Rounding and backing

Caroline Gilderson-Duwe <c5d [at] gml__lib__uwm__edu> writes

>There are conflicting points of view regarding rounding and backing
>of commercially bound library materials.
>Has
>anyone had success with having their commercial bindery round and
>back only under certain conditions?  And has the general consensus
>regarding rounding and backing changed since these standards were
>written?

I think that your best answer on the rounding and backing question
is to take a walk through the stacks of a library that has been
using this method for four or five years. Compare the heavily used
items with similar material from your own library. The "flat back"
binding I've seen has been disappointing to say the least.

Unfortunately, there are some binderies who are pushing "flat back"
binding for all items bound.  As a commercial library binder, I can
see the benefits for the binder in cost reductions and ease of
processing in the plant.  This should never justify the exclusive
use of flat back binding for the library.  In my opinion (and many
of my colleagues at binderies across North America) rounding and
backing, when done carefully without excessive paper distortion,
will most often enhance the durability of the binding.

On certain volumes, the elimination of rounding and backing is
highly recommended. (ie. very thin items or volumes with maps,
photos and/or spine stubs, brittle paper, etc.)  Usually our
customers allow us to make this judgement,  but we do have instances
where libraries wish to stipulate precise binding instructions for
their materials.  Most library binders welcome this type of input
and are responsive to the customer's wishes.

My advice is to continue your quest to stay abreast of developments
in the library binding industry and to exercise your knowledge by
regular communication with your binder.  You can, and should, direct
your library binder to provide binding services that meet your
specific requirements.

Clarence Dykhouse
Wallaceburg Bookbinding & Mfg.

                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 9:58
                 Distributed: Sunday, February 4, 1996
                        Message Id: cdl-9-58-005
                                  ***