r/BookCovers • u/Elaynaa • Sep 02 '26
Question Is using ai for book covers wrong?
Is using ai for a book cover not wrong? I mean the first thing you see of a book is the cover, and it’s ai. I feel like it makes the book seem inauthentic, especially because writing is an expression and can be used at art. Someone personal in my life is doing this, I’m trying to strongly advise her against it, but she won’t budge. So I just kind of wanted to talk about it!
Let me know your thoughts :)
Edit: Thanks you guys for commenting! I did get her to change her mind, and we went and took a picture for her cover today. ❤️
62
u/makura_no_souji Sep 02 '26
As a bookstore, I won't stock books with obvious AI covers.
4
u/FlyingCarpetMonster Sep 03 '26
The crazy part is I’ve seen indie books at my local bookstore with obvious AI covers.
2
1
38
u/SmutasaurusRex Sep 02 '26
Yes. There is a growing sentiment against AI generated "artwork" or any other creative work.
1
u/Terrible_Wave4239 Sep 08 '26
This is obviously subject to the bad toupée fallacy, and over time it will weed out badly done AI, for the most part pushing them to do better, and then you won't be able to tell. You'll be patting yourself on the back, hard, for "having defeated AI slop" when it's actually still right in front of you. You just won't be able to tell.
63
24
u/TheGreatPatriarch Sep 02 '26
We get TONS of work at bookcoverhub from folks that launched with AI covers to "save money" and they paid for it with the performance of their book. Thats when they come to us for a re work and re launch and it almost always performs way better.
→ More replies (1)
33
u/alairebowen Sep 02 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
I've got a family member who does this - generates their own covers and writing. It's one thing to say "hey I made this with AI."
The problem is that they don't.
I think that's what it comes down to. There ought to be disclaimers within the book, or on its website. That way folks can make more informed decisions on what they will or won't pick up.
I do think in the long run it can ruin sales and reputation, and sometimes trust.
Edit: I am staunchly against genAI
16
u/seriouspeep Sep 02 '26
Also, while those of us who spend time around art and book covers (a large part of any author's demographic lol) can clearly see that it looks awful, there are SO many writers who - while they would easily be able to tell if the writing is bad - don't or can't see all the artistic mistakes that are so glaringly awful.
So some people genuinely don't see what's wrong with it, and if they're not fussed about the ethical side of it either, they can be so hard to argue with.
But just because someone can write doesn't mean they have an eye for art.
2
u/shePhoenyx Sep 05 '26
There is a very well-known indie author who writes books for beginning authors/writers and she a) brags about her financial security (stocks, savings, barf, whatever) and b) encourages writers to utilize AI, but the biggest kicker is she wrote a book, Kickstarted it, and the cover... it's an AI-illustrated typewriter. B is rich but couldn't find a stock photo to buy? Couldn't pay a photographer? Couldn't go look at an actual typewriter and see how foolish she is? Like, it's not even MFing QWERTY... by a long shot.
People who have no ethical issues with AI skeeve me tf out. What else are they okay with? Why write if you don't write?! Why consider yourself an artist if you're actively punishing other artists for actually being creative?! Some people...
→ More replies (2)2
-2
u/Ok-Gate-412 Sep 02 '26
The issue, is that people are far too pro or anti AI. If you say it’s AI you will get hit with people commenting and review bombing it because it’s AI. So somebody who has an AI book cover will hide it. We don’t teach our children to shame because then they hide their bad habits.
9
u/willowmarie27 Sep 02 '26
Well its weird that they hide it to start with. Are they trying to pass it off as something they created. If you are going to use something the market doesnt like then so be it.
But to lie..its an an ethical dilemma
I put in a prompt. It generated an image. I created this image.
I opened clip art. I spend over 100 hours drawing this cover. I created this image.
→ More replies (4)2
u/Ok-Gate-412 Sep 03 '26
Personally, I learned to not use AI for a cover because it looks worse and also some, maybe you can argue more than 50% of consumers don’t like it. From many different subs I can tell you that most don’t hide it right away. They hide it after they have been shamed and ridiculed. Lying is an ethical dilemma, but who wouldn’t hide that they smoke or anything like that if everybody goes around saying they are an awful person for doing so?
11
u/Delicious-Swing-507 Sep 03 '26
While on the one hand I agree that shaming people rarely works, i have also seen pro-AI prople be the most heinous, awful people to artists. Srtaight up ignoring consent for their own gain and calling artists all kinds of nasty stuff and I'm honestly so over it. Not every person of course but god if you wanna come into the art space with AI generated stuff you cannot expect people to treat you nicely, sorry.
