Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#21

Ararara Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote:
IvyVeritas Wrote: I don't have a lot of time for reading these days, and covers are one quick and easy indicator (among many) that an author has put real effort into their story. It's not a perfect indicator, but it certainly helps (the blurb is another good indicator). There's nothing wrong with amateur writing, and I'm glad there are outlets for it, but I just don't have the time or patience to read the low-effort attempts anymore. There are so many stories posted that the cover helps narrow down the selection.

My own covers are designed for Amazon and other bookstores. The style doesn't match Royal Road's preferred style, but I'm not going to pay for multiple versions of the covers, and the books need to be competitive against professionally published novels, so bookstore-style covers take precedence.
Please don't take this the wrong way or as a personal attack or anything. But to me, your covers actually look pretty uninteresting. I don't mean it as an insult and I'm sure my own cover leaves a lot to be desired, but you seem to have put a lot of thought into your covers, and yet I can't help but feel they would really just blend in with everything else. What do you mean when you say they are "designed" for Amazon? Because yes, they do look a lot like other things that are on Amazon, but isn't that a problem? If you were going to pay for something to be professionally done, wouldn't you want something that really stood out, something eye-catching?
If you assimilate with the shelf, you'll receive a portion of the shelf's profits. Perfectly fine business strategy, to be "unassuming" and fit in with the rest of the products
yup. I see no issue with those covers if he's going for amazon. will fit right at home there.

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#22

CloverCloverClover Wrote: Please don't take this the wrong way or as a personal attack or anything. But to me, your covers actually look pretty uninteresting. I don't mean it as an insult and I'm sure my own cover leaves a lot to be desired, but you seem to have put a lot of thought into your covers, and yet I can't help but feel they would really just blend in with everything else. What do you mean when you say they are "designed" for Amazon? Because yes, they do look a lot like other things that are on Amazon, but isn't that a problem? If you were going to pay for something to be professionally done, wouldn't you want something that really stood out, something eye-catching?


You can find tons of advice from professional cover designers that when you want to sell books in a genre, you'll do far better if the covers match the styles used for that genre. Customers are looking for clues that the book will deliver the type of story they enjoy reading.

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#23

IvyVeritas Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote: Please don't take this the wrong way or as a personal attack or anything. But to me, your covers actually look pretty uninteresting. I don't mean it as an insult and I'm sure my own cover leaves a lot to be desired, but you seem to have put a lot of thought into your covers, and yet I can't help but feel they would really just blend in with everything else. What do you mean when you say they are "designed" for Amazon? Because yes, they do look a lot like other things that are on Amazon, but isn't that a problem? If you were going to pay for something to be professionally done, wouldn't you want something that really stood out, something eye-catching?


You can find tons of advice from professional cover designers that when you want to sell books in a genre, you'll do far better if the covers match the styles used for that genre. Customers are looking for clues that the book will deliver the type of story they enjoy reading.


Right but, what's the evidence? 

When I think back to the covers that have stuck with me, rarely are they ones that looked very similar to others in the genre. For example, this version of the cover to Stephen King's 'The Stand' always stuck with me: 

https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51ASBEurcmL.jpg

It's very simple, almost barren, and doesn't really inform you of anything about the work itself, really, other than it involves a very general 'good vs evil' story. You might even think that it's a classic fantasy story or a fairy tale from the cover, when it's not. 

Or this one, as another example, Farenheit 451: 
https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fe..._cover.jpg
This one might be a bit more informative if you ponder the image a bit longer, but what's more obvious is that it really popped out in comparison to other covers. 

I haven't thought about it in a while but another cover that I actually think was super effective was Jurassic Park: 
https%3A%2F%2Fpaperbackcinema.com%2Fwp-content%2Fu...-cover.jpg

Definitely not as uninformative as the other two, but that logo is certainly eye-catching, all the more so against the complete black background. 

