Who wouldn't want an AI Frank Frazetta to design their cover???

[Finchbearer]

So many people are going down the diy route and cutting out the middle man, look at the success of YouTube, and artists who sell their work via social media or who have grown an audience through social media. People have just realised that they can do it all themselves with a little know how, and I both understand and respect that, because I think it has become ever more apparent that the traditional way of doing things is often a pain in the proverbial.

Why pay a gallery to exhibit your work when you can take to Instagram for free, and sell direct to your consumer, or why wait until a production studio or channel give you a programme when you can literally take your phone, edit your own videos and stick them on YouTube?? Same goes for the publishing world.

But, I can see the value in a good agency and a good publisher who will work with you and *help* make your writing a success. In the end you have to be the one producing something that others will want to be a consumer of.

 

[Mad Swede]

To get this back to the OP's question, no I wouldn't want an AI generated cover in the style of Frank Frazetta. And that is because the cover is part of my image as an author. The style, how it relates to the book and what it conveys about me and my book.

I hadn't realised how much work goes into a good cover until I sat down with the designer to sort out the cover for my first book. It wasn't just about what the story was about, it was much more than that. The designer had read the final draft of the novel. We had several meetings and a lot more telephone conversations, we talked about things like how I saw the characters in my head, what sort of message was there in the novel, how did I visualise the setting etc. The designer produced quite a few sketches, we talked about them. Eventually we had a cover we both liked and which we both felt was right for the novel.

And we've worked together since then on the covers for all the books I've got out there. It's like working with your editor, the more you work together the more you understand one another and the better the final product is. There's no way you can get an AI system to do that for you.

 

[R. R. Hunter]

I hadn't realised how much work goes into a good cover until I sat down with the designer to sort out the cover for my first book. It wasn't just about what the story was about, it was much more than that.

And this is why actual artist will never be replaced by AI image generators. I will never be able to convey what I want out of my cover to a computer with any amount of prompting. Ever. I know the posted image is about as generic as you can get. It only relates to my story because it has a castle and a character with blonde hair.

Prompting AI is a roll of the dice. I tried generating an image with all of the main plot characters, but it literally combined all the descriptions into one character. There's a red headed 11 year old and a one eyed homeless man... Yeah, maybe I could use those images for a horror novel.

I honestly don't see an issue in using AI art for a book cover as a first time author. Yes, I do agree that a prolific author using AI art would probably get burned at the stake, career wise. If I sat down with an artist and said, please make me some cover art with specific details in mind and make it look like a Frazetta painting, there wouldn't be any problem with using the final product. Though, that product may cost me $2000 that I dont have to invest. Asking an AI to do the same thing for $10 a month? Listen, there are a few guys that work at MidJourney, they probably aren't very good artists, but they are getting paid.

 

[R. R. Hunter]

All those guys at MidJourney are doing is making good art more accessible for everyone. Which is pretty important. Again, big name authors have the big name bucks to buy the big name covers. And they will always do so.

 

[Mad Swede]

All those guys at MidJourney are doing is making good art more accessible for everyone. Which is pretty important. Again, big name authors have the big name bucks to buy the big name covers. And they will always do so.

You've missed my point. Doing the cover itself is perhaps the smallest part of the job. It's the discussions that lead up to the final design which really matter, because that is where you and the designer define what it is you're trying to convey and why. It takes time, and that time needs paying for. I saw what that first cover cost my publisher - just over 45 000 SEK, about $4500.

Good cover design isn't cheap, but done properly it pulls the potential reader to the book stand and gets them to pick the book off the shelf and then take a look inside the cover. After that it's what you, the author, have written which decides whether they buy the book.

 

[R. R. Hunter]

It takes time, and that time needs paying for. I saw what that first cover cost my publisher

Above the "accessible for everyone" post, I agreed with your point. AI art is a crapshoot, and you have to take what you get. If I had the money to sit down and work with an actual artist, I know for a fact that the cover would accurately convey the tone and style of my novel. Right now, as a starving artist, I have to accept "Cone Headed Blond Guy Next to a Castle With Fighter Jet Wings". When I return a rich man, I will pay the piper his dues and buy actual art for the covers. I swear this by the old artists and the new.