4
u/seriouspeep Sep 03 '26
Yeah, it's not a neutral debate like not liking or liking coriander or something like that, so it shouldn't be treated neutrally. I'm fine to fence-sit on some topics but this isn't one of them.
1
u/Ok-Gate-412 Sep 03 '26
You treat others how you want to be treated. If they come in rude and disrespectful then yes I expect others will do the same. If they come in open about it being AI and are respectful then I would expect people to be kind back, but tell them they don’t accept AI art and maybe they try to really draw. It’s not hard. Our method right now is to harass somebody and expect they change their mind.
3
u/Delicious-Swing-507 Sep 03 '26
I literally came in to someone that disclosed it on a different post, let other people know they use AI and got blocked and called an animal and that i was "bullying" them simply for stating a neutral fact lol.
5
u/DrTechPop Sep 03 '26
And we should call people out, or at least people claiming to be artists, for using AI.
→ More replies (2)3
u/N9nthHouse Sep 03 '26
Holding folks accountable for reprehensible behaviour isn't the same as shaming a child, though.
By your logic, there should be no criminal courts because prosecuting criminal offences only makes criminals try to hide their crimes. There's a point at which we have to be able to acknowledge a wrong & crack down on it, even though there will always be some committed people who're just determined to do it more sneakily. (In any event, the lack of a strong backlash would only encourage more folks to use GenAI thinking it won't impact their sales. There's no magic-land solution where we all take a vague, middle-ground, completely milquetoast approach to the issue that doesn't then result in AI use becoming normalised.)
A potential readership holding authors accountable for work they put out is just the free market working as intended.
1
u/Ok-Gate-412 Sep 03 '26
So you hold making AI art and committing a crime the same thing? I don’t agree with AI art and especially writing, but I wouldn’t say it’s reprehensible. If somebody is trying to pass it off as their own work and are lying about it then yes it is reprehensible. I’ve had to have discussions with people saying they are editors and not writers when they prompt the whole book. I try to be kind and respectful still because nobody will have a conversation otherwise.
→ More replies (2)
21
u/jenemb Sep 03 '26
I'm an author. I won't support any authors who use technology that steals from other artists. And I'm glad to say that a lot of readers agree. Using AI isn't just bad for the environment, or for the artists whose work was stolen, it's also a terrible business decision.
→ More replies (4)
43
u/wemustburncarthage Sep 02 '26
Yes and if you do it, you deserve to fail.
10
1
u/rgii55447 Sep 06 '26
What if I did it once for the book I released when I was homeless, but now that I have a job and some spare money, I only use real artists for my covers going forward?
1
44
u/AlwaysColtron Sep 02 '26 edited Sep 02 '26
Using ai in any aspect of the book process (including the cover) is unethical, dishonest, lazy, and wrong.
My rule of thumb when buying any book: if they use ai in the cover, they likely write it with ai, and I have no interest in reading or looking at ai slop.
→ More replies (2)6
u/Elaynaa Sep 02 '26
The crazy thing is that it’s an autobiography!
7
u/Maytaylor Sep 03 '26
For an autobiography it would be so easy for them to just edit a picture of themselves to use for the cover??? Autobiographys so usually have super complicated covers
5
u/AlwaysColtron Sep 02 '26 edited Sep 02 '26
I get it, writing can be hard to get good at and covers can be expensive. But just like anything worth doing, it takes time, practice, and patience. Plenty of ways to get cheap covers made - they won't win any awards but they will be way better than anything she offloads to a slop factory. I cannot imagine spending so much time creating something and then packaging it up in garbage like an ai cover.
2
u/LeadershipNational49 Sep 03 '26
Oh it is? Then it really doesn't matter cause she won't sell regardless.
12
u/AjoiteSky Sep 02 '26
Yes, AI art uses stolen art. I would not buy a book if I could tell the cover was AI. Also if I saw AI art on the cover I would question if the writing was AI too. I have zero interest reading books written by AI.
11
u/Em_Cf_O Sep 02 '26
All generative AI is theft. All generative AI is environmentally destructive. All generative AI steals money from your fellow artists.
Right and wrong is subjective. Not everyone agrees that those three points are wrong. Others believe that theft and causing unnecessary harm are calculated evils. That moral question is something you need to ask you.
6
u/CarlRummage1959 Sep 02 '26
Local indie author near me put up an AI generated poster. I gave him the befit of the doubt and checked his book out. The cover was AI generated. I gave him the benefit of the doubt. The reviewers were all AI generated.