Probably the professional covers are more effective than something more amaturely designed. But I find that they tend to blend together in a very generic aesthetic that I find pretty off-putting, and which certainly doesn't catch my eye as I skim. I have my doubts that holding to that aesthetic is really all that helpful beyond distinguishing a work from something obviously done by an amateur. And maybe you could make the argument that if you are spending the money, that's the safe bet. But I think there's definitely an argument that if you have the money to hire a professional cover maker, maybe you could spend it on commissioning some artwork that really sticks out instead. 

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#24

CloverCloverClover Wrote: When I think back to the covers that have stuck with me, rarely are they ones that looked very similar to others in the genre. For example, this version of the cover to Stephen King's 'The Stand' always stuck with me:


All three of the authors you listed can sell books based on their names alone. They can do anything they want for the covers. Also, when books go through lots of printings, then the publisher will try out different covers to attract different audiences. My copy of "The Stand" has a very traditional horror novel cover--exactly what you'd expect from something in the horror section.

First printings for fantasy novels (or westerns, or romances) are typically character(s) plus scene, because that's what attracts readers. They want to see if the characters look interesting. Whereas, with modern-day mystery or suspense, characters are usually absent from the cover or just shown as silhouettes, because what are you going to show--a normal modern person? Those genres have different styles.

If a fantasy novel does well enough to get a second cover, it's often symbolic rather than character-based (to draw in a second wave of readers that prefer a different style), and both the title and the author take greater precedence (because at that point, the book and the author are more well-known). But sometimes the second cover is character-driven again, especially if the author or the publisher wanted a different look.

These aren't hard-and-fast rules, and there are always variations, but professional cover designers know what sells.

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#25



CloverCloverClover Wrote:
IvyVeritas Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote: .....


... Customers are looking for clues that the book will deliver the type of story they enjoy reading.


Right but, what's the evidence? 

When I think back to the covers that have stuck with me, rarely are they ones that looked very similar to others in the genre. For example, this version of the cover to Stephen King's 'The Stand' always stuck with me: 

https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51ASBEurcmL.jpg

It's very simple, almost barren, and doesn't really inform you of anything about the work itself, really, other than it involves a very general 'good vs evil' story. You might even think that it's a classic fantasy story or a fairy tale from the cover, when it's not. 

Or this one, as another example, Farenheit 451: 
https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fe..._cover.jpg
This one might be a bit more informative if you ponder the image a bit longer, but what's more obvious is that it really popped out in comparison to other covers. 

I haven't thought about it in a while but another cover that I actually think was super effective was Jurassic Park: 
https%3A%2F%2Fpaperbackcinema.com%2Fwp-content%2Fu...-cover.jpg

Definitely not as uninformative as the other two, but that logo is certainly eye-catching, all the more so against the complete black background. 

Probably the professional covers are more effective than something more amaturely designed. But I find that they tend to blend together in a very generic aesthetic that I find pretty off-putting, and which certainly doesn't catch my eye as I skim. I have my doubts that holding to that aesthetic is really all that helpful beyond distinguishing a work from something obviously done by an amateur. And maybe you could make the argument that if you are spending the money, that's the safe bet. But I think there's definitely an argument that if you have the money to hire a professional cover maker, maybe you could spend it on commissioning some artwork that really sticks out instead.


I agree with Ivy here. 2 out of 3 of these covers read "By the author of..." and the last one "His best to date". These all imply these novels are from already well known, famous authors. 

So what are these novel covers informing readers of? They are informing readers that "these works are from well-known, successful authors that you may like already, come read to read more of this author's work". There is no need to have flashy, eye-catching artwork, when the authors' names are printed on the front covers in big, bold letters. The goal is not to sell the novel by selling the genre, story, or characters. The goal with these covers is to sell these stories to customers who are already looking to read more of a best-selling author's work, which they've already enjoyed.

Having an uninteresting background is actually beneficial to these sorts of covers. Because the goal is to get the reader to focus on the title of the book and the author's name.

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#26

O_Weaver Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote:
IvyVeritas Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote: .....


... Customers are looking for clues that the book will deliver the type of story they enjoy reading.


Right but, what's the evidence? 

