|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:Elgarbo you are in Melbourne right? Sydney.
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 10:03 |
|
|
Also interested in a copy, despite not being in. Shipping to Europe?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
Whoa you guys work fast, I remember Elgarbo talking about the idea but a few months later you guys have put it together? I'm definitely in for at least one copy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Also interested in a copy, despite not being in. Worldwide shipping! Geektox posted:Whoa you guys work fast, I remember Elgarbo talking about the idea but a few months later you guys have put it together? I'm definitely in for at least one copy. Well, so far it's a semi-complete in a digital form... but I should be able to have a proof by mid to late January and from there we can getting exact prices and taking orders. But I wasn't kidding when I said I wanted to do this!
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
Should we advertise the zine in the Creative Convention ? Whoever is going to package it might want to keep a low count though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
I think it would be easier if Elgarbo setup a Google forms submission thing to capture the details of those who want a copy (and more).
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
I will not be able to commit to printing anything until at least February. Even then I would need to discuss this with my boss. We are doing the install of our digital press the middle of January and then a couple of weeks of training and dialing things in. So at this time I would not count on me printing anything just in case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
IMO Kickstarter would actually be good in this case - could essentially take "preorders" for a # of zines per-person with the cost set at whatever KS takes + payment processor cut + printing costs + shipping etc
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:IMO Kickstarter would actually be good in this case - could essentially take "preorders" for a # of zines per-person with the cost set at whatever KS takes + payment processor cut + printing costs + shipping etc "If your project is successfully funded, the following fees will be collected from your funding total: Kickstarter's 5% fee, and payment processing fees (between 3% and 5%). If funding isn't successful, there are no fees." https://www.kickstarter.com/help/fees So, 10% markup?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
huhu posted:"If your project is successfully funded, the following fees will be collected from your funding total: Kickstarter's 5% fee, and payment processing fees (between 3% and 5%). If funding isn't successful, there are no fees." https://www.kickstarter.com/help/fees Seems fair. They deal with the organization, payment, etc. Plus more people will probably buy in making things cheaper for everyone. Kickstarter makes sense for this I think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
huhu posted:"If your project is successfully funded, the following fees will be collected from your funding total: Kickstarter's 5% fee, and payment processing fees (between 3% and 5%). If funding isn't successful, there are no fees." https://www.kickstarter.com/help/fees Yeah it'll be about 8% if prior experience is anything to go by. But Paypal isn't free either and at least kickstarter does all the backend work. And, perhaps most significantly, it sets a hard deadline for orders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
Yeah I wouldn't mind the 8-10% markup as an administrative cost. Makes payment collection and processing much easier too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
I'm all for a Kickstarter. 50 copies isn't very many if we want to get this further than the Dorkroom, so this would be a good way of judging extra demand and gives us a way to promote (even if just in CC) before we have to decide on a print run. Again, happy to pay extra if it makes admin easier for elgarbo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
I'm on-board for KS if that's the thread consensus. I can think of a few people on my facebook who might swing for a copy if I posted a kickstarter link with a "hey folks I took some pictures and so did other people".
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Yeah KS seems like a good idea. Extra 2.5 USD won't be a deal breaker, and maybe some of my friends and family might be silly enough to spring for a copy if it is open to people outside of dorkroom. Quick question: will you be posting a mockup of the layout you are planning for the magazine? I am curious how you will be handling horizontal images in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:Yeah KS seems like a good idea. Extra 2.5 USD won't be a deal breaker, and maybe some of my friends and family might be silly enough to spring for a copy if it is open to people outside of dorkroom. Here's a basic mockup with a landscape oriented shots. Imagine the fold dividing these two pages:  Generally, shots are justified to the top of the page, centered with the bleed area as a border. Obviously that means portrait oriented shots get more page real estate but there's not much that can be done to solve that (other than crossing the fold, but then there wouldn't be space for two photos.) Obviously, I am open to any other suggestions that might solve this problem that I'm missing, but I've been poring over photobooks to get layout ideas and this is what I've found most palatable so far. 90% of submissions are in the same format, so I've been opting for symmetrical layouts across the double page spread. In the cases where I have different crop sizes or different orientations, I've just been experimenting until I find something that looks pleasing to my eye. In some instances, I've been experimenting with black page backgrounds to add some contrast and variety. Not sure if I'm going to run with this in the final copy or not at this point. Open to feedback on this as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 09:23
|
|
|
You can't straight up rotate the page for landscape shots? So you rotate the zine to view those. I've certainly seen that done in print before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:Here's a basic mockup with a landscape oriented shots. Imagine the fold dividing these two pages: Looks pretty cool. I would consider aligning the caption with the left side of the photo, instead of centering it, and maybe use regular font for names instead of bold. Maybe having just one line of text. In my mind captions are meant to be unobtrusive, instead of being central to the page composition. Just my 2 cents. The back background idea seems pretty neat! nielsm posted:You can't straight up rotate the page for landscape shots? So you rotate the zine to view those. I've certainly seen that done in print before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:Generally, shots are justified to the top of the page, centered with the bleed area as a border. Obviously that means portrait oriented shots get more page real estate but there's not much that can be done to solve that (other than crossing the fold, but then there wouldn't be space for two photos.) Obviously, I am open to any other suggestions that might solve this problem that I'm missing, but I've been poring over photobooks to get layout ideas and this is what I've found most palatable so far.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 12:28
