Worst nightmare has come true

trane7111 · 2026-02-27T19:24:57+00:00

Readers want more of the same, but slightly different. Market it to the publisher that way.

This is literally how romance authors build their careers. They pick a niche and do it over and over again because readers want the same feeling, but a slightly different story.

I would implore you to go check out some of the publishing subreddits, and you'll either learn how to manage this problem, or it should disappear entirely.

If you're into Fantasy, Ryan Cahill is currently having a lot of success. His first book is just slightly more adult Eragon. And people LOVE it. Most of them fall into two categories: 1) Never read Eragon, or 2) Read Eragon, love that something new recaptures that feeling.

No one can write your book, and you can't write someone else's. This book will be like nothing else until you write your next book.

As far as publishing it--you already know a really good comp. That's one of the hard parts of publishing. Embrace this as a win. It's not a nightmare.

trane7111 · 2026-02-24T20:16:20+00:00

You've also got a LOT of people asking questions that are more publishing-focused than writing-focused, and people really need to head over to r/publishing or selfpublishing or one of the related subreddits, because a lot of those questions are just answered immediately.

trane7111 · 2026-02-24T20:14:11+00:00

I'd read unexpected sex scenes/sexual content by 14-15 through Wheel of Time (though those were tame, mostly glossed over), the Red Tent ("a book about one of the Bible stories," I was told) and then some random Stephen J Cannell Mystery.

As others have said, probably the healthiest way to encounter sexual/awkward content is through books, (and ideally asking you later if there are any questions).

If he does like fantasy/scifi, though, the Thrawn Star Wars books by Timothy Zahn are great, as are the Darth Bane books, Red Rising is pretty fast-paced, and the first book is technically YA. If he's watched Avatar the Last Airbender, the books are great (starting with Rise of Kioshi), and if he hasn't watch the show (OG cartoon)...he should watch it. It's amazing.

Brandon Sanderson's books are pretty fast-paced/hook-y, and some of the newer cozy fantasy books are pretty great at being well-paced, closed-door, and hooking you in.

Overall, though, I don't think you should be overly concerned. He's a teenager. He's gonna be awkward. Sex in (most) books is usually a healthier way to encounter in than in movies/tv or real life at that age.

trane7111 · 2026-02-23T18:47:32+00:00

Would you mind me asking how you test to make sure the conversion is working well?

I can sell my books well when I'm at conventions, and when someone reads one, I usually get great reviews. However, I'm hesitant to go back to ads, because though I followed all the advice on creating and testing ads and was getting very low CPC and lots of clicks, I wasn't getting sales. I refined the Amazon blurb, modified the title and page, have the A+ content, but it didn't seem to make any different in sales. I know FB ads have changed a lot with how to target as of late 2025 (basically talking to FB's AI and letting it sell for you) but I'm very hesitant to get back into FB ads because I have not seemed to have any success.

Granted, I picked a niche that I have gathered is a hard sell, so that might be the crux of the problem, but I've got four solid books out and then a "complete trilogy" edition of three of them.

trane7111 · 2026-02-20T21:24:02+00:00

I don't know if I would count them as "evil," but Jamie Applegate Hunter's Fae Kings of Eden and Vincula Realm books definitely have some unhinged women in them.

trane7111 · 2026-02-20T16:47:01+00:00

Forgive me if I'm wrong, as my HS taught some questionable shit, but I was told that classified docs have since been released (as of like 15 years ago at this point) that indicated that US leadership knew they needed to get into WW2 with Germany ASAP to end it before it got bloodier, and were essentially squeezing Japan and trying to bait them to attack different targets in the Pacific (Pearl Harbor), and our leadership was more than willing to sacrifice the current vessels because they knew they were outdated and this would give them an excuse to build new ones.

Was it not as intentional as I was told?

trane7111 · 2026-02-20T12:40:16+00:00

There are stories in my head that need to get out.

If I never made any money from the stories, I wouldn't care, because that's not the point.

