Facsimiles versus Reprints

KeskusteluEaston Press Collectors

Liity LibraryThingin jäseneksi, niin voit kirjoittaa viestin.

Facsimiles versus Reprints

elokuu 22, 2022, 11:03 am

Does EP make a consistent distinction between "facsimiles" and "reprints"?

I recently purchased the 1996 EP Ulysses, and was rather disappointed. I generally like the reprints of the George Macy originals; I don't find the fading to be as acute as other people in this group have reported. (Also, the price for the 1935 LEC Ulysses is very much out of my range.) But in this case the fading of the text is egregious. It looks like someone used a photocopy machine from the 1980s. I am surprised that EP went to the trouble of approximating the nice qualities of the original (Matisse illustrations, attractive cover design, etc.) but went ahead and used such a poor text.

The copyright page calls this volume a "facsimile of the first edition." I don't think I've seen this designation from EP before. Do people know of other examples of "facsimiles," in contrast to what I think of as EP "reprints" of George Macy originals? Is different printing technology used?

elokuu 22, 2022, 11:33 am

EP often produces facsimiles of texts from the 1800s and early 1900s, usually marketing them as deluxe limited editions, but their quality ranges all over the map. Sometimes it looks like they were just slapped onto my home copier with broken fonts and muddled illustrations, while other times they look brand new. The quality of the original text they are duplicating can make a big difference, but so can the skill of the person doing the duplicating and the quality of the equipment used.

Join to post