# Pricing for Book Cover Art



## Ven West (Jan 19, 2013)

humblenations said:


> I actually went through every response on this thread and it highlights one issue to me. One that was mildly touched on. I'm a cover design as you can see from my signature.
> 
> *{Snipped a lot of text because this post is very long!}*


I've been working as a freelance artist doing mainly titlecards for online videos or cartoony-styled portrait drawings for a bit over 2 years now, and I agree with absolutely everything here. Including the bits about how "[artists] are touchy-feely-sensitive-creatures."  I'm sorry that that's true, but... it sort of is, most of the time, certainly it can be with me. I've had to turn down 2 commission requests this month for reasons I'm sure the other side of the issue would see as me being "touchy-feely-sensitive." I offer these examples not because they have anything to do with anyone on this forum, but as examples of how NOT to deal with touchy-feely-sensitive artists. 

The first was a guy who had emailed me the day after Christmas -- a time I was not spending much, if any, time on the internet for several days. Makes sense, right? Regardless of their beliefs, a lot of people have time off over Christmas and use it to travel or spend time with their families. His email, I found, DID go to my inbox, but I must have skimmed over it in the stacks of notification emails and mailing list stuff I usually have in my inbox. 3 weeks afterwards, the guy re-sent the email but ALSO tweeted me to inform me that he had sent me something and informed me in a really snootily offended manner that I was not to "blow him off" again. That IMMEDIATELY left a bad taste in my mouth because... as much as I need the money from every commission I can get, I'm not someone's friggin' butler and the nature of the artists' economy in that particular field means I am already massively undercharging for my art most of the time. Anyway, still, my fault for not reading my inbox carefully, right? So I responded to him via Twitter apologizing to him and explaining that I had not seen his email for the reasons explained above. This guy responded to me via Twitter to tell me that it would have been "less rude" for me to have just told him no. He followed that tweet immediately with two tweets of further instructions he had not (for some reason) included in his emails, phrased in a way that clearly showed he assumed I had accepted his commission, even though I had not agreed to take his commission or given him a price quote yet.

As rude as that was of him, the reason I told him I couldn't work with him was because I have a locked Twitter account... therefor ANYONE can read his tweets to me accusing me of blowing him off and being rude, but no one who isn't following me can read my replies to him. In other words -- he was harming me professionally. I explained that to him -- twice -- and he first ignored it and then declined to admit that he had behaved inappropriately and would neither apologize nor delete those tweets.

It was very, very tempting for me in the beginning to give him a quote that would have been more than usual for me (or any of my colleagues) due to factoring in an "a$$hole tax," but his refusal to give a single %&@# about my reputation or feelings about his attitude drove me to ultimately tell him, in the most polite and professional way possible, to screw off.

The second example is nothing so elaborate or annoying... Early in my career as a freelancer I did some portrait art for a guy who I later learned has an absolutely horrible reputation among other people I work for. He's known to be a complete jerk to people and to purposefully make videos that will p*ss people off. And OF COURSE... he still uses my portrait art as his avatar picture pretty much everywhere he posts anything.  That's a lesson to me -- make sure the people offering to throw money at you aren't people who are going to make you look bad by association down the road.

ANYWAY! All that said, there was something earlier in this thread that caught my eye.

This Ronnell guy... apparently complained about working for the "cheap" price of *$300??!?!!*

For photoshoping stock images together

...I... I have to ask. Is that normal pricing for cover design? Is that really considered "cheap"? Because I could knock out a lot of the cover designs I've seen around here in under 6 hours, if not under 3. HOURS. Not days. Not weeks. That's not including finding or creating stock art, no, but still... The amounts that have been established as accepted averages among my current fellow artists and most people who hire me from that pool of artists is equal to approximately minimum wage, sometimes much less, sometimes a LITTLE more, depending on how quickly we work.

Are people here really paying $300 then waiting over a month for photoshopped stock images? Seriously? Or am I misunderstanding how this works? I would slip on my own drool if I though I could get HALF of that for ANYTHING.

EDIT: This discussion has been split off from another thread: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,128346.0.html

Betsy


----------



## MrPLD (Sep 23, 2010)

Ven West said:


> ANYWAY! All that said, there was something earlier in this thread that caught my eye.
> 
> This Ronnell guy... apparently complained about working for the "cheap" price of *$300??!?!!*
> 
> ...


Honestly, as an IT professional who dabbles in doing artwork for his wife's covers, I'd say $300 is perfectly fine a price to pay if the work is good and it's what you want. I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market. At prices that are genuinely below a working-wage type income you will start to encounter a lot of issues from the creator of the work if even the smallest thing comes up, because in their heart it's "just not worth it".

If you're good at something, you should charge appropriately, to do otherwise is to simply embitter yourself.


----------



## Skate (Jan 23, 2011)

MrPLD said:


> Honestly, as an IT professional who dabbles in doing artwork for his wife's covers, I'd say $300 is perfectly fine a price to pay if the work is good and it's what you want. I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market. At prices that are genuinely below a working-wage type income you will start to encounter a lot of issues from the creator of the work if even the smallest thing comes up, because in their heart it's "just not worth it".
> 
> If you're good at something, you should charge appropriately, to do otherwise is to simply embitter yourself.


I have to agree. I design book covers myself, ones that involve doing artwork, rather than using stock art. It takes me days to do some, especially when the author wants revisions, so the money I charge will never allow me to live off my writing/artwork income, which is what I'd like to do. I see people offering $10/$25/$50 covers and wonder how they can possibly do it. I'd love to charge what would be a fair amount for the time spent, but when people see $300 as overcharging, what chance do I have?


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Skate said:


> I see people offering $10/$25/$50 covers and wonder how they can possibly do it.


Generally speaking? Volume, and all they do is typography on a premade.

Custom art is absolutely worth more, and logical people (even crazed authors) recognize that.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

back before Ronnell went cuckoo I saw many of his covers, and they were NOT stock art slid together with photoshop, they were all cool original art.


----------



## Ven West (Jan 19, 2013)

MrPLD said:


> Honestly, as an IT professional who dabbles in doing artwork for his wife's covers, I'd say $300 is perfectly fine a price to pay if the work is good and it's what you want. I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market. At prices that are genuinely below a working-wage type income you will start to encounter a lot of issues from the creator of the work if even the smallest thing comes up, because in their heart it's "just not worth it".
> 
> If you're good at something, you should charge appropriately, to do otherwise is to simply embitter yourself.


If you just heard a peculiar sort of "thud" sound over there in Australia, that would be the sound of my jaw hitting the floor with all the force of someone who's spent 2 years doing my primary regular commission job for free on the basis that my employer has a large fan base and the exposure gets me commissions... which I have rarely charged more than $30 for.

For work that takes me 8 hours or more to do.

Because my colleagues who have more technical skill in both photoshopping and hand-done work, who have college degrees in doing that instead of apprenticeships... that's what they charge. That's all they can get for video promotion work.



> *I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market. At prices that are genuinely below a working-wage type income you will start to encounter a lot of issues from the creator of the work if even the smallest thing comes up, because in their heart it's "just not worth it".*


I'm quoting this again. In bold. Because you don't just "think." You know. That's EXACTLY what happens. That puts tremendous pressure on artists because once we quote a price, we can't really change it if it turns out to be harder than we thought it would be to do. Which does land some of us in this kind of trouble, where people complain about us taking too long or being uncommunicative, because it's hard to tell a client that your kid is sick and your boss offered you more hours and your family business is tanking so they need you to cook dinner and do shopping and vacuum and fix the car...

And we're competing with each other -- even when we like each other, even when we don't MEAN to be competing in a malicious way because we want to bet business a colleague would otherwise get -- we're "competing" in the sense that we're constantly trying to match our prices to people who will work for the least amount our very limited potential client pool can afford to pay for art AT ALL, so that the people whop think our styles are appropriate for their work will hire us. And that amount is not in the hundreds. That amount MIGHT be up to around $50 for a title card IF the producer has a huge audience and is getting tens or hundreds of thousands of views per video.

Good lord, writers will pay TEN TIMES what I might normally charge for a title card for something that takes a fraction of the time for me to produce? And gets me more exposure? And the kinds of payment and revision policies I've used since I started are the kinds of policies writers will appreciate and be drawn to instead of using them to take advantage of my time and effort?

This feels too good to be true.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Good lord, writers will pay TEN TIMES what I might normally charge for a title card for something that takes a fraction of the time for me to produce? And gets me more exposure?


It depends. I rarely pay more than $75 for a cover, because I write romances. Many artists have large stocks of premades that suit my purposes, and in any event romance covers do not tend to be so unique that they're usually worth paying a great deal extra for. Also, I write shorts, which means volume, which means I need to buy deals when I see them. Something like epic fantasy is entirely different. So it really depends. There are no doubt cover artists out there charging $300 and getting it, but there are lots of others charging less and getting it, too. It all depends on what the author writes and what s/he wants for his/her cover.


----------



## Ven West (Jan 19, 2013)

MegHarris said:


> It depends. I rarely pay more than $75 for a cover, because I write romances. Many artists have large stocks of premades that suit my purposes, and in any event romance covers do not tend to be so unique that they're usually worth paying a great deal extra for. Also, I write shorts, which means volume, which means I need to buy deals when I see them. Something like epic fantasy is entirely different. So it really depends. There are no doubt cover artists out there charging $300 and getting it, but there are lots of others charging less and getting it, too. It all depends on what the author writes and what s/he wants for his/her cover.


That is still twice what I normally get for my work, and I do original art combined with photoshopped backgrounds. And I don't even consider myself to be on the particularly high end of the professionalism spectrum, since I'm self-taught and have a very identifiable and distinct style. Some people like it. Some think it's crap. Regardless, my photoshop work is as good as any of my colleagues'.


----------



## Rayne Book Covers (Sep 11, 2011)

Ven West said:


> That is still twice what I normally get for my work, and I do original art combined with photoshopped backgrounds. And I don't even consider myself to be on the particularly high end of the professionalism spectrum, since I'm self-taught and have a very identifiable and distinct style. Some people like it. Some think it's crap. Regardless, my photoshop work is as good as any of my colleagues'.


I do photo-manipulations combined with a bit of painting and I charge above $300. So far, none of the clients I have worked with has complained about me over charging and everyone has said that what I charge is fair. I am a self taught artist as well. There isn't definitely as much work as there would be if I charged $100, but I am content with the amount of work I get. This way I can happily work on the revisions clients ask for and other small things. Charging fairly makes me willing to deliver my best. 
A lot of times it is to do with more than just the amount of time we spend on the artwork. Some clients who love your work and think it fits perfectly with their project would be willing to spend more on it. I say this to all artists, you should charge what you think your work is worth. Otherwise as someone else said here, it just leaves you frustrated.


----------



## Kwalker (Aug 23, 2012)

Ven perhaps you could start a promotional thread with some samples of your art. You might get a better sense of where you and the author market stand, and we could admire your creations.

This was not a happy thread, but it sounds like you could have quite a happy and profitable thread such as our other cover artists have.


----------



## Ven West (Jan 19, 2013)

The Dark Rayne said:


> I do photo-manipulations combined with a bit of painting and I charge above $300. So far, none of the clients I have worked with has complained about me over charging and everyone has said that what I charge is fair. I am a self taught artist as well. There isn't definitely as much work as there would be if I charged $100, but I am content with the amount of work I get. This way I can happily work on the revisions clients ask for and other small things. Charging fairly makes me willing to deliver my best.
> A lot of times it is to do with more than just the amount of time we spend on the artwork. Some clients who love your work and think it fits perfectly with their project would be willing to spend more on it. I say this to all artists, you should charge what you think your work is worth. Otherwise as someone else said here, it just leaves you frustrated.


