| |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jim Green writes:
> > * the "image in the back" trick is called a screened image. easy to do.
> > sometimes it's a hard-edged graphic. it acts as a hint. but again it should be
> > simple. people often do this to make something look more "designed." it gets
> > more ink on the page.
>
> This should be no more than 20% and kept monochromatic. I'm not partial to this
> since I like to write on my calendar and screened overlays create a legibility
> issue.
I'm not arguing, just saying.. A screened graphic could travel under date boxes.
In which case multicolor wouldn't be out of the question. Percentage varies
greatly with ink, screen type, and paper stock. If spec'ing a PMS color for
instance, you may use it at 100% whereas black with a heavy dot gain would be
only a few percent (or better avoided entirely).
> Hmm. I'm unfamiliar with printhouses and prices in this region (I only recently
> moved here),
I doubt we'd use anyplace local unless we were offered a special deal or someone
in NELUG really wanted to attend the run. There's a place in Utah, for instance,
that I've used in the past. It's true that working only with proofs is scary,
but some of those places are seriously cheap - particularly if going with a
standard package.
> but I guestimate that we're talking at least $0.75 per unit for 4/
> 4 color, 14 page, 8.5x11 booklet @ 1000 qty. I don't know NELUG, but $750 is a
> big chunk of change
Actually, I'd expect a 4-digit budget. but the group needs to decide important
things first if they want to do it.
> and 1000 calendars is a lot of calendars.
If we were only planning local distribution, I agree. But once we consider 'net
sales and leaving the AFOL market, 1,000 is a small number. Larger runs equal
cheaper price per/pc.
> Maybe area toy stores would be willing to fork up some loot for a small ad on
> each month?
A good fundraising tool. It's surprising how much a small business will pay. And
if they do it once, they tend to do it again ('course, having a printed sample
from the previous year helps). And if pitting competitors against one another,
the second guy may take a bigger ad space. :-)
but we needn't limit ourselves to local retailers. Nor should we think only of
toy stores. LEGO has a massive appeal. [not suggesting we make something that
looks like it's from TLC] think of how many geeks in cubes would love something
like this..or kids that may be amazed by what we can do..
> > * resolution of offset pics has to be very high in order to survive screening
> > (being reduced to dots) [...] digital pics aren't going to cut it.[...]
>
> Digital isn't there yet. Nor are consumer scanners. Would be best to work
> straight from negatives.
Well, 'best' or even just 'better' would probably mean shooting medium format
positives, drum scan, non-ganged, 4-C proofs from films. But I'd put my vote on
'acceptable' to 'good' and shoot slides for pre-press. I doubt we'd even use a
line screen over 150. And although we have an issue of product color-matching,
at least we could (probably) use TLC's values as a starting point. And
thankfully we wouldn't really have to deal with flesh tones. (unlike in
portraits, where anyone can tell a face is too green)
Again, not arguing with Jim at all.. I agree professionally. But, as NELUGer,
after some thinking, I'd be really interested in seeing pictures from any of us
with a high resolution digital camera. I'm sure they've come a long way since I
last looked at them. Plus I have no idea what sorts of talents and fun gadgets
our members have. In prev message, I didn't mean to sound, like, pushy. If we
looked on screen, we'd have a pretty good idea of what we could get away with.
And a digital camera sure would make our lives simpler! (and the job cheaper)
> I would recommend using metal spiral
> (not the GBC "cookbook" variety) so the pages can be turned down, keeping the
> weight at the bottom (and it stays flat).
that would be great.
> This also works out for the paper as you would only need a
> single-side glossy--the calendar side should stay uncoated so it can accept
> pencil marks and ink.
good point. [1]
> I hope no one minded me being a butt-in-ski, but this is stuff I've had to live
> and breath and I couldn't help but provide input.
input is appreciated.
> I look forward to seeing the
> final result. Be sure to put in important NELUG dates, too!
and KKK's birthday!
-Suz
[1]
[explaining:] if doing staples (called saddle stitched), the folded form
dictates glossy on both picture pages and date pages. In contrast, if each page
is cut around 4 sides (as with spiral bound), you can (in direct comparison)
flip some over.
For what it's worth, here's what's called a 'pagemap' for saddle stitched:
C = color b = black & white
---------------------|-|--------------------
front cover |C| back cover
inside front cover |C| dec dates
1 [info, whatever] |C| Dec picture 24
2 Jan picture |C| nov dates 23
3 jan dates |C| Nov picture 22
4 Feb picture |C| oct dates 21
5 feb dates |C| Oct picture 20
6 March picture |C| sept dates 19
7 march dates |C| Sept picture 18
8 April picture |C| aug dates 17
9 april dates |C| Aug picture 16
10 May picture |C| july dates 15
11 may dates |C| July picture 14
12 June picture cnt fld june dates 13
---------------------------------------------
2 extra pages happen because faces are added 4 at a time. Imagine a pile of
11x17 sheets, then folded in half. The papers are nested. Looking at any such
magazine or calendar makes this immediately obvious.
Follow pages across to see the surface they share. this demonstrates how we
couldn't save $ by printing half the calendar in B&W. The top two lines can be
of another stock, to, say, give the calendar a super heavy cover.
If you're still with me, the number 24 being divisible by 8 is handy. If we were
to print on a large press, it would be fed big sheets that were then cut into
quarters. Printing front and back, that's 16 of our pages (see 1st 8 lines of
numbers above). That's called a form. To do the rest, half sheets can be fed or
we'd print half as many whole sheets.
less changing of printing plates and less press time = good
getting off topic, but kinda neat: The number 32 is even better, because it's 2
whole forms. If you look at children's books, you'll see they're often 32 pages
long. and practically any saddle-stiched magazine, sans cover, will be a number
of pages divisible by 16, ie. 128.
by comparison, with a spiral bound calendar, you need only worry about what's on
the other side of each page. So, as below, all the b's can be printed at once,
then sheets get flipped over, and then all the C's get printed at once, then all
pages get cut apart and trimmed as a pile.
---------------------
1 front cover |C|
2 Jan picture |C|
3 jan dates |b|
4 Feb picture |C|
5 feb dates |b|
6 March picture |C|
7 march dates |b|
8 April picture |C|
9 april dates |b|
10 May picture |C|
11 may dates |b|
12 June picture |C|
13 june dates |b|
14 July picture |C|
15 july dates |b|
16 Aug picture |C|
17 aug dates |b|
18 Sept picture |C|
19 sept dates |b|
20 Oct picture |C|
21 oct dates |b|
22 Nov picture |C|
23 nov dates |b|
24 Dec picture |C|
25 dec dates |C|
26 Back cover |C|
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 2002 NELUG wall calendar
|
| Dangerously, I got to thinking again... (...) Agreed, definitely no argument. In my mind I was thinking b+1 if anything. I just wanted to acknowledge that it's a bad idea to screen a photo in full- color... you tend to lose the yellows, bright (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.publish)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 2002 NELUG wall calendar
|
| [Previous msg clipped for space] Hi, I realize I'm a neo-NELUGer and outside the group but I can't help but chime in, too. I hope this is okay. (...) A well composed collage may look nice, too. Also, maybe if each month was treated graphically to go (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