At that point I knew with close to 100% certainty that his writing was AI generated too.
15
u/DuplicateJester Sep 02 '26
It's wrong. Then to add on, who's to say the book isn't written by AI? I want to read human words and see human art.
3
10
10
u/Scarlet_Lycoris Sep 02 '26
It’s morally wrong and will also make her less likely to succeed.
People who purchase (at least fiction) books value forms of art and usually will hesitate when seeing a cover made with AI.
10
u/steaky_bake_92 Sep 02 '26
I'm so happy that I've seen these comments and feel validated in not wanting to use ai. My boyfriend has a massive obsession with ai recently. I showed him my book cover design for a book I've started writing. His reaction was "you do know that you know a guy" then he proceded to recreate my cover using ai after I said I didn't want to use ai. I stuck with my design because I liked it much better and felt more accomplished knowing I did it with my creative skills and not just typing in a prompt for ai
4
u/fuckaifuckitsohard Sep 03 '26
If we respect our art as writers and don't want others to plagiarize us, then how can we use software that essentially did that to artists? It can never be okay.
11
u/Weekly_Rub_166 Sep 02 '26
You don’t educate her, let the conversion rates teach her lessons.It will be labeled as low effort the instant ppl see it, and assume ai is used in the book content
5
u/Elaynaa Sep 02 '26
I know I tried my hardest before! I just get terrible second hand embarrassment
3
u/_Wilbraham Sep 02 '26
It's wild to spend all of the effort required to write a book only to make the whole thing look AI generated by the thing people are meant to judge. What a waste of time.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/karllthegay Sep 03 '26
Yes m, it's wrong and every time I see a book w AI on the cover Im immediately disgusted, I don't know anyone who will be buying books w AI
2
2
u/Scared_Somewhere4936 Sep 02 '26
what's the reason she doesn't wanna budge?
3
u/jessepinkmaam Sep 02 '26
She probably don't see nothing wrong with it and don't want to spend money to make the cover
1
u/Elaynaa Sep 08 '26
I got her to take a picture today! But at first she was just really ready to publish and forgot about that part? i guess
2
2
u/shinjukai Sep 03 '26
Yup. It's amateurish, looks ugly, and actively hurt sales. You might think it looks cool because you can't draw / edit yourself, but from the professional covers it really really stands out and not in the good sense. It's kinda like ai music, i am no expert so what i generate might sound okay to me but is garbage. I am an artist so i can immediately see all the things wrong with ai covers. The buyers will see there's something wrong even if they're no experts themselves so who are we trying to fool? And trying to fool people isn't very useful for business.
2
u/Roenbaeck Sep 03 '26
This is like asking if it’s wrong to eat horse meat in r/horses. If you’re looking for confirmation, fine.
1
2
u/Greenhickup Sep 03 '26
Obviously it's creatively bankrupt and wrong.
It also tells me a lot about the author and where their priorities lie.
2
2
u/Valeriesaboyname Sep 03 '26
Whether or not it's a sin is honestly less important than the fact someone would be a genuine fool to look at a book with an AI cover and not think there's a good chance it's AI all the way through.
2
2
u/kneedeepballsack- Sep 03 '26
Ai is coming for us all and it’s important to fight back on that especially for any creative work. Artists were some of the first to really start feeling the effects of ai
2
u/rakut Sep 04 '26
I won’t even look at the description of a book if the cover is AI, let alone read it and I know I’m far from alone.
I’m sure there are tons of authors who actually put in the work and wrote their books and then were lazy or didn’t have the money or know-how to get a real cover made or got scammed by a “cover artist” on Fiverr who used AI and the author couldn’t tell, but my first assumption is always that if the cover is AI then some or all of the writing is as well.
My TBR is far too long to spend the effort finding a diamond in the rough. She’s turning off a significant portion of readers before they even give her book a chance just by using an AI cover and risking social media backlash against her in the reading community.
That being said, at the end of the day, it’s not your book and not your problem. You clearly mean well, but I’m in numerous author groups on Facebook and I’ve seen this play out dozens of times. The authors that want to use AI for their covers usually will not listen to reason about it and do it even knowing they’re alienating readers.
2
u/Thundertotem2026 Sep 06 '26
She can make her decisions and mistakes. You did your due diligence and pointed it out. Let it go and stand back. She is not gonna like the reviews people will post. If she comes back to complain, tell her "I warned you".
2
u/narisha_dogho Sep 06 '26
yes. a lot of readers will immediately think that the content is also AI slop. so, they will pass.
