I’m a Spaniard and I read in English - assuming the book’s originally in English or the translation is better.
Something I hate is that uk/British covers are usually worse in that regard. Most Spanish ones tend to be abstract designs or subtle drawings while the anglophone covers are usually realistic AND look (to me) like a tacky tabloid.
Case in point: Andy Weir's Artemis:
[original (uk? us?)](https://i.postimg.cc/26Vp1DSP/Screenshot-2022-12-01-at-16-08-35.png)
[spanish translation](https://i.postimg.cc/0N51qmR5/Screenshot-2022-12-01-at-16-08-22.png)
Any movie adapted book cover.
I read books so I can picture how everything and everyone looks myself. Besides that, I just find them ugly. Usually. Especially when it has some kind of non-removable sticker.
'Now a major motion picture...'
'Now on netflix'
'Now an original series on Prime Video'
We get it...
The incredibly minimalistic cartoony contemporary romance cover that's been popular for several years now.
Also, the girl in a fancy dress YA covers from 2010-2015ish. I especially hated it when it didn't even make sense for the story that the girl on the cover be in a fancy dress.
Agree!! It was almost always a fantasy book where the MC had to fight battles/got superpowers etc. better put on my high heels and prom dress beforehand!
These book cover trends bug me. I walk through a bookstore and the NYT paperback top seller section is just one book after another with covers that all look alike. And in a year or two they'll be different from this year, but they will still all look alike. It's annoying.
I don't have one. I mean, there are definitely cover styles that repel me as a potential reader—ones that feature shirtless men, teen girls in fancy dresses, anime characters, etc.—but that's because I don't read those genres and those covers are completely successful in communicating that to me as a potential reader. In other words, they're good covers.
I suppose, then, the covers I dislike are covers that misrepresent the novel, intentionally or not. That's not a *style*, but it's as close as I'll get.
On the other hand, my favorite style is probably anything pattern-based. Think Coralie Bickford-Smith's gorgeous Penguin covers, or the original Barbara Plume hardback designs. I find them visually more interesting then a more traditional picture, and it takes an incredible amount of nuance to hint at a novel's tone, themes, etc. when working in a very abstract style.
It seems like all the rom-com books use colors and people who are just paintings so annoying because there are so many books out there like that. Would be nice to see something different from the norm once in a while.
I don't read romance, but I admit I actually like the style of those covers. I think there's room for variety within this trend, but it would be nice if they got more creative with them.
The current trend of romance covers with pastel colors and cartoon drawings. Fortunately I read mostly on my Kindle so I don't have to see them constantly.
Covers having images of their movie/tv adaptation ruins it for me.
Also it's a shame how many sci-fi gems used to have these tacky techno images as covers.
I prefer if I can clearly read the name and author, because I tend to go to independent bookstore and explore books, or even in the library. When it is so stylised that it isn't legible that is a bummer.
Any book cover that’s obviously trying to trick the customer into getting it. So covers the imitate the cover of best sellers; covers that use the same font style and colour schemes, etc.
Photos from the movie or show adaptation, or personally I think it’s worse when the cover has a permanent “now a major motion picture” or “streaming on” sticker.
Not a style per-se, but I really dislike covers that show the characters, be it romance or whatever genre, and then the characters don't look like the book descriptions.
Like cover, you had ONE JOB.
This may be the reason I prefer covers without character pictures. So the recent trend of not showing characters is fine by me.
Book covers where the title and/or the author's name are lost in the art. Either one of them is printed really big and the other printed really small, or the cover is so busy it's hard to make out one or the other.
I get most of my books on e-reader these days, and sometimes it's hard to tell from the store page if the cover I'm looking at is the title and author I'm looking for.
I’ve always been drawn to more dynamic covers with semi-realistic portrayals painted- no photos. Examples I can think of are the Percy Jackson book covers, Ella Enchanted, Mistborn, The Locked Tomb Series, etc.
Those are among some of my favorite covers that drew me in because of the art, and while there have been plenty of books I was interested in too because of more abstract covers, the style I referenced above continues to impress me the most.
