creep

[PrepressCrapFixer]

Traci, my question would be, why would you need creep on a 24 page book? Even folded, there is no reason for it. If the paper is of "standard" weight, it would need to be over 72 pages to really need it. I add creep to books over 72 pages, but that all depends on your bindery. To adjust for creep, you need to find the actual mic thickness of the paper, take the total pages, and divide by two, then multiply that by the mic thickness. This tells you the final thickness of the book. Now divide this number by two, and place that number in the Inner and Outer fields. That will adjust the outside pages to work from the spine out to equal the final horizontal trim size, eg; 8.5" and work the inner pages towards the spine. Why you need creep? Take a stack of 50 or so pieces of paper equal size, now fold it in half... see the outer edge away from the spine, all that fanned paper? That is why.

DCS, I will admit at the time I started calculating and applying creep to my Apogee S1 workflow I was very green and didn't entirely understand the way it worked.  I calculate the total page count by 4 then multiply that number by the thickness of the paper.  I put that amount only in the Inner field.  Is there something better about using both the Inner and Outer fields?  I'm not looking to debate but rather discover a better way to do things.

Thanks in advance,

Hey DCS, I'd like to know about this too. I'm sure it is working for you and your bindery but I have to admit it's got me a little confused. The inner number start the creep at the middle of the book and calculates the creep distance towards the outer pages until it reaches zero at the front and back page. In our case we enter a negative value to shift the pages towards the gutter. If you enter a value in the outer fields to start moving the outer pages wouldn't that work against the inner value? If there is a benefit to doing it this way I'd like to know too.

In my case I actually put a positive value in the inner field.  I think the software assumes that the amount is going into the spine and doesn't need to be indicated as a negative value.  Are you determining creep in preps or some other software?

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

You are splitting up the creep adjustment to put half on the outer and half on the inner. That way both take the brunt of the value instead of just the outer or inner. If you adjust JUST the inner, you are not compensating at all for outer face trim. The bindery just hacks it off at the marks. If you measure the finished book it will not equal your original trim size. If you put numbers in both the fields, you get adjustment on the "inside" signatures towards the center, and you get adjustment of the "outside" signatures AWAY from the spine. When it all gets hacked on the marks... it WILL measure your original trim.

Picture it like this... Letter sized pub. 104 pages. The Inner field will take a value of .0625 or a sixteenth of an inch. Now put a value of the same in the Outer field. My  book thickness is .125 inches, so in essence, I have moved the inner signatures away the spine, and the Outer pages towards from the spine.

I have never put in a negative number, so maybe that is where my method differs from yours.

[PrepressCrapFixer]

You are splitting up the creep adjustment to put half on the outer and half on the inner. That way both take the brunt of the value instead of just the outer or inner. If you adjust JUST the inner, you are not compensating at all for outer face trim. The bindery just hacks it off at the marks. If you measure the finished book it will not equal your original trim size. If you put numbers in both the fields, you get adjustment on the "inside" signatures towards the center, and you get adjustment of the "outside" signatures AWAY from the spine. When it all gets hacked on the marks... it WILL measure your original trim.

Picture it like this... Letter sized pub. 104 pages. The Inner field will take a value of .0625 or a sixteenth of an inch. Now put a value of the same in the Outer field. My  book thickness is .125 inches, so in essence, I have moved the inner signatures away the spine, and the Outer pages towards from the spine.

I have never put in a negative number, so maybe that is where my method differs from yours.

So if I understand you correctly, the method I'm using to calculate the number is the same as yours, I would just put the same number in the outer field too?

[Joe]

You are splitting up the creep adjustment to put half on the outer and half on the inner. That way both take the brunt of the value instead of just the outer or inner. If you adjust JUST the inner, you are not compensating at all for outer face trim. The bindery just hacks it off at the marks. If you measure the finished book it will not equal your original trim size. If you put numbers in both the fields, you get adjustment on the "inside" signatures towards the center, and you get adjustment of the "outside" signatures AWAY from the spine. When it all gets hacked on the marks... it WILL measure your original trim.

Picture it like this... Letter sized pub. 104 pages. The Inner field will take a value of .0625 or a sixteenth of an inch. Now put a value of the same in the Outer field. My  book thickness is .125 inches, so in essence, I have moved the inner signatures away the spine, and the Outer pages towards from the spine.

I have never put in a negative number, so maybe that is where my method differs from yours.

Now I'm really confused. The inner pages are the ones you have to worry about getting live work chopped off because they stick out the furthest, correct? If you move them away from the spine it would make it worse, no?

In my case I actually put a positive value in the inner field.  I think the software assumes that the amount is going into the spine and doesn't need to be indicated as a negative value.  Are you determining creep in preps or some other software?

We use Preps. I think a positive value moves the page away from the spine while a negative number moves it in towards the spine. I'll double check. I'm going off memory from home but I'm pretty sure we enter negative values.

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

No. Let's say you had a page mic at .0035. You take your total page count, let's say 104 pages, divide by two, then multiply by .0035, you end up with .182"... your publication thickness. You divide that number by 2 and that is the value you put in Inner and Outer. In this case it would be 0.091".