When I think back to the covers that have stuck with me, rarely are they ones that looked very similar to others in the genre. For example, this version of the cover to Stephen King's 'The Stand' always stuck with me: 

https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51ASBEurcmL.jpg

It's very simple, almost barren, and doesn't really inform you of anything about the work itself, really, other than it involves a very general 'good vs evil' story. You might even think that it's a classic fantasy story or a fairy tale from the cover, when it's not. 

Or this one, as another example, Farenheit 451: 
https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fe..._cover.jpg
This one might be a bit more informative if you ponder the image a bit longer, but what's more obvious is that it really popped out in comparison to other covers. 

I haven't thought about it in a while but another cover that I actually think was super effective was Jurassic Park: 
https%3A%2F%2Fpaperbackcinema.com%2Fwp-content%2Fu...-cover.jpg

Definitely not as uninformative as the other two, but that logo is certainly eye-catching, all the more so against the complete black background. 

Probably the professional covers are more effective than something more amaturely designed. But I find that they tend to blend together in a very generic aesthetic that I find pretty off-putting, and which certainly doesn't catch my eye as I skim. I have my doubts that holding to that aesthetic is really all that helpful beyond distinguishing a work from something obviously done by an amateur. And maybe you could make the argument that if you are spending the money, that's the safe bet. But I think there's definitely an argument that if you have the money to hire a professional cover maker, maybe you could spend it on commissioning some artwork that really sticks out instead.


I agree with Ivy here. 2 out of 3 of these covers read "By the author of..." and the last one "His best to date". These all imply these novels are from already well known, famous authors. 

So what are these novel covers informing readers of? They are informing readers that "these works are from well-known, successful authors that you may like already, come read to read more of this author's work". There is no need to have flashy, eye-catching artwork, when the authors' names are printed on the front covers in big, bold letters. The goal is not to sell the novel by selling the genre, story, or characters. The goal with these covers is to sell these stories to customers who are already looking to read more of a best-selling author's work, which they've already enjoyed.

Having an uninteresting background is actually beneficial to these sorts of covers. Because the goal is to get the reader to focus on the title of the book and the author's name.


But that's exactly my point. These covers *do* have flashy, eye-catching, unique looking artwork, compared to other books. They stand out *way more* than others. I have *seen* some of the other covers for the Stand, and I think they're rather poor. My point is that there seems to be a lot of conventional wisdom driving people towards making rather generic looking covers for their books, and I'm questioning that conventional wisdom. It might be what professional cover makers say, but I'm wondering where those conventions *come from*. Do they exist because they are actually effective? Or is something formulaic simply easier for a professional cover maker to follow?  

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#27

CloverCloverClover Wrote: But that's exactly my point. These covers *do* have flashy, eye-catching, unique looking artwork, compared to other books. They stand out *way more* than others. I have *seen* some of the other covers for the Stand, and I think they're rather poor. My point is that there seems to be a lot of conventional wisdom driving people towards making rather generic looking covers for their books, and I'm questioning that conventional wisdom. It might be what professional cover makers say, but I'm wondering where those conventions *come from*. Do they exist because they are actually effective? Or is something formulaic simply easier for a professional cover maker to follow?

Honestly, the book covers you showed just going off the images, make me less inclined to read them vs Ivy's covers. To me Ivy's covers look prettier and far more interesting. The ones you showed just feel "ick". 

And I could be considered a fairly typical Amazon reader since for years Kindle was where I got my books. I read fantasy, high fantasy, YA, urban fantasy, romance etc. If I was looking for a fantasy book I'd be looking for covers like Ivy's since they're what I expect to see in Fantasy. I'm far more likely to click on a cover like Ivy's when I'm browsing Amazon for a fantasy book than a cover like your 3 examples. Actually I can't think of any instance when I'm looking through my preferred genres that I'd click a title like you showed. Probably because those three don't fit into the same genre as Ivy's so you're comparing apples to oranges. 