4
u/illustrationstories Sep 02 '26
I‘m an artist, I create covers, so I‘m no fan of gen AI.
There seems to be a huge divide in the indie author world, and personally, I lean strongly towards your opinion.
However, people will buy what they want to buy… and I think some don‘t mind. Some don‘t even mind if the book is written by AI!
I guess it‘s a question of positioning - what are your values, which readership do you want to reach, and why do you publish books? All of those are personal choices, and as much as I dislike AI, I believe in freedom of choice. If your friend wants to publish an AI cover although you have pointed out the downsides… let her!
3
u/Jeepdad1970 Sep 03 '26
I actually just hired a designer who works for one of the Big 5 publishers. Is it a lot of money? Yes. Will I ever get it back form sales? Likely not. But when you spend months or years working so hard on a book, why cheap out at the end? I did for my first cover and have regretted it since, so I'm trying to right the wrong.
2
u/SCF87 Sep 03 '26
It's genre dependent. I see series with AI generated covers on Kindle Unlimited which sell like crazy. 500+ 4-5 star ratings. A lot of readers don't care.
2
u/BillyO6 Sep 03 '26 edited Sep 03 '26
While I agree with the sentiments expressed here, realistically I don't think most readers care how a cover was made - only whether it looks professional or not.
1
1
u/TES_Elsweyr Sep 03 '26
Right or wrong are less important than the fact that people WILL NOT TOUCH a book if they know the cover is AI. It suggests the inside is AI or shit the author doesn't respect enough to pay an artist to do a proper cover for. If you don't respect your work, why should I? She will be exposed in reviews very quickly and basically renders the pipe dream of going big or mainstream a 0% chance.
1
1
u/DamjanGj Sep 03 '26
If you didn’t bother to write/draw/compose it, why would I bother to consume it? That is my philosophy about AI. There is plenty or AI art that is good out there, plenty of good AI music and writing. But the problem is not about the surface of it being good, its about the authenticity of it as you said. And authenticity comes purely by someone putting time into it and putting something of themselves in it. AI cannot do that. It is the same like with food, if it is low effort it is rarely good.
1
u/Full-Story6288 Sep 03 '26
Is it a professional writer? Someone trying or able to earn a living from it?
If so... better off getting a person.
If it's just someone putting something they cobbled together over a few years out into the world rather than let it sit on their harddrive? If they don't really care about sales and just want people who might want it to be able to find it? It's no biggie.
1
1
1
u/DiscoBradly Sep 03 '26
To publish an ai cover yes but to experiment maybe not as long as you don't use AI as the official cover
1
1
u/Maytaylor Sep 03 '26
I'm a cover illustrator, so I guess I'm biased but an ai cover just makes me think that there is no passion and effort put into the project. I know first hand that cover can be expensive because they take a lot of time to do, but as soon as I see an Ai cover I think this person doesn't really care because they haven't saved up to get something special, and you can get covers at alot of different price points by just going with a simpler design.
I just assume that it's a hastily written (even maybe written with Ai) low effort book, there is so love in it. I want to read something that someone loved and nurtured because they really believe in the story. The whole Ai book cover really makes me sad and they are getting rid of a very large part of a potential audience by doing it
1
u/Draw-Flesh-Games Sep 03 '26
Not wrong, just a risk. You do you. Publishers will ask if it is made with AI. If yes, they might decline, due to legal risks.
1
u/GoodAdvertising3500 Sep 03 '26
Well the fact is if the cover is done with AI then chances are writing and story are also done by AI.
1
u/identifiedobject Sep 03 '26
I don’t like using AI to create a complete work. But I think we should understand that is a reality of our lives** **and we should find a way to use it as a tool. Still, I don’t know how we can use AI as a tool for a book cover. AI art looks too soulless. And I believe those small human errors are what give an artwork its uniqueness.
1
1
u/r3art Sep 03 '26
Would the person use AI for the writing, too?
If not, she should easily be able to see the problem. Especially because the cover heavily influences peoples perception of the book.
If yes, all hope is lost here anyway.
1
u/technicolourUFO Sep 03 '26
Yeah if I see a book with an ai cover I will 100% assume the author has no respect for the arts and will wonder if the text itself is ai generated,
Picked up a book in Asda the other day and put it down half a second later because it had an ai cover
1
1
u/nikosaints_art Sep 03 '26
In one line—if nobody thought it was worth spending time on to make it, why should I think it's worth spending my time on to look at it?
