Stu wrote:

onthetrail wrote:

eorl wrote:

I’m sorry if my opinion is unpopular…

… but whether it is 1% or 10% of the products that have these problems, it is a premium item for which HARPER COLLINS (not the printers!) are charging premium prices.

We can try to explain away this whole situation by speculating on all sorts of production issues and problems with the printers indeed, but Harper Collins is the company, the brand, the ultimate responsibility does lie with them, and they should own up to it.

This!

I buy my books with a HarperCollins logo on the spine, not a printers.

Totally - the printing issues might be the fault of Rotolito, but they are the responsibility of HarperCollins. I think the rubbish paper is entirely on HC. It isn't like they don't have a proven track record of low quality products (more often reprints, but not always). Some good stuff as well, but they don't shy away from mass market cheap and nasty.

This hearkens back to a post I made on FB. At what point are we collecting HarperCollins rather than Tolkien? And, are HC worthy of such devotion?

This is an excellent question. Personally what distresses me is that for many years now and the mass production edition. We are losing the quality and the beauty of the writings in fake deluxe books, the poor quality of which is quite appalling. So yes we could say that currently I collect the novelties of HC ... I sincerely hope that there are new "players" of the edition who come to enhance the quality of the works in order to allow those who have sinned in the quality, get back on the right track. Perhaps a publishing house will come and restore the quality of the works to the level of respect for Tolkien's writings. I hope so with all my heart.

I'm not sure if HC are specifically the problem here. What other modern publishers are you thinking about in respect to a better quality of product? FS come to mind, but I'd think most other big publishers aren't producing anything any better. Take for example OUP's Tolkien's Lost Chaucer; that is a perfect-bound POD-style softcover just glued into boards. And that's OUP. Big publishers aren't really going to deliver the kind of quality you're referring to, I don't think.

Khamûl wrote:

I'm not sure if HC are specifically the problem here. What other modern publishers are you thinking about in respect to a better quality of product? FS come to mind, but I'd think most other big publishers aren't producing anything any better. Take for example OUP's Tolkien's Lost Chaucer; that is a perfect-bound POD-style softcover just glued into boards. And that's OUP. Big publishers aren't really going to deliver the kind of quality you're referring to, I don't think.

I don t have a publishing house in mind quickly but just take the example of FS, the assembly work and the quality of the paper do not compare with the latest books from HC. Whether it is the fault of the printer, it remains HC's responsibility to provide its customers with a book that meets their expectations and the price!

Khamûl wrote:

I'm not sure if HC are specifically the problem here. What other modern publishers are you thinking about in respect to a better quality of product? FS come to mind, but I'd think most other big publishers aren't producing anything any better. Take for example OUP's Tolkien's Lost Chaucer; that is a perfect-bound POD-style softcover just glued into boards. And that's OUP. Big publishers aren't really going to deliver the kind of quality you're referring to, I don't think.

I collect Stephen King books and I have never had issues with Hodder & Stoughton, Scribner, Cemetery Dance, or any of the other publishers of Stephen King's books. And whether glued or sewn the paper is always of a reasonable quality. Certainly if a Stephen King book is published as 'deluxe', it is deluxe. I also collect BBC Natural History books/BD/DVDs etc and again I never have any issues with poor quality. Then I come to HarperCollins... and often have issues with their books, whether it be poor materials or bad printing and the price range does not seem to be a factor, HarperCollins does.

Oh wow, Roäc's picture makes me wonder whether either HarperCollins or Rotolito (or both) are or were affected by the recent Adobe Acrobat 'yellow pages' bug. If you're experiencing this irritating bug, you'll know what I'm talking about, but if not you can read about it on Adobe's support community here. In short, the bug causes all pages of pdf files (whether newly created or predating the bug) have a pale yellow background tint (presumably HarperCollins sends print-ready material to the printer in the form of pdfs). Some seem to report that the affected pdfs print correctly, others that they do print with the yellow background. As of today this mess still isn't fixed, although there are a bunch of workarounds (none of which are great as they of course don't really address the problem).

There's some speculation that all this was the result of an interaction between an Adobe update and a Microsoft update that were pushed around the same time; but then again, other apps (like the Windows photo viewer) are also affected, so the issue might be bigger than that.

On the other hand, it seems that this bug surfaced in early September, and surely these books must have already been printed long before that (?). Still, the similarity between Roäc's picture and the yellowish pdfs really struck me.

onthetrail wrote:

Khamûl wrote:

I'm not sure if HC are specifically the problem here. What other modern publishers are you thinking about in respect to a better quality of product? FS come to mind, but I'd think most other big publishers aren't producing anything any better. Take for example OUP's Tolkien's Lost Chaucer; that is a perfect-bound POD-style softcover just glued into boards. And that's OUP. Big publishers aren't really going to deliver the kind of quality you're referring to, I don't think.

