# Can a book be too long or short for you on Kindle?



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Standard novels are about 250 pages, but a Kindle book can be any length. Does it put you off if a novel is too long or too short? And do you check before you get it on Kindle. With print books I do check the page number because I'm put off by very long books.


----------



## MKP (Jan 5, 2012)

I don't have an answer to this... but I'm curious, as well, to see what people say.


----------



## Pawz4me (Feb 14, 2009)

I'm a fan of long books.  When I invest my time in getting to know characters, I like them to hang around for awhile.  I rarely buy anything less than 350 pages (either for the Kindle or when I was buying DTBs) and my preference is for books in the 750 to 1000 page range.


----------



## mscottwriter (Nov 5, 2010)

> I'm a fan of long books.


That's the opposite of me, lol!

I just finished reading 11/22/63 (which I enjoyed), but according to my Kindle, the thing was as long as War and Peace! What I like about the Kindle is that I can't really tell how long or short a book is, and so I'm not daunted by the length like I would be if I got the book out of the library.

I don't mind if a book is short; however, if I'm purchasing a novella or short story, I want to know it up front. I was annoyed a few months ago when I paid $3.99 for a single short story. It's not that I begrudge the author the money, but the book was marketed as a novel. Nowhere were the words 'short story' or 'novella' mentioned in the description.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Yes, it could be hard to see how long or short a Kindle book is. I don't usually like long books, although there are a few really long books that I've loved. Sometimes you just don't want a book to end.

What I love about the Kindle is that little bar telling me the percentage of the book I've read. I find I read much faster on the Kindle and concentrate better without drifting off and having to go back a page to re-read. I'm usually a very slow reader so this is a real bonus.


----------



## Sophrosyne (Mar 27, 2011)

LOL! Great question. When I first found the world of Kindle publishing, I was astonished at all the 99-cent books. And then I started realizing that they were almost all short stories! And a lot of the $1.99 books seemed to be novellas. So, now, I tend to assume that if the price is $2.99 and above, it's a full-length novel.

I do like to know up-front if it's a short or a full-length novel. But if it's well-written, that's really all that's important to me.

Although, I think I would be upset if someone charged me full-length novel prices for a short story. So, I do tend to quickly check the page/word count before I click buy.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I like all lengths. I do find some long novels hard to trudge through. I'm reading Best Served Cold right now and wow. It's 800 pages. It's like dog shedding through a snow storm. The book is good, don't get me wrong, but it's really hard to keep up the attention span when I can only read 1/2 a chapter some days.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

For me, it depends on the genre. If I want something light and easy to read, I'm going to look for something short. But for historical fiction, I prefer longer books. All my favorite historical novels are at least 600 pages. This was the case even before I had my Kindle, I don't see why ebooks would change that.

I think the longest book I've ever read was 1,128 pages - A Storm of Swords. And it was pretty awesome.


----------



## Aenea (Dec 24, 2011)

I don't buy short stories, novellas, or Kindle Singles. I wan't something that lasts a while and I can get involved in. Of course if it's a really bad book, being long can be very frustrating.


----------



## NightwishFan (Jan 7, 2012)

I sometimes get annoyed if a books too short and there's no indication of length. I like long books that take a long time to read but on occasion I've bought a kindle book on a whim (going by the star rating it's got and the description) and it's took me no time at all to get through. Tis always a bit disapointing.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

My only annoyance was before Amazon started giving page lengths.  In a few cases I paid what I felt was too much for too little story (in which the author didn't mention that it was a 30 page novella or some such).  However, that was few and far between.  Generally speaking, I like to know what I'm getting myself into...whether it's a short story or War & Peace.  Aside from that I don't really have any issues with length at either end of the spectrum.


----------



## Jeff (Oct 28, 2008)

Long books are my preference, but I often read short works. My pet peeve is buying what I think is a book and then discovering that it's a short piece. To me, calling something that's only a few pages long a book is a dirty trick, and charging more than 99¢ adds insult to injury.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I don't read shorts at all or even novellas. I make exceptions with novellas only with very specific authors. 

So my issue with ebooks now is more that authors are straddling the line between novella/novelette and novel. They think they have written a novel, when its really a novella. So they aren't marked and I end up with these really really short "books". There seems to be this new thing about ebooks can be shorter than paperbooks, which baffles my mind. A book is a book. Doesn't matter what the medium is, it still needs to follow a certain guideline. 

Most of my books I read I think are in between 330 - 450 pages with also longer ones. I'd rather read a longer book, than one that comes up short so to speak.  

And I agree that a few pages is not a book, a novel or anything like that. Just like a novella is not a novel. 

So really the length I want in a book is the same if I read it in paper, or on Kindle. Its the same book. Just that I can't read paper books anymore because of the print.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

I hadn't thought about the issue of people thinking a book is a novel when really it's a short story or novella. That would be annoying. I must check to see how clear it is.

I think a lot of authors don't know how many words make a short story, novella or novel. In fact I'm sure of it because it's something people ask so much.

A novel is more than 50,000 words.

A novella is between 20,000 and 40something thousand. There's a bit of a crossover once it's in the higher region.

A short story can be anything from flash fiction of 100-500 words, to a more normal 3,000-5,000 and even 10,000. Once it gets above that length it's starting to cross over with novellas.

In some genres this can vary as the length can be quite short for some novels, and they'd be more novella length.

I agree that if I'm reading a book I'm really enjoying it never seems to feel too long.


----------



## Tony Rabig (Oct 11, 2010)

Re length, from the Science Fiction Writers of America web page giving the rules for the Nebula awards (http://www.sfwa.org/nebula-awards/rules/):

Nebula Awards will be made in the following categories:

Short Story: less than 7,500 words;
Novelette: at least 7,500 words but less than 17,500 words;
Novella: at least 17,500 words but less than 40,000 words
Novel: 40,000 words or more.