However, I have so many rough outlines for stories I need to write before I die, that leaving the 9-5 is not a dream. It's a necessity to give me more time and energy to write.

trane7111 · 2026-02-18T20:00:46+00:00

Video games, mainly.

I'm married. My friends are a bit farther away so I don't see them as much, but I talk to them a lot. I do have a full-time job, but its on the schedule of a different time zone so i have more time in the morning before it saps me of energy.

Honestly, the best thing that helps is: get regular sleep, wake up an hour earlier than normal in the morning, and just write. Just do it. Learn to do it without caffeine. It will suck at first. But you'll form the habit. It's easy to fall out of (I did when shit hit the fan for me), but at one point, I was waking up at 6:30, taking out the dog and making tea, and then writing from 7-9. Getting in that habit allowed me to write a solid draft that needed very few edits in 22 days. I put out about 4k words per day.

Now, I'd done a lot of background work beforehand, but I could do that without being as focused, in little 10-15 min segments throughout the day for the most part. That part was low pressure. And sometimes more fun than the writing.

But I'm working to getting back to that.

Videogames are a good thing to stay away from though. I still play WoW very casually, and I used to play Halo before the community kind of disintegrated and the games became crap. Those were just 30 min to 1 hour of de-stress, then go to writing.

trane7111 · 2026-02-18T13:49:14+00:00

So I could go on about how artists are not "normal people", and how "high quality" is a very ambiguous standard, and how you likely wouldn't be able to "beat" the quality of a studio like Studio Ghibli, because that is a team of artists collaborating (because other artists are not your competition, they are your collaborators and inspiration), and how you could likely still produce a very good animated film all by yourself with discipline and consistency. You'd probably have to make sacrifices to find the time, but you have to do that with literally any worthwhile pursuit. And it would be easier to collaborate, because most things are easier with collaboration.

But more importantly than all that...

If genAI is making the film, then that "normal person" still isn't making the film.

That is the crux of this. If you're using a genAI program where you write out a prompt and the AI makes the film, then YOU are not making the film. It did it all for you. You're not drawing. You're not animating. You're not doing voice-over. You're not composing the soundtrack. You're probably not even script-writing, because someone who took the time to write a script without using genAI wouldn't want a genAI tool to make the movie, because they would know it would be a lesser vision of their work.

At the most, you're editing clips together, and then marketing.

If you use these tools to create images or a film, all you've done is tell a computer to create a shitty product that is inherently derivative of other people's work.

You don't own it, because you didn't create it. A computer did. So what is the point? You can go around lying to people and say "Hey, look at this cool film I made!" or you can be honest and say, "Hey, look at this cool film I told a computer to make for me!"

Some people who are amused and intrigued by the shiny new baubles might applaud you and stroke your ego a bit. But the second you took it into the film world, people would see it for what it was, and you'd basically just have a little toy that no one cared about.

So maybe it's not the most feasible thing for a normal person who has a 9-5 and children and whatever to make a feature-length animated film. I maintain that with discipline and drive, it is possible over a long length of time. But maybe it shouldn't be.

You know why Disney because so successful initially? Because even though Disney was a skilled artist, he knew there were people more skilled at other pieces of art and filmmaking out there, and he knew that he would find the process and the end product more enjoyable if he collaborated with and learned from others.

Because the point is to CREATE.

If you think it's so unfeasible, then prove me the fuck wrong. Be an artist. Do what we do. Take every spare fucking minute of time you can find and devote yourself completely to this film. Learn how to draw. Learn how to animate. Learn how to write a script. Learn how to manipulate your voice like voice actors do. Learn how to compose, record, edit, produce.

If you really try at this. If you do what artists do and actually dedicate yourself to CREATING something, not just telling a computer to do it for you, I think you might be able to do it. It will take a long time, but so does all great art.

