Print on demand - seriously

For many years, there has been talk of a machine that would print and bind a book in about 15 minutes, enabling bookshops and distributors to reduce the cost of shipping and storage of books. Shops would keep a range of covers in stock for browsers to examine, and maybe a few dumpbins of books so much in demand that buyers weren’t willing to wait for a copy.

The first of these Espresso Book Machines (TM) has just been installed at the New York Public Library. At present, it prints only 20 titles, all of them in the public domain, but that’s one small step for a machine, one giant leap for increasing the availability of those books that should never have gone out of print.

4 People have left comments on this post



» John Parker said: { Aug 3, 2007 - 02:08:44 }

About 15 years ago I saw an article about the “Indigo” printing system