----------



## Sophrosyne (Mar 27, 2011)

Tony Rabig said:


> Nebula Awards will be made in the following categories:
> 
> Short Story: less than 7,500 words;
> Novelette: at least 7,500 words but less than 17,500 words;
> ...


Thanks for the guidelines! Although, I'm really surprised they consider 40,000 words or more to be a novel. I always thought anything under 60,000 was a novella. I would have a hard time calling 40,000 a novel, outside of the YA/MG world, since that only translates to 160 pages. At least, with 60,000 you have 240 pages. And that feels like a novel.

Although I know page counts don't mean what they used to, especially in the indy world, since paperback prices are so much higher. My full-length novel, if it was a normal-sized paperback, would run 372 pages. But that would increase the price drastically, just to cover production costs and distribution margins. So I went for an oversized paperback, to get the page count down to 332 and bring the cost down. So the page-length field on Amazon can be a bit deceptive.

For people who want to know how long the book is you're downloading, take the word count and divide it by 250 (which is what paperbacks traditionally used to have as their per page count). That will give you a good idea of how long the book would be if it was a paperback, so you don't get sucked into paying novel prices for a short, (especially when it's not labeled as one), that comes out to barely 30 pages.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

40,000 is used because many modern classics are that word count.

Clarification: "indie" has nothing to do with the return of shorter works. Epublishing is the reason. Some of the large epublishers in romance and erotica have been putting out novellas in ebook format years before anyone even realize a person could/would/should self-publish their work in ebook format.

Clarification: 250 words usually works if the font is courier 12pt, aka typewriter.


----------



## Sophrosyne (Mar 27, 2011)

Krista, what I was trying to say was that paperbacks cost indy writers more to publish than the big publishing houses pay. So to try to keep the price of paperbacks down, indies often have to go with larger-sized books, which artificially skews the page count down. But that's the page count Amazon will use on the e-book description. But if you don't have a physical book to tether your e-book to, Amazon's estimated page count sometimes gets a little wonky.

So a more accurate method, if you're a reader wanting to know how long a book is, is to take the word count and divide it by 250. 

It used to be that authors took the page count and multiplied it by 250 and that would give them their word count. But that worked best with either 12 pt. Courier font or 14 pt. Times Roman.


----------



## tinytoy (Jun 15, 2011)

I prefer a book to be on the longer side as long as I'm enjoying it.  Some of my favorite books are over 800 pages; Outlander and a few books in the A Song of Ice and Fire series for instance.  I find that the longer books are the ones leaving me thinking about the story and characters when I am not reading, even some time after I've finished the book.  I don't purposely seek out very long books, though.  The length of a book doesn't influence my decision on whether to read it, although I'd be hesitant to purchase a very short story unless for a very low price or free.


----------



## wdeen (Dec 29, 2011)

As long as I know up front, it doesn't matter to me. Sometimes I like reading a nice tight novella. 50-100 pages, 99 cents, a cup of coffee, and a nice hour or so of enjoyment from beginning to end. Hate it when I buy what I think is a book, 300 - 1000 pages, pay $5 or $8 and it ends up being 100 pages and barely an afternoon or eve of reading.


----------



## kindlegrl81 (Jan 19, 2010)

I don't care if a book is long, as long as it has the substance to fill the length.  If a book is 1000 pages long but only has enough plot to really fill 300, I'm going to be irritated.

With short ones, I guess it depends on how much I spent.  I don't want to spend more than a dollar or two for anything that is less than 200 pages.  Even if it is really good writing, by a favorite author, if it is short then it needs to be cheap or bundled in with other stories.


----------



## D/W (Dec 29, 2010)

I prefer books that are about 250-350 pages, but there are times when I'm in the mood for a short story or novella. I don't enjoy long books. My time for reading is often limited, with only a few chapters read at a sitting, and I don't like it when it takes weeks to read one book. If I have to put the book down too many times, I find that the story loses continuity and/or I get bored.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I go through moods where nothing appeals to me. I don't want to read yet another 800 page fantasy novel. I'm sick of SF novels where I can't follow what's going on. I hate all romance novels. I want to fork-stab the TSTL urban fantasy heroines. etc.

So, I read short fiction. Last year, I barely read any novels. I mostly read short stories and novellas. It was refreshing for me and once against instilled hope in me that I might like novels again.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

For me 40,000 words are a novella, not a novel. That is shorter than the shortest category Harlequin lines to give you an idea. I do understand that its genre specific. I just don't think that most readers, and I mean readers only, not writer/readers, deal with word count. Book lengths have always been presented in book pages for a long long time and it has worked fine all this time. Not perfect, but what is. 

I don't really want to deal with word count and a lot of books don't list them anyway so it wouldn't help me. I keep hearing this 250 per page. A while back I counted some pages in some of my paperbacks I have in the house and I came up with more per page than that. More around 300. So that would be over stating the page count using that when compared with whats usually out there in paperback. Then I am right back to where a novella is being sold as a novel. 

The new page count Amazon is adding to some books that are only out in ebook format is helping a bit. They put it right under the title so I can scroll right on by when its a novella and below as my preference is to read full books. 

There are those that love long, those that love short stuff and those that love everything. As long as there is a way to mark it correctly as much as possible, we can all be happy.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

It's quality over quantity for me, regardless of format.  As long as the story is well told, I don't care how long it is.  There's no perfect length, some books feel to short as the plot and characters don't get full developed, other's feel too long as the plot meanders or there's too much extraneous detail etc.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I keep hearing this 250 per page.