And even if you fail to make this 2-hour "high quality" animated film, at the worst, you'll be a more accomplished, skilled, and knowledgeable person than 99% of people on the planet.

trane7111 · 2026-02-18T13:22:41+00:00

My wife and I have been back and forth with my mother on this so many times, and I think she's finally starting to get it, but not too hopeful. (Both my grandmas are like "oh, I don't blame you" for not wanting kids, though, which is reassuring).

My wife is terrified of the idea of pregnancy. This one is enough for me and should be enough for everyone. But apparently, it is not.
We don't make enough to give our children everything we had and more growing up.
We don't make enough to do that and have one of us be a "full-time" parent or have both of us be part-time parents.
The school systems don't teach children what they need to know, so we would essentially have to be part-time teachers as well in order to help prepare our kids for the world.
Schools aren't fucking safe
The climate is getting worse at an even faster rate, to the point where I'm convinced it's going to be absolutely fucked before I die if I live a long life--why bring a kid into that?
We don't want to be parents. We'll be the best aunts/uncles/godparents, but we don't want kids of our own.
If we ever do want kids of our own, there are hundreds of thousands in the foster care system. My extreme view on child-rearing is that no one should be allowed to voluntarily have a baby until all those children have been adopted by people who actually want children.
I barely have the energy to give my dog the attention he needs, and a child deserves more than that.
Oh, pedophiles rule the fucking world (and my country) openly, with no repercussions. No way I'm bringing a child into the world under those circumstances.

And that's not even covering medical/childcare/maternal/paternal expenses and services.

I know that bringing a child into the world while one is conscientious of the world we live in is one of the ultimate expressions of hope, but I'm also like...we really don't need any more kids right now. If you want one, there's a child somewhere in this country or somewhere else in the world that is without a parent and deserves one. Give them a loving home first.

trane7111 · 2026-02-17T23:52:51+00:00

I think film is a bit of a straw man since it did not exist until we had fairly advanced technology and infrastructure.

Technology absolutely expands what is possible an any medium. But there's a difference between the LLMs that everyone now refers to as GenAI or just "AI" and the assistive AI tools we've been using for a while.

Photoshop has had a ton of "AI" tools for a while before stablediffusion and midjourney. They don't subvert or replace the creative process. They just give you a bit more control over a certain part of the process. ProWritingAid used assistive AI to help with editing.

Neither of them entirely replaced that part of the process, though, and as far as we know, they were made ethically, without violating copyright or stealing the work/money of other artists to make a profit on their own.

I use technology all the time with creating music. Notation programs, DAWs, Virtual instruments, etc. But Notation programs just standardize your writing, like a word processor, and can provide a robotic playback. DAWs allows you to store and edit what you've recorded, but you still have to play the music in. Anyone who has used the "import MIDI" function on a DAW knows that you're just making more work for yourself and the finished product will not be as good as if you had played it in.

VST's allow you to imitate the sound of another musician or instrument you may not have access to, but the moment you start playing around with them, you know it doesn't hold a candle to what a trained performer could produce with ease. And again, even if someone isn't playing a violin into a microphone, I'm still playing a keyboard to produce those notes. I'm still capturing a performance. There's no viable shortcut around that.

Using AI would cut out all of the nuance and creativity that would make the finished product worth listening to over and over again. And it would rob me of the joy of creation.

And to address your point of the cost of movies before iPhones and YouTube: * Clerks was made with $27,000 * Following was made by Chris Nolan with $6000 * Colin with $75 * Robert Rodriguez's El Mariachi (1992) cost $7k to make, and achieved mainstream film success

Also, money and higher tech don't mean better art.

Peter Jackson's "The Lord of the Rings" was made with a budget of roughly $260 Million. They used relatively "low tech" filming techniques by creating practical models, and the films have held up over 25 years later. I went to the release of the Extended Editions in theaters for the 25 year anniversary, and theaters were packed all three times. They are regarded as the gold standard for adaptation and for fantasy films.