I _should_, yes, people have told me that, but the simple fact is that in the communities I've been working with since i started charging people for custom art, if I asked for that kind of money, people would laugh their asses off and go have a chat with one of my art colleagues... probably one of the ones who works more quickly and graduated from an art school.

And yes, it leaves me frustrated. It leaves me devastatingly frustrated -- with my work and with myself. That's why I'm on these boards posting as an author and not an artist. I've ALWAYS been a better writer than an artist, except in mediums that are expensive to work with and take a long time to finish, but as little as anyone pays for art, NO ONE pays for writing. I've just reached a point where I'm tired of constantly feeling like a loser because my friends and colleagues succeed in areas they have the training and skill and talent to work with while I just kind of trail along like a puppy begging for scraps. So you know what... screw it, the producer I work for primarily just made $10,000 in 36 hours to fund his short film just by asking people to help him. People like him. People REALLY like him, for that kind of money. If it takes money to get published... he owes me enough publicity to get at least some of that. Other producers with large audiences have either promised to promote my book or are close enough friends of mine that I can't imagine they would refuse if I asked them to tweet it or something. Point being... my writing is as good as my producer's work. Why shouldn't I publish and at least be able to say "well... I did it" even if it fails?

And if it does fail -- which is likely will because "post-apocalyptic gay robot hippies" is sort of a niche market -- well at least I'll know where to look for business as an artist from now on. XD

I'm sorry if I made this thread get all negative... I didn't mean to come off as whiny. It's just really astonishing to me that there's a market for what I can do artistically that pays enough to be an option I will consider if and when it becomes clear that my writing isn't going to pay off in any significant way. But dammit... even if only one person in the world ever really likes my writing, I am still a writer, and I WILL do this at least once before I go back to marketing myself as an artist. It's just nice to know I have an option that's worth selling to if and when I go back to offering my services in that category. ^_^


----------



## Lefty (Apr 7, 2011)

MrPLD said:


> I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market.


Free books!


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

CB Edwards said:


> Free books!


Nonsense. Giving away free samples has nothing to do with undervaluing our work.

I rarely pay much less than $75 for a cover and I have spent well over $500 for one, so I think maybe it is a case of the ARTIST not valuing their own work and not asking enough rather than market pressure.


----------



## Lefty (Apr 7, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Nonsense. Giving away free samples has nothing to do with undervaluing our work.
> 
> I rarely pay much less than $75 for a cover and I have spent well over $500 for one, so I think maybe it is a case of the ARTIST not valuing their own work and not asking enough rather than market pressure.


$0.99 books!


----------



## Rayne Book Covers (Sep 11, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Nonsense. Giving away free samples has nothing to do with undervaluing our work.
> 
> I rarely pay much less than $75 for a cover and I have spent well over $500 for one, so I think maybe it is a case of the ARTIST not valuing their own work and not asking enough rather than market pressure.


I agree. There is a market for artists in all price ranges from $50 to $1000. The artists have to be honest to themselves and decide what their art is worth. If the price is fair, there is no reason for people not wanting to pay for it.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

MrPLD said:


> Honestly, as an IT professional who dabbles in doing artwork for his wife's covers, I'd say $300 is perfectly fine a price to pay if the work is good and it's what you want. I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market. At prices that are genuinely below a working-wage type income you will start to encounter a lot of issues from the creator of the work if even the smallest thing comes up, because in their heart it's "just not worth it".
> 
> If you're good at something, you should charge appropriately, to do otherwise is to simply embitter yourself.


Well said!



JRTomlin said:


> I rarely pay much less than $75 for a cover and I have spent well over $500 for one, so I think maybe it is a case of the ARTIST not valuing their own work and not asking enough rather than market pressure.


lol, so true.

I'm so glad I don't do this kind of work anymore. Even the clients I liked were pretty demanding, which made it harder for me to like them. 
It's better to just be independently wealthy.


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

Ven West said:


> Good lord, writers will pay TEN TIMES what I might normally charge for a title card for something that takes a fraction of the time for me to produce? And gets me more exposure? And the kinds of payment and revision policies I've used since I started are the kinds of policies writers will appreciate and be drawn to instead of using them to take advantage of my time and effort?
> 
> This feels too good to be true.


Ven, using as a basis my husband's experience as an illustrator: his latest industry client (an Italian publishing house) paid him the equivalent of $ 1000 for a cover, and _they_ came looking for him.

That isn't the kind of price he asks from indipendent writers, of course, but there is a wide range of options that don't involve short-changing oneself.

Working for exposure very rarely pays off, I'd rather suggest using that time to build a strong portfolio,and then put it out there (on free galleries and on one site of your own, a blog works perfectly well for that) advertising that you are available for commissions.


----------



## Ven West (Jan 19, 2013)

...apparently I started this post, lol.   (Thank you, board mods who separated this discussion, and I apologize for hijacking the other thread with this!) 

I'll catch up with this after work or during down time this evening.


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

MrPLD said:


> I think as a general rule too many people undervalue their work and over time it tends to depress the whole market.


That is true, but there's also that the Internet has made the marketplace global, too. I've worked with a couple artists in India and Indonesia and far eastern Europe, where what you or I might think of as a healthy hourly wage for skilled work is a good _daily_ wage. It's not like twenty years ago, where your only competition is the three other artists in town. On the other hand, it also means that we the consumers are spoiled for choice, and no longer have to use That One Guy because he's the only designer in town.

And some people are just damned fast at what they do. I have no artistic talent - I can _just_ about draw a stick figure and manage to get the arms and legs in the right spots - but I'm constantly impressed by what a lot of artists can speed-paint in just one hour.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

We're probably conflating a lot of different things such as sticking some fonts on un-manipulated stock art with manipulated stock art to original art. Some jobs are obviously worth more than others. Some cover designers/artists can work faster than others. Some like to do pre-made covers by the dozen and only change the title and author names. Some do very original work that is time consuming. Some only do art and not cover design. Some do cover design but not original art. 

It is obviously important for a designer/artist to know what their skill level is and know what they can charge as well as understand the market. All this seems pretty obvious, but I have a feeling that it doesn't always happen. I realize all this is easy for someone who isn't a designer/artist to say, but if you become known and valued somewhere like this board, I can tell you that word will get around and you CAN charge more than some ridiculous $10 a cover.


----------



## Keri Knutson (Apr 10, 2011)

Agree with both JRTomlin and Renu -- there are different covers with different levels of manipulation for different needs. You have to find out what your price point is for what you're offering, and that will be determined by what it's worth to you and what it's worth to clients. 

For me, I've had great success with premades at $30. It might seem like a low price, but I can kick out three beautiful premades in an hour because I'm the only one I have to make happy. I start with great art and go from there, and I don't have to go through any revisions. Now I do charge at least $100 for a custom cover, because I have to make the cover to someone else's specification, which may include hours of searching for images and then multiple revisions. So even though the "difficulty" level of a premade versus a custom cover is technically the same, the client has to also pay for my time. If I'm honest about my time, I make more "per hour" on premades than I do on customs. 

Renu does gorgeous work -- and while it's not technically completely "orginal," her manipulations are of such high artistic quality that her prices are well in line for her product. 

Original artwork -- well, I have no artistic ability, so I'm in awe of people who can create. If you do great work, you'll find people willing to pay the price for it. (But you also have to be a good business person to succeed. No matter how good your work, you're selling a service and you have to meet a customer's expectations, even when those expectations may dance all over your nerves.)

And there is a living to be made doing it if you do high quality work and have a good reputation and good business skills. I've quit my "day" job and now all I do is write and design -- it's taken a year and a lot of hard work and study, but it can be done.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Ven West said:


> ...apparently I started this post, lol.  (Thank you, board mods who separated this discussion, and I apologize for hijacking the other thread with this!)
> 
> I'll catch up with this after work or during down time this evening.


Not a problem, Ven! Our topics frequently meander. But there was an ongoing thing already ongoing  in the other thread...and this is an important discussion I didn't want people to miss! Thanks for starting it.

Betsy


----------



## SBJones (Jun 13, 2011)

My first book cover that I bought was for my second novel Guardian.  It ran me about $375 for front art, spine and back.  It was a bit steep and I was caught off guard that when I originally commissioned it for $200, it didn't include the spine/back.  Sentinel cost me $200ish and we reused the back art to save costs and I was thankful that the artist agreed.  I updated book one's cover and I got a discount so it ran me about $175.

I also commissioned the same artist to do the covers for the serial that I am writing.  Between the individual covers, bundle covers, and a full front/back print cover there will be 27 covers.  Price comes in about $32 a cover for this project.  So there is a wide swing in cover price even with the same artist.


----------



## Charmaine (Jul 20, 2012)

I'd like to chime in about price. 
I think there are several issues with pricing for the illustrator.
For one, I know a fully illustrated cover should cost $3000 in the mid-range for a traditional publisher. 
There is this book floating around for artists called "Pricing and Ethical Guidelines" (something like that). It's recommended to all illustrators.
*BUT* all of these agreed upon pricing limits have been set with no consideration for the indie author.
The indie movement is really gaining steam and I think because it's new people don't know how to treat it.

The rule of thumb is "Charge your client according to their budget. So $5000 for a S&S book cover, but $3000-$1000 for some other company.

What *I* would consider fair for indie pricing:

Simple photo-manipulations as in only compromised of 2 images merged should never go over $50 in my mind
More complicated photo manipulations (still just layering)= $100 (at most)
Photomanips with extreme changes (painting is involved)=$250-$500
Actual illustrated cover= $100-250 (simple iconic art) all the way to $500-$1000 (full rendered paintings) *also though, keep in mind a well known artist will command a higher price.

What it all really comes down to though is what are you willing to charge for your work.
I'm a recent graduate and I would consider these prices fair ( I would most likely be offered $3000 for a $5000 cover from a publishing company because I'm new to the business and I'm fine with that. I know I have to work my way up. I have a professor who doesn't look at a book cover for less than $10,000, but he's a big deal name.

This does bring up an interesting thought though. In traditional publishing, there is the chance to work up to a higher price. I'm not sure if that exists yet in the indie market. Very likely what you set now is what you'll be stuck with for the next few years.

Just my 2 cents


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Royalties on sales of the book, while it uses the cover art in question, is not a bad way to go about getting a cheaper up front cost. Although it seems whenever "royalties" and "rights" are  brought into the mix, a lot of people flinch. Unfortunate, because if done right, it could be a real win/win situation.


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

Be aware that 'never work for royalties, it's a good way to get burned' is just about the first piece of advice an aspiring artist receives.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Ven--if you do quality work, and communicate well during the process, and get that work back to authors in a timely fashion, I don't think you'll ever be hurting for work doing covers.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Ven West said:


> ... NO ONE pays for writing.


I've made a living in part by freelancing for a decade or so.

People definitely pay for writing.

But 1) you need to be excellent, 2) you need to be willing to write anything at any time for anyone (which requires more than JUST being a good writer, it demands the ability to become an instant pseudo-expert), and 3) you have to deal with the fact that there's a very wide range in the kinds of compensation you will get getting in order to make things work.

Now, selling to end users is a completely different kettle of fish. I think enough people on KB have had enough success to say that people DO pay for writing. But it's sometimes more luck than judgement that gets you there, and it's not any kind of instant or guaranteed process.

If you want more certainty, either as a writer or an artist, I strongly suggest being a for-hire freelancer, and learning how to deal with the realities of that life. I can attest to the fact that it is possible to make money from "artistic" soft skills working for others. And getting a contract for $500 to do a one or two day web-page content rewrite is a lot more lucrative than writing is when you're starting out. (Though to be fair, I can get that much for what I do because I have as much experience as I do freelance. Starting out you can't catch jobs like that very often.)