As I've said, the 250 is generally outdated due to font sizes now on computers. The majority of folks are using TNR 12 font, meaning you're getting 300-400 words per page.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

as I've said in a bunch of other threads, word counts mean nothing to me.  I've reached the point where I go by kindle locations (3000-3500=shortish read, 4000-6000 mean medium, over that is longish.  over 10,000 means WAY LONG!).  

as for the original question, i agree with the poster who says they don't care about length as long as they know it up front.  somedays i feel like a short work, somedays I want to delve in deeper.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Krista D. Ball said:


> As I've said, the 250 is generally outdated due to font sizes now on computers. The majority of folks are using TNR 12 font, meaning you're getting 300-400 words per page.


That would explain why I couldn't find any books in my house that had 250 words on a page. But then why is this number still used. . If it doesn't match what is out there in the stores, its not the correct one. So I guess Amazon is using a much better calculation to get to the page numbers then.
Or are you only speaking on computer printouts, not actual books in the store.

I just want to read


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

It's 350 words to the page as there are usually 35 lines on a page and about 10 words to the line. But this does vary with font size and the size of margins. 50,000 is what publishers classify as a minimum length for a novel. The Booker Prize also sets this as minimum novel length. Some well known novels are this length, including Ian McEwan's On Chesil Beach, and the novels of Virginia Woolf.

It doesn't matter so much what you call a book as whether or not you know the length of the Kindle book you're getting. It's becoming apparent on this thread that people want this to be clear.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> As I've said, the 250 is generally outdated due to font sizes now on computers. The majority of folks are using TNR 12 font, meaning you're getting 300-400 words per page.


250 words per page (at 12 pt TNR) was what instructors told my classes to use as an estimation basis all throughout honors high school and college English (and creative writing courses). This was based on standard, double-spaced, 8.5x11 paper with one inch margins all around. The word count related to each "word" representing every five character spaces (not actual words).

That is probably obvious to most everyone here, but I thought I'd clarify where I thought the beginning of this theory for estimating it on ebooks possibly originated. I suggest it over the computer reference because I think this variation didn't depend on the printing device (computer, typewriter, electronic word processor, etc.) and related to school standardizations (in America, at least).

Perhaps, writers related back to that when they tried to estimate out of habit leftover from school. Perhaps, they/we/etc. figured that if they fell back on this out of habit, then so would their reader base (Americans who were told this in American schools, at least).

However, it may not be as commonly used an estimation process as originally thought. Maybe readers don't think in those terms outside of when they had to write papers. Maybe readers don't relate that estimation to fiction books since a fiction page is not the same size as standard sheet of printer/copier (once known as typewriter, lol) paper.

I do wish there was a generalized standard estimation for words per paperback pages or words per hardback pages that was common knowledge or at least commonly accepted.

I wouldn't even care how accurate it was (within 5% margin of error would be nice though), just so long as everyone used it as their measuring stick across the board. Readers and writers would adjust their thinking just as we have adjusted our thinking when we see a paperback compared to a hardback and use the page number as a generality to guesstimate how much reading time we'll get out of it (or have to commit to it) by completion.

I have a feeling nobody wants to be bold enough to do a rough count over several books (using the 5 characters per word method as a standardized basis perhaps) and declare an official estimation standard to translate for ebooks.

I wish they would because the estimated pages of my short story varies from Nook to Kobo to Sony, etc. (I may have the device/retailer incorrect in that. I don't remember which ones, other than Nook, that listed it based on their own variation of counting.)

Would anyone on the Kindleboards like to be the DECLARER? lol


----------



## Jeff (Oct 28, 2008)

The hardcover of one of my books (294,280 words) is 664 pages (443 words per page) while the trade paperback is 801 pages (367 words per page). Amazon uses the trade paperback to quote a page count and references the ISBN.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

Randirogue said:


> Would anyone on the Kindleboards like to be the DECLARER? lol


Okay, I declare this...

Word counts mean nothing to most readers.

And I further declare it doesn't really matter if you're using 250 words per page, 300 words per page or whatever. Just give us something we can work with. Estimate your page length. Nobody's really gonna get angry if you're off by a few pages.

Also, I think after a while, most kindlers get used to using amazon's locations as a guide for how long a "book" is. So, as long as you don't pad your front or back material, people will figure out length.

Lastly, remember, no matter what you do, some people will be happy, some will be upset, and some will not really care.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

scarlet said:


> Okay, I declare this...
> 
> Word counts mean nothing to most readers.
> 
> ...


Agreed. I really do now relate most to locations when it comes to my books. That is because I read almost exclusively ebooks and all of those on my kindle. I been doing so for over 3 years now and many many books. I look at locations now and mentally know right away how "long" a book is, just based on other books with same locations.

I do remember when I read Outlander the first time and saw the locations and went Holy carp   . Everything else seemed really short after those books. . I never even seen or held a physical copy of them, but I know the the locations mean.

The only reason I even know anything about word counts at all is from this board. I never heard it in school, or at any time over my many years reading. So for me its useless. 
I am with Scarlet, an estimated page count will do. It gives me a ballpark idea where the book is at. I don't expect or need it to be exact down to a page.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

If the book is gripping, I tend not to notice its length. If I start to wonder when the book will end, I feel the author has added too much "filler" and detracted from the story - then I start to skim. A book should be as long as is necessary to tell a great story.


----------



## rubymatthewserotica (Jan 7, 2012)

I actually prefer shorter, novella length stuff.  But I know I'm the minority in this.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

scarlet said:


> Okay, I declare this...
> 
> Word counts mean nothing to most readers.
> 
> ...


Very true, Scarlet. I already use those location guides as such. I even find myself getting grumpy (not terribly) when I buy a novel that for some reason (either blurb or estimation or kb size) gives me a certain expectation of number of dots that will be under the title (on my phone kindle library) but discover a much lower number of dots. I love long books, especially when they are captivating, and thus, prefer it when there are more like 12-20 dots under the title on my phone. I love it more when I download a new book whose length force all the other dot-lengths to reduce because the new book set a new precedent for what was in my library. lol.

I only would like the word count per page estimation standard as a cross-reference point. Since I still buy some books in print (usually the big 6 authors I read since I (perhaps absurdly) refuse to pay for that much for an ebook, but can (perhaps absurdly) at least understand the cost when relating it to physical printing, distribution, and storage costs)...

Let me start that sentence again since I completely weighted it down with all my asides...

Since I still buy some books in print, and have a grasp of time/length to go with the physical page number, I'd like to be relate/translate that same information to ebooks before I read them, simply so I know what I'm getting when I buy it. You're right that I don't need to know the word-to-page ratio necessarily, but it helps me to make that translation/comparison of print-to-ebook. A word-to-page ratio would then better substantiate the estimated page number for me.

If I know that a 900 page paperback is roughly around 300 words per page, and that I can likely get at least a weekend of non-stop reading out of it (or a week of to-from-work-on-the-subway reading), then...

If I'm told an ebook is equivalent to 450 paperback pages, I can thus guesstimate that it will give me half a weekend of non-stop reading out of it (or half a week of to-from-work-on-the-subway reading).

Right now, I've not found that to be true because it seems that writers aren't using the same measuring-stick word-to-page relationship. These seem to vary significantly from one writer to another, from one book to another. I'm not sure if it's because of the lack of a base standardization for their measuring-stick (ie, someone's using meters but calling it feet), or if the writer is trying to game the estimate to what they think readers will like best (which I think would turn off the reader if they end up feeling deceived), or if the conversion itself is altering it for some unknown reason. As I tend to give the benefit of the doubt, I'm thinking it's because there's no general agreed-upon measuring-stick that both readers and writers are using.

In time, I'll figure out the median relationship... but, of course, I'd prefer if someone just handed it to me now. 

It could even be readers that declared it. However, I think they tend to ask the writer to make that relationship known to them since the writer would potentially learn it / figure it out during the publishing process. The writer would have the base word-processor file, which was thus translated to each of the other formats (to hardback, to trade-paperback, to paperback, to Kindle, Nook, iBook, etc.). I know that when I go to buy an ebook, I automatically think it's the writer's job to inform me of its length and density based on pre-existing publishing standards. I also know that when I put out my short story as an ebook that I tried and failed to simply figure out why the estimated page count varied so drastically from device to device, and then from those to my projected paperback equivalent estimate. In the end, I picked a number that was between them all and used that in my blurb. After having that experience, I wondered if other writers did similarly.

I think that using the actually printed paperback as the basis for informing readers before they purchase is a great idea. Unfortunately, not every ebook is in paperback, and thus, it is up to the writer to give an estimate.

But... that estimate really only works if there is at least a psuedo-standard that the readers can rely on for their translation.

On topic of the OP... I think that a book can be either too long or too short on Kindle, but my reasons aren't because I don't like short or don't like long. For me, it's more that I can get bothered if I feel misled to what the length will be.

I'll buy, read, and enjoy a short story that would take only 5-10 paperback pages. But, my final opinion will be tainted if I feel I was misled to believe it would be much longer than that, even if only that I was misled to believe it would be the equivalent of 25 paperback pages instead.

The same can be said of an ebook that was longer than I was led to believe. However, for me, so long as the story was captivating and not a chore at parts, I'd feel like it was a bonus rather than a detriment.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

I'm not supposed to say my job here so I won't. But I can say the standard is 350 words per page in a novel, and 80,000 words is about the normal length for a novel. A lot of people get confused because they estimate based on the wordcount for their school and academic essays, double spaced on A4 sheets of printer paper.

An 80,000 word novel with the common font size of 12pt is about 250 pages if the margins are a reasonable size.

However, a lot of publishers can spread a shorter wordcount over more pages by widening margins etc and raising the font size.

With Kindles it's probably easiest if people know the typical wordcounts for each type of book - novel etc. Over 50,000 is a novel. 80,000 is about 250 pages, so for the shorter ones you can work it out from that.

Once it gets over 100.000 words you really are getting into those 300 plus page longer novels.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Adele Ward said:


> Once it gets over 100.000 words you really are getting into those 300 plus page longer novels.


I really do love to strain my eyes on those. I had used my current favorite novel in my example. It was over 900 pages (with only the actual story pages being counted in that), with tiny margins and tiny print (smaller in both respects than most novels I've bought).

If it hadn't been as good as it was, I probably would've been dreading its length. But, since it was so exquisite to me, I was all the more glad that I had so much of it to enjoy. And enjoy repeatedly. It's the book I've reread the most so far. And it was the first in a series, the others which were of comparable quality and length.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

As Scarlet mentioned, unless one is an author or in the publishing industry, I don't think anyone cares about word count or even the number of words to a page .... For myself, I read 2000 -2500 locations a day and I prefer books that take me a few days to read. I'm usually not interested in books less than 3000 locations and I consider anything smaller than about 4500 locations to be a short read.

On the other end of the spectrum, I don't really haven an upper limit so long as the book is interesting. The longest book I've read on my kindle is _Sarum_ by Edward Rutherfurd at 24,000 locations.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Geoffrey said:


> On the other end of the spectrum, I don't really haven an upper limit so long as the book is interesting. The longest book I've read on my kindle is _Sarum_ by Edward Rutherfurd at 24,000 locations.


Oooh, really?

