[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Perfect" replacements for "perfect" bindings.
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
- Subject: Re: "Perfect" replacements for "perfect" bindings.
- From: NBR1415 <NBR1415@AOL.COM>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 20:27:57 EDT
- Message-Id: <199804260041.RAA18282@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.edu>
- Sender: "Book_Arts-L: On the web at http://www.dreamscape.com/pdverhey" <BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
In a message dated 4/25/98 3:43:46 PM, Duncan wrote:
>There was some mention that notching wouldn't do much for the binding. In
>general I agree, in fact the hand process described involved no notching
>what so ever. However, the notching does allow for more surface area to be
>covered by the glue. I assume that this means that there would be a better
>hold on the notched book. But there are times when notching is more
>harmful to the book and we go without. Truthfully I don't notice a
>difference myself but I have to go with the odds that more surface area
>means more hold.
Apropos machine notched bindings, a variation that I have not seen mentioned
is a hand process I learned from the late Bill Anthony. Just before glueing
up the spine, saw in about 1/32 to 1/16 spaced as you would sewing stations.
Immediately after glueing, into each saw cut lay a length of Bookbinders linen
twine long enough to hang over each side about 1 1/2 inches. With finger,
rub a little glue over the freshly laid in twine. When all is dry, fray out
the cords and paste them to the endsheet paste down. This gives a good deal
of extra strength.