|
|
|
Ric posted:If we're aiming for a consistent, clean design, I'd be tempted to make all images have apparently equal area rather than print each one to fill as much page area as possible. Given some images have different aspect ratios, I'm suggesting what one perceives to have equal weight, not necessarily what is actually equal. It's certainly an option, although filling up all of the top space of the page up to the bleed also provides that unifying consistency - just in a different way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
Ric posted:If we're aiming for a consistent, clean design, I'd be tempted to make all images have apparently equal area rather than print each one to fill as much page area as possible. Given some images have different aspect ratios, I'm suggesting what one perceives to have equal weight, not necessarily what is actually equal. While that would be consistent, I kinda feel that's just probably going to end up wasting space on paper. I'd probably go with the solution of rotating landscape shots to turn them into "portrait" orientation, maximizing the space. And although I do think it could possible be jarring, ultimately this isn't a sequenced photobook but a showcase of separate works so the continuity in that sense doesn't really matter so much IMO. But I guess the final choice should be Elgarbo's, since he's the one doing all the hard work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:Looks pretty cool. I would consider aligning the caption with the left side of the photo, instead of centering it, and maybe use regular font for names instead of bold. Maybe having just one line of text. In my mind captions are meant to be unobtrusive, instead of being central to the page composition. Yea I agree with this. Smaller non bold font. Centered or left aligned, doesn't matter to me they both look good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
I'm gonna chime in here as somebody who hates the idea of having to turn a book/zine to look at a photo. It disrupts the flow of my experience of the thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:While that would be consistent, I kinda feel that's just probably going to end up wasting space on paper. I'd probably go with the solution of rotating landscape shots to turn them into "portrait" orientation, maximizing the space. And although I do think it could possible be jarring, ultimately this isn't a sequenced photobook but a showcase of separate works so the continuity in that sense doesn't really matter so much IMO. But I guess the final choice should be Elgarbo's, since he's the one doing all the hard work. I've seen books where turning works very well, amongst other devices that remind the viewer that he/she is looking at a book. In this instance, it's unlikely to work, and would merely serve to change the relationship between the selected pairs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Voting for no turning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Definitely not going to be able to please everyone in this regard. I'll keep tinkering with it, though. I like the justification for less prominent captions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Ric posted:
I have been thinking about doing this in some of my books, but I haven't figured out how to make it work well. Mind dropping some titles where I could get some ideas of how to go about it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Well at least I now know my design sense is pretty bad!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:I have been thinking about doing this in some of my books, but I haven't figured out how to make it work well. Mind dropping some titles where I could get some ideas of how to go about it? Chris Killip's In flagrante also requires the viewer physically manipulate the book to reveal a clear image, through use of shiny paper prone to glare. elgarbo posted:Definitely not going to be able to please everyone in this regard. I'll keep tinkering with it, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:Voting for no turning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Thoogsby posted:Voting for no turning. Maggie Thatcher on the back cover
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Suggestion: keep the portrait shots the same paper area as the landscape shots and enjoy the whitespace.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Suggestion: keep the portrait shots the same paper area as the landscape shots and enjoy the whitespace. Maybe go for 8x8 or 10x10 zine size so that portrait or landscape orientation will be roughly be the same image size.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Maybe go for 8x8 or 10x10 zine size so that portrait or landscape orientation will be roughly be the same image size.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:But then all of your square crops will be bigger than everyone else's! Could always make it 3/4 lengthwise of the long side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
Okay, I think I've finished making this thing. No point discussing layouts anymore because I've plugged everyone's photos in, captioned them and it looks done. Too much work to go back and revise it now... so if the design ends up being poo poo and against everyone's taste, we'll write it off to being a zine made by a guy who just stole all his design ideas from photobooks. That said, I think it looks pretty rad. Next step: give the PDF a good proof-read, then send it off to the printer to get a proof printed. This will cost me some cash, which I'll account for when I work out the final cost of each zine. Apparently the proof should be ready mid to late January.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 11:34
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:Okay, I think I've finished making this thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
rohan posted:I don't want to make any more work for you, but does this mean everyone's photos are up to scratch res & colour wise? Or is that something you'll be evaluating once you have the proof? Yeah I'll confirm that with the proof. It all looks like it *should* be fine looking at the final PDF, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
So are we kickstarting this bitch? Who is organizing that part? I don't mind helping, but I can't guarantee good work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 10:03 |
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:So are we kickstarting this bitch? Who is organizing that part? I don't mind helping, but I can't guarantee good work. for minimum "money transmission, know your customer" bullshit it should probably be elgarbo's accounts that get the $ straight from KS
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:05
|
|