Here's some data for you, since you specifically asked for something like this I figured it would help. 66% of people asked found cliche covers useful

Adding in another link:
An example of how "standout" art actually severely hurt a books sales

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#28

CloverCloverClover Wrote:
O_Weaver Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote:
IvyVeritas Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote: .....


... Customers are looking for clues that the book will deliver the type of story they enjoy reading.


Right but, what's the evidence? 

When I think back to the covers that have stuck with me, rarely are they ones that looked very similar to others in the genre. For example, this version of the cover to Stephen King's 'The Stand' always stuck with me: 

https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51ASBEurcmL.jpg

It's very simple, almost barren, and doesn't really inform you of anything about the work itself, really, other than it involves a very general 'good vs evil' story. You might even think that it's a classic fantasy story or a fairy tale from the cover, when it's not. 

Or this one, as another example, Farenheit 451: 
https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fe..._cover.jpg
This one might be a bit more informative if you ponder the image a bit longer, but what's more obvious is that it really popped out in comparison to other covers. 

I haven't thought about it in a while but another cover that I actually think was super effective was Jurassic Park: 
https%3A%2F%2Fpaperbackcinema.com%2Fwp-content%2Fu...-cover.jpg

Definitely not as uninformative as the other two, but that logo is certainly eye-catching, all the more so against the complete black background. 

Probably the professional covers are more effective than something more amaturely designed. But I find that they tend to blend together in a very generic aesthetic that I find pretty off-putting, and which certainly doesn't catch my eye as I skim. I have my doubts that holding to that aesthetic is really all that helpful beyond distinguishing a work from something obviously done by an amateur. And maybe you could make the argument that if you are spending the money, that's the safe bet. But I think there's definitely an argument that if you have the money to hire a professional cover maker, maybe you could spend it on commissioning some artwork that really sticks out instead.


I agree with Ivy here. 2 out of 3 of these covers read "By the author of..." and the last one "His best to date". These all imply these novels are from already well known, famous authors. 

So what are these novel covers informing readers of? They are informing readers that "these works are from well-known, successful authors that you may like already, come read to read more of this author's work". There is no need to have flashy, eye-catching artwork, when the authors' names are printed on the front covers in big, bold letters. The goal is not to sell the novel by selling the genre, story, or characters. The goal with these covers is to sell these stories to customers who are already looking to read more of a best-selling author's work, which they've already enjoyed.

Having an uninteresting background is actually beneficial to these sorts of covers. Because the goal is to get the reader to focus on the title of the book and the author's name.


But that's exactly my point. These covers *do* have flashy, eye-catching, unique looking artwork, compared to other books. They stand out *way more* than others. I have *seen* some of the other covers for the Stand, and I think they're rather poor. My point is that there seems to be a lot of conventional wisdom driving people towards making rather generic looking covers for their books, and I'm questioning that conventional wisdom. It might be what professional cover makers say, but I'm wondering where those conventions *come from*. Do they exist because they are actually effective? Or is something formulaic simply easier for a professional cover maker to follow?


That art might seem super flashy, distinctive and eye-catching from a modern reader’s viewpoint. But back when those editions were first published (The Stand and Fahrenheit 451 in particular), that color scheme and those art styles were common in publishing. At the time, they likely blended in as well with their respective genres as the ones you’re critiquing do today. 

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#29

Mystique Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote: But that's exactly my point. These covers *do* have flashy, eye-catching, unique looking artwork, compared to other books. They stand out *way more* than others. I have *seen* some of the other covers for the Stand, and I think they're rather poor. My point is that there seems to be a lot of conventional wisdom driving people towards making rather generic looking covers for their books, and I'm questioning that conventional wisdom. It might be what professional cover makers say, but I'm wondering where those conventions *come from*. Do they exist because they are actually effective? Or is something formulaic simply easier for a professional cover maker to follow?

Honestly, the book covers you showed just going off the images, make me less inclined to read them vs Ivy's covers. To me Ivy's covers look prettier and far more interesting. The ones you showed just feel "ick". 