And yes Joe, you are correct, I typed them out bassackwards. Sorry.

[Tracy]

We get these too, if you put in creep to keep the outer elements from pushing out, the crossovers are ruined. Usually we are able to go 0 creep and let the bars suffer a little. If the book was too big to ignore creep, we would prolly move the bars manually and still apply 0 creep.

yeah the book shouldnt require creep on this one, i agree the bars should have been moved manually, were going to let it go.
my coworker left the job on the desktop. the day after he was let go the computer crashed. i always said never leave on the desktop! ionly have the postscript files on the brisque. this is a rerun job from a press error.

[PrepressCrapFixer]

We get these too, if you put in creep to keep the outer elements from pushing out, the crossovers are ruined. Usually we are able to go 0 creep and let the bars suffer a little. If the book was too big to ignore creep, we would prolly move the bars manually and still apply 0 creep.

yeah the book shouldnt require creep on this one, i agree the bars should have been moved manually, were going to let it go.
my coworker left the job on the desktop. the day after he was let go the computer crashed. i always said never leave on the desktop! ionly have the postscript files on the brisque. this is a rerun job from a press error.

Coincidence?  I think not!

[tapdn]

Prolly beating a dead horse I know...but, I agree with DCS (gawd I'm gonna hate myself in the morning!).
At least in principle. I see less distortion if I divide the total creep between the inner and outter pages- especially on the spine margins of the inner pages that get pushed into the gutter. If the job calls for .125 shingling then I apply half to the inner and half to the outter in Preps.
Inner .0625   Outter -.0625.

[Joe]

Prolly beating a dead horse I know...but, I agree with DCS (gawd I'm gonna hate myself in the morning!).
At least in principle. I see less distortion if I divide the total creep between the inner and outter pages- especially on the spine margins of the inner pages that get pushed into the gutter. If the job calls for .125 shingling then I apply half to the inner and half to the outter in Preps.
Inner .0625   Outter -.0625.

I agree that is logical for the outer most and inner most pages and I can see times where this would be beneficial, however, at page 26 and 78 won't the inner number and the outer number cancel each other out? Plus our bindery trims to the trim size, not specifically the marks.

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

Prolly beating a dead horse I know...but, I agree with DCS (gawd I'm gonna hate myself in the morning!).
At least in principle. I see less distortion if I divide the total creep between the inner and outter pages- especially on the spine margins of the inner pages that get pushed into the gutter. If the job calls for .125 shingling then I apply half to the inner and half to the outter in Preps.
Inner .0625   Outter -.0625.

I agree that is logical for the outer most and inner most pages and I can see times where this would be beneficial, however, at page 26 and 78 won't the inner number and the outer number cancel each other out? Plus our bindery trims to the trim size, not specifically the marks.

At page 52, the pages preceding get adjusted away from the spine, at a maximum incremental measurement of .0625". All the pages after 52 get adjusted towards the spine at a maximum incremental measurement of .0625". No cancellation.

And... our bindery has no preference. Whatever way is incorrect, that is the way they will cut it.

[PrepressCrapFixer]

Prolly beating a dead horse I know...but, I agree with DCS (gawd I'm gonna hate myself in the morning!).
At least in principle. I see less distortion if I divide the total creep between the inner and outter pages- especially on the spine margins of the inner pages that get pushed into the gutter. If the job calls for .125 shingling then I apply half to the inner and half to the outter in Preps.
Inner .0625   Outter -.0625.

I agree that is logical for the outer most and inner most pages and I can see times where this would be beneficial, however, at page 26 and 78 won't the inner number and the outer number cancel each other out? Plus our bindery trims to the trim size, not specifically the marks.

Me too.  We don't even print trim marks.

[Joe]

Prolly beating a dead horse I know...but, I agree with DCS (gawd I'm gonna hate myself in the morning!).
At least in principle. I see less distortion if I divide the total creep between the inner and outter pages- especially on the spine margins of the inner pages that get pushed into the gutter. If the job calls for .125 shingling then I apply half to the inner and half to the outter in Preps.
Inner .0625   Outter -.0625.

I agree that is logical for the outer most and inner most pages and I can see times where this would be beneficial, however, at page 26 and 78 won't the inner number and the outer number cancel each other out? Plus our bindery trims to the trim size, not specifically the marks.

At page 52, the pages preceding get adjusted away from the spine, at a maximum incremental measurement of .0625". All the pages after 52 get adjusted towards the spine at a maximum incremental measurement of .0625". No cancellation.

<=========== Confused prepresser.

[DigitalCrapShoveler]

Talk to Uncle DCS, Joe. Where are you confused?

[Joe]

Talk to Uncle DCS, Joe. Where are you confused?

I'll get back to you later. Leaving for work right now.

[PrepressCrapFixer]

DCS I get it.  Your explanation makes perfect sense to me.  I think I will try that next time I do a saddle stitch book.  Most of our jobs are perfect bound catalogs. :rolleyes: