What's the opposite of Jumping the Shark?  Candace Camp has improved for me. The first book of hers I read was a blantent and bad Georgette Heyer rip-off; the second was forgettable. Her most recent series has a running plot that's intriguing and I actually quite liked the second one, though it wasn't a keeper.

I think Loretta Chase got much, much better. I don't care for her early books at all.  Didn't like early Carla Kelly I tried to read either.

I think Jo Goodman just gets better and better, though I haven't read that much of her early books.

And I think later Linda Howard is much improved, though I still enjoy the more stereotypical  early romances she used to write.

Wow, this is actually harder to think of... hmm, right now only author I can come up with is Maggie Shayne. I  I adore her immortal witch series..

Kay Hooper -- actually think she's grown over the years since her early loveswepts - I like her Bishop series.

Susan Mallery -- has been successful in branching out to larger books --- not to deep but enoyable

Lisa Kleypass --- Maybe hasn't grown but has branched out to contemporary while still keeping her historicals interesting (depending on the book)

I have to agree with Linda Howard and Loretta Chase -- have really liked most of their recent releases and they have gotten more interesting.

Hmmm...Karen Marie Monings "Fever" series is wonderful.  I don't know that is better than her Highlander series but its definitely deeper and darker.  I would say a writing improvement though.

Sherri

Willa, that is so true about Candace Camp and Georgette Heyer! I read one of her books- Impulse maybe- and could actually pick what books she was stealing from- I don't remember them all now, but I do remember the dog creating mayhem in the park was from Frederica. I never read anything else by her.

I never thought of Candace Camp as being all that *bad*.  Not great stuff - just meat & potatoes.  I have a lot of her books on my shelf and no keepers, but I don't think she's completely God-awful.  She's a big plot recycler, although I guess I never paid that much attention to it before now; I've seen a lot of the big names in romance do it time and again, and it just doesn't push any immediate buttons with me when they do.  Aside from which, whatever she's doing, she doesn't do it all that well or memorably:P  I always just figured the writers who do a lot of plot recycling are romance readers as well - which all romance writers aren't.  I can sort of see them reading something that they sorta like - but think they can do better...:P  I suppose there's a fine line there with plagiarism, but I've never viewed plot recycling as quite the same thing.  It's not indicative of much talent or creativity, and probably puts me off a writer more than I consciously acknowledge though.  It just depends on what it is, IMO.  An overall storyline being redone, like say, a Judith Ivory redoing Beauty & the Beast or Cinderella is one thing, and a Candace Camp rewriting specific scenes from someone else's bestseller is something else entirely.  I don't know why more writers don't make a big fuss about that really.

Anne Stuart

Her early regencies were great --then some contemporary series that were so/so--then her historicals most of which are very good to excellent--and now her romantic/suspense like the "Ice"  series..excellent.

I feel she definitely has improved with age and experience.

I was going to say Rachel Gibson, til I read Not Another Bad Date. That was the most shallow, emotionless, lust-filled, chick lit, romance-wannabe book I've ever read.