And I could be considered a fairly typical Amazon reader since for years Kindle was where I got my books. I read fantasy, high fantasy, YA, urban fantasy, romance etc. If I was looking for a fantasy book I'd be looking for covers like Ivy's since they're what I expect to see in Fantasy. I'm far more likely to click on a cover like Ivy's when I'm browsing Amazon for a fantasy book than a cover like your 3 examples. Actually I can't think of any instance when I'm looking through my preferred genres that I'd click a title like you showed. Probably because those three don't fit into the same genre as Ivy's so you're comparing apples to oranges. 

Here's some data for you, since you specifically asked for something like this I figured it would help. 66% of people asked found cliche covers useful

Adding in another link:
An example of how "standout" art actually severely hurt a books sales


Those polls are a little contradictory though, aren't they? They have one poll where a majority of people say that cliched covers are useful; but another poll says that a majority almost as large is bothered by them (58-42). There's another poll where the majority of people (70%) say that covers are "fine" today, but twice as many people (20 vs 10 percent) find them uninspired and drab. 

And I assume in the second link you're talking about point #2. And I have to say, I think the original art in that point was much nicer looking, and I really hate what they replaced it with. But the broader point they make there is that the original art didn't necessarily say "scifi" enough, not that unique or standout art itself killed it. I actually think the original art could have worked well if they had changed the background from the strange, weatherworn paper look they were using to something a bit more futuristic looking. 
[url=https://i0.wp.com/www.thebooksmugglers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/CM-6.png][/url]
KittraMcBriar Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote:
O_Weaver Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote:
IvyVeritas Wrote:
CloverCloverClover Wrote: .....


... Customers are looking for clues that the book will deliver the type of story they enjoy reading.


Right but, what's the evidence? 

When I think back to the covers that have stuck with me, rarely are they ones that looked very similar to others in the genre. For example, this version of the cover to Stephen King's 'The Stand' always stuck with me: 

https%3A%2F%2Fm.media-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51ASBEurcmL.jpg

It's very simple, almost barren, and doesn't really inform you of anything about the work itself, really, other than it involves a very general 'good vs evil' story. You might even think that it's a classic fantasy story or a fairy tale from the cover, when it's not. 

Or this one, as another example, Farenheit 451: 
https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fe..._cover.jpg
This one might be a bit more informative if you ponder the image a bit longer, but what's more obvious is that it really popped out in comparison to other covers. 

I haven't thought about it in a while but another cover that I actually think was super effective was Jurassic Park: 
https%3A%2F%2Fpaperbackcinema.com%2Fwp-content%2Fu...-cover.jpg

Definitely not as uninformative as the other two, but that logo is certainly eye-catching, all the more so against the complete black background. 

Probably the professional covers are more effective than something more amaturely designed. But I find that they tend to blend together in a very generic aesthetic that I find pretty off-putting, and which certainly doesn't catch my eye as I skim. I have my doubts that holding to that aesthetic is really all that helpful beyond distinguishing a work from something obviously done by an amateur. And maybe you could make the argument that if you are spending the money, that's the safe bet. But I think there's definitely an argument that if you have the money to hire a professional cover maker, maybe you could spend it on commissioning some artwork that really sticks out instead.


I agree with Ivy here. 2 out of 3 of these covers read "By the author of..." and the last one "His best to date". These all imply these novels are from already well known, famous authors. 

So what are these novel covers informing readers of? They are informing readers that "these works are from well-known, successful authors that you may like already, come read to read more of this author's work". There is no need to have flashy, eye-catching artwork, when the authors' names are printed on the front covers in big, bold letters. The goal is not to sell the novel by selling the genre, story, or characters. The goal with these covers is to sell these stories to customers who are already looking to read more of a best-selling author's work, which they've already enjoyed.

Having an uninteresting background is actually beneficial to these sorts of covers. Because the goal is to get the reader to focus on the title of the book and the author's name.