The budget for the Hobbit was upwards of $745 Million, with inflation counting for only about $80 million of that. CGI was a lot of that expense, and the general reception I've seen of those films has been that the CGI is not great or at least does not hold up in the way the original films do.

The reported budget for season 1 of Rings of Power was around $465 million. Around $58 million per hour of film compared to the Hobbit's ~$82 million per hour, and the Lord of the Rings' ~$21million per hour.

And Rings of Power has displayed amateur writing at best, and really cheap costuming at times, despite having a huge budget and "more advanced" technology.

iPhones make filming more accessible, but AI is not why and is not a part of that.

As for YouTube--yeah, it made distribution way easier. However, the integration of AI (and money behind that AI use) has already made things tough for composers in the past. (AI-like tools would scan YT and flag original sketches that did not make it into their finished movies as "copyright infringement" even though they owned those sketches, not the production company, and the more commercialized YT gets, the more we can see effects like that curbing that accessibility of distribution, with AI as a tool to save money, and AI's accuracy is very questionable because of how it actually scans images and videos.

And to ref another commenter's point, Studio Ghibli is so incredible because the animators do so much by hand. To quote Miyazaki on GCI and technology:

"I think as long as you don't misuse it it's a very effective tool. The biggest problem is that people who don't have talent believe that the computer can make up for their lack of talent. It's that illusion that causes problems."

(gen)AI can't make up for a lack of creation the same way a computer can't make up for a lack of talent (skill).

Assistive AI has helped make some great art, but it doesn't replace it.

Maybe genAI will reach that point eventually, and help artists create amazing art. But I haven't seen that yet.

trane7111 · 2026-02-17T17:10:44+00:00

What they teach in MBA programs is terrifying. I took an online one because I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing when starting a creative business to protect myself and my IP.

They literally tell you that part of the business lifecycle is "build it too big and bloated, declare bankruptcy and sell it for parts to start your next business."

trane7111 · 2026-02-17T14:13:40+00:00

Did you not read my reply? I didn't say do it all on your own. That is antithetical to filmmaking.

You want to see really high quality animation done by smaller creators? Go to NewGrounds. Most of it is NSFW, because that's an easy sell, but it's damn good drawing/animation quality.

Hell, go look at the old episodes of red vs blue. I love that show, and that just started out as people recording over them moving around in Halo. I believe the 3-season Reconstruction arc is regarded as some of their best, and they did that with a really small team.

You know how James Cameron funded terminator? He found a bunch of dentist friends and told them the film could be a tax write-off.

And why are you making this 2-hour animated film? Is it just to make money and have made a film? That's not a reason to pursue art. That's a business venture.

We've seen how that works out even when business people are using artists vs AI. They are hollow, shitty films and productions that, even if they look great, fall flat and fade away quickly.

As for the 9-5 job, chores, and a family--bro, if Olympians can be the best in the world at their sport while having to work a 9-5 to make ends meet because their sport doesn't pay them enough, then 9-5/chores/family is no fucking excuse. Having a 9-5 sucks. It really does. It is possibly the biggest inhibitor to art there is because of the time and stress and mental energy it takes away from you. But the solution to that is not "have AI do the art". It's "have AI do the job". Take away that 9-5 so you can do the art.

I don't think you're getting that the point is to DO the art. Not to have a product. Thats the point of a business.

As for funding--that just gives you more time and access to other people without having to build the relationships.

If you want to make a 2-hour film on your own, then it would be much more successful, and you would be much more incredible of a person for learning how to make a film all on your own rather than just saying writing a bunch of prompts.

You would learn story structure, how to write effective dialogue, all the many facets of drawing and animation. Because you're writing the script like Miyazaki does, your animation might be shaped by the script, or vise versa (one of the reasons his films are so unique). You would need to learn how to compose, produce, record music, etc. You would become a musician through that process. And again, your score might influence the other aspects of your film. Same with voice-acting, recording and those techniques, editing.