*runs to get the sample*


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

scarlet said:


> Okay, I declare this...
> 
> Word counts mean nothing to most readers.


This is true but I think if it were included more in the product details of ebooks, I would get used to it and use it more than page numbers (or file size) since it will be a more accurate measure of length for ebooks. I don't have a problem with the page numbers, it's more helpful than "locations" - I'm just saying I think I could get used to word count if it was used more but most books don't list it and I don't know if it will ever become more common.



> Also, I think after a while, most kindlers get used to using amazon's locations as a guide for how long a "book" is.


Not me! Especially when the total locations isn't listed on the product details of the website before buying. Before I buy a book, I like to consider it's length... not that it's hugely important but if I'm on the fence about buying it and then notice it's a really long book, I might think it's too much of a time investment for a book I'm on the fence about... or if it's short, I might decide the opposite - that it's not a big time investment and therefore might as well give it a try.

But even once I've bought the book, I never got used to locations. I use the percentage and progress bar as a guide to how far in a book I am and the paperback page numbers to judge how long the book is overall (even before page numbers were added, I would just look at the paperback version on Amazon to get an idea). I would not use word count as a guide to how far in a book I am - not like "word 500 of 50,000" - just as a guide of how long or short the book is.

Oh! Having said all that, I just remembered that some print editions of books on Amazon will list the word count in the section "Inside This Book" (rather than in "Product Details" where we usually look for the details like this). But again, this is not available on most books. Example: http://www.amazon.com/Storm-Swords-Song-Fire-Book/dp/sitb-next/055357342X/ref=sbx_txt#textstats


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

'Locations' is a new concept to me. What does it mean?


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Seems to me it wouldn't be any harder to get used to 'locations' than it would to 'word count' and vice versa.  

Though, as kindleers, we see the locations listed when we purchase books.  It would be good if it were listed on the product page; file size is not necessarily an accurate indicator.

I read a book last night that was around 2500 locations. . . super short, really. . . .

I like the dots on the home screen of a kindle as it gives a good idea of relative length. . . . . .


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Seems to me it wouldn't be any harder to get used to 'locations' than it would to 'word count' and vice versa.


Everyone knows what a word count is, it's even self explanatory. But not everyone knows what a location is (especially at first) and I also think it's specific to Kindle (do other ereaders use them?) so I'm not sure it's universal. And even though I understand what a location is, I have no idea how many locations an "average" book might roughly be whereas I know an average novel is around 75,000-90,000 words depending on the genre. But maybe that's just me.

Having added "real page numbers" to most Kindle books, it does give us a good idea of how long a book is on the product page before buying. But word count would be more accurate and it wouldn't require learning what it is and how it works, just what the average is so you can compare. I'm not saying word count should be added to the product page, I'm okay with page numbers... I'm just saying it wouldn't take much for me to get used to it if it was added.


----------



## soofy (Nov 26, 2011)

The overall answer is no book can be too short or too long as long as it is well written and full of substance. I think a book would be too short or too long when I finish it and the length is the lasting thought on my mind. I "enjoy" reading a book around 300-400 pages (however many that is on the Kindle) because I like having a fair chunk of the book done in a couple of reads.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Seems to me it wouldn't be any harder to get used to 'locations' than it would to 'word count' and vice versa.
> 
> Though, as kindleers, we see the locations listed when we purchase books. It would be good if it were listed on the product page; file size is not necessarily an accurate indicator.
> 
> ...


I agree.

Do the "locations" change from device to device (using Kindle app on phone vs. on iPad vs. on laptop vs. actual Kindle)?

I'd really like it if the number of locations were in the product description. I could totally use that to gauge what to expect of the book before buying it. Of course, this would only really work if the location numbers had a standard base as well. If it did, I'd be able to eventually translate that to what it is on my device.

I also like the dots (like I said in a previous post). However, I've noticed that when I buy a book that's longer than all the other books I already have, the number of dots resets for all my books. I like long books, so that's a bit of a bonus when that happens, making me even more excited to read the story. However, as such, the possibility of using the dots on the description page (which would at least be something) could be awkward since every time a new longest book was uploaded, all the dots of all the books at Amazon would be adjusted accordingly. Still, it would at least be a gauge that I could rely on to some degree.

Dictionaries would totally make the dots of novellas and short stories be tiny in comparison. lol.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Randirogue said:


> I agree.
> 
> Do the "locations" change from device to device (using Kindle app on phone vs. on iPad vs. on laptop vs. actual Kindle)?


Nope. That's kind of the point. 

With the scalable fonts, "pages" don't make sense because if you're using a larger size you'll have many more 'pages' than if you're using a smaller size. So a "location" refers to some finite amount of data (128 bytes I think, but don't quote me.). If Chapter 5 starts at location 657 on my kindle it starts at location 657 on your kindle too. . .even if you use size 6 and I use size 3 fonts.

Initially there was no reference to pages at all but in the last year or two Amazon has started listing a 'reference' edition that has pages for when that's needed for citations or something. But, actually, locations are much more precise.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Nope. That's kind of the point.
> 
> With the scalable fonts, "pages" don't make sense because if you're using a larger size you'll have many more 'pages' than if you're using a smaller size. So a "location" refers to some finite amount of data (128 bytes I think, but don't quote me.). If Chapter 5 starts at location 657 on my kindle it starts at location 657 on your kindle too. . .even if you use size 6 and I use size 3 fonts.
> 
> Initially there was no reference to pages at all but in the last year or two Amazon has started listing a 'reference' edition that has pages for when that's needed for citations or something. But, actually, locations are much more precise.


They are. I'm totally going to request my fave indie authors to test their ebook on a Kindle so they can include the total locations. Of course, it would be nice if the process of uploading automatically included it in the product description like the "file size" already is.