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Bob Ryan (Dec 19, 2012)

Hello Everyone,

I paid about a hundred bucks for my cover, which I love. There wasn't much back and forth; since Satan and demonic red eyes are key elements in my book, I told the designer to come up with something that would have the reader running for the nearest crucifix,  and this is what he came up with. I guess there's no "right" answer to the question posed in this thread, depends on a person's budget and so forth. I do believe, as someone else mentioned, that we sometimes sell ourselves cheap. There's craft to what cover designers and writers do, but there's also art, and we all know as consumers what we think of the merchandise when we find ourselves rummaging around in the bargain bin at Wal Mart or the dollar store... Anyhoo, that's my two cents. Best wishes to all, Bob Ryan


----------



## Charmaine (Jul 20, 2012)

I would just say that the comments since my last one are giving great advice.
I do want to add one comment thought about your work.
I looked at it and I would consider the style as middle grade, as in for books suited for children ages 10-14 ( I'm a middle grade artist myself  )
If you're considering illustrated covers, I've noticed a few things in that regard:
1. I would expect to be asked to work at a  lower price for middle grade, because at the moment it doesn't sell incredibly well. Sad but true.
2. Most authors want painted photo-manipulations because its the industry standard and that commands a higher price at this time.
Just something to keep in mind.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Wow, this thread really shocked me. I'm brand new on this website today and one of the reasons i joined was because I read in a book that a good way to get some help with stuff like editing and book cover was to find like minded people here.  In my total nievety I thought it meant free help, or at the least low cost help in a sort of tit for tat basis.

I've nearly finished a book and was thinking about the cover, so when i saw this thread about prices i was instantly curious.  I'm now reeling at the costs involved.  I genuinely thought it was as simple as someone drawing me a picture and putting the title and my name on it.  I actually thought it would cost me about £5!

I now of course realise that that is kind of insulting to you amazing artists out there, and maybe I'm the only penniless writer still going.....  If the costs truely are hundreds of dollars I think I'm going to have to learn how to do it by myself!


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Seleya said:


> Be aware that 'never work for royalties, it's a good way to get burned' is just about the first piece of advice an aspiring artist receives.


I think it comes down to comfort level. You have to know who you're dealing with, on both ends, before royalties come to the table. But yes, it's a good way for an artist to get burned.


----------



## MrPLD (Sep 23, 2010)

Seleya said:


> Working for exposure very rarely pays off, I'd rather suggest using that time to build a strong portfolio,and then put it out there (on free galleries and on one site of your own, a blog works perfectly well for that) advertising that you are available for commissions.


+1 to this.

I find more often than not the ole trick line of "Do this freebie for me and i'll spread your name..." type approach is more often than not a dead end. It's actually quite insulting too. I'm not against genuine tit-for-tat favour trades but typically in these situations you're the one who loses out significantly (on the other hand, if Amanda Hocking offered me such a deal then I'd be going for that  ). I think a lot of us have gone through it a couple of times before we learned to cut and run from such situations.


----------



## George Berger (Aug 7, 2011)

Howietzer said:


> I think it comes down to comfort level. You have to know who you're dealing with, on both ends, before royalties come to the table. But yes, it's a good way for an artist to get burned.


And an _enormous_ opportunity for a writer to get screwed over, too.

I know a lot of people are "Woo, free residual income for life, yay!", but, seriously, any kind of royalty/profit-sharing arrangement for cover art is a terrible, terrible idea.

Just say no.

If you're really so hung up on the pipe dream of moar monies down the road for doing nothing, try offering clients a rights-managed license good for the first, oh, twenty thousand copies, or so.



Clements said:


> I genuinely thought it was as simple as someone drawing me a picture and putting the title and my name on it. I actually thought it would cost me about £5!


It _can_ cost you about five quid, if you use someone on Fiverr. You're not likely to get the most awesome illustration in the history of mankind, but there are some surprisingly skilled folks on there. For some of my short fiction, I've bought two or three $5 covers, and picked the best of the bunch.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Clements said:


> Wow, this thread really shocked me. I'm brand new on this website today and one of the reasons i joined was because I read in a book that a good way to get some help with stuff like editing and book cover was to find like minded people here. In my total nievety I thought it meant free help, or at the least low cost help in a sort of tit for tat basis.
> 
> I've nearly finished a book and was thinking about the cover, so when i saw this thread about prices i was instantly curious. I'm now reeling at the costs involved. I genuinely thought it was as simple as someone drawing me a picture and putting the title and my name on it. I actually thought it would cost me about £5!
> 
> I now of course realise that that is kind of insulting to you amazing artists out there, and maybe I'm the only penniless writer still going..... If the costs truely are hundreds of dollars I think I'm going to have to learn how to do it by myself!


If you've got a good book and you want to sell it, I really, really suggest finding a way to get a good-looking cover. I know how it is when every cent matters, but there are some talented artists around who can put together a cover for like $30-70. If you can, find a way to make that work. It's not impossible to succeed with a homemade cover, but it makes a tough sled that much tougher.


----------



## Scarlett_R (Sep 30, 2011)

You're not paying for someone to stick some images together in Photoshop.

You're paying for experience, knowledge, and service. Price is not about "how much work can I do in 3 hours?"

Lets break it down:

Experience:

I have seven years experience behind me. I have a very high expectation of quality with the work I do. I am always, _always_, learning new things in my field to make myself a better designer. Me putting something together now will be vastly different than me 6 years ago. It will be faster, stronger, and much better quality. It's about typography, portraying the right message the right way, riding the find line of trend and originality--just to start with. I am also always encouraging others to do the best they can, and I support anyone who wants to make their work better, so as an industry we can transform the perception that self-pubbing is poor quality, to the idea it is professional, and is a worthy comparison to traditional publishing.

Also having worked with both traditional publishing houses and self-published authors gives me another edge, as I have a broad scope of how the industry moves.

Knowledge:

I am a source of information and my clients come to me because they don't know how to do what I do. I can advise them of what will work best, what won't work, design trends, and what will last for another 10 years. And it's not just design, I have knowledge of small business so I know how to organize an invoice, how to project manage and time manage, I know what to do if there is an issue that needs resolving. As a writer I have insight into the client's experience and I know what they're looking for, and at what points they could become confused or need guidance.

Service:

Then it comes to the work. Am I doing design work? Yes. What else am I doing as a business owner? Communicating, constantly. So there's time on the project for phone calls, emails, Skyping. Then there's organizing invoices, contracts, and CRM management. And realistically, how many concepts does one go through in a book cover project? You don't do just one concept, you do many. That takes time. Brainstorming for the concepts in the first place, reading their book, providing a high level of customer service, ensuring they know what's happening at all times. That is all specific to the client, on top of that there is general running of a business.

When talking about book cover designers this is my profession, this is what I do full time. If I'm charging, for example, $100 for a book cover that would be 8-10 hours of work. That breaks down to $10 an hour, and at 8 hours for one (as an example) if I'm working 5 of those a week that's $50. It's not worth it for me, or the authors I work with, to charge that. I'd go back to my old job at $25 an hour being on the phones. In general professional designers begin at a base rate of $45 an hour, and then go up depending on how many years experience. The best will be anything up to $130 an hour, if not more.

I know that for my position, with my skills, knowledge and that I do my best to make my clients feel like traditionally published authors, I'm charging what I'm worth. I think that the designers here on KB are way undercharging, which in turn unfortunately creates that shock effect for authors.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

George Berger said:


> And an _enormous_ opportunity for a writer to get screwed over, too.
> 
> I know a lot of people are "Woo, free residual income for life, yay!", but, seriously, any kind of royalty/profit-sharing arrangement for cover art is a terrible, terrible idea.
> 
> ...


It's this kind of opinion that gets royalty deals blown out of proportion (and I'm not "hung up" on the idea, it's just a suggestion for gods sake)... are you saying it's ok for authors to make a residual income off their work (and the artists) but not okay for artists to do the same? Sounds a bit one sided to me.


----------



## SBJones (Jun 13, 2011)

I remember having a conversation with my lawyer in 2011 and we were talking about my royalties that I receive from Amazon and other retailers.  The topic came about us discussing copyright expiration and my estate owning the rights to my work after I die vs specifically naming people in a will.

I asked the question about what if I got to the point where I was paying royalties to someone.  Specifically picking up other authors and publishing their books or on art used.  He told me in plain English.  Frack No.  Unless I was going to hire a bunch of people and turn into a mega corporation with a lot of people to stay away from paying people royalties.  His rational was the same as what we were talking.  If I hired someone and was paying them X% royalties on my books for a fixed contract or for life and the artist up and dies one day,  I still owe those payments to the deceased estate.  I'm now responsible for hunting down and finding out all that information and it's very possible that now three or five people own that artwork and I'm splitting payments all over hell and back if the family split everything on their own and didn't hire or designate a lawyer to act as executor.  Also it's quite possible that the art contract gets completely null and void on the authors death regardless of what it says and some zealot third cousin shows up trying to sue me for art they now own after seeing me use it on the book shelf in the store.  I would also end up with a book in need of an immediate new cover as an extra expense.

I asked, what are the odds of that happening?  He said for me, slim to none, but for him.  He deals with it every day.  For what it's worth.  I would not contract any cover artist or editor or formatter or anyone to work for a slice of the royalty pie.


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2013)

Ven West said:


> ...
> ANYWAY! All that said, there was something earlier in this thread that caught my eye.
> 
> This Ronnell guy... apparently complained about working for the "cheap" price of *$300??!?!!*
> ...


Honestly? My willingness to pay for something that is essentially mixing pre-existing images - and don't get me wrong, there are some astoundingly talented people around here on KB - tops out at 100 bucks, and even then it would have to be an awesome piece like no other. The point is this: For the stories I've published and/or worked on I've enlisted the services of both freelance hobby artists and industry professionals, both doing *custom work* at prices way below $300. Ronnel's rates and the apparent time it takes him to do the job aren't competitive in nowadays market if you can get something like this:








for less than half the cost in a quarter of the time.

Edit: That's a low-res picture. The actual image resolution is something like 2500x3000.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

SBJones said:


> I remember having a conversation with my lawyer in 2011 and we were talking about my royalties that I receive from Amazon and other retailers. The topic came about us discussing copyright expiration and my estate owning the rights to my work after I die vs specifically naming people in a will.
> 
> I asked the question about what if I got to the point where I was paying royalties to someone. Specifically picking up other authors and publishing their books or on art used. He told me in plain English. Frack No. Unless I was going to hire a bunch of people and turn into a mega corporation with a lot of people to stay away from paying people royalties. His rational was the same as what we were talking. If I hired someone and was paying them X% royalties on my books for a fixed contract or for life and the artist up and dies one day, I still owe those payments to the deceased estate. I'm now responsible for hunting down and finding out all that information and it's very possible that now three or five people own that artwork and I'm splitting payments all over hell and back if the family split everything on their own and didn't hire or designate a lawyer to act as executor. Also it's quite possible that the art contract gets completely null and void on the authors death regardless of what it says and some zealot third cousin shows up trying to sue me for art they now own after seeing me use it on the book shelf in the store. I would also end up with a book in need of an immediate new cover as an extra expense.
> 
> I asked, what are the odds of that happening? He said for me, slim to none, but for him. He deals with it every day. For what it's worth. I would not contract any cover artist or editor or formatter or anyone to work for a slice of the royalty pie.