But that's exactly my point. These covers *do* have flashy, eye-catching, unique looking artwork, compared to other books. They stand out *way more* than others. I have *seen* some of the other covers for the Stand, and I think they're rather poor. My point is that there seems to be a lot of conventional wisdom driving people towards making rather generic looking covers for their books, and I'm questioning that conventional wisdom. It might be what professional cover makers say, but I'm wondering where those conventions *come from*. Do they exist because they are actually effective? Or is something formulaic simply easier for a professional cover maker to follow?


That art might seem super flashy, distinctive and eye-catching from a modern reader’s viewpoint. But back when those editions were first published (The Stand and Fahrenheit 451 in particular), that color scheme and those art styles were common in publishing. At the time, they likely blended in as well with their respective genres as the ones you’re critiquing do today.
Did they? The Stand was a bit before my time (well, so was Farenheit 451), but I read a lot of older books as a kid and I can't remember anything looking quite like it. And I thought that Farenheit 451 cover was actually something added on a later edition, not the original. But I could be wrong. 

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#31
It's a well known saying and obviously holds some sway even if specifically here it's gone off rails in terms of "quality" being subjective. I'm not going jump into the mess of an argu- "discussion" behind me and instead offer another point.

One of my Most Popular Reviews for Dungeon Item Shop goes into how the cover isn't marketed as well towards the target audience of the story.

It's a dark story with a lighthearted face but by looking at the pastel colours of the cover and the name and many potential fans might move on (it's really a good story for a certain niche). Simultaniously a different crowd looks at the cover and thinks its going to be happy and then gets sucker punched and curb stomped by how much goes wrong.

That's not to say the cover is "bad" - it's a munch better drawing than I could do - just that it doesn't 100% match the story itself. If there was an open window with horrific stuff happening in the background or similar it might be better able to convey the sort of "let's ignore all the rape and murder that's hinted at in the background and focus on making friends and pretending everyone is nice" theme the story has.


The tags (slice of life) and (grimdark) probably paint a much better picture of what the story is offering but I've recently found out many readers don't expand the tags and will never see those hints.

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#32
Well, I’ll just add my thoughts to the discussions here—book covers nowadays can be seen as generic, for sure, but it lets the reader know if a story is for them or not through a single glance. Like people have said earlier, the covers from The Stand etc. mostly sold through a famous author name, but those books also had a much bigger advantage. Those covers only competed with the other books that could fit in a book store. With the online bookshops like Amazon, your cover isn’t competing with like 500-5000 books, but hundreds of thousands (or millions, if you don’t sort by genre). 
That makes it more important than ever to make sure your reader knows what your story is about through a single glance (or at least genre and possibly a trope or even subgenre), because while your book competes with the thousands and thousands of books in your genre, the readers have to scroll through them to pick something. If their search is niche and they know they’ll find exactly what they’re looking for, then sure, your book can benefit from breaking from the norm. But most likely readers will think it belongs to a different genre all together and look for a book that looks like something they’ve enjoyed before.
There have been lots of studies that back this up. If you break from the mold, you’ll probably suffer for it. There are outliers, for sure, but they are just that; outliers. 
As a reader, I’ll confess to one thing: I have a kindle library of over 2000 books, neatly sorted into collections. One of those collections is called ”Have no idea/unclear cover”. I rarely visit that collection because if I feel like I want to read something from a certain genre, that’s the sort of cover I’d look for. I don’t feel like reading about 50 blurbs before I find what I’m looking for because the cover doesn’t tell me. 
Though, who knows? I might be the outlier in this. 
Anyway, that’s my take. 

Re: Do you think book covers can sometimes work against a story's favor and the website it is on?

#33

“Did they? The Stand was a bit before my time (well, so was Farenheit 451), but I read a lot of older books as a kid and I can't remember anything looking quite like it. And I thought that Farenheit 451 cover was actually something added on a later edition, not the original. But I could be wrong.” (Sorry for the weird quote style, didn’t wanna include the whole ass thread quote and trying to delete the extra stuff messed up the formatting) 

Yes. Google “Book covers from the fifties to seventies” or something like that and you’ll probably see what I’m talking about. As for Farenheit 451, there are a few different design variations of the first edition as far as I can find, two of which use the art from your example.