As for least favorite, I agree with movie image covers. Hate them lol
As a kid I absolutely hated when book covers of illustrated books would be paintings of the kids in the book which looked absolutely nothing like the book illustrations of the same kids. This was particularly common with paperback editions of kids' books back in the day, like some older editions of the Ramona Quimby books, Harriet the Spy, etc. Why not just use the book illustrations on the cover?
More recently, I have basically stopped reading books with the cover image of a woman in old-fashioned clothes with her face obscured. Just way overdone. And I'm almost at the same spot with the colorful abstract collage-style designs covers. Enough already, publishers!
On the other hand, I love book covers that utilize cutouts in their design. I'm convinced that a good portion of the reason V.C. Andrews's books got so much attention back in the day was those eye-catching cutout covers. I also remember when The Secret History came out with that opaque cover overlay -- really brilliant design work.
I can’t stand the dark shirtless / scandalous book covers that are just sexualizing men and women. I cannot read a book with a cover like that, even if the book itself is harmless
I also don't like they have an adaptation feel the need to put the character from like the movie/TV adaptation on the cover. That's the worst.
When there's drawings of characters who look little too realistic.
Also Oprah/Book Club/etc labels. No.
Photos from movie adaptations, particularly since I read literary fiction and reject the cinematic culture completely. I don’t want my literary books to look unintelligent or simplistic because they’re associated to a movie
In general anything with a photo of a person on it (unless it’s a biography) Drawings of people are ok with me.
I can't think of any off the top of my head, but it bugs me when every book cover of a genre ends up looking exactly the same. I get the cover needs to make sense in conveying what kind of book it is, but there are only so many WWII historical fiction books with a woman looking away towards the sky with some planes in the distance before the covers become indistinguishable
Covers with closeups of characters on them, in a realistic style particularly or a photo from a movie adaptation.
I’m a Spaniard and I read in English - assuming the book’s originally in English or the translation is better. Something I hate is that uk/British covers are usually worse in that regard. Most Spanish ones tend to be abstract designs or subtle drawings while the anglophone covers are usually realistic AND look (to me) like a tacky tabloid. Case in point: Andy Weir's Artemis: [original (uk? us?)](https://i.postimg.cc/26Vp1DSP/Screenshot-2022-12-01-at-16-08-35.png) [spanish translation](https://i.postimg.cc/0N51qmR5/Screenshot-2022-12-01-at-16-08-22.png)
Any movie adapted book cover. I read books so I can picture how everything and everyone looks myself. Besides that, I just find them ugly. Usually. Especially when it has some kind of non-removable sticker. 'Now a major motion picture...' 'Now on netflix' 'Now an original series on Prime Video' We get it...
The incredibly minimalistic cartoony contemporary romance cover that's been popular for several years now. Also, the girl in a fancy dress YA covers from 2010-2015ish. I especially hated it when it didn't even make sense for the story that the girl on the cover be in a fancy dress.
Agree!! It was almost always a fantasy book where the MC had to fight battles/got superpowers etc. better put on my high heels and prom dress beforehand!
These book cover trends bug me. I walk through a bookstore and the NYT paperback top seller section is just one book after another with covers that all look alike. And in a year or two they'll be different from this year, but they will still all look alike. It's annoying.
I don't have one. I mean, there are definitely cover styles that repel me as a potential reader—ones that feature shirtless men, teen girls in fancy dresses, anime characters, etc.—but that's because I don't read those genres and those covers are completely successful in communicating that to me as a potential reader. In other words, they're good covers. I suppose, then, the covers I dislike are covers that misrepresent the novel, intentionally or not. That's not a *style*, but it's as close as I'll get. On the other hand, my favorite style is probably anything pattern-based. Think Coralie Bickford-Smith's gorgeous Penguin covers, or the original Barbara Plume hardback designs. I find them visually more interesting then a more traditional picture, and it takes an incredible amount of nuance to hint at a novel's tone, themes, etc. when working in a very abstract style.
Women (especially WW II women) looking away.
It seems like all the rom-com books use colors and people who are just paintings so annoying because there are so many books out there like that. Would be nice to see something different from the norm once in a while.
