This is a sort of follow up to my previous question. It is generally understood that covers matter a great deal in terms of getting people to click on a fiction eBook and check out its blurb and contents, and covers are the main marketing tool of an eBook.
But I have noticed that there is a great deal of ambiguity or confusion over what exactly people mean when they say ‘a good cover’ vs ‘a bad cover’. Is it ‘good’ in terms of relevancy to the target audience? Or is it ‘good’ in terms of professional quality? Of course, ideally, it needs to be both. But which one is ultimately more important?
Let me explain what I mean:
When browsing eBooks, people ignore a lot of professional quality book covers because they do not convey themes that are relevant to their tastes or interests. But at the same time, we are often told that people will only click on pro-designed covers and not homemade/amateur designs.
But what if someone comes across a book cover that is clearly homemade but it uses an interesting image and title that is relevant to the person’s tastes and interests?
Am I to believe that the person will move on and not check the book out simply because the cover looks homemade? This is the impression I keep getting from a lot of authors and cover designers who bang on and on about how no one will click on a book cover if it isn’t clearly pro-made. Is that really so? Even if the homemade cover image (and title) speaks directly to the person’s tastes and interests? Really??
[Note: the word ‘homemade’ is not a reference to location. It is a reference to level of skill at cover design.]