 

[pmmg]

The problem with AI is that its going to replace you. Today it is book cover artists, tomorrow its the books author. There should be more concern.

The problem with a first time author using it is becomes their standard. It will set your brand. If your first impression is bad, its much harder to recover.

The numbers you chose are putting your thumb on the scale. The average cost of a book cover it $400-$800. Subscriptions have no end, and rely on you to end to them. They don't favor you, they rely on human nature that you will keep paying even when not using, and their costs go up.

I would hope that as an artist, your goal is not to be someone else's clone. I would hope cover artists were the same. But... I'll just say for me, if the effort is one of taking shortcuts and letting the AI do it, it will show, and I will think less of the work.

I think its all moot anyway. Nothing will stop AI, and for some, it will work out.

 

[R. R. Hunter]

I think its all moot anyway. Nothing will stop AI, and for some, it will work out.

"The times they are a changin" -Bob Dylan

I doubt it will ever get that bad where we have robots writing stories. The "AI" we have now is more like "RI", as in, regurgitative intelligence. They just take something that already exists, chew it up, swallow it, and then barf it out. Plenty of people are making children's books with RI, but that's because those formats are so generic that only the proper nouns are changing from story to story. And that's exactly what RI is doing.

And if it does ever get that bad, where we have real thinking machines with artificial brains and unique personalities: Well, we will be living in an actual Sci-Fi novel and probably spread out across galaxies. Work will be a thing of the distant past as robots will do all the work because it's cheaper... but no one is getting paid so we can't buy the goods and services the robots produce and provide. so humankind art will become the new currency. Everyone will write, or draw, or sculp, just to pass it on for a new power converter so they can make a trip down to the Tosche Station and pick up some blue milk.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

AI covers are a lot like premade covers and splashing stock art together, the source is the only difference, and to be blunt, the stock photo market is worn out. AI will wear out too. It's another option, but it will never be the highest-quality option without MAJOR advances. Novels are even further out.

I really expect there to be a whole lot of trying and failing here, but the monetization of AI in general, is not going to be in the writing and artwork fields where there isn't big money to be made anyhow (except by a select few), the focus will be across the corporate and computer world are where the money is.

I expect a period of shaking out, and it could get nasty for new authors to try to get attention amid the masses of upcoming AI attempts, but heads up! It already is.

Of course, another aspect could be that Stephen King keeps producing new novels decades after his death because his estate owns his "writing style" and they keep plugging together even more hackery than King already does, heh heh.

 

[Prince of Spires]

I actually like the cover (the one in the first post, the second doesn't load for me....). If you clean it up to fix the AI-odities then I doubt many average people could tell it was an AI cover. And I've seen a lot of worse covers made by human artists. Like Demesnedenoir sais a lot of cheaper covers are simply sticking stock images together in the same ways.

This cover will stand out looking a lot more professional than those (again, assuming it's cleaned up nicely). I think it does its job (assuming your story matches the style of the cover and it's the direction you want to take your brand in). So well done.

Would I buy this book? I might, depending on the blurb and perhaps the look inside. I wouldn't realize it's an AI cover unless you tell me.

As for the moral debate. Well, the first AI covers on books by the one of the big 5 publishers have already been sighted (and they were worse than this). So it won't be too long before first time authors by traditional publishers are getting AI covers. After all, the math works for indie authors, who pay $500 for a cover (give or take). That just means it will work even more for trad publishers who pay 10 times that number. Why pay $4500 for a cover when you can get a dozen of them for $10 a month? Yes there is some editing and cleaning up of AI images, but it's a lot less than creating something from scratch.