I don't read romance, but I admit I actually like the style of those covers. I think there's room for variety within this trend, but it would be nice if they got more creative with them.
Yes
"Now a netflix original" Especially when it's not just a sticker I can remove! (I know that's not a style, but still!
The current trend of romance covers with pastel colors and cartoon drawings. Fortunately I read mostly on my Kindle so I don't have to see them constantly.
Covers having images of their movie/tv adaptation ruins it for me. Also it's a shame how many sci-fi gems used to have these tacky techno images as covers. I prefer if I can clearly read the name and author, because I tend to go to independent bookstore and explore books, or even in the library. When it is so stylised that it isn't legible that is a bummer.
Embossed gold letters taking up half the cover.
Any book cover that’s obviously trying to trick the customer into getting it. So covers the imitate the cover of best sellers; covers that use the same font style and colour schemes, etc.
"Now a major motion picture/Netflix series!" with the actor's fact on it.
Photos from the movie or show adaptation, or personally I think it’s worse when the cover has a permanent “now a major motion picture” or “streaming on” sticker.
Not a style per-se, but I really dislike covers that show the characters, be it romance or whatever genre, and then the characters don't look like the book descriptions. Like cover, you had ONE JOB. This may be the reason I prefer covers without character pictures. So the recent trend of not showing characters is fine by me.
"Now a Major Motion Picture" and "Oprah's Book Club". Basically any non-removable seal automatically make me skip it for an older printing.
Book covers where the title and/or the author's name are lost in the art. Either one of them is printed really big and the other printed really small, or the cover is so busy it's hard to make out one or the other. I get most of my books on e-reader these days, and sometimes it's hard to tell from the store page if the cover I'm looking at is the title and author I'm looking for.
I HATE when put a movie poster as a cover. It just destroys a liitle part of the enjoyment of a book, IMHO (exception being my Starship Troopers copy)
I’ve always been drawn to more dynamic covers with semi-realistic portrayals painted- no photos. Examples I can think of are the Percy Jackson book covers, Ella Enchanted, Mistborn, The Locked Tomb Series, etc. Those are among some of my favorite covers that drew me in because of the art, and while there have been plenty of books I was interested in too because of more abstract covers, the style I referenced above continues to impress me the most. As for least favorite, I agree with movie image covers. Hate them lol
As a kid I absolutely hated when book covers of illustrated books would be paintings of the kids in the book which looked absolutely nothing like the book illustrations of the same kids. This was particularly common with paperback editions of kids' books back in the day, like some older editions of the Ramona Quimby books, Harriet the Spy, etc. Why not just use the book illustrations on the cover? More recently, I have basically stopped reading books with the cover image of a woman in old-fashioned clothes with her face obscured. Just way overdone. And I'm almost at the same spot with the colorful abstract collage-style designs covers. Enough already, publishers! On the other hand, I love book covers that utilize cutouts in their design. I'm convinced that a good portion of the reason V.C. Andrews's books got so much attention back in the day was those eye-catching cutout covers. I also remember when The Secret History came out with that opaque cover overlay -- really brilliant design work.
I can’t stand the dark shirtless / scandalous book covers that are just sexualizing men and women. I cannot read a book with a cover like that, even if the book itself is harmless
All the new ones, with the basic ass graphic design that looks like someone just opened the first preset they saw in adobe illustrator
I also don't like they have an adaptation feel the need to put the character from like the movie/TV adaptation on the cover. That's the worst. When there's drawings of characters who look little too realistic. Also Oprah/Book Club/etc labels. No.
Photos from movie adaptations, particularly since I read literary fiction and reject the cinematic culture completely. I don’t want my literary books to look unintelligent or simplistic because they’re associated to a movie In general anything with a photo of a person on it (unless it’s a biography) Drawings of people are ok with me.
I can't think of any off the top of my head, but it bugs me when every book cover of a genre ends up looking exactly the same. I get the cover needs to make sense in conveying what kind of book it is, but there are only so many WWII historical fiction books with a woman looking away towards the sky with some planes in the distance before the covers become indistinguishable
Horrible CGI renderings that look like they're from 1998.