What do you think constitutes a good cover for a new/unknown book?

>>24544703 (OP)
Is there even a single good fantasy book these days? I think when it comes to a 'good' fantasy book its all clocked back to the old 90s fantasy, even some people resort to mass market paperback 80s fantasy if they have an access to it.
Not going to ask for its sibling science fiction since sf seems to be in a more okay-ish situation compared to fantasy as a genre fiction

>>24544703 (OP)
An object that only makes sense when you read the book

>>24544730
both are still better than horror fiction or, god forbid, crime fiction which is a solved genre

>>24544703 (OP)
From the marketing perspective, they prioritize genre recognizability, which is why we can already make some guesses about this one. But I do like when it's just something bizarre or highly unusual. I suppose that tells you something, too.

Good cover art is something you'd be willing to hang on your wall. This means most cover art is an abject failure, and Penguin Classics' method of using copyright free museum pieces for their covers is genius.
>>24544808
it's even worse than that. They prioritize readability from an amazon thumbnail. That's why everything looks like pastels puked on a size 94 font.

>>24544808
What if it's something like pic rel? Obviously ignoring the fact that it belongs to the most recognizable book series of all time

>>24544837
>pastels
Can also work as a free advertisement if one of these female reader post their current read on instagram or tiktok aesthetic alongside those rainbow color stripes on the book side whatever is that, attracting other femaledrones to buy a copy of the book because god knows that female are scared of pirating stuff
From design-marketing strategy this is a genius method because you can tackle not two but three birds with only one stone, but from literature reader perspective this type of cover is gay and retarded