I think this trend will force changes in the cover market. People doing nothing more than just slapping stock images together will be in trouble. Better designers not so much. Mad Swede is correct in saying that more goes into a truely professional cover than just the images. That's the kind of thing that is very hard to explain to an AI and get right.

This is also the reason I'm not too worries about AI writing whole novels. Of course they can. But unless you put a lot of time and effort into editing them, they won't be very good. AI will know what word is likely to come next. But pacing, continuity and not introducing new characters at random are a lot harder. If anything, I think editors should be a lot more worried. At least line editing, copy editing and proof reading. Those are all about what word is likely to come next. Simple tools like Grammerly already know some of this, and AI can be made heaps more advanced.

Then there's a whole legal debate that needs to be settled. There's no telling which way that will play out. Watch and see.

Of course, another aspect could be that Stephen King keeps producing new novels decades after his death because his estate owns his "writing style" and they keep plugging together even more hackery than King already does, heh heh.

To be fair, plenty of authors have already done that. Tolkien and Robert Jordan and Frank Herbert all published plenty of books they never wrote or finished. I'm sure there are heaps more. I'm sure when the time comes the King estate could keep finding "lost manuscripts" and notes for decades to come if they wanted to...

The only author I know who was very vocal against this was Terry Pratchett. I think he explicitly said that as far as he was concerned all his unfinshed stuff and notes could be (and had to be) destroyed after his death.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

A properly trained AI producing brand new work in the voice of King would be a bit different and unlimited in output. But! I was more taking a shot at the REAL horror story of eternal King releases, heh heh.

You might be right about some fields of editing. There shouldn't be a reason that AI can't get way better at that basic job.

This is the thing that fascinates me: The ability to learn the style/voice of a particular writer and (maybe) emulate it. I'm skeptical, but the attempts will be fascinating. Narrators are already essentially able to own their voice... I can't create an AI of Morgan Freeman and have him narrate my book (damn it!) so, with the AI also able to develop a keen sense of writer's "voice" will a writer be able to own their particular writing voice?

Hmmm, the narrator thing is odd, because if frank Calliendo narrated a book with a celebrity voice, would that be banned?

Oh, the silliness of even wasting my time thinking of this stuff, LOL.

 

[Mad Swede]

A properly trained AI producing brand new work in the voice of King would be a bit different and unlimited in output. But! I was more taking a shot at the REAL horror story of eternal King releases, heh heh.

You might be right about some fields of editing. There shouldn't be a reason that AI can't get way better at that basic job.

This is the thing that fascinates me: The ability to learn the style/voice of a particular writer and (maybe) emulate it. I'm skeptical, but the attempts will be fascinating. Narrators are already essentially able to own their voice... I can't create an AI of Morgan Freeman and have him narrate my book (damn it!) so, with the AI also able to develop a keen sense of writer's "voice" will a writer be able to own their particular writing voice?

Hmmm, the narrator thing is odd, because if frank Calliendo narrated a book with a celebrity voice, would that be banned?

Oh, the silliness of even wasting my time thinking of this stuff, LOL.

Emulating someone's voice or style is one thing. But it's the humanity that we as writers add that is so hard to replicate, and that is where AI has a long way to go.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Agreed, I don't see it as a near-term threat, just another annoyance to flood the market for a while and maybe a useful tool. There might be some folks able to "story-edit" well enough to make a good book out of AI babbling, but if putting in that much work, why not write it yourself? heh heh.

Emulating someone's voice or style is one thing. But it's the humanity that we as writers add that is so hard to replicate, and that is where AI has a long way to go.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Personally I've recently had my eyes opened by AI art. Yes it's a crap shoot, and sometimes even if you get something good you have to repair it. But damn! Sometimes it's amazing!!! I'm using Deep Dream AI by the way. This is one I prompted just a few days ago for the book I'm working on.

 

[Jason]

The Image Creator can also help with visualisation. Beezds like this feature in my debut - a 15-word description created something scarier than I had imagined.

CotH beezd 1.jpg/

CotH beezd 2.jpg