That is an excellent observation, Ann. Thanks!


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

I still don't completely understand locations. From what you're saying it's the size of the file - but I could see that just by file size surely? How do I convert that to or from locations? I feel I'm being a bit dense here and must look at this on Kindle book descriptions!


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Adele Ward said:


> I still don't completely understand locations. From what you're saying it's the size of the file - but I could see that just by file size surely? How do I convert that to or from locations? I feel I'm being a bit dense here and must look at this on Kindle book descriptions!


You really cannot convert file size directly to locations as there are sometimes things like larger cover images that take up more file space. usually, however, I consider a file under 100k to be a short story and a file under about 250k to be a novella.

I measured page count to location count from Oct '09 to about July '11 (yeah, I'm a spreadsheet geek) and the average across books was 16.5 locations per page. If we take your average of 350 words per page, then there are about 21 words per location.


----------



## Jeff (Oct 28, 2008)

Books with illustrations or maps create very big files.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

I'm still baffled about what a location is but if I divide the total number by about 20 I could convert it to pages by the sound of things.


----------



## Mark Young (Dec 13, 2010)

Generally, I prefer a novel of 80,000 words and greater. Anything shorter and I feel the reader is being shortchanged, unless the length is made clear at the time of purchase. Often, I will pass on novellas unless I'm in the mood. Give me a long story with characters that grow and change.


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

I used to like really long books, but as I've gotten older, I've lost patience with books I can't finish in one sitting -- I read fast, and I like to know the end of the story sooner rather than later.   So I mostly go for books that are 4-500 pages or less, which tops out at about 125,000 words generally.  I do like shorter stories as well, but anything less than about 10,000 words just annoys me.

That doesn't mean I won't go for the occasional door-stop, though.  But it has to be a really good book (by reviews, reputation, word of mouth, blah blah blah).

I've never gotten into using locations; after all, until I've bought a book, I have no idea how many locations it has most times, as I've only ever seen a handful of indie authors put that info in their description.  So I've learned to 'decode' estimated words/pages/kb as well as an author's or website's (for non-Amazon purchases) use of short/novella/novel -- not sure I've ever seen novelette used in the wild really -- in connection with the price.

It's not an exact science, but we do the best we can with what we have available, eh?


----------



## Laura Lond (Nov 6, 2010)

Long books are usually not a problem for me, I've always preferred those that were on the longer side. The only exception would probably be if the book happens to be plain bad - but I've been lucky so far not to come across such.  Short stories and novellas are fine with me. I like them a little less, but if it's a good story, and I know upfront it's a novella, I will not be disappointed.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Yes, I would read something short, and love short stories, but this thread has made me realise the important thing is to know that when getting the book and it isn't immediately apparent from an ebook.

It's interesting why people like longer or shorter books, and I love that idea about getting more impatient with age and wanting to read in one sitting!

Fashions also change for books. I remember in the 1970s very long novels were the trend, and the idea was that readers would feel they weren't getting short-changed. But some literary fiction was in very slim volumes of exquisitely written and edited prose as a sort of reaction to that. There were, on the other hand, some fantastic, really long books about women discovering themselves - the iconic feminist novels.

Slimmer novels have become the trend, and longer ones are harder for publishers to afford now. But there are genres where the long novel is the thing - like historical novels/romances. And genres where people like a lot of short novels in a series.

What has come out of this for me is the importance of knowing what we're getting with an ebook. Nobody likes the surprise of it suddenly ending too quickly.


----------



## Math (Oct 13, 2011)

My feeling is from a different point of view. 

Even though the question is directed at readers - I would like to point out an answer regarding how we as readers should respect what Kindle offers (especially re: self-publication). 

Publishers investing money could demand parameters on length. They also would not publish one short story - they demand collections. 

Kindle removes these issues. It is, to me, expected that I can find publications usually short or long now, because Kindle has freed writers from these issues. It is something I feel that should be encouraged as one of the reasons why e-books actually came into being.

I think Kindle and e-books are great - and so I'm willing to be carried by whatever 'liberated' (for the want of a better word) writers want to do. I'll buy something if I think it's worth it and if I like the sound of it - whether it will take me five minutes or five months to read it.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Ebooks also liberate publishers who would like to publish longer books and also short stories. It's almost impossible to sell short stories in traditional print books, so it's great to see that people do read them as ebooks. It's also very hard for many publishers to publish long novels, especially if the author isn't already a bestseller, purely because it costs so much to print and in postage (due to the weight of the book), so these books are likely to make a significant loss. Again, ebooks liberate publishers from this problem. So ebooks definitely are a great advantage in allowing the publication of long and short books without the publisher making a loss and not recuperating the cost of a print run and the postage on deliveries. Bookshops in general won't stock short story collections either. Hopefully, if short stories could prove successful as ebooks, bookshops might consider stocking the authors who do well. So ebooks could have an influence on print books and high street bookshops.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

I'm wary of investing my time in a very large book, unless I have very good reason to assume it is going to be worth it. I do like knowing what I am getting. With a paper book, I can pick it up, and easily tell whether it is a long or a short book. You can't do this with e-books. As e-books take over more of the market, pages are becoming less meaningful. If locations were an industry standard term, it might be more useful. I think more and more people will pay attention to word count, it is the most direct indication of how long a book it is. Sure, there is going to be a learning curve for people to use this to tell if a book is long or short, but the same is true with locations.

There are times when I don't have the time to invest in a novel, and prefer a shorter work. Other times, I just want to explore one idea, and a short story does that well. Short stories an novellas have a long (no pun intended) history in print, but have fallen out of favor in recent decades. The e-reader is breathing new life into them. I think it is a good thing, the Twilight Zone wouldn't have been what it was without a tradition of short stories to rely upon.

