4 ms·

I noticed this too! > In fairness, the author (Robert Bringhurst) probably didn't have final say over the paperback, at least as it was bound in final form. I

by sampl 8y ago

I noticed this too! > In fairness, the author (Robert Bringhurst) probably didn't have final say over the paperback, at least as it was bound in final form. I’m guessing he had a LOT of influence over the printing. The paper is extremely high quality, there’s red color type every so often, etc. If there’s any book where the author would control the printing, it’s this one. I’m guessing he’s either optimizing for a mathematically or historically “correct” ratio over the reader experience, or we’re supposed to “break in” the book more before reading: http://booksville.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-to-break-in-new-book.html?m=1 http://booksville.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-to-break-in-new-b...

Isamu 8y ago
> If there’s any book where the author would control the printing, it’s this one. I agree. My point is that the final, bound form is probably not available for approval. The author sees and approves pages before they are bound. He probably did not have a bound paperback in his hands until the first print run. Only then could you judge how the choice of center margin did not work with the other choices. He may have had approval over the method of paperback binding, but a number of variables are conspiring to make the final spine stiff enough that the pages kind of disappear into the binding. Some of those were the variables the author apparently approved - the paper choice, the page dimensions, the margins. I will add that the layout really looks like a hardback layout. I think that was forefront in the author's mind.
- sampl 8y ago
  The hardback theory makes sense
mattkevan 8y ago
The book is versioned like a software product (I have versions 4.0 and 3 point something), so I’d be surprised if it was a binding error or the author didn’t have control. I think you’re right that it’s about it being the correct ratio and is intended to be broken in. The copy I had as a design student certainly was.

by sampl 8y ago

Isamu 8y ago

> If there’s any book where the author would control the printing, it’s this one. I agree. My point is that the final, bound form is probably not available for approval. The author sees and approves pages before they are bound. He probably did not have a bound paperback in his hands until the first print run. Only then could you judge how the choice of center margin did not work with the other choices. He may have had approval over the method of paperback binding, but a number of variables are conspiring to make the final spine stiff enough that the pages kind of disappear into the binding. Some of those were the variables the author apparently approved - the paper choice, the page dimensions, the margins. I will add that the layout really looks like a hardback layout. I think that was forefront in the author's mind.

sampl 8y ago
The hardback theory makes sense

mattkevan 8y ago

The book is versioned like a software product (I have versions 4.0 and 3 point something), so I’d be surprised if it was a binding error or the author didn’t have control. I think you’re right that it’s about it being the correct ratio and is intended to be broken in. The copy I had as a design student certainly was.