I collect Stephen King books and I have never had issues with Hodder & Stoughton, Scribner, Cemetery Dance, or any of the other publishers of Stephen King's books. And whether glued or sewn the paper is always of a reasonable quality. Certainly if a Stephen King book is published as 'deluxe', it is deluxe. I also collect BBC Natural History books/BD/DVDs etc and again I never have any issues with poor quality. Then I come to HarperCollins... and often have issues with their books, whether it be poor materials or bad printing and the price range does not seem to be a factor, HarperCollins does.

I was interested in where my main Stephen King titles (Hodder & Stoughton) are printed given that we are always wondering where HarperCollins will have Tolkien books printed next. For the last 20 years everything has been printed at Clays. I am certain that that consistency matters. The relationship clearly matters and Clays get it right for them every time. There is no loyalty when a publisher shops around for the best price.

onthetrail wrote:

onthetrail wrote:

Khamûl wrote:

I'm not sure if HC are specifically the problem here. What other modern publishers are you thinking about in respect to a better quality of product? FS come to mind, but I'd think most other big publishers aren't producing anything any better. Take for example OUP's Tolkien's Lost Chaucer; that is a perfect-bound POD-style softcover just glued into boards. And that's OUP. Big publishers aren't really going to deliver the kind of quality you're referring to, I don't think.

I collect Stephen King books and I have never had issues with Hodder & Stoughton, Scribner, Cemetery Dance, or any of the other publishers of Stephen King's books. And whether glued or sewn the paper is always of a reasonable quality. Certainly if a Stephen King book is published as 'deluxe', it is deluxe. I also collect BBC Natural History books/BD/DVDs etc and again I never have any issues with poor quality. Then I come to HarperCollins... and often have issues with their books, whether it be poor materials or bad printing and the price range does not seem to be a factor, HarperCollins does.

I was interested in where my main Stephen King titles (Hodder & Stoughton) are printed given that we are always wondering where HarperCollins will have Tolkien books printed next. For the last 20 years everything has been printed at Clays. I am certain that that consistency matters. The relationship clearly matters and Clays get it right for them every time. There is no loyalty when a publisher shops around for the best price.

You are all looking for complex reasons...

HarperCollins is owned by Rupert Murdoch. I'm not sure I'd describe him as totally evil. Wait, yes I absolutely would.

Eucatastrophe wrote:

Oh wow, Roäc's picture makes me wonder whether either HarperCollins or Rotolito (or both) are or were affected by the recent Adobe Acrobat 'yellow pages' bug. If you're experiencing this irritating bug, you'll know what I'm talking about, but if not you can read about it on Adobe's support community here. In short, the bug causes all pages of pdf files (whether newly created or predating the bug) have a pale yellow background tint (presumably HarperCollins sends print-ready material to the printer in the form of pdfs). Some seem to report that the affected pdfs print correctly, others that they do print with the yellow background. As of today this mess still isn't fixed, although there are a bunch of workarounds (none of which are great as they of course don't really address the problem).

There's some speculation that all this was the result of an interaction between an Adobe update and a Microsoft update that were pushed around the same time; but then again, other apps (like the Windows photo viewer) are also affected, so the issue might be bigger than that.

On the other hand, it seems that this bug surfaced in early September, and surely these books must have already been printed long before that (?). Still, the similarity between Roäc's picture and the yellowish pdfs really struck me.

It isn't a bad theory, to be honest, given it seems to a color profiles problem.

Stu wrote:

onthetrail wrote:

onthetrail wrote:

Khamûl wrote:

I'm not sure if HC are specifically the problem here. What other modern publishers are you thinking about in respect to a better quality of product? FS come to mind, but I'd think most other big publishers aren't producing anything any better. Take for example OUP's Tolkien's Lost Chaucer; that is a perfect-bound POD-style softcover just glued into boards. And that's OUP. Big publishers aren't really going to deliver the kind of quality you're referring to, I don't think.

I collect Stephen King books and I have never had issues with Hodder & Stoughton, Scribner, Cemetery Dance, or any of the other publishers of Stephen King's books. And whether glued or sewn the paper is always of a reasonable quality. Certainly if a Stephen King book is published as 'deluxe', it is deluxe. I also collect BBC Natural History books/BD/DVDs etc and again I never have any issues with poor quality. Then I come to HarperCollins... and often have issues with their books, whether it be poor materials or bad printing and the price range does not seem to be a factor, HarperCollins does.

I was interested in where my main Stephen King titles (Hodder & Stoughton) are printed given that we are always wondering where HarperCollins will have Tolkien books printed next. For the last 20 years everything has been printed at Clays. I am certain that that consistency matters. The relationship clearly matters and Clays get it right for them every time. There is no loyalty when a publisher shops around for the best price.

You are all looking for complex reasons...

HarperCollins is owned by Rupert Murdoch. I'm not sure I'd describe him as totally evil. Wait, yes I absolutely would.

? That s a good one Stu. There is a Scottish proverb which says "Better to keep the devil out, than to throw him out." well but I can t ... I continue to buy HC anyway damn.