I'm thinking thats why you work out those details beforehand... granted that could take a lot of time. Most probably wouldn't want to deal with the hassle, which I completely understand. It's the "Doing art is easier than writing" feeling that I get from these conversations that really gets under my skin.

I know that's not what you're saying, but comments like George posted "Getting paid for doing nothing" is totally untrue and reeks of belittlement toward artists (that's how I took it anyway).


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2013)

C.C. Kelly said:


> Do you have exclusive rights to the illustration?


Yup. 


> If it is exclusive (and custom) and the artist only charged you $100-$150, then he is seriously seriously under valuing his work. And that sucks, because he is very good and could command much higher prices.


He is, indeed. To be completely honest I was really surprised when he told me his rates. I'm usually fully willing - and expecting - to have to pay in excess of *€ 300* for a fully custom design. I was lucky with my very first cover because Jorge was just getting started as a freelancer.


> That illustration is straight up professional by every measure and has a great unique style.


No disagreement.


----------



## wearywanderer64 (Jan 27, 2013)

I just bought my first ebook cover after stupidly trying to do it on my own. Well worth ithe money.

http://alexthomasmahon.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/whats-your-poison/


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Howietzer said:


> are you saying it's ok for authors to make a residual income off their work (and the artists) but not okay for artists to do the same? Sounds a bit one sided to me.


That's not the reason that traditional advice is for service providers to stay away from profit-sharing offers. The reason is because you never know if you'll get paid. What if the client's (and I'm using client because people of all services see this - writers, editors, artists, website designers, programmers, etc. and so forth) idea never takes off? Sucks to be you.

With books in particular, I would consider editing for a small percent of a book's sales if there were any way to do it other than the honor system or being the "publisher." Right now there's not, so it's not an option for a lot of us.

Good points about estate issues with regards to royalties, SB.

SP, I love that art. Reminds me of something you'd see as the cover for a _Cyberpunk 2020_ book


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I've been sitting on my hands for a couple of days now, since I have the same concerns regarding pricing and editing.  My thoughts - it's not the client's job (saying client because this pretty much applies to freelancers in any industry) to ensure you're being paid a fair amount.  Their concern is to acquire a service that meets their needs and falls within their budget. It's your concern as a freelancer to charge an amount that allows you to actually live on your wages and not resort to eating Ramen Noodles five days a week.  If you're priced outside of a particular client's needs, that's okay.  There are plenty of artists out there who can and will meet that demand (pre-made covers being a great example). But as for spending hours on something that nets you $30?  Why?  You can make more selling plasma, for Pete's sake. Not only are you pulling less than minimum wage but you get none of the perks that come with being employed. Not worth it, IMO, unless you just want a little extra pin money. If you're trying to earn a living, you'll make yourself miserable that way.


----------



## Charmaine (Jul 20, 2012)

C.C. Kelly said:


> As for working for a percentage from an artists perspective, I can't stress this enough - never do it. You provide a product, you get paid - period. This situation rarely works out well. How does the artists know how much the book is earning in sales? Just say no. Pay or pay not, there is no percentage.


THIS.
My professors basically gathered all the illustration seniors in a room and made us repeat several times,"We will not work for royalties."
No Joke.
Most traditional publisher's wont offer them anyway.
Only case where royalties are acceptable is in picture books. 
EVEN then the illustrator is paid the up front $8,000 -$10,000. And they know not to expect a penny of royalties because most likely the book won't make enough.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Arkali said:


> That's not the reason that traditional advice is for service providers to stay away from profit-sharing offers. The reason is because you never know if you'll get paid. What if the client's (and I'm using client because people of all services see this - writers, editors, artists, website designers, programmers, etc. and so forth) idea never takes off? Sucks to be you.


Agreed. I was just reacting to how I interpreted the statements posted earlier.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Arkali said:


> I've been sitting on my hands for a couple of days now, since I have the same concerns regarding pricing and editing. My thoughts - it's not the client's job (saying client because this pretty much applies to freelancers in any industry) to ensure you're being paid a fair amount. Their concern is to acquire a service that meets their needs and falls within their budget. It's your concern as a freelancer to charge an amount that allows you to actually live on your wages and not resort to eating Ramen Noodles five days a week. If you're priced outside of a particular client's needs, that's okay. There are plenty of artists out there who can and will meet that demand (pre-made covers being a great example). But as for spending hours on something that nets you $30? Why? You can make more selling plasma, for Pete's sake. Not only are you pulling less than minimum wage but you get none of the perks that come with being employed. Not worth it, IMO, unless you just want a little extra pin money. If you're trying to earn a living, you'll make yourself miserable that way.


I think this ties back to the whole global market thing. Currency being worth different amounts depending where you live and all that jazz.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Howietzer said:


> I think this is ties back to the whole global market thing. Currency being worth different amounts depending where you live and all that jazz.


True. But, that's also not the freelancer's problem. Certainly it's a consideration when setting rates, but just because someone living in Timbuktu can live on $5 a day doesn't mean that you should lower your prices to that. As I said, at that point you're better off selling plasma twice a week, ya know? And sure, all other things being equal, price will usually win out. But it's a freelancer's job to ensure that all other things are _not_ equal. Attitude, personality, communication, professionalism, quality of work, expertise / skill / knowledge / talent -- those are the things that will allow you compete.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Arkali said:


> True. But, that's also not the freelancer's problem. Certainly it's a consideration when setting rates, but just because someone living in Timbuktu can live on $5 a day doesn't mean that you should lower your prices to that. As I said, at that point you're better off selling plasma twice a week, ya know? And sure, all other things being equal, price will usually win out. But it's a freelancer's job to ensure that all other things are _not_ equal. Attitude, personality, communication, professionalism, quality of work, expertise / skill / knowledge / talent -- those are the things that will allow you compete.


Well, it kinda is a problem for freelancers. Say that Timbuktu artist has the same "Attitude, personality, communication, professionalism, quality of work, expertise / skill / knowledge / talent" as you do, but can charge $30 for a totally kickbutt design that takes 10 hours to complete. How are you suppose to compete with something like that? (move to Timbuktu I guess? lol)


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

I am one of those people charging $25 for premades, and I want to chime in and say that I do it because I have no aspirations to be a professional artist. I simpy enjoy noodling with graphics and use the money to buy software and hardware upgrades. For example my Bamboo tablet appears to have bitten the dust and I need to buy a new one.

I've had no training except what I taught myself, and I have no arts background except a gazillion of professional artists in my family.

I enjoy it and am not, and will never call myself, a professional. My images on DeviantArt are purely WYSIWYG, and are for low-level entrants into the ebook market, where people cannot justify to spend a couple of hundred dollars on a cover.

I have spent up to about $300 on some of my own covers and I definitely think a serious artist should be charging that much.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Arkali said:


> True. But, that's also not the freelancer's problem. Certainly it's a consideration when setting rates, but just because someone living in Timbuktu can live on $5 a day doesn't mean that you should lower your prices to that. As I said, at that point you're better off selling plasma twice a week, ya know? And sure, all other things being equal, price will usually win out. But it's a freelancer's job to ensure that all other things are _not_ equal. Attitude, personality, communication, professionalism, quality of work, expertise / skill / knowledge / talent -- those are the things that will allow you compete.


I have been in direct competition with people in low cost of living areas of the world. I did just fine charging ten times what they did.

Because I was better. In all of the above.

People do not want a cheap end result. They want a professional end result. They want someone who can do a job well, and listen to them.

There are very few English speaking low cost of living areas. VERY few. Most are within a relatively average cost of living range. The people who don't speak English FLUENTLY (and that does include some English language natives) are at a disadvantage when it comes to communication, which (outside of doing the job itself well) is the most important aspect of being a freelance professional.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Mathew Reuther said:


> I have been in direct competition with people in low cost of living areas of the world. I did just fine charging ten times what they did.
> 
> Because I was better. In all of the above.
> 
> ...


I find this a rather patronising reply.

People all over the world charge less than commercial rates because they don't derive their main income from their art, and they are happy with less because their regular job pays the mortgage.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Howietzer said:


> Well, it kinda is a problem for freelancers. Say that Timbuktu artist has the same "Attitude, personality, communication, professionalism, quality of work, expertise / skill / knowledge / talent" as you do, but can charge $30 for a totally kickbutt design that takes 10 hours to complete. How are you suppose to compete with something like that? (move to Timbuktu I guess? lol)


*shrug* Change jobs? That sounds flip, I know, but you have to do the best you can - improve your skills, network, etc. But do you really think that making $60 a day is the answer? It's not, I assure you. Because when you're working for yourself you have the additional administration things to deal with. You also have the burden of your own expenses (software, classes, computer, etc.), paying all of your taxes (in the USA your employer pays half of your taxes behind the scenes, not so if you're self-employed), paying for your own insurance, sick time, vacation, etc. is unpaid. When you factor all that in, your $60 a day is about $20. So I am totally not lying when I say that you're better off selling plasma. No idea what it is now, but back when I was in college the first time around you could do it every other day for $15 per, it only took an hour, and they gave you a cookie afterward. But I fail to see how pricing yourself in Ramen Noodle land on a permanent basis is the solution.

All that said, and perhaps this is an unpopular opinion, but I, at least, am not the same as every other freelancer out there. Some have more experience than me, some have less. My personality probably rubs a lot of people the wrong way, but other people love working with me. It's going to vary. But I am not going to bust my ass for what equates to under minimum wage when I can go wait tables for three times the money. If someone else wants to, that's their prerogative - it's not up to me to tell anyone else how to run their business. Thankfully, I work with great people who like working with me and I enjoy the work I do and am able to earn a living doing it, so no waiting tables for me anytime soon, knock on wood


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> People all over the world charge less than commercial rates because they don't derive their main income from their art, and they are happy with less because their regular job pays the mortgage.


Patty, I get what you're saying. And that's fine, but also not the concern of another freelancer. From the potential client's perspective, let's say they have a choice between Joe and and Bob. Heck, let's level the playing field and say that Joe and Bob are twins - same skillset, same everything EXCEPT - Joe has a full-time job and freelances on the side. Bob is a full-time freelancer (ie. he earns his living from it). So the client's conundrum is does he want to pay Joe $100 and accept the fact that Joe will be unavailable for contact between 9-5, Monday through Friday and if something comes up at Joe's job, the client is screwed (temporarily) because Joe's got to fix the work stuff - his job (that pays the mortgage!) depends upon it. The freelance client is not the priority. On the other hand, Bob is available 5 days a week, 8 hours a day (more like 7 days a week, 10 hours a day, but I digress  ). The client, who pays his mortgage, is his number-one priority. Period.

Client A may choose Joe because that's what they've budgeted, or they don't need the extra service, whatever. But should Bob drop his rates or wait for the client who _will_ pay his rates? Let's take a restaurant that specializes in hamburgers. And another that does GOURMET hamburgers (whatever those are LOL). Then you've got McDonald's. The three restaurants are not competing for clients via price - they're competing on their food, service, ambiance, etc. Snooty Burgers is never going to sell you a burger for ninety-nine cents--barring the occasional sale--they'd go out of business. But if you're on the road and can't stop for a sit-down meal or you've got five dollars until your paycheck arrives tomorrow, or heck, you're just craving a Big Mac, then there's nothing wrong with hitting the McD's drive-through.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Patty Jansen said:


> I find this a rather patronising reply.
> 
> People all over the world charge less than commercial rates because they don't derive their main income from their art, and they are happy with less because their regular job pays the mortgage.


Yes, they do, and they're less able than full-time dedicated professionals as a result. They're less able to dedicate time to a client. Less able to drop and rearrange for rush jobs. Less able to put in extra hours.

