We're aware of an issue with converting some DOC, DOCX, ODT, and RTF files to EPUB through our Ebook Wizard.

At this time, we're investigating the problem and looking for a solution.

If you've encountered this issue while converting your file, we suggest attempting to create and upload an EPUB directly to our system.

While there are a number of EPUB conversion options, Calibre (Download Here) has shown the best results for creating an EPUB for the Lulu system. Please review their extensive Help resources (Found Here) to create an EPUB 2 that our system can validate.

We've also created this Forum Thread. Post questions here and we'll do our best to respond and assist.

Good vs. bad book covers

Personally I think well done covers sell more books but I found this after seeing the author on tv talking about the book. One of the worst covers in my opinion but it's a number 1 best seller. Go figure.

 

 

\51SF0kl1DuL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Comments

  • Where I think that one might appeal is in the fact that it vaguely resembles old military training manuals.

     

    It gives the impression that it might offer the very thorough and very effective training methods taught in the military.



  • My thought exactly. Does give the impression of a manual. Guess it gives it some sort of authority look or appeal.

  • As I constantly say. A book can sell well regardless of the cover if it gets a lot of publicity. There's many classic books that prove that. One mistake often made is that top sellers become that because they have good covers, but the cover is irrelevant if no one knows the book exists. People have to be told.

  • I don't think either of those examples prove anything either way. First of all, they're books which are already famous enough to sell regardless of the cover, and even if we knew what the original covers were we wouldn't be able to judge them because they were designed in a time when tastes were different. Also, it looks as though the Dickens one is a hardback that would have a dust jacket with the actual cover on it.

     

    Of course other factors such as publicity are important, but you can't deny that a good or bad cover can influence the saleability of a book.

     

  • I don't think either of those examples prove anything either way.

     

     

    They do perhaps prove that covers do not have to be in your face, or even graphically complex.

     

    First of all, they're books which are already famous enough to sell regardless of the cover,

     

    Indeed, that's always my point when such things are discussed here. Then again, they no longer have those covers. Those are the originals. When something is made in to a film they insist on filmshots being used. They were not always famous though, so what caused them to be so? Word of mouth usually in those days (and Dickens was already a famous London newspaper columnist and social reformer) and becoming required reading in schools. (In the UK at least.)

     

     

    and even if we knew what the original covers were we wouldn't be able to judge them because they were designed in a time when tastes were different.

     

    And costs. Mostly costs. Some even earlier books just have plain text on, applied by hand using blocks. (Actually, some classics did not even start off as books, but what we would now call magazines perhaps.)

     

     

    Also, it looks as though the Dickens one is a hardback that would have a dust jacket with the actual cover on it.

     

    In those days they were all hardbacked, mostly bound by hand, and dustjackets had not yet become in use. I Don't recall LotRs being hardbacked for a long time, even though it was a much later book to the Dickens one.

     

    Of course other factors such as publicity are important, but you can't deny that a good or bad cover can influence the saleability of a book.

     

    On your first point I agree, on your second, I can, and do.  Smiley Happy Even more so now that the internet if full of review sites. But I would never suggest that anyone use an obviously amateur created cover.

Sign In or Register to comment.