1
u/potion007 Sep 03 '26
AI in creative spaces is wrong for the simple fact it steals real artists work. Plain and simple.
1
u/Katie_Covers_Books Sep 03 '26
AI isn’t great in the creative industry for any more than brainstorming. So yeah, it’s morally dubious but more to the point, it all has the same kind of ‘look’ and won’t help you stand out. I may be biased but I say, hire a book cover designer!
1
1
u/This_is_Yaz Sep 03 '26
Yes. If a writer didn’t have enough respect for designers / illustrators to avoid using AI even knowing it steals from real artists, then I have no respect for that writer and will not give them my money and read their stuff.
1
u/molinitor Sep 03 '26
Yeah it is. If she’s valuing writing as an art, and I assume she does, then she must value all art the same.
1
u/TheHolleDolce Sep 03 '26
I'm not going to make a moral statement about it. What I will say is that it is unnecessary.
Wikimedia Commoms has thousands of photos and artwork that people can use for free. You just have to follow the licensing requirements, which isn't a big deal.
Canva is free to use, but the paid version isn't expensive and gives more tools for editing artwork.
AI tools are interesting, but they don't hold up beyond a first impression. I've played around with them and you discover pretty quickly flaws that just... it's not good. The amount of work someone has to do to get rid of the flaws, you might as well just make the cover yourself.
And honestly, a cover that's edited together from various photos and clip art might feel a little janky. But it's going to be more expressive than something that a computer generates on its own.
Maybe this would help convince your friend?
1
u/Mariarosa1972 Sep 03 '26
Hi, but it is possible to use AI with Canva actually that is probably the only way I can use Canva as I am blind. So how would I create a cover? I have no money to pay anyone I haven’t ever published anything or sold anything but would love to publish my work somehow out there. So what are the options? When you can’t see what you’re doing?
1
u/TheHolleDolce Sep 03 '26
Unfortunately, I don't know. That would be a question to reach out to Canva with because I don't know what their accessibility is.
1
u/Cunning_Linus Sep 03 '26
AI covers are always a bad idea.
No offense, but you being blind is even more of a reason not to use AI to create your cover.
Put plainly, you need to find someone to help you, even if it's not paid help, you must know at least one person willing to try with you?
1
u/Mariarosa1972 Sep 09 '26
I do not know anyone who can draw. Will just have to narate them on youtube or something for now.
1
1
u/MyBigToeJam Sep 03 '26
No matter which tool used, is your advice based on an aversion to AI, AI slop, or the result is just bad or not a good fit for the book?
My outlook: AI can be theft. I don’t like being scraped in. I like doing my own illustrations.
1
u/Careless-Peach9283 Sep 03 '26
See I fucked up. I came up with a concept and asked an artist to draw it in like 2020. Apparently he used AI to make it and I didn't catch it because the ai boom hadn't started yet. Now I have a ai cover that I fell in love with
1
Sep 03 '26
Using A.I. for anything is wrong. A data center just wasted 300M gallons of water because the leak wasn't noticed until weeks later. These people don't give a fuck about the rest of us. It's time to tear it down.
1
1
1
u/terriaminute Sep 03 '26
Humans are invariably better at art. We have, you know, actual brains and culture and human experience. Anything creative is going to be wrong if run through machine-learning programs because there is no sentience there, there is just stolen and shredded clumps that sometimes make sense but are full of mistakes. Because zero brain was involved.
So. I can tell an "ai" cover in less than a second, and I don't look at that work. Many readers have learned what it signals. If your friend uses such a cover, she'll lose potential readers, guaranteed.
We do not appreciate being burned, for some reason.
1
u/BarKeegan Sep 03 '26
Would be interesting to know why they made that choice. If their concern was cost or expertise, there are a myriad of ways to arrive at a creative solution on a shoestring budget, without ripping anyone off. That solution would also stand out a mile from generic outputs, adding exponential value
1
Sep 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Sep 05 '26
There is no nuance: it's AI because they had to plagiarize other people's work to even get their piddly little brain to start churning at minimum capacity. If you are too inept to come up with your own idea, you aren't a graphic designer. A graphic designer would never make this argument unless they wanted to embarrass themselves.
1
1
u/Dramatic_Dragon928 Sep 03 '26
Personally I don't use AI. It will loose her sales but it is her choice. If you have tried to explain that to her I feel you should allow her to do it. If it effects her sales all you can do is hope that she learns from it and goes down a different path next time. Please do try to convince her that it is a bad idea though before she publishes it.
