Thanks, I hadn't seen bookbinder.js, that looks really neat. I'll remember that if I get back into sewn binding.
I personally like to use standard A4/letter size paper and print one page per side and do perfect binding. Printing two A5 pages on A4 was my original approach, but then the grain direction is wrong for standard computer paper and the pages come out too stiff.
I think the quality is good enough for me, but I definitely understand the appeal of sewn binding.
For epubs, I split the book into chapters and run ebook-convert on each chapter individually, adding an extra page if needed to make the number of pages even. Then I combine all the chapters and do a custom scheme for numbering (because you don't want numbers on blank pages, you want the numbering to start at chapter 1, etc)
For html books from Project Gutenberg for example, I make sure they have text in <p> and chapters in <h2>. Then do a similar logic with ebook-convert.
For pdf books, I just use pdf-lib to draw the pages directly.
I also shift odd pages to the right and even pages to the left so there is a larger inner margin than outer margin.
If you're looking to do custom books, I would just use ebook-convert by itself, it just won't be quite as pretty though because it lacks those improvements.
It's a really neat hobby. It's great for gifts, especially if you take the high quality artistic approach. I like to do simple "perfect binding" because it saves money (materials are probably around a penny per page), gets me the book faster than buying it, and makes all my books consistent in font, size, and cover style.
How do you handle printing? I've got a color laser (that I'll generally run B&W), but it seems like "pigment inkjet" is actually the correct choice for the paper+ink combo.
What's your experience / recommendation?
My technical workflow (for personal books) is `Makefile` + `frontmatter.tex` + `chapter-*.md` + `endmatter.tex` and some unholy abomination of pandoc or whatever that'll stitch it all together and some other software to run imposition, etc.
I'll (at some point) take a look at what you're doing, but it's a really neat hobby- I've been doing 1-2 books at a time (~50-100 pages) w/ kettle stitching and hard-cover (with ribbons of course!).
...looking through your recommendations, but don't see mention of pigment-based ink/printers or short-grain paper (ChurchPaper was where I got some of mine from). Is the ET-8550 "the one" that you've found? Having something "large format" for printing is tempting, but it'd probably be better to outsource at $1-5/page compared to a more compact printer. What about drying out or long-term storage of inkjet / print heads?
re: the Guillotine, I've been tempted by seeing some hydraulic manual cutters, but it seems like big space investment... how have you experienced it? They're saying 400 pages (a whole ream?) on the one you've linked but that seems like a stretch.
My understanding is that ink tank printers can be cheaper per page, but lasers can be faster and possibly more durable. I think professional machines tend to be laser printers. I haven't had a problem with the heads drying out but I try to use my printers at least weekly.
I like the Epson ink tank printers and have been happy with them. I usually use cheap generic ink. I wouldn't be surprised at all if there are better options though.
I mostly do perfect bound books so I can use normal printer paper, center the pages, and it will be in the correct grain direction. Otherwise you'll have to order through dedicated specialty paper suppliers and also might need a larger format printer. In a pinch, you can ignore grain direction but the end result definitely isn't as good. Once I run out of my current cover paper, I'll probably order coated on 1 side short grain paper from some specialty paper supplier.
I also use a one sided laminator on the cover which makes the cover much more durable.
I think the manual cutter works well enough for me. It does work at 400 pages with some muscle. Upgrading to a programmable cutter would be the next step for me, but it would only be needed if you're making 5+ books a day.
You could print smaller booklets in half-page format and use stapled or sewn binding, for a more durable and higher-quality result. That could be done without needing a larger-format printer. It might be especially appropriate for shorter text such as individual articles, and this was often the historical practice with e.g. octavo books which were quite popular back in the day.
Wowee, a dedicated machine! I built my own lying press with wooden cutting boards, and neatened out the edges of my text blocks with the blade of a chisel/single bevel utility knife that could be laid flat. I used an old application called Cheap Impostor that converted PDFs to printable signatures for me.
I was writing an honors thesis then, and DIYing my old books was much more interesting (and relaxing) way to get a book that I'd otherwise have to wait a month to get via interlibrary loan. Don't ask me where I got the scanned pages from...
This doesn't address the entire point of the recommendation, that saturated fats like tallow and butter aren't inflammatory compared to PUFAs, and that red meat is filling and extremely nutritious. Limiting those things over heart disease risk is wrong, especially when most people will replace them with sugar and seed oils, which are extremely inflammatory and fattening.
I found it very disturbing how heavily these were marketed as miracle drugs that would "bankrupt fast food". Seems like another instance of create a problem ("food" industry) and sell a recurring "solution" (big pharma).
> The stories about bankrupting the fast food industry were from journalists looking for sensational stories to write, not from the marketers.
Those are not necessarily disconnected. Marketers pitch stories, they fund studies they know will show X outcome, etc etc, which are picked up by journalists.
I mean it isn't a conspiracy. People love food that makes them fat cuz it's fucking tasty. But being fat is cosmetically unappealing, is socially stigmatized, makes it hard to do things, and is bad for your overall health. All of this, the drugs, the fat burning "cures," diet culture, surgery, all of it going back to time immemorial is trying to resolve this inherent conflict:
* Shitty food is fucking delicious.
* For whatever reasons an individual cites, being fat is undesirable.
And... you can't. At least not with today's technology. But people hate that answer and so there's huge money in figuring out how to make it so people can eat like fatasses without being fatasses.
And... same. I'd fucking love that, I just don't expect it coming anytime soon.
I have understood that mechanism these drugs actual work with is making fatasses not eat like fatasses. While possibly continuing to eat what fatasses do, but less of it and less often.
No that's basically what they do, AFAIK. Seems to something with the rewards center of the brain since it also seems at least somewhat effective in treating addiction too.
reply