Which is why I never had any shortage of work. I could take a job and finish it. I didn't have to wait until the end of the day when the kids were in bed. I didn't have to schedule around anything. My job was to be available 16 hours a day. So I was.

People doing cut rate things for the sake of "my art, my art" are artists. They are creatives. That is lovely.

But they are not dedicated professionals, even when their day jobs overlap.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

I'm not sure where both of you seem to think that I think artists should lower their rates. I only explained why so many of them DO.

All artists are not equal. If you find someone whose work you really like, you are much more willing to pay more, and no, the next artist is not going to be an equal replacement.

You pay the money... or you don't.

I asked an artist I know and respect how much he would charge to do a cover for me, and he quoted something like $2500. I sadly had to tell him that if he could get that much from publishing houses, then good luck to him. I didn't try to talk his price down. If that's what he wanted, he has every right to charge it.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Patty Jansen said:


> I'm not sure where both of you seem to think that I think artists should lower their rates. I only explained why so many of them DO.


I didn't say you thought that, I said that the reasons they did were the reasons they weren't capable of demanding the same rates. I happen to agree that they do need to lower their rates. They're NOT worth what a dedicated professional is. Just as, if you're cover designing on the side, you're not worth what a dedicated graphic designer (whio yes, may not do ALL covers, but they are a dedicated designer, and not doing it as a bonus on the day job) is.



> All artists are not equal. If you find someone whose work you really like, you are much more willing to pay more, and no, the next artist is not going to be an equal replacement.


Which is why some people stick with an illustrator, layout designer, or whatever. Others will jump from person to person because they have njot found anyone that clicks so well they want to keep it up.



> You pay the money... or you don't.


Which is why higher priced people still make money. People do pay the money. And lower priced people make the money as well, from those not inclined to pay the price.



> I asked an artist I know and respect how much he would charge to do a cover for me, and he quoted something like $2500. I sadly had to tell him that if he could get that much from publishing houses, then good luck to him. I didn't try to talk his price down. If that's what he wanted, he has every right to charge it.


Which is the right way to go. When I quoted a $30 an hour for something, or a flat fee of $500 or whatnot, people would try to haggle with me. All that happened was I told them what I'd told them before: I charge what I charge because I deliver the kind of quality results they are looking for in an end product. Going cheaper with someone else is possible, but I guarantee my results, and have the history and experience to support my rates.

In the context of this thread, if you want to design covers, you (Ven, I think?) should start designing them. Price them based upon what your experience is and what their quality is. Don't say "I charge $500 because someone else did" say "I charge $x because I have these qualifications and experience. here are my samples" . . .

I don;t overly think we're that far off. I didn't even get irritated when you suggested that it was patronizing to point out that a professional is worth more than an amateur.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

You don't get why that post was patronising. Not because of the "professionalism" of the work--or not--and I completely agree with CC Kelly here. A degree in graphic design and 16 hours a day does not guarantee that the result will be effective,  nor that the artist will not be flaky.

The post was patronising because there are more countries in the world than the US. We DO have members from "Timbuktu" here, and I'm sure that these people do not enjoy being talked down to as being second-class citizens who, by the very virtue of where they live, deliver second-class work.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

C.C. Kelly said:


> Sorry, but this is B.S. Working really hard 16 hours a day doesn't mean the designer is even competent, it just means they work hard.


We've already established the paradigm of "everything equal" but you probably missed it because it was in the post above mine.



> While on the other hand some hobby amateurs churn out amazing work, because they have superior talent. Talent usually trumps "hard work" and "experience".


Really?

You're an author and you believe that? Do you believe that every person who has had success in publishing has more talent than those who have not?

I certainly don't believe that talent is the leading cause of success in anything in life. Effort and time count for far more. Finishing what you start. Building a base. Being responsive.

50% of the long term clients I scored as a freelancer I got on a rush job the first time. "I need this in two hours." Sometimes at 2am. Sometimes at noon.

Good luck to the talented amateur trying to keep up with tracking posted jobs and responding to them. They simply cannot.



> I see where you are going, but you presented it as an absolute and the reality is that it isn't even accurate a majority of the time.


In my decade of experience it's held true. I can speak from my career and from those of freelancers I've worked with. The professionals who dedicate their time get ahead. Those who dabble are left with no repeats, and low wages.



> I'm not making a distinction between trying to run a business or being a hobbiest in terms of price. The product and market determine the price, not experience. It's like saying I'm a new author, I better price my books at 99 cents or free. Its a crap argument. Product is product and quality is quality.


And yet I don't see anyone pricing at $15.99 for their ebooks. New authors from traditional publishers are priced there.

That's an aside.

The experience and quality of work is the determining factor. The need to be available and communicate is a factor. The confidence in one's own product is a factor.

But let's be honest, what was just said is true. Patty mentioned that not all artists ARE equal. (So she had caught the paradigm.) TO that end, there are ebooks worth 99c. (Not even, actually. Let's be honest.)

Similarly I have seen covers advertised for sale on these boards that aren't worth paying for. That does not mean they do not get sold. But it certainly means that were the cover artist to attempt to charge a great deal they would have extremely limited success.

Others I have seen are absolutely excellent, (or hell, even phenomenal) and to be honest I suspect even at the higher rates they are charging they are still under-selling their services.

But the reality of freelancing is that it IS your effort that matters. Same as in self-publishing. Your effort matters. Write more. Improve your writing. Revise better. Get better blurbs. Work to get more exposure. Write guest blogs. Etc.

It never ends. The work never, ever ends.

Do you think that someone who produces 1.3 million words in a year like Elle Casey is automatically more talented a writer than anyone else? Talent is not the driving factor in her success. She has worked her ass off. And then worked some more. I have zero doubt as to her producing readable product (all the words of garbage in the world won't make people repeat buy if they are junk) but the real success there is the 10k word days. The ability to keep pushing forward and writing, and getting the work out in a professional manner.

Effort counts. Time counts. Talent is a component, yes. But by far not the most important one.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Patty Jansen said:


> You don't get why that post was patronising. Not because of the "professionalism" of the work--or not--and I completely agree with CC Kelly here. A degree in graphic design and 16 hours a day does not guarantee that the result will be effective, nor that the artist will not be flaky.
> 
> The post was patronising because there are more countries in the world than the US. We DO have members from "Timbuktu" here, and I'm sure that these people do not enjoy being talked down to as being second-class citizens who, by the very virtue of where they live, deliver second-class work.


Sorry, I've been paid to edit the material of the bargain basement writers from Asia and Africa. They very much do produce poor quality work.

Ever gone to a webpage and said, "what does that even mean?"

Good bet it was written for a dollar per five hundred words by someone from Africa or Asia whose command of English is tenuous.

There are writers who write from those low income locations who are good. They don't charge those low rates, even though they can afford it. They charge what the work is worth.

I'm not really interested in how insulting you think it is to share my real world experiences. We;re talking about the real world of freelancing, so unless you have some extensive history, I suspect you simply lack the frame of reference needed to realize what actually goes on across the globe.

That's not a bad thing. It's just a true thing.

I am worth more than someone who is not as talented, not as dedicated, and in general not as professional.

People need to price their freelance services according to that their unique combination of skills, experience, and devotion work out to.

For example, my rates drop when I am otherwise gainfully employed, because I am less valuable to my clients, and they are getting what they pay for when they pay the lower fees. They get someone who is adept, but not fully dedicated. (Can't stay up all night because they have to work in the morning for example.)

Again, I reiterate, we're not as far apart as you think. You're trying to make issues out of some insult to talented people I never rendered. *shrug*

You can take offense if you'd like, but none was ever given.


----------



## ElHawk (Aug 13, 2012)

I agree with the folks who've said it's pretty reasonable for the work involved.  It's so much more than just photoshopping stock images together.  Anybody can do that.  It's coming up with an overall design that conveys a TON of information about a book in a way that makes the product as attractive as possible.  And it's dealing with sometimes demanding clients, too!

Right now I'm working at $50/cover because I need to build up the happy client base.  But I am most definitely planning on bringing my prices up to a level that's commensurate with the work I put into it at a future date...hopefully the near future!


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

C.C. Kelly said:


> Mathew, I'll go along with you on the hard work (and the low quality covers being sold), but all the earnest effort in the world can't make up for a lack of talent and intelligence.


Agreed.



> And yes, by and large, I think that talent usually rises to the top.


Agreed to some extent, but I know some amazing talented writers who are living at the poverty line even with social security and pension. That's in great aprt due to what happens to people who get old in freelance industries where healthcare is not something they have access to. Hopefully with the changes we see in the next few years we will be able to see out freelance population get better care and live longer, more productive lives.



> This isn't meant as an absolute, but a general rule yeah. Crichton, Grisham, Koonts, King, Howey, Roberts, Patterson, Cussler - they are [expletive] talented. They didn't achieve success with old fashioned hard work.


Patterson is the epitome of hard working though. If you wanted a reason for his unusual level of success it would simply be his drive. Talent did not get him there. It could not get him there.



> I've only known freelance illustrators who worked on the side, never as a main business. They went to work and then stayed up all night working the second job (myself included). They all got great rates and worked with big name clients, because the client doesn't care about your business model or staffing. They care almost exclusively about artistic style for the advertisement, and then availability and then price.


Availability and communication do not go out of style no matter what industry you work in.



> Again, business intent is irrelevant, satisfying your market is all that matters.


Which is made easier the more time and energy you have to devote. Which is why a professional firm that does graphic design often produces results which far outstrip freelancers. They also charge more.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

C.C. Kelly said:


> I'll agree to "sometimes", not often. Again, I get your point, but all the freelancers I've known did very well from a business perspective and were top notch illustrators. So the design business doesn't necessitate better work. But, in all fairness to your argument, myself and the freelancers I'm referring to were professional illustrators and designers, not amateurs. We just had day jobs too, sometimes for design companies.


And I won't say that there are no people who have two jobs who don't do good work.

I am just saying that if you go back to all things being equal, the people who put in more time get better results. And time equates to the ability to get new customers as well. It's not all just doing jobs, it's also getting jobs in.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Mathew Reuther said:


> And I won't say that there are no people who have two jobs who don't do good work.
> 
> I am just saying that if you go back to all things being equal, the people who put in more time get better results. And time equates to the ability to get new customers as well. It's not all just doing jobs, it's also getting jobs in.


This. My whole argument regarding the fulltimer vs. the moonlighter was predicated on everything else being equal. Joe and Bob were twins except one had a job in the corporate world and moonlighted, the other freelanced full time. *All else being equal*, the fulltimer can and should command higher rates, and people are willing to pay the higher rates _if their budget and project allows it_ because they expect (rightfully) priority treatment and quicker turnarounds (you can knock work out quicker if you're spending 10+ hours a day as opposed to 2).

Sample scenario:
Two clients (also twins) notice a typo in the blurb on their book jacket. They send a panicked email to their artist because they really wanted to publish today. One twin gets a response back within thirty minutes, along with the fixed cover. The other twin waits. And waits. And waits. If he's lucky his artist will get home at six and start working at seven or so, and it's not the end of the world. But wait! The moonlighters company had an emergency at their plant in Dallas and they put him on a flight this morning - he won't be back home for three days. Maybe the client can fix it himself. Maybe he can't. That's beside the point. A lot of people out there will pay extra for knowing that they've got that support if they should need it.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Arkali said:


> *shrug* Change jobs? That sounds flip, I know, but you have to do the best you can - improve your skills, network, etc. But do you really think that making $60 a day is the answer?


I don't think "change jobs" is flip at all, in fact I think that will be one of the main answers as time goes on. And no, I don't think making $60 a day is an answer, I never did and didn't mean to imply that either.