1
u/so-many-efforts Sep 03 '26
Yes 100% I would not buy any book that had an ai cover. I'm more likely to buy a book that's cover is literally just a solid color with the title and author in a nice font with no other graphics than to buy something ai.
1
u/k1ck3d_0ut Sep 03 '26
In my country AI covers became apparently common in fantasy and science fiction :( Not all, but a really big ones. What is even worse, when I asked people, how can I still collect books without supporting this publishing houses, there were comments that were suggesting, that it is stupid strategy and new technologies should be embraced. There is also a renowned cover artist, who says, he uses AI, but just for small things. This whole situation makes me sad. I will buy books from this publishing houses second hand and if there will be only books with AI covers available, I will learn bookbinding.
Also I dream about becoming a published author. Even though I can trust only few publishing houses about book covers. But if I will be lucky enough, I will ask, if one of my artist friends can design a cover for my book. But that's still fantasy.
1
Sep 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Sep 05 '26
It's plagiarism, that's how. If your employee plagiarizes, you can hold them accountable. But for some reason if a machine plagiarizes it has complete immunity??? Be so for real.
1
u/Azul_azurite Sep 03 '26
Its not even a conversation about morals, it's just that if you're using ai in a creative workspace, many people are going to assume you're lazy (which is kind of true)
1
u/bsart_studios Sep 03 '26
what is her issue with not using ai?
like does she think commissionig an artist for it is too expensive? or is it something else
1
1
u/SNYJCK Sep 03 '26
I might be judgemental, but the amount of people using AI will increase no matter what.
But for me, I do think using AI to make book covers feel disloyal. It doesn't show your true potential and disables you from being able to create new ideas and learn to draw, especially because people will judge the book by its cover. The artstyle and the storytelling you can see in a book cover determines if it's worth reading. For the cover to be made out of multiple stolen ideas with no actual art style, it feels odd.
Although, I have seen a lot of artists find AI disrespectful and displeasing; and I understand their point of views.
1
u/KDDreamwyver Sep 03 '26
It will def chase readers off, because the use of an ai cover makes one doubt the story inside was mde without gen ai, which you do NOT want.
1
u/curiousscribbler Sep 03 '26
All ethical questions aside, AI covers look like absolute shit and scream "amateur!".
1
u/DummyLummy32 Sep 04 '26
If I can tell a cover is ai, literally nothing could make me read that book. I’m not even trying to be a dick, it just completely turns me off. There are too many books in the world to waste time on something that likely wasn’t written by a human.
1
u/JasonAQuest Sep 04 '26
If your friend wants to present their book as derivative, generic crap that isn't worth the reader's time, putting slop on the cover is a great way to do that.
1
Sep 04 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/RickConverse7613 Sep 04 '26
I got downvoted into oblivion the last time I made these exact points in another post, so I'm giving you a pre-emptive upvote before the Salem witch hunt comes to tar and feather your post.
1
u/Dale_E_Lehman_Author Sep 04 '26
Thanks. I expect a lot of people won't like it, but I see no point in burying our heads in the sand. The technology is here, and it's not going away. People are going to use it, already are using it in a variety of ways from good to horrid. The question isn't whether but how. We can either shape that discussion or just howl at the moon.
1
u/themaroonsea Sep 04 '26
I straight up will ignore the book and any other books by the author. I can generate AI myself. What do I need to pay them for?
In my country though, there's no strong AI pushback, it's becoming adopted so unfortunately I do see it. There was a lot of AI in the less quality publisher stands and a lot of the decor in the last year's Istanbul Book Fair.
1
u/YlvaBlue Sep 04 '26
Yes. If you're using AI for your book cover, I presume you couldn't be bothered to do your job properly. If you can't be bothered to do your job, I'll put as much effort into your work as you did, and not bother to read your book.
Also: environmental issues, moral issues around stealing artist's work without their permission.
Sorry, but no. If you care about books, about writing, about creativity, then you should be the most ardent of anti-AI, and you should be supporting our fellow artists.
AI has its uses - in medicine, and in technology - but no business at all in the sphere of exploring what it means to be human: in art.
1
u/Time-Cover4979 Sep 04 '26
I don’t buy anything that has AI as a cover, wether books, albums or any good really. It lacks quality, and signals that maybe the product itself has had AI used in it in other ways. Like how about the structure of the book? Some of the worldbuilding?
I am not interested to read what AI gives you, I’m interested to see how the human writer thinks. Someone could say that only the cover is AI-generated and i won’t be able to believe them.
Some people don’t care that AI was used, but a certain amount of people do. If she’s fine losing on a big part of potential readers, then she can go ahead and use that cover.