If a story is novella length, that's what it should be, it shouldn't be padded with fluff just to be longer.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

In terms of short stories etc., there is the question of value.  If I can buy a 300+ page novel from a major publisher for $7.99, I'm not going to pay say half that for a 30 page short story.  I'm not much into short stories in general though, I just like novels and non-fiction books.

I don't care about how much time I invest in a book as long as I'm enjoying.  I don't care at all how many books I read a year or in my life time etc.  So I don't think of it in terms of "I could have read 3 regular sized novels in the time I spent reading that 1,000 page book."  All that matters is that I enjoy what I'm reading.

But reading is my least prioritized hobby, so that's probably the difference.  I'm a little more selective with some of my other hobbies.  For instance, I don't watch a lot of TV series on Bluray/Netflix streaming as they're just huge time sinks and I could watch a lot of movies in the time it takes to finish multiple seasons of a TV series.  I suppose some could argue that's mixing two different hobbies (TV and movies), but they're both stories in visual form so I view them as the same hobby.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

If you haven't read the book yet, you don't enjoy it yet. A very long book might be quite enjoyable, but it is always an investment of time whenever you read a book. If I like, but don't love a book, I'll be a lot more inclined to finish a shorter novel than a longer one. A long book that I don't truly love can wear out its welcome. In my experience, a book of over 500 pages is very often in need of editing.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Still doesn't matter to me.  Regardless of whether a book is 300 pages, 600 pages, or 1,000 pages I'm still going to stop reading it pretty early on if I'm not enjoying it at all.

But with blurbs, reviews and samples it's very rare that I start a book that I don't end up enjoying.  I'll finish anything I like though.  I don't have to love something to finish it, be it a book, movie or whatever.  I just have to be enjoying it to some some level.

But I don't view books, movies etc. as purely entertainment either.  Some I'm willing to put some effort into finishing something that's maybe not super entertaining if I'm learning something from it or it's causing me to think about something etc.  Those may be harder reads than some of the pop fiction stuff I read, but are worthwhile for reasons other than entertainment and just loving the experience.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

There is a large range of possibilities between loving a book and not enjoying it at all.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

QuantumIguana said:


> There is a large range of possibilities between loving a book and not enjoying it at all.


That's what I'm saying.

I'll pretty much finish anything that I'm at least enjoying somewhat and getting something out of it (be it entertainment, knowledge etc.). Others on here are more picky and only read things they love or at least really like.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Math said:


> I think Kindle and e-books are great - and so I'm willing to be carried by whatever 'liberated' (for the want of a better word) writers want to do. I'll buy something if I think it's worth it and if I like the sound of it - whether it will take me five minutes or five months to read it.


It's a bit of a two-sided conversation. Authors are free to write according to the lengths they prefer and that may lead to an overall better story that exists at its natural length. However, that doesn't necessarily mean a reader is willing to change their reading patterns to accommodate the author. I prefer books over a certain size - that doesn't mean I won't read books that are shorter than that, but it does mean that I'm less likely to buy a shorter book without first giving it more scrutiny than I would a longer one. I'm sure it's the same for people who prefer books below a certain length as well.

So, while the author has more freedom, they also need to keep an eye on the expectations of their audience. If the majority of a target audience prefers (or has been trained to prefer) a 200-page book, then a 1000-page book will be off-putting and the author will have negatively impacted the size of their target audience .....


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Geoffrey said:


> You really cannot convert file size directly to locations as there are sometimes things like larger cover images that take up more file space. usually, however, I consider a file under 100k to be a short story and a file under about 250k to be a novella.
> 
> I measured page count to location count from Oct '09 to about July '11 (yeah, I'm a spreadsheet geek) and the average across books was 16.5 locations per page. If we take your average of 350 words per page, then there are about 21 words per location.


You are a little bit my hero for that, Geoffrey.

(I love spreadsheets - and figuring out more and more complex, but useful formulas. :-D)


----------



## GGKeets (Jan 2, 2012)

Pages has never bother me. The only thing that has is tiny print. Which is why I love reading on my IPad! Still love paper books though too.


----------



## DH_Sayer (Dec 20, 2011)

I don't think length really factors into my decision whether I read it on the kindle. Any length is good...I even don't mind reading it on my ipod with the kindle app.

I liked the "locations" that the kindle uses. Having a kindle for a few years really gave me a sense of how long a location is and it is more useful in comparing the lengths of books to one another because while not every page is equal length (ie. not every book has the same number of words per page), a location is a fixed size. So you don't get fooled by page counts so much. Like I read the Marriage Plot and the Art of Fielding back to back and MP is I guess 406 pages and AoF is 520, but MP has 7809 locations compared to AoF 8243 locations so they are more comparable in length (which is to say word count, which is all that matters) than their disparity in physical book page counts would seem to imply.


----------



## Math (Oct 13, 2011)

Geoffrey said:


> It's a bit of a two-sided conversation. Authors are free to write according to the lengths they prefer and that may lead to an overall better story that exists at its natural length. However, that doesn't necessarily mean a reader is willing to change their reading patterns to accommodate the author. I prefer books over a certain size - that doesn't mean I won't read books that are shorter than that, but it does mean that I'm less likely to buy a shorter book without first giving it more scrutiny than I would a longer one. I'm sure it's the same for people who prefer books below a certain length as well.
> 
> So, while the author has more freedom, they also need to keep an eye on the expectations of their audience. If the majority of a target audience prefers (or has been trained to prefer) a 200-page book, then a 1000-page book will be off-putting and the author will have negatively impacted the size of their target audience .....


