zionius wrote:

Just wanted to remind you to update the M6 and M50 cells in your spreadsheet :) I only did a quick check so there could be more images on the website.

I did base the website column off of what was currently online (and I remember noticing those two), but I must have neglected to mark them off. Thanks.

zionius wrote:

BTW, I notice the kindle version of this edition changed the word "mould" to "mound" in S QS.01.011:

Before its western gate there was a green mound, Ezellohar, that is named also Corollairë; and Yavanna hallowed it, and she sat there long upon the green grass and sang a song of power, in which was set all her thought of things that grow in the earth. But Nienna thought in silence, and watered the mould with tears.

Have they changed it in the paper version too? As far as I know, this variant has appeared in at least one paper version. I guess the editor modified it to "mound" since "mound" is mentioned in the context. However Tolkien often used these two words together, and the versions in HoMe also used "mould".

I can confirm that the printed trade edition now reads "mound" here. Don't have the deluxe.

The deluxe edition shows "mound" for "mould" as well.

Thanks folks. This change does feel like a mistake to me, "mould" is used in four versions of this passage in HoMe (HoMe4/81, HoMe5/209, HoMe10/55, HoMe10/144).

I'm umming and ahhing what to do with this silmarillion. It's not as bad as others, but still, pretty average. Just a headache for an overseas purchase.

The "frieze of trees" is an early design, undated but pre-1928.
The device for Finwë, used twice, an asymmetrical rotating sun, should normally be square, as it is the design of "Finwë and the High Kings of the Noldor".
Finwë's design proper is a symmetrical rotating sun.
The 'Mannish' design for Finrod is, as is most often the case, shown upside down. The harp and the torch should be right way up to make any sense.
Very poor reproduction of Mithrim, compared with previous versions.

wheresrob wrote:

I'm umming and ahhing what to do with this silmarillion. It's not as bad as others, but still, pretty average. Just a headache for an overseas purchase.

I would return that, it's a faulty copy.

The stamping on mine is generally very poor, with a couple of really bad spots. I've decided to return it. I may not bother replacing it. Out of the last 6 Tolkien books I have had from HarperCollins, 5 have been faulty (3 significant enough to return). All Rotolito.

Edit: Refunded. I won't bother replacing until there is clarity whether a replacement is likely to be any better. This one also had a defect to the page-edge gilt, but nothing like as bad as on my LoTR.

The one thing that is very noticeable vs the LoTR is that the silver stamping looks like poorly adhered silver paint, rather than a glossy gilt. The edges are all rough, rather than being relatively sharp as one normally sees. I'm not at all convinced this is the same gilt process. Does anyone have a photo of a good copy?

After looking at mine I really don’t think it’s rubbed off, but is it in fact the texture of the leather not fully taking the gilt well?

There is no discernible impression(s) looking at my copy under examination. My copy is okay in respect to loss, but it does look pretty fragile in respect to possible handling damage. I suspect it might be some kind of sublimation printing that's been used, rather than die stamping; which is barely a step up from heat transfer vinyl (HTV). Very popular with amateur Etsy bookbinders...

Khamûl wrote:

There is no discernible impression(s) looking at my copy under examination. My copy is okay in respect to loss, but it does look pretty fragile in respect to possible handling damage. I suspect it might be some kind of sublimation printing that's been used, rather than die stamping; which is barely a step up from heat transfer vinyl (HTV). Very popular with amateur Etsy bookbinders...

Yep, that's what I think. I don't think these are die stamped (whatever any claims there may be to the contrary).