Mathew Reuther said:


> I have been in direct competition with people in low cost of living areas of the world. I did just fine charging ten times what they did.
> 
> Because I was better. In all of the above.
> 
> ...


I don't think this holds much water. Take Croatia for example, English isn't their language of choice, but holy cow, some of the art I've seen from the people over there will knock your socks off. And I've seen great stuff from quite a few other non-english speaking countries as well. I've actually contracted some really good work from Spain and Russia too, and they were pretty on point with the whole service side.

I also believe that people will tolerant some slackage with service if the art is good. I've seen it happen on this forum in fact. lol.

I think in the long run the price difference will kill the bulk of art freelancing from high cost of living countries. I'm basing this speculation on other industries that have tanked do to "out sourcing" (Steel, Auto, Call Centers... etc.). These may not have any real correlation with the art industry but the overall situation seems the same to me.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Howietzer said:


> I don't think this holds much water. Take Croatia for example, English isn't their language of choice, but holy cow, some of the art I've seen from the people over there will knock your socks off. And I've seen great stuff from quite a few other non-english speaking countries as well. I've actually contracted some really good work from Spain and Russia too, and they were pretty on point with the whole service side.


The issue was more from the writing side, and I've admitted that plainly.

As far as the service goes, if they can manage it well, they're going to have success. And, hopefully, we'll see a global shift towards English as time goes on, and education and resources get better. That will allow talented people to operate on a better footing.



> I also believe that people will tolerant some slackage with service if the art is good. I've seen it happen on this forum in fact. lol.


And very recently it exploded badly between an artist and an author. The root of the problem was communication and prioritizing. Both things I have stressed as being where the people who are native English speakers and full-time professionals USUALLY have an advantage.



> I think in the long run the price difference will kill the bulk of art freelancing from high cost of living countries. I'm basing this speculation on other industries that have tanked do to "out sourcing" (Steel, Auto, Call Centers... etc.). These may not have any real correlation with the art industry but the overall situation seems the same to me.


Going to take an extremely long time for that to happen. 1) Nationalism exists. I have been hired for being American. 2) Culture does not translate without immersion. You cannot "be American" in style without being American in reality. (Living here.) 3. Budgets are not always set by people who are broke. Here, sure, a lot of people are on the edge, but there's a huge market where people actually have the money to pay a good wage, and their cultural bias steers them towards doing so.


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

I pay $60 for my novels under my own name and between $85 and $115 for my novella covers (art plus separate titles) and I reckon I'm getting a steal.  For my novels I tried to get a brilliant original artist but after sending him several emails (and hearing similar problems from other writers) it became clear he either didn't want my business or had stopped doing commissions so I went with recommendations and they've both done great jobs.  The guy I wanted at first was $200 to $300 and his work was easily worth it.  I earn that much teaching English for half a day. As someone else said you should value your ability and I think a good cover artist should be charging at least $30 an hour, probably more.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Mathew Reuther said:


> The issue was more from the writing side, and I've admitted that plainly.


My bad, I was looking at this from the art side of the thread.



Mathew Reuther said:


> And very recently it exploded badly between an artist and an author. The root of the problem was communication and prioritizing. Both things I have stressed as being where the people who are native English speakers and full-time professionals USUALLY have an advantage.


Okay, that was a mega screw up (and even so, if an apology is issued and work progresses, a lot of people will forgive). I'm talking about kinda shotty service (missing deadlines, late communication, even changing the price a bit). People will tolerate that kind of garbage if the work is good and they can get it cheaper.



Mathew Reuther said:


> Going to take an extremely long time for that to happen. 1) Nationalism exists. I have been hired for being American. 2) Culture does not translate without immersion. You cannot "be American" in style without being American in reality. (Living here.) 3. Budgets are not always set by people who are broke. Here, sure, a lot of people are on the edge, but there's a huge market where people actually have the money to pay a good wage, and their cultural bias steers them towards doing so.


Sorry, lol at this. Money talks my friend.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

C.C. Kelly said:


> Advertising art for the most part will be fine, but fringe markets, like CD and book covers will continue to see a decline in pricing to the point of ridiculousness and people will use them, because it's cost effective for their business.


Not being an artist, I can't comment about this. However, I do hope that you're wrong. Time will tell.



C.C. Kelly said:


> But, you've created a scenario to satisfy your position, and while it is plausible, it isn't all that relevant for the average indie writer/publisher. Most new writers will be happy to wait three days for 10% of the price of the full-time designer. The primary business concern for most indies is cash flow. Publishing today or early next week probably isn't that big of an issue.


Well, of course - that's the purpose of creating a hypothetical scenario--to illustrate your point  As for whether or not clients will be happy to wait - it depends, I reckon. I would think as indies (individually) become more successful and their livelihood is more and more dependent on their publishing, the more they'll be to pay to ensure that they get priority. Kind of like dedicated vs. moonlighting  An author who writes full time and that IS their job is going to be much more sensitive about deadlines. They don't have the paycheck to fall back on and delaying publishing may mean their rankings fall for books already out (the whole algorithm thing and all). Also, if they're successful and have a wide readership and good sales, their budget will (probably) be more per project than the indie who's just getting into publishing. And that's fine - that's why not everybody charges the same (nor should they). That means there are freelancers out there to fit every project.



C.C. Kelly said:


> I think we are more or less on the same page. Having professional services available is great and cost not withstanding, would be a first choice for most writers. But, it's great that writers have a quality, less expensive option to maintain a professional brand. I just believe that artists and designers shouldn't devalue their work.


Agreed - and that was pretty much my point, that competing on price alone is a losing proposition.


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Howietzer said:


> My bad, I was looking at this from the art side of the thread.


No, and as well you should. This is about art, and I'm muddying things in a way by talking writing.



> Okay, that was a mega screw up (and even so, if an apology is issued and work progresses, a lot of people will forgive). I'm talking about kinda shotty service (missing deadlines, late communication, even changing the price a bit). People will tolerate that kind of garbage if the work is good and they can get it cheaper.


Not everyone. I've had some extremely sensitive clients where after twenty four hours of not getting a reply they were screaming about not wanting to deal with my any more. I've had clients come to me saying their last person was too flaky, and I could only have the job if I could guarantee a certain response time.

There's people who accept that they only have fifteen dollars and that only buys them fifteen dollars worth of stuff.

There are others who have a hundred and fifty, but they damned well want you to pay attention when they talk.



> Sorry, lol at this. Money talks my friend.


I base my statement on over a decade of charging more than other people for my work and not starving to death while doing it. Having a high percentage of repeat work too. (To the point where I didn't look for new customers, they came to me via word of mouth.)

You base your lol on what? Your desire to buy a burger for 99 cents even if it tastes like cardboard? 

People will always pay for quality. Perceived value is a psychological phenomena which drives many individuals AWAY from bargains. It's been present in humans for, well, a long time, if not forever.


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Mathew Reuther said:


> You base your lol on what? Your desire to buy a burger for 99 cents even if it tastes like cardboard?


Stop making me laugh, I need to go to bed. 

I'm laughing about the Nationalism thing. It's not that I don't believe it happens, i just believe over time it won't be enough. 
As much as I hate to say it, as much as it terrifies me to say it _*melodrama drumroll*_ as artists in wealthy countries, we're doomed.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Howietzer said:


> Stop making me laugh, I need to go to bed.
> 
> I'm laughing about the Nationalism thing. It's not that I don't believe it happens, i just believe over time it won't be enough.
> As much as I hate to say it, as much as it terrifies me to say it _*melodrama drumroll*_ as artists in wealthy countries, we're doomed.


Nah  It just becomes even more vital, I think, to focus your business on keeping your clients happy. Happy clients are repeat clients, and they refer new clients to you. If someone gets a referral from a trusted source to come to you you pretty much have the job (assuming you're asking a price that's within their budget. They may pass if you ask for $5000 dollars ;-) )


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Howietzer said:


> Stop making me laugh, I need to go to bed.
> 
> I'm laughing about the Nationalism thing. It's not that I don't believe it happens, i just believe over time it won't be enough.
> As much as I hate to say it, as much as it terrifies me to say it _*melodrama drumroll*_ as artists in wealthy countries, we're doomed.


Right, but it still DOES matter.

Believe me, I wish it would stop mattering sooner rather than later, but I'm fairly afraid I won't live to see the day. *sigh*


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

One element I haven't seen in the debate yet (but maybe I missed it, I admit I skimmed the last couple of pages to get up-to-date with the thread) is the 'temporary' moonlighter. There are quite a few artists that hold on to a day-job as a way to pay the bills _while working on building a reputation and a 'stable' of returning clients _ with the aim of moving to full-timers as soon as possible.

If those are serious, they are every bit as professional as the (good) full timers and can afford to choose their commissions based on what they think can help them along since they don't depend on getting every possible job to make enough to live on.

Many at some point give up, because it's hard and they do need support from the family on that to be able to make it. Just about every moment free from the day job is devoted to painting or communicating with the clients: no television, no regular nights out, 'holiday' means going to Cons or events related to the gaming lines or book series one is working on and so forth.

Usually they start with lower fees to get known and create a first client base and raise them gradually as they move to better jobs and their reputation grows.

There is an old saying in the industry, still valid in my opinion: " Cheap, fast, good. Pick any two".


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Seleya said:


> There is an old saying in the industry, still valid in my opinion: " Cheap, fast, good. Pick any two".


My wife has the Venn Diagram which illustrates that printed out at work.

It works for freelance writing as well as design.


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

Howietzer said:


> I think in the long run the price difference will kill the bulk of art freelancing from high cost of living countries. I'm basing this speculation on other industries that have tanked do to "out sourcing" (Steel, Auto, Call Centers... etc.). These may not have any real correlation with the art industry but the overall situation seems the same to me.


There is some evidence that some companies are beginning to bring U.S. jobs back from overseas: http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/3208-american-jobs-coming-back.html. Concerning the manufacturing businesses, generally the main point of out-sourcing was to get things done more cheaply, but what guarantee is there that the costs of overseas employment will stay low? Also what guarantee is there that foreign competitors will keep their prices low once they drive out the higher-priced competition in the U.S.? In these cases, low price can be just a temporary strategy, the purpose being to kill off the competition.

Anyway, that's manufacturing and the like. For freelancing in the artistic fields, I think different factors are involved. However, I do think cheap will win out in some areas, especially in tasks that require less skill or talent or something that is the equivalent of simple assembly line manufacturing. The other jobs--let's say the equivalent designing a new car--probably don't come cheap wherever you live.

Jodi


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

Seleya said:


> There is an old saying in the industry, still valid in my opinion: " Cheap, fast, good. Pick any two".


Good point. To take it a step further, just because you want it cheap, fast, and good that doesn't mean you will get even two of the three. When I look at cover art to buy (not there yet, but someday), I try to stop and calculate dollars per hour and how it compares to the minimum wage. If I don't want to work for the equivalent of, say, $4 an hour for good, quality work that takes hours to complete, why would I want someone I hire for a job to do so?

Jodi


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Jodi said:


> There is some evidence that some companies are beginning to bring U.S. jobs back from overseas: http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/3208-american-jobs-coming-back.html. Concerning the manufacturing businesses, generally the main point of out-sourcing was to get things done more cheaply, but what guarantee is there that the costs of overseas employment will stay low? Also what guarantee is there that foreign competitors will keep their prices low once they drive out the higher-priced competition in the U.S.? In these cases, low price can be just a temporary strategy, the purpose being to kill off the competition.
> 
> Anyway, that's manufacturing and the like. For freelancing in the artistic fields, I think different factors are involved. However, I do think cheap will win out in some areas, especially in tasks that require less skill or talent or something that is the equivalent of simple assembly line manufacturing. The other jobs--let's say the equivalent designing a new car--probably don't come cheap wherever you live.