Agreed! But forgive me, but I was talking about the authors who would normally never comtemplate being a commercial entity - or just have that one story to tell. I love the idea of authors not needing to worry about expectations of the audience. Kindle will be a fantastic thing in the long-run for literature, as it will allow these boundaries to be pushed - almost like in early cinema when every film was in 30 min reels 

I never thought that readers have been trained by publishers, and I think it's a crying shame - and I hope e-books will break that. In a sense, my first post was about 'liberated' writers - now I see this can 'liberate' readers. And why not? I think JRR Tolkien wanted Unwin to wait for all the 6 books of the LOTR to be completed before publishing, and wasn't happy with the 3 volume format. Now, we can get that 1000 page book as intended - rather than the 300 page books Unwin thought we should have had. I think the readers that pick that up for the first time today, have a better experience than those who read the volume released at a time when they were first published. That's a rare exception, of course, but it will be a welcome trail that any e-book writer, and reader, can now follow when they wish.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

I do think you're right in one way that Kindles are good for literature in that authors can write to the length a piece of writing needs to be, rather than the length the printed book needs it to be, or the length that can be managed for financial or market reasons.

On the other hand I do feel gadgets and ereaders could be changing the way we write in ways that might be harmful. I was workshopping my novel, which doesn't have particularly long paragraphs, and one of the people in the workshop kept saying she thought the paragraphs should be shorter. She was a teacher and I was a bit surprised she had trouble with ordinary paragraphs. It turned out she was reading on a gadget that meant the whole paragraph wasn't showing and she wanted to see the whole paragraphs.

Poetry is also tricky because the lines roll over.

I have a feeling authors will start writing shorter paragraphs and lines that work well on a small screen and at the worst it could become a bit like email structure. The printed page does have this effect too, but the screen is more limiting.

I do wonder how it will go.


----------



## JScott (Dec 3, 2011)

For me, a book can never be too long for Kindle. In fact, now that I own an E-reader, I would much prefer to have super-long books (e.g. Rutherfurd's "New York") on it. The way many printed books are assembled these days, by the time I finished up a novel of this length (880 pages), the book would have already begun to fall apart.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

JScott said:


> For me, a book can never be too long for Kindle. In fact, now that I own an E-reader, I would much prefer to have super-long books (e.g. Rutherfurd's "New York") on it. The way many printed books are assembled these days, by the time I finished up a novel of this length (880 pages), the book would have already begun to fall apart.


That's happened to me. One novel I've replaced 3 times for this because by the end, the first few pages are falling out if not already lost. I wish they'd make a hardback of it, since I have every other book in the series in hardback. Would make a balanced nook on by bookshelves too. :-D


----------



## Barbara F (Jan 7, 2012)

Indie authors pick the size of their book and font. The larger the book, the less pages. Smaller book, more pages. To get a better idea, check the product detail below the description. The print paperback page will list the size of the book where the kindle product page will list the size of the file. The large the file, the longer you get to read. Compare the product detail to other books you have read.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Yes, comparing the file size to other books you have read is probably the best idea, although things like images mess this up, but if they're similar types of books (like novels and text only) the comparison should work.

We keep the same font size and type as in the print book, as it's a good size as a start point to let people increase and decrease it. We use Garamond 12pt for fiction and Palatino Linotype 10pt for poetry. People don't like smaller than 10pt but it needs to be that small to let the lines fit a print page as well as a Kindle page. You can turn the page to landscape, though, on Kindle, which helps for poetry with long lines.


----------



## Louie Flann (Aug 3, 2011)

I really liked _The Heart of Darkness_ by Joseph Conrad. It might be a little long but that guy sure knows how to use them words.


----------



## cheriereich (Feb 12, 2011)

I would definitely prefer reading a longer book on my Kindle than lugging a heavy hardback or thick paperback around. Although I do enjoy reading shorter works more than longer ones because I get more read that way. I'm sure there is a too short limit, though. After all, who wants to read a one word "book."


----------



## Beatriz (Feb 22, 2011)

Adele Ward said:


> Standard novels are about 250 pages, but a Kindle book can be any length. Does it put you off if a novel is too long or too short? And do you check before you get it on Kindle. With print books I do check the page number because I'm put off by very long books.


Then you don't know what you're missing. If the book is good, if it's interesting, you never want it to end.


----------



## StephenEngland (Nov 2, 2011)

It all depends on the story. If the plot can carry 700 pages, I have absolutely no problem with a long book. But if the book is full of filler and I feel like the publisher was trying to pad their page count--forget about it.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

A book is like a house guest. I might enjoy their company greatly, but eventually, I want them to go home, the pleasure of their company eventuatlly diminishes.


----------



## Adele Ward (Jan 2, 2012)

Conrad's Heart of Darkness is a fantastic book. One of my all-time favourites.

I should explain that the only reason I'm put off by long books is that I'm very short of time because I have an incredibly heavy workload, and as my work involves continually reading books I do tend to try to find time to slot in a few books that aren't 'work'.

In the old days when I was young and days were long and not full of work I did enjoy a long book or more. I loved George Eliot's Middlemarch and the Russian novelists in particular. And Thomas Pynchon, who is very unusual, and those wonderful long books in the great days of feminism that were the 1970s and early 1980s.

Erica Jong is still going and very active on Facebook too.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

QuantumIguana said:


> A book is like a house guest. I might enjoy their company greatly, but eventually, I want them to go home, the pleasure of their company eventuatlly diminishes.


That's not always the case for me. Some books, even if I love them, I am ready to finish and move onto another one.

But there are many other's I love and hate to see come to an end and wish they were longer or would get sequels. I love long-running series for that reason as there's future books to look forward to with new stories involving my favorite characters etc.


----------

