Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/04/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I can see where paper quality would have a good deal to do with longevity. We used common variety letter paper. The intent was quick prep and short term usability, not archival storage. On Apr 04, 2016, at 12:08 PM, George Lottermoser <george.imagist at icloud.com> wrote: > >> On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:42 AM, Richard Taylor <r.s.taylor at comcast.net> >> wrote: >> >> Lew - My thought exactly. We used this method of binding for our >> technical reports at work for at least twenty years. Cheap and quick and >> can be done in-house. But, not awfully durable unless the pages are >> carefully handled. That said. most of the reports we bound this way, >> some over 300 pages, were still in good, useful condition, many, many >> years after they were first issued. >> >> Dick >> >> >> On Apr 04, 2016, at 1:08 AM, Jay Burleson <leica at jayburleson.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I've had calendars done that way, and have seen some fairly thick >>> work-related reports (text, pictures & charts) done as well. >>> >>> Kind of fragile for something that might be handled often. > > I don?t agree re: fragility. > > The key to binding durability, like everything else, > rests with the quality of materials and the craft. > > If using good quality paper and punching well into the sheet > (as opposed to too near the edge) > There?s very little that can break down during extensive handling of the > finished product. > > George Lottermoser > george.imagist at icloud.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information