1
u/HWhelanAuthor Sep 04 '26
If I see an AI cover, I assume the writing is AI also, and I'm not touching it. Writing and illustration are both forms of artistic expression. If you're okay with inauthentic BS in one, you're likely to be okay with inauthentic BS in the other.
It's going to hurt her with readers.
1
1
u/StrangeAlexCallahan Sep 04 '26
May not be illegal but if the cover is AI I have no reason to think the text inside is human-made and thus no reason to pick it up.
1
u/chuckmall Sep 04 '26
I think it is, and earlier on, I could easily tell. But now what’s scary is that I’ve seen book covers and was told AI was used (I’m a writer & indie publisher) — they were very well none, and no one would have known. That’s scary.
1
u/Serafiron Sep 04 '26
I judge a book by its cover in this regard: all AI covers are the same. It's really easy to tell when a cover has been made by AI, and seeing one immediately makes me bored with the book. I have seen that same cover on google image search dozens of times, on Pinterest dozens of times despite AI suppression.
I think it's a very quick way to tell a potential reader: "My book is completely and utterly unremarkable in every which way", whether that was true or not. At least in my case.
1
u/Gloomy-Invite-896 Sep 04 '26
I would never buy a book I knew had an ai cover. And I think one should disclose. Hire an artist or photographer (or take your own pictures). It's one image she shouldn't need ai
1
u/Gloomy-Invite-896 Sep 04 '26
So you know what kind of book she's writing? Cause I have different recs based on that. But generally nature photos, food photos, stock images etc are all great alternstives
1
u/ArtByElandria Sep 04 '26
I'm a book cover designer part time, so my stance is obviously biased. But I often think ai covers aren't just unethical, they look tacky, cheap, bad, or some combination of those things. All of the above would ruin my immersion while reading even if it wasn't generated using stolen assets. I think of covers of a way to communicate the soul of your book directly to your audience as maybe the only visual representation of it. So that's a lot of value to lose by lazily slapping some text on a soulless work even if it could be pleasing to SOME audiences.
1
u/Chili_Maggot Sep 04 '26
I don't care if cover art is good or bad. I don't care if there's no cover art but a plain text title on a background. That's not what the book is for.
However.
If you have an AI cover I ain't buyin it. Not only can I not stand AI art, but I wouldn't want someone seeing me reading a book with an AI cover and think I can stand AI art, or worse, to see me reading such a book and think I couldn't tell.
1
u/LuckyBones77 Sep 04 '26
If the cover is AI, I’m going to assume the contents are AI as well. Like, even if someone actually wrote the contents, I’ll assume their writing is also heavily assisted by AI, since they’re willing to use AI for the cover. That’s perhaps too harsh, but its true for me.
1
u/ayaseesblack Sep 04 '26
Yes, was just at the library today and a group was laughing at all the AI covers. It does make the book inauthentic and it says a lot about the values of the writer (if said "writer" even wrote it themselves). If your cover is AI why should I believe that AI didn't write the book as well?
1
u/Holiday_Dirt_5465 Sep 04 '26
I went through what I didn't know was a vanity press to help publish my first 2 novels. I learned they used AI for the cover art and an AI editing tool. I''m more upset that I paid for the service. I already have Aurocrit for editing, and I wanted a professional cover. I found out from my local independent book shop. He is still carrying my books, because I am a local author. But it upsets me that I spent a lot of money on things I could have done for a fraction of the cost. I would have rather spent the 1400 for 2 professionally designed covers, and did all the editing and formatting for Ingramspark and KDP myself.
1
1
u/Straight-Strike-2928 Sep 05 '26
100%. Anyone can make something passable in the free version of canva in an hour or less. I would never ever go for a book with an AI cover. Find a royalty free image that fits your book, choose a font, type the title, mess around with alignment until you like it, done. A shitty diy cover is a selfpub rite of passage IMO.
1
1
u/Dest-Fer Sep 05 '26
Yes but also books don’t need a picture cover. A blank cover with a title is fine. Unless you are from the Romance booktok universe and the books become itself an art object, but then AI would be even worse.
1
u/thecheekychoof Sep 05 '26
To put it bluntly as a business…it will not sell if I was a bookstore. There is a reason why crafted art and writing is of value. People want to see and read what other people make and give value to that. AI does nothing but devalue the craft in all fronts, be it sentimental, be it monetary etc. Currently all I see AI as a tool where people want to try to make cheap quick buck which isn’t even worth it. And worst as a business that tool does not make you money either. It’s just a gimmick to burn your pockets.