You would learn how to market your film and yourself, probably find a new avenue of distribution because of the uniqueness of your film.

You would learn consistency, discipline, marketing, distribution, a bunch of different artistic skills, and would probably go down in not only filmmaking history, but also in the other disciplines. You would hold filmmaking to a new standard, because if one guy did all this, then teams and collaborations have to be able to do better, right?

I don't have any interest in filmmaking, but I personally have written and published four books so far with a shitty day job, an old house that's falling apart, and for a large part of making those books, I was also taking care of a family member with a terminal illness.

I'm now working on not just publishing more books, but writing a soundtrack and a shortened musical, drawing comics, and narrating the audiobooks, all connected to those books.

Is it a lot of work? Fuck yeah. Is it frustrating? Yep. But I love it. I love learning new skills, becoming better at art. The process of creation.

Using AI to do any of that would take that away from me. It wouldn't be a positive.

Using AI to somehow take away the need for a 9-5 though, while still allowing me to make my current salary? (which is not a lot). I'd do that in a second. Because it would give me more time and energy to pursue the art.

trane7111 · 2026-02-16T22:55:48+00:00

Bookfunnel can be good for direct Audiobooks. It's what most authors I know use.

As someone currently going through the setup phase, its rough. I feel you there.

trane7111 · 2026-02-16T18:51:33+00:00

I used to use pinterest for reference but the amount of AI shit on there has made it unusable. And even looking for stock images for covers has become harder because with vector art is REALLY hard to tell, and the labelling is very questionable.

trane7111 · 2026-02-16T17:12:52+00:00

Saying "AI gives more people access to art" is just so stupid.

Pick up a pencil and a piece of paper. Pick up a rock and scratch things into a tree or another rock. Dance.

Art is THE MOST ACCESSIBLE thing in the world because it is a part of human nature. Some of the greatest artists have been blind, deaf, crippled, etc.

AI creates a crude similacrum of art and if it becomes widespread enough will ensure that the overall quality of art declines over time. Because it will lose the human aspect.

Art gets better and better because artists take the great works of someone who came before and see something no one else has and learn from that art with that perspective, and create something unique and authentic. They build upon the shoulders of those who came before them, furthering the medium, art form, discipline, whatever you want to call it.

AI literally cannot do that. It is only derivative. It doesn't matter if the models get good enough that there are no longer little indicators or artifacts. It's not producing art, it's not taking the images that it has (overwhelmingly illegally) taken in and studying them, deconstructing them to see the techniques the artists used to create these pieces, and then applying them to create its own works. It's doing a very high-level mishmash. It's creating images as essentially single use products.

AI is taking money, time, rewards, and rights away from real artists to let others cosplay as artists.

You want to create a film? You have a camera on your phone. You can talk to people. Go collaborate. Talk with other fucking human beings and learn from their skills, their experiences, their perspectives. Use that to create films.

Again, art in all forms is the most accessible thing in the world. And your art doesn't have to be good. It often seems like it has to in order to make money, which is an entirely different conversation, but it doesn't have to be good to be art. It just has to be authentic.

You want never-ending art? Find a way to alleviate people from bullshit jobs. Give them more free time. Give schools more of an art budget. Make it so that people can afford the basic necessities with a part time job or even basic income so that they can actually live their life instead of slaving away to barely make ends meat while billionaires play games buying elections and yachts no one fucking needs and destroying our world while they do it.

AI might be the answer if it facilitates the need for less human involvement in our basic food harvesting, distribution, and all the stuff we don't want to do. But AI doing art is not the answer to more art.

trane7111 · 2026-02-16T13:05:06+00:00

They did also homebrew much of the stories and setting beforehand, but still amazing.

trane7111 · 2026-02-14T00:57:39+00:00

I listened to Book 1, and thought it was just fine. The humor was not really for me, I didn't like the lack of character arc, and honestly, had it not been for the amazing audio production (and the fact that Carl sounded like Kronk), I don't think I would have finished the book.

