I fucking hate AI art slop. I hate it.
But
This seems like a case where the authors are being punished for the bad behavior of their publishers. Authors have very little control over this sort of thing, and yeah, you can say “they should have chosen a better publisher” or whatever… but book publishing is an extremely crowded market, and authors aren’t exactly spoiled for choice when it comes to finding someone to publish their work.
I think the publishers should absolutely be shamed and dragged through the mud for this, but let the authors compete. As long as there’s no evidence they used AI to write anything, let their work stand on its own merit rather than judging a book by a cover they had no control over.
Authors often don’t even control the TITLE much less the cover.
It seems odd to punish an author and a book because of the cover in a competition that has nothing to do with the cover.
I worked for a shady publisher back in 2010. I did children’s book layouts, and the author had to provide all off their own illustrations and I had to make the images fit with the text.
I knew the people in the department doing the covers for adult books. I could totally see them using AI, and the authors would have no say in the matter. My wife had a book published through them before I worked there, i even did a cover for her but they said they do not accept covers and did their own that had nothing to do with the book itself. I think it was a fountain pen and a rose.
I hate that this comment is so reasonable and it’s at the bottom of the pile. Upvoted.
Wilson said it was also upsetting for the production and design team, who had worked hard on the books.
Angel Train’s cover is literally plain, hard-to-read white text slapped on top of a slop image. What fucking design team?
In a statement, Smither said the designers spent hours working on the cover of her book, which features a steam train and an angel “half-obscured in the smoke”, inspired by artist Marc Chagall’s figures.
“It is them I am most concerned about: that their meticulous work … is being disrespected,” Smither said.
Well apparently they spent hours giving prompts to copy Marc Chagall’s work just right
There’s more to book design than the cover, like layout etc.
I can understand that this hurts for the authors, as they often have little to no say in cover design, but I also am not sad for this decision. The publishers or whoever thought these were reasonable book covers deserve to be called out for this. The authors need to find better publishers, or the company needs to feel the backlash from this shit, otherwise they’ll keep doing it.
Who am I kidding, Rothwell keep doing it anyway.
Good.
As it should be. Basic drawing isn’t impossible. To learn, look at something you like, and copy until you perfect. Do it again with something more complex. Rinse/repeat. Then, take those technical skills and make something of your own.
If you think you aren’t physically capable, look up Chuck Close.
Or hire an artist like everyone has been doing for ages.
Either is valid. Teach yourself over time or hire out.
Or I will just have a clean cover and not pay someone and not draw because I can’t drawn very well and I’m broke af being a writer.
(I’m not actually a writer but probably how many writers are)
If you read the article, apparently the author didn’t know that the artist she hired was using AI. It’s really sad. Shame on that “artist”.
You still ought to have a designer to do that just so it doesn’t look like a law book.
Hard downvote.
You can find a competent artist to illustrate something for you for $25 bucks easy. AI slop is theft.
