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 10, 2015)

Teresa Edgerton said:


> I assumed that in the final version the figures of the divers would be more realistic and in realistic colors.



Originally, the swimmers were going to be without fins, the idea being that the cover symbolically showed their life-situation generally rather than illustrating any particular part of the story. I might revisit that idea and see how that looks. I'll try a version with the divers coloured, too, to see how that works, but my fear is that they'll be completely lost against the background at thumbnail size.


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 10, 2015)

Here's a coloured-diver version. Does anyone prefer it to the white silhouette?


----------



## alchemist (Jul 10, 2015)

I preferred the contrast with the white silhouettes. The face is bang on.


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 10, 2015)

HareBrain said:


> Here's a coloured-diver version. Does anyone prefer it to the white silhouette?


Looks great now!

The White silhouette would be OK for text or a logo, but not for the divers, makes them too separate from the image. Too much contrast.

EDIT:
Now maybe a skinnier aspect ratio font for the title.

I think the Title and Author can sometimes be different fonts, even though generally in Graphic design a single font is preferable. But a Title or Chapter Heading can always be a different font.


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 10, 2015)

Hmm, I hope it doesn't get stuck at a one-all tie!

I think the contrast works better at thumbnail size:



 

 

That lettering was always going to be temporary. The artist who did the rough does some nice hand-drawn lettering, and I'm thinking of going for that, just to be different. Save me having to sort through 17678 fonts.


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 10, 2015)

Makes them very ghost like and in the foreground on the thumbnail having white.  Maybe on thumbnail I'd do a combination of two tricks:
1) Crop slightly so centre space and figures are not so small
2) Try increasing size of figures maybe 10% too

But even as it is I prefer the right not-ghost version. My screen is about 133dpi, so only HD phone screens or retina tablet screens at native are going to have much smaller thumbnails.

(I preview stuff on several different devices, but it's all web sites really, not book thumbnails, though one site has book thumbnails produced by others.)


----------



## Jo Zebedee (Jul 10, 2015)

White for me, too. Makes a better thumbnail.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Jul 10, 2015)

I wonder if you rotate the swimmers 90 degrees, reduce their opacity and have them bracketing the right eye, if it would become more cohesive overall? I love the background face. Could it be shifted to the left to make the right eye central?

pH


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 10, 2015)

Phyrebrat said:


> I wonder if you rotate the swimmers 90 degrees, reduce their opacity



ETA: I did manage to shift the face so the divers bracket the eye. I think that does work really well for the eye itself, but it draws the viewer's eye too much to the left. I'd need something to balance that.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Jul 10, 2015)

Ohh, I see what you mean... I'm not entirely sure what to suggest but I'll have a think!

pH


----------



## Teresa Edgerton (Jul 10, 2015)

For me, the white is very off-putting.  Sure, it makes a striking design, but it doesn't make me want to read the book.  A striking design should affect the potential reader subliminally, grab their_ attention_, so that they look at the picture and the picture grabs their _interest_.  The white silhouettes don't tell me ,"Here are two people in an interesting life situation."  They tell me, "Here are two white silhouettes symbolic of . . . something.  Danged if I know."  Unless they are in diver's gear, I wouldn't even know that they are underwater.

Actually, if they are not going to look like realistic people in diving gear, I think the picture would be more striking and intriguing (also cleaner and works in thumbnail) if they weren't there at all, and there were just the tentacles and snakes and the face.  Without the floppy white things in front of it, I think readers would focus more on the face.  If it were me, I would think "How are the face and tentacles related? Hmmm.  Interesting."


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 10, 2015)

Teresa Edgerton said:


> if they are not going to look like realistic people in diving gear, I think the picture would be more striking and intriguing (also cleaner and works in thumbnail) if they weren't there at all,


Agreed.


----------



## Jo Zebedee (Jul 10, 2015)

Whereas for me they provide a focal point and interest me - without the figures (and the white works fine for me) I'd wonder what on Earth the whole thing was about. It both grabs my attention and my interest.


----------



## Droflet (Jul 12, 2015)

Hey, HB. I've been sitting back watching this evolve all the while waiting for you to take components from both and combine them. IMHO the right one is a winner. Nicely moody. Well done.


----------



## Warren_Paul (Jul 12, 2015)

I prefer the coloured version.




HareBrain said:


> View attachment 23927



Don't like how you've moved it all around. Thought the silhouettes and face was better how they were in the previous version.


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 12, 2015)

telford said:


> IMHO the right one is a winner.



Thanks Telford -- I'm guessing you mean the right one from the original post, rather than the two thumbnails in #19?



Warren_Paul said:


> Don't like how you've moved it all around.



Though I like the moved-around version as a picture, I think it might be a bit much as a cover. My current thinking (reinforced by some off-thread feedback) is to stick closer to my original concept, keeping it simpler and with the face less obvious (though exactly how much less obvious is something to play with). I appreciate that not everyone likes the white figures, but they definitely work better with the darker water, which I prefer.


----------



## Kerrybuchanan (Jul 12, 2015)

I really like this version, but I think the white figures at present look like rough sketches, whereas when they are coloured in they look more professional. I would be concerned that they might make a really excellent cover look a bit amateurish, but I see what you mean about them standing out.

They are probably going to be drawn more realistically for the final version, in which case I'll keep my mouth shut, but as shown above I definitely prefer the coloured-in version. Sorry


----------



## Juliana (Jul 12, 2015)

I think the ghost-like quality of the white figures is a little misleading. You can't really tell they're divers unless you know it, and the ghostliness makes you think it might be another sort of story. Personally I like the color version where you absolutely _know_ these are divers, even if you haven't looked at the blurb yet.


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 12, 2015)

Thanks, you two. At the risk of seeming like someone who always agrees with the last person who speaks, I am coming round to the dark divers, when reduced a little in size -- they stand out better now the centre of the image is paler. (And even more so in thumbnail.) But I'll leave off fiddling with it for a while and see if my subconscious makes up its mind in the meantime!



Kerrybuchanan said:


> They are probably going to be drawn more realistically for the final version



Well, I hope so!


----------



## Kerrybuchanan (Jul 12, 2015)

Yes, I like that version a lot!


----------



## Ray McCarthy (Jul 12, 2015)

Yes excellent. I think the more indistinct face is better and the divers are fine on thumbnail.


----------



## Warren_Paul (Jul 12, 2015)

Agree with Ray about the face, it's better only being a hint of it.


----------



## Jo Zebedee (Jul 12, 2015)

Yes, now you've lightened the background the dark divers work well.


----------