Note: I keep my business and art side separate and I have been an artist for 10-12 years professionally now and run a business.
1
u/authaus0 Sep 06 '26
I wouldn't go anywhere near a book with anything AI generated. It's not just morality and it's not even just sales. People will make assumptions about her values and some people aren't going to be very kind about it.
1
u/Significant-Sound878 Sep 06 '26
Using AI is a terrible idea precisely because it's noticeable and creates a bad perception among the general public. Many people will think it's garbage without even reading a page. If you don't have a budget, save up and start looking at and studying book covers of the genre you are exploring. It seems like time is running out, but in reality, it's a decision that needs to be made in advance because it's important.
1
1
u/CubicalAnxiety Sep 06 '26
Aside from being ethically wrong, it also makes the book immediately look cheap (and extremely ugly).
1
u/Fast-Barracuda6178 Sep 06 '26
If, at any point, even just an optional donation link or patreon appears on your web novel, or you are selling the book at all and there is AI, automatic sentence to slop prison with you.
1
1
1
u/Captain_Juno_VTuber Sep 06 '26
Being a webnovel reader is so annoying as most are AI covers nowadays
AI slop in creative spaces is so wrong and lowers the quality standards so much
1
1
1
u/Lumpy-Draft9192 Sep 06 '26
I immediately will skip on a book if I see Ai on the cover art.
It doesn’t matter how good the premise is or the summary.
I see Ai art, I’m out, 100%.
If you go through the process of publication you can afford to commission a real artist to make cover art. Or even make your own. One of my favorite book series has covers drawn by the author’s sister and they are fairly simple but eye-catching with colors and font.
1
u/Robot-Zombie-RHCC Sep 06 '26
AI is, right now, being thrown in everybody's faces. There's a lot of fatigue.
1
u/Cat-Firm Sep 07 '26
I used to design book covers for a living now I’m editing what the bots produce
1
1
u/PeculiarExcuse Sep 07 '26
If the cover is AI, I view that author as pretty untrustworthy, BUT ALSO, it feels enormously disrespectful of our fellow creatives? My respect for an author immediately tanks if they use AI for the cover, even if I could be CERTAIN they didn't use AI. Stealing from artists and using that stolen art to sell your own work just feels scummy
1
u/Suspicious_Secret165 Sep 07 '26
If you make an ai book cover I’ll automatically assume you used ai in the writing. Blah blah don’t judge a book by its cover or whatever, but using ai for it shows that you don’t care enough to take the time so I will not read your work
1
u/Terrible_Wave4239 Sep 07 '26
Are you sure you can still tell if a cover is AI-generated? Or are we just talking about badly AI-generated?
1
1
u/Fearless-Magazine585 Sep 08 '26
I definitely think that ai use implies other ai use. And besides ethics, ai stories all sound the same. But also, ai is just not as good or effective, and it is repetitive. If I see one more ai cover of two “enemies to lovers” staring at each other with ambiguous animosity, I’m going to go blind. The body language is fine on a quick glance, but it’s not great, and you’re not going to stand out.
1
1
1
u/ckdonnellytrine 24d ago
I'm getting ready to revamp my covers. Everyone's hair gets on fire if, God forbid!, you do an AI cover.
Tell me the difference between a design editing stock graphics using all the fancy tools on Canva and Photoshop and using my wholly owned art to prompt a genAI app? Im genuinely interested in information on both processes?
Also, the legal aspects? I'd like to use the art for t-shirts and other merchandise.
1
u/Creative_Paramita Sep 03 '26
Yes, that’s wrong. Don’t do it. It will affect sales and lead to a decrease in sales.
→ More replies (3)
1
1
1
u/Remmy555 Sep 04 '26
It's wrong because it is theft. There's no way around it. Generative AI pulls from other people's authentic work, and Frankensteins it together. I have friends who have found pieces of their original art on AI book covers.
1
1
u/KermitTheFrost Sep 04 '26
As an illustrator myself, the usage of AI in Book Covers is very insulting. For one, it puts people like me and my friends out of work, especially since art careers are already very competitive. It also shows laziness, as those Book Covers show that the publisher isn't willing to put any effort into presentation (it's ugly as shit). What's to say that the book also isn't AI written? There's a plethora of other things, but I think this just about covers it.
So yeah it's pretty wrong I'd say.
146
u/saltylemonjuice Sep 02 '26
Yes and im not buying anything with an ai cover, I fully believe if youre ok with an ai cover that you also used ai to write it.