I don't dispute this. I think the shifting process is cyclical, but how much time will there be in between shifts? 5 years? 20? There are a lot of variables to consider: What's the economy like, Who is in political power, What kind of foreign policies are in place? Just to name a few. I don't think there are guarantees _either_ way, but the way things look currently, I'm thinkin' the freelance market is shifting away from higher cost of living areas. Hope I'm wrong about my assumptions but I can't help feeling that's what's happening.



Jodi said:


> Good point. To take it a step further, just because you want it cheap, fast, and good that doesn't mean you will get even two of the three. When I look at cover art to buy (not there yet, but someday), I try to stop and calculate dollars per hour and how it compares to the minimum wage. If I don't want to work for the equivalent of, say, $4 an hour for good, quality work that takes hours to complete, why would I want someone I hire for a job to do so?


So if you found two artists, one is Fast and Good, the other is Cheap and Good, you think you would go with the higher priced one?

What if the Cheap and Good artist is asking for half of what the other guy is charging?


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Howietzer said:


> So if you found two artists, one is Fast and Good, the other is Cheap and Good, you think you would go with the higher priced one?


I have four days between finishing a work and publishing it.

Not hypothetical. Real.

So I go for whoever is fast enough to get it done in that time frame. In this case probably Fast and Good.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Mathew Reuther said:


> I have four days between finishing a work and publishing it.


Why?

Betsy


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

Mathew Reuther said:


> I have four days between finishing a work and publishing it.
> 
> Not hypothetical. Real.
> 
> So I go for whoever is fast enough to get it done in that time frame. In this case probably Fast and Good.


Granted in that situation the Fast and Good is the victor. I was addressing the comment that Jodi would pay an artist more because it didn't seem right to pay them an equivalent to minimum wage.

The thing I'm trying to stress is that what we in higher cost of living areas perceive as minimum wage may not be perceived that way somewhere else.

You bring up good service as a way to keep clientele, and in the short term I do think that will work but eventually the low cost regions will figure it out, some already have. They (low cost) will have the cheaper price and competition in their own region will force better service, while we (high cost) as competitors are in a completely different fish tank. So, for now, we're all swimming around fat and happy, but what we don't realize is that we're about to get harpooned. Doomed to be harpooned I tell you! 

_Disclaimer: I could be completely wrong, but I doubt it._


----------



## Mathew Reuther (Jan 14, 2013)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Why?
> 
> Betsy


Because I have a product schedule with 34 items on it in 2013 and that's how long I have.

Sometimes I need three covers in a week.


----------



## Rayne Book Covers (Sep 11, 2011)

I live in a country where the cost of living is quite lower than what it is in US or UK. However, what I charge is on the basis of the quality of service I provide, not on the basis of where I live. I could charge a lot less, but that would just mean me undervaluing my own work. There are a lot of clients who prefer to work with me over hundreds of other designers from their own country even at a higher cost because they like my art and have had great experience working with me. No one has ever had any communication issues.

Talking about bad experiences, I have seen threads here discussing bad experiences with artists from both America and abroad. So it is most certainly more to do with the individual and his work ethics than the country he is from.

As far as nationalism goes, I have experienced that too. There was an author who almost hired me for about half my usual rate for art but didn't due to price constraints. The same author then got the artwork from someone who charges about 4 times what I quoted. There could have been other reasons at play here. But nationalism just seems quite more likely to me.


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

Howietzer said:


> So if you found two artists, one is Fast and Good, the other is Cheap and Good, you think you would go with the higher priced one?
> 
> What if the Cheap and Good artist is asking for half of what the other guy is charging?


When I see "cheap" and "good" together, it makes me wonder how the person is doing good work at very cheap prices. What is the "cheap" artist doing to save on cost so that he or she has a living wage? Does it mean that quality might suffer because the "cheap" artist is not putting in as many hours? Does it mean the person is just lightning fast yet still very good? Does he or she have special tools that do half the work for him or her? Etc. These questions enter my mind.

Basically, I put it this way. What is the cost of being good or cheap or fast? To be fast, does that mean quality suffers or price is high? To be good, does it mean speed suffers and cost to customers might be high? And so on. Because in my personal opinion, I think it is hard to get fast speed, high quality, and low cost in one bundle. It is far easier to get one of the three. Middling easy to get two. Of course, this is just speaking in general.

Jodi


----------



## Howietzer (Apr 18, 2012)

The Dark Rayne said:


> I live in a country where the cost of living is quite lower than what it is in US or UK. However, what I charge is on the basis of the quality of service I provide, not on the basis of where I live. I could charge a lot less, but that would just mean me undervaluing my own work. There are a lot of clients who prefer to work with me over hundreds of other designers from their own country even at a higher cost because they like my art and have had great experience working with me. No one has ever had any communication issues.
> 
> Talking about bad experiences, I have seen threads here discussing bad experiences with artists from both America and abroad. So it is most certainly more to do with the individual and his work ethics than the country he is from.
> 
> As far as nationalism goes, I have experienced that too. There was an author who almost hired me for about half my usual rate for art but didn't due to price constraints. The same author then got the artwork from someone who charges about 4 times what I quoted. There could have been other reasons at play here. But nationalism just seems quite more likely to me.


Ah well, maybe I'm just swimming around in my own fish tank. lol



Jodi said:


> When I see "cheap" and "good" together, it makes me wonder how the person is doing good work at very cheap prices. What is the "cheap" artist doing to save cost so that he or she has a living wage? Does it mean that quality might suffer because the "cheap" artist is not putting in as many hours? Does it mean the person is just lightning fast yet still very good? Does he have special tools that do half the work for him or her? Etc. These questions enter my mind.
> 
> Basically, I put it this way. What is the cost of being good or cheap or fast? To be fast, does that mean quality suffers or price is high? To be good, does it mean speed suffers and cost to customers might be high? And so on. Because in my personal opinion, I think it is hard to get fast speed, high quality, and low cost in one bundle. It is far easier to get one of the three. Middling easy to get two. Of course, this is just speaking in general.


_YOU_ should be a politician. You completely evaded both of my questions. That's awesome!


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

Howietzer said:


> _YOU_ should be a politician. You completely evaded both of my questions. That's awesome!


Lol, I've missed my calling. I didn't mean to not answer your question but explain that I generally need more data because I believe there are trade offs.

If quality and general services were exactly the same, then it would depend on my needs. If I needed that cover now, I'd go with Fast and Good. If I could wait, I would go with Cheap and Good--but even then a voice would whisper at the back of my mind, "Why is it so much cheaper?" I have to be comfortable when I purchase something like cover art.

Jodi


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

"Cheap and good" could be due to a lot of different things, for instance:

The artist wants to take his/her time painting the assignement: 'I'll do it in my spare time, so the deadline should be at least X months off'. 

The artist is new in the field and wants a 'real' book-cover in his /her portfolio for submission to other possible clients.

The artist wants to work under somebody else's directions as a trial run to see if s/he would fit in the industry or would do better taking another route.

The artist wants to see if there is a market for his/ her style.

The artist is a (talented) student and has 'paint a book cover' as an assignement but draws a blank on ideas...

and so on.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Seleya said:


> "Cheap and good" could be due to a lot of different things, for instance:
> 
> The artist wants to take his/her time painting the assignement: 'I'll do it in my spare time, so the deadline should be at least X months off'.
> 
> ...


Or the artist is experienced and well known in his own field and says "I'll have time to do it in three months."


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

Seleya said:


> "Cheap and good" could be due to a lot of different things, for instance:


Good examples, Seleya, of why "cheap" and "good" can be paired together. Important things to keep in mind when looking at a price quote.

Jodi


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Or the artist is experienced and well known in his own field and says "I'll have time to do it in three months."


Usually that won't be any cheaper than said artist's normal rates, though.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Seleya (Feb 25, 2011)

C.C. Kelly said:


> "Good" art relates to style.


Not quite, 'art that I like' relates to style. 'Good art' relates to technical knowledge, anatomy, perspective, color theory and savy on what makes a cover image effective.



> Most artists are not busy 24/7. Steady work might be only one or two jobs a month. As a result, artists often charge for the time they are not working, if that makes sense.


Honestly I've never heard of one doing it, I guess the big names could but they tend to be booked solid. If I heard of a would-be cover artist getting that little work I'd stear well clear.

One thing that is good to keep in mind is that in the illustration world those who work mainly, if not exclusively, as cover artists are seen as the top of the game, the two main objectives you hear again and again on any illustration forum are 'I want to do covers for Tor' and 'I want to paint for Magic the Gathering'.



> Not all artists are paying the bills with their art, nor do they necessarily wish to.
> 
> Whether or not the designer has high rent office space and a staff of ten or works out of their basement all by themselves, the quality of product can be exactly the same. Experience and industry knowledge can be the same.
> 
> Some armatures can be just as good, just as experienced and just as knowledgeable. These designations often point to business or career intent, not talent and ability.


All true.



> The artists is either talented with a marketable style or they aren't. Decades of trying isn't necessarily going to turn them into a great artist. And in this regard, yes, lots of new artists fresh from school, hobby painters or illustrators from countries with lower costs of living are going to erode the price point for book cover illustration.


Many art directors say 'I'd rather work with a solid, professional illustrator than with a flaky genius that I cannot trust not to blow a deadline', good art direction is an half of a successful cover, another element, linked to the first is team-work, no one who can't take directions or resents revisions is going to last long in the industry, no matter how talented.

Countries with lower cost of living change as well, China is now outsurcing jobs in Vietnam, for instance, since it's cheaper.



> As for cheap, fast or good, pick any two - I'm not sure how much this applies to illustration.


Well, the first time I read it it was on Jon Schindehette's blog (he is the art director for D&D), soon after it came up on Muddy Colors, a blog by a collective of artists and art directors, all well known names in the illustration industry.

Time is an important factor in the industry, and it is a fairly rare occurrence that one unique stile would do for a piece, so which illustrator could be suited for a specific job within the time and the budget constraints _does_ matter.



> Illustration and cover design are two very different businesses and the same rules do not apply.


Yes and no. Professionalism, reliability (first main rule: _never_ blow a deadline), technical skill, ability to work in team are very important skills for both and often the clients are the same for both and expect comparable results.

[/quote]


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## CathleenShaffer (Feb 15, 2012)

I've been lucky with finding a great premade for $35, another where I found the photo and someone just did the title and name for $10, and another totally free photo manip cover from someone on these boards who was offering free covers one day. I found all these people on these boards and make sure I place their names prominently because I so appreciate the price. I only do shorts so no way can I afford over $50 a cover-ever. I'm new at this and living on a shoe string but as a freelance writer for many years, I too have worked for less than I felt my work was worth but you know--that's life.


----------



## Edward Curley (Jan 24, 2013)

I recently had a book cover designed by http://mariondesigns.com/

He charged $450 for front and back cover and the spine. He had it all set in PDF for me to upload to the publisher. I too am familiar with Photoshop and have taken several classes in it at local junior college. The teachers are professionals.

However, I had the idea of what I wanted but no photo library, he did. We were able to communicate in image editing language and he did exactly what I wanted and had explained to him. He was fast, conscientious and willing to work until I had exactly what I wanted. * I thought $450 was a steal*. I had contacted other cover designers who wanted thousands of dollars. Kieth, at Marion Designs told me that most authors don't have a clue to what they want for a cover. He listened very closely what I had to say and he did a great job.