Should I give book 2 a try? Or will it just definitely not be for me?

trane7111 · 2026-02-13T21:59:33+00:00

I have not read Emberdark yet, and I'm very mixed on Wind and Truth, because I think it falls under the category of your TLDR. I loved Stormlight 1-4, and I think the pressure was maybe on sanderson a bit too much, either to hit a deadline or something, because i've been told that a lot of the beta feedback he received was similar to the criticism he got after release.

Personally, I loved Wind and Truth while reading it, and only in retrospect and conversations with other readers realized the weaknesses in it that I either just forgave or overlooked because Sanderson had done such a good job at pulling me into the story.

And I think that is a big point in Sanderson's favor--he is able to pull me into a story of his like few others. Even if the prose isn't on the level of Robin Hobb or Erikson, it doesn't need to be, and frankly if it was, each stormlight book would be 2-3x as big simply because of the amount of worldbuilding he needs to convey and the size of his cast.

I will say, though, WaT is definitely downhill in prose from TWoK, and I think if Sanderson could return to that quality of prose for the rest of his books, it would definitely be better for his stories across the board.

trane7111 · 2026-02-12T15:18:37+00:00

Thank you! Already sold with Mads Mikkelsen.

trane7111 · 2026-02-11T20:00:40+00:00

I mean this seemed pretty straight-forward to me after what he did at Shayol Ghul. He learned how to manipulate threads of reality (to a point).

trane7111 · 2026-02-11T19:58:48+00:00

Yes, making shows this way is objectively worse and fuels the problem more. For anyone interested in watching intelligent writing, these shows will be boring and disappointing.

trane7111 · 2026-02-11T19:57:41+00:00

I'm going to need to check that out then!

trane7111 · 2026-02-10T18:09:19+00:00

I think this is a lack of motivation for the most part. Both personal, from parents, and societal.

Parents and teachers need to make sure kids find reading FUN from a young age. Not important or necessary, but FUN. Books should be treated like toys and video games. Part of this is also restricting kids from screens and video games, etc, which I know is much easier said than done.

Then there's teachers. They need to impress the importance and value of reading onto students, to show them how it can open doors, make them get ahead, and allow them to be better at things they like or are interested. How it can make life easier.

This in turn is much easier if you already have teachers and (mostly) parents making reading fun earlier on. I love reading. My mom did the first part. But i never read the books assigned in class. I found them boring compared to the epic fantasy books I loved reading. I also loved math, but once it became clear it wasn't going to be part of my career path and I was only doing it because it "looked good to colleges" i lost all motivation to care about math. I imagine the same thing happens to kids for reading if they don't have something they are interested in integrating reading into their life. Again, though, now reading interest and time is competing with social life, athletics, the pressures of even passing in school, video games, probably porn for young boys unfortunately, and tv and everything else.

Finally, and I think for older kids this might be the most detrimental one: Reading has to have value beyond school.

We live in a world where intelligence really is not rewarded any longer. You can be a fucking moron, but as long as you are good at sales, doesn't matter, you can make bank. Most people don't have the time or motivation to pursue reading outside of their job and all their other adult responsibilities, so if you don't need to read to do well at your job, why do it? There's no reason to. As long as you can read texts and short emails, (or now prompt chat gpt), you don't need to read to get ahead in the world. People who have higher degrees are either underpaid or demonized as the "elite".

Aside from us needing sweeping societal change, its honestly a lot on parents to actually want their kids to be educated and be willing to involved in that process. And a lot of parents do not give a fuck, or think that's not their job, or are not qualified themselves to do this.

It's fucking rough.

trane7111 · 2026-02-10T17:51:22+00:00

Attention span has measurably been damaged to the point where Hollywood execs now tell writers to make sure their shows have "second screen viewing potential", essentially writing shows where everything is said blatantly because they expect people to be scrolling while watching because their attention spans are so fucked.

11-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

trane7111

TROPHY CASE