New Printing Press book quality.

Rurik

Mongoose
I am breaking this off from the discussion in the Players Guide Poll threadas that thread is about the players guide contents, not the new printing press.

Rurik said:
I just picked it up and the binding sucks.

The Cover is actually seems a bit more substantial than my other books - though I'm not at home so can't compare them yet. And I think the colors are a bit more vibrant. So that is encouraging. Also I think the pages are a bit heavier than earlier B&W books and the art looks like the printing quality is just fine.

But enough with the good. There is a noticable gap between the bound pages and the back of the spine - the only thing holding the pages to the cover is the sheet inside the front and back cover that is attached to both the cover and the interior pages (I forget what it is called - coverplate maybe? ). On the front the seam where that piece of paper joins the cover to the pages seems to have a bit to much paper - making an excess fold, and on the back it seems to have a bit to little paper, making a small gap.

If Mongoose ever wants to find out who exactly bound the book it should be easy as there is a fingerprint in glue on the back cover.

So actually, once they learn how to bind the books or hire someone with bindry experience I think these will be nice quality books.

andakitty said:
...and this is the first book off the new printing press they (Mongoose) have been talking about?

It is the first RQ book off the press. There were a couple of others before it (BF Evo was I think the very first title off the press) but it is one of the first.

I compared mine to my older books last night. It definitely uses heavier stock for both the cover and the interior pages - it is noticeably thicker and heavier than the RQ Companion (also 96 pages B&W). Interestingly, the pages are smaller than the older books. Players Guide pages are just as tall as older books but about 1cm or 1/2 inch narrower than the older books. The text area and outside borders are the same, the text runs that much closer to the binding on the inside of the pages.

On to the binding. The new books the pages are bound by glue while the old books used a sewn binding. The sewn binding allows the books to lay open flat nicely when opened to any page (even page 1). The new binding does not lay open very well. If you lay the book open it will close unless you open it to around the middle of the book (pages 40-60 or so) and even then the pages lift up around the binding to form a kind of squished McDonald's M rather than laying flat. Note one disadvantage to the old sewn together in groups of pages (I didn't count them but I would say 8 physical sheets - which is 16 printed pages - to a group) so that page counts are constrained by multiples of this number. The new binding seems as though any number of pages can be bound together, so that is a plus (the only plus?) to the new binding method.

The narrower margins near the spine combined with the tendency for the pages to bulge out from the center make it a little hard to read the text right next to the spine - it is not that bad but when compared to the older books wider inside margin and ability to open flatter it is a world of difference. It is a very minor issue admittedly but it used to be not an issue at all.

The color on the cover is definitely more vibrant than my older Glorantha Books. I think the color books will be very nice indeed. The interior art is all B&W but the solid blacks are much blacker than the old books, a dark inky black. Very nice, but...

... the printing screen (the little dots that make up the grayscale) is much courser than than the old books. In my Companion you can't really notice the screen and in my Players Guide you definitely can. Since Mongoose uses textured backgrounds you can notice the screen dots over the entire page. Look at the scrolled parchment corners of an illustration or text box to compare the differences - it is very apparent there.

Finally, I have no way of knowing how long the binding will last. The pages seem very solidly put together - there is no indication they will start falling out - but the older sewn binding I know will hold up.

That is my take after carefully comparing my players guide with older books. Note none of the points in this post have anything to do with the poor quality of the assembly of the binding (except possibly the narrower pages?) - these points will probably all still stand even with a well bound book. I don't know if they can get a finer screen for the printing or not.

So though there are a couple pros to the new book I have to say I prefer the old books construction. The new book isn't bad by any means though, and if we start to see some of the advantages of the in house press (more flexible page counts, ability to do projects that would not be cost effective or too risky or with too small runs to be profitable otherwise, and hopefully even some day customised rule books) then it will be probably a worthwhile trade off (so long as these books hold up through use).
 
And I as I was making this a new thread Matt was responding to the old one...

msprange said:
Rurik said:
On to the binding. The new books the pages are bound by glue while the old books used a sewn binding.

Actually, they don't :)

The older books _look_ as if they do, and we will soon be adding the tabs that make them look as if they are sewn (they really are just sticky tabs with fabric on one end - they give the books a classy edge :)). However, true sewn books are quite rare these days - and you have to destroy the book to see whether they are or not, which is probably not recommended. . .

As for the method of binding, we are very happy with the way the pages are collated, and have not had one failure over around 10,000 books put together so far. The method of fixing the core of the book to the case is an ongoing thing - we have already changed the method from that you have seen in the Player's Guide, and will be changing once again in about a month's time. There are many different ways we can do this, and we will be experimenting with most of them.

We now have a two tier quality control process on books going out and if anyone, for any reason, is not satisfied with a book, we will replace it with no quibbles (as always).

Now we are producing our own books, we have ultimate control over how they get put together. We will be using this to bring you all sorts of wonderful things in the future but, for now, we will be learning to walk before we run!
 
Which is all very interesting. I'm not trying to bash the new books, but to just give honest feedback on what I think of them.

Really the bit I liked best about the old books is that they can lay open flat to any page and my Players Guide can't - and making it lay open makes me feel as though I may be damaging the binding. If you could bind them to lay open better I would be happy.

The 'faux sewn' binding did the trick, it sure made me feel confident about the binding. So far as I mentioned the pages of my Players Guide feel as though thery will hold together as bound even though they are clearly not attached to the spine of the cover in any way (or is that actually normally the case?).

Probably second on my wishlist would be to do something about the more noticable screen (the little dots).
 
Rurik said:
So far as I mentioned the pages of my Players Guide feel as though thery will hold together as bound even though they are clearly not attached to the spine of the cover in any way (or is that actually normally the case?).

Probably second on my wishlist would be to do something about the more noticable screen (the little dots).

No, cores are not attached to spines, though the tabs can make it look as if they are. If you mess around with a lot of hardbacks, you will see that many have a visible gap. Basically, this is so they can hinge properly.

As for the screening, we are currently using 600 DPI, as this is the format most of our art gets submitted in, though we have the capability to go to 1200 DPI, and we will be experimenting with this soon.
 
Was the Companion originally printed in 1200 dpi? The grayscales in that are much smoother than in my Players Guide.

Either way keep at it. I'm curious to see what Uz is like - are there any differences between the way that was printed and bound and the Players Guide or will it be pretty much the same?
 
msprange said:
As for the screening, we are currently using 600 DPI, as this is the format most of our art gets submitted in, though we have the capability to go to 1200 DPI, and we will be experimenting with this soon.
Good stuff. If I remember my printing properly, though, it's not always the DPI that causes the dots but the way the digital printer is set up. You can get excellent 600dpi results with no noticeable "dots" and awful 600dpi results which look slike someone printed it with a dot matrix printer....
 
I think Halfbat is right, I have seen much smoother grays on 600 dpi printers. I think it has more to do with how it is dithered.*

* I'm not sure if dithering is exactly the correct term. I know enough to sound like someone who thinks he knows what he is talking about but doesn't really. :?
 
If you guys REALLY want to know about DPI, dithering etc. I can probably get you documentation.

I can definitely tell you that one 600DPI image can look totally different from another 600DPI image based on how the dots are arranged (dithering I believe).

One of the big differences between color laser and ink is the fact that laser toner doesn't bleed so a dot that it makes stays a dot, while ink bleeds a little (on purpose sometimes) to make uneven dots that blend together.

I personally can't just look at a sample and tell the difference, but I know people who can :)

Oh and I took a general class on printer theory to help me report problems with print quality in stuff I print at work. Some of it's interesting, most is boring though. ;)

Nezeray
 
Back
Top