You can find the cover on Amazon. The Cheaters: Turning Vegas Around. By Edward A. Curley.

If I could figure out how to put the cover of my book at the end of posts, as others do, I would. I'm still struggling with that. I click on "insert image" and "browse" does not open.All I get is the following: http://And, you do not charge enough. If you do quality work, don't cave.

[img]

Ed.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Edward Curley said:


> If I could figure out how to put the cover of my book at the end of posts, as others do, I would. I'm still struggling with that. I click on "insert image" and "browse" does not open.All I get is the following: [img]http://And, you do not charge enough. If you do quality work, don't cave.
> 
> [img][/img]
> 
> Ed.


Ed--

To insert an image using the [img][/img] tags, you need to already know where the image is stored on the Internet and have to have copied the URL there. Then, tap on the insert image icon and paste the URL between the [img][/img] tags.

The easiest way to add a book cover is to use our link-maker in the top row of the top grey menu group.

Click on link-maker, then enter your book's title, your author name or your ASIN in the search field. Tap on search, then on the left side, click on "make link" for the book. On the right, copy the text in the first image link field and paste it here (it will already have the img tags). This will be a clickable link as opposed to just an image.

Betsy


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Edward Curley said:


> I recently had a book cover designed by http://mariondesigns.com/
> 
> He charged $450 for front and back cover and the spine. He had it all set in PDF for me to upload to the publisher. I too am familiar with Photoshop and have taken several classes in it at local junior college. The teachers are professionals.
> 
> ...


Here's your cover, Ed.



And yeah, Insert Image doesn't browse the image from your hard drive and upload it to KB - it links to the image on the web.


----------



## Edward Curley (Jan 24, 2013)

Arkali said:


> Here's your cover, Ed.
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah, Insert Image doesn't browse the image from your hard drive and upload it to KB - it links to the image on the web.


Arkali, did you put my cover up for me? I tried to do it yesterday, but didn't know if I was successful or not. Will I have to use Link-maker to put up my cover each time I post? Or am I supposed to put the cover in the signature thing? Betsy, the quilt maker sent me the info on how to put up the cover and I appreciated that greatly.

I am still trying to remove my e-mail address from my profile but it stays there no matter how many times I have tried.

Thank you very much for your help.

Ed.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Hi, Ed,
I did, and you're very welcome   I believe there's a sticky about how to set up your signature.

To answer your question - you don't have to use linkmaker (especially if you only want to post an image), but it's probably easiest for someone new to using Bulletin Board Code (BBC).


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

I read a few times in this thread (and the other one) how artists are touchy-feely. I agree, but what do you think writers are?
Isn't it enough that we sometimes get disrespected in the most demeaning language, for the whole world to read, by people who feel entitled to do so because _they_ pay _us_ (usually a few dollars). When _we_ pay _other_ people (a few _hundreds_ of dollars), we should wear kid gloves? Nice deal we've got&#8230;

When I do translation work for a client, I am at his beck and call. I will not change the sequence of sentences because _as an artist_ I feel that is the better choice. I get paid to put my skills, such as they are, to accomplish what the client expects. When I write my books I can be an artist as much as I like.

The last one I mailed with asked me, rather rudely, if I didn't know who he was and that he had worked for big companies (He cited some names, none of which I had heard of). I don't care if his name is Michelangelo and whether he has worked for the pope. I need an illustration that conveys what I want it to convey.

When I pay someone (again, several hundreds of dollars) to make a cover for me, I expect an illustrator. A capable illustrator who can put _my_ vision on a cover. I expect the illustrator to know what he is doing and to apply his/her artistic skills to the _job_. I will go out of my way to tell the illustrator - very politely, and in great detail - what exactly it is I want. I'm prepared to listen to suggestions from someone who knows a lot more about this stuff than I do, but at the end of the day, if I want a red rose on my cover a yellow tulip won't do. (No, not even if it goes better with the color scheme.)

Am I expecting too much?


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Actually, this is the reason why I'm doing so much of it myself. Not just covers, but formatting etc.

Different expectations.

No one who works with me would say that I'm particularly demanding, but I do like people I contract to do stuff to communicate, and to deliver stuff at the agreed time. Since the majority of people I could afford to pay are not professionals, that's kinda hit-and-miss, and usually if you find a good one, they don't tend to stay affordable for long.

So I've learnt to do it myself, because at the end of the day, I'd rather write than wrangle uncommunicative people into delivering what I'm paying for.

On the other side of the equation, this is also why I do premade covers, because people come in and say I want that one. I spend five minutes repositioning the text and send it off, no arguing over what colour the tulips are.


----------



## jesrphoto (Aug 7, 2012)

I'm a designer who generally works at the very bottom of the pay scale - and I do covers that are usually from $15 to $75 depending on the amount of time they're going to take me.  I am able to do this comfortably.  I don't illustrate though, I work in image manipulation - and within a bounds of creative freedom that I express to my customers in advance.  
I also supplement with premades, that I sell through a third party, when I have extra stock photography in my subscription.  

I've just taken the jump and started designing full time, after freelancing on top of a "day job" for the last year.  I have been able to replace my call center job completely, while allowing myself more time to devote to school and focus on my design degree without the stress I had before.

I've had other designers send me nasty emails saying that I'm "under cutting" or adding to a pay scale issue - and they are welcome to their opinion, but mine is that if I'm working less and doing what makes me happy, than what I quote is enough for my time.


----------



## Edward Curley (Jan 24, 2013)

Arkali said:


> Here's your cover, Ed.
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah, Insert Image doesn't browse the image from your hard drive and upload it to KB - it links to the image on the web.


Arkali,

I'm still trying to get the signature thing going. I think I have it. Am I correct in assuming that my book cover will now appear at the end of each post?

I'm going to paste in this link. I don't know it will do. I am so lost in this mess. Why can't I just write?  Would you please write back and tell me what the below code did? Is my book cover there? My name?

Ed.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Hi, Ed,
Yepper, your cover is in your signature and clicks through to Amazon 



jesrphoto said:


> I've had other designers send me nasty emails saying that I'm "under cutting" or adding to a pay scale issue - and they are welcome to their opinion, but mine is that if I'm working less and doing what makes me happy, than what I quote is enough for my time.


It's nobody's business what you charge aside from yours and your clients'. Someone is welcome to think whatever they wish or comment how they wish to their friends, but to email you about it? Rude. And fruitless. As I've said, competing on price is a no-win way to do business. If you're making enough money to live comfortably, good for you


----------



## TLH (Jan 20, 2011)

Jodi said:


> When I see "cheap" and "good" together, it makes me wonder how the person is doing good work at very cheap prices.


Cheap and good means it'll take longer. The person will do it when they have time, it takes a lower priority. Reason why it's cheap.

Fast and cheap means you're sacrificing quality. Because you want it fast but don't want to pay, you won't get more than minmal work needed to deliver. You're not getting their best.

Good and fast means you'll pay top dollar. In order to deliver their best, fast, the person will need to pull all nighters or perhaps weekends to deliver. Reason why it's expensive.

This diagram is well known in the ad industry and dead on in my opinion.


----------



## Scarlett_R (Sep 30, 2011)

*to note: Yes, I suspect bluenose is a troll but sometimes I just can't help myself...

<post deleted to save energy and spend time on editing!>


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

To  Scarlett and the others from whom I received reports--

bluenose was not really a troll but somone who was posting "web beacons" or "web bugs"--someone posting with small invisibile graphics in their posts to track the views their posts get.  This is not allowed at KindleBoards and bluenose is no longer with us.  

Thanks for the reports, folks.

Betsy


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> To Scarlett and the others from whom I received reports--
> 
> bluenose was not really a troll but somone who was posting "web beacons" or "web bugs"--someone posting with small invisibile graphics in their posts to track the views their posts get. This is not allowed at KindleBoards and bluenose is no longer with us.
> 
> ...


You know, I wondered what the deal was with those little images that almost looked broken. Who knew? Thanks, Betsy!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Arkali said:


> You know, I wondered what the deal was with those little images that almost looked broken. Who knew? Thanks, Betsy!


Well, some people have real broken images, too...  But the combination of those images and the tenor of the posts--short posts that feel "off"--were an indicator. And when I looked into the posts, it was obvious.

So thanks to y'all!

Edited to add: A reminder that the term "troll" is a four letter word here on KB... Thanks!

Betsy


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2013)

TLH said:


> This diagram is well known in the ad industry and dead on in my opinion.


It's pretty much spot on for _every_ industry.


----------



## Edward Curley (Jan 24, 2013)

Arkali said:


> Hi, Ed,
> Yepper, your cover is in your signature and clicks through to Amazon
> 
> Thanks Arkaly. I was still wondering about it. I had people who were not registered on Kindle Boards try to find it and they couldn't. Now on to more websites to begin my e-book giveaway.
> ...


----------



## MichMasoch (Dec 1, 2011)

This thread is a perfect example of the difficulties in contracting or being contracted for creative work. Everyone is right, to an extent, because there is no one right answer. As I've mentioned on several other threads, I'm a long-term design pro, so I have a lot of experience with the rate/expectation spectrum. Though I may mention them in our site copy, I have very little interest in designing book covers. Most of my reasons are mentioned in posts within this conversation. Cover design is such an over-saturated market, the potential for frustration is too great and potential for decent rates too low to consider taking time from the book I'm writing. That, of course, is just my opinion.

But, just because it's not worth opening the MacBook for under $75/hr for me, doesn't mean another equally skilled designer wouldn't be all over something much less. I live in Los Angeles, so the scale is a far cry from what'd be agreeable in a city/state/country with a lower cost of living. Also, just because I've been able to open my own studio, doesn't mean that a designer whose financial situation requires they stay in their day job isn't equally skilled. We all have our own situations, and they vary as widely as our individual styles.  

Then, when push comes to shove, not everyone needs exquisitely rendered custom art work. Not everyone can afford it, yet they want a decent image to help promote their work. I sympathize with them and can understand how/why the cheaper designers keep themselves busy. So long as the author goes into the process understanding that, with low price, one can run the risk of not getting the special touches and knowledge which are the hallmark of a seasoned pro. Those of us who design for a living will usually take less time for even intricate work (lots of practice), will know just the perfect font (we all have a font addiction issue, truth be told), and can advise re: the right image/color scheme/layout/etc. to give the cover the right impact. These are intangibles, not something one can quantify or place a specific value on, yet they'll make the difference in whether someone like me (an avid multi-genre reader) will even make it to a book's blurb. That doesn't mean that a cover without those nuances won't do the job.

I've seen amazing cheap covers by artists who should probably be charging more. I've also seen execrable covers that I'm sure cost the author/publisher a small fortune. But, in the end, all that really matters is whether the authors are happy and everyone feels the price was fair.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Mich, I'm finding it a little ironic that all the links in the bottom of your signature are broken. It's probably a backslash thingie in the links.

/oops


----------



## MichMasoch (Dec 1, 2011)

Patty Jansen said:


> Mich, I'm finding it a little ironic that all the links in the bottom of your signature are broken. It's probably a backslash thingie in the links.
> 
> /oops


That's funny. I just clicked on all of them and they worked fine in Firefox. Maybe I'll try them in Chrome, too.

Have I inadvertently slighted you in some way that you felt it necessary to be snarky? My post is supportive of moonlighting and fledgling designers, but you can take it how you like if you'd rather be offended. Granted, I'm not sure what my being a graphic designer has to do with links in my sig, anyway.


----------



## lee987 (Mar 1, 2013)

Artists (and any professional) should get paid for what they are worth.  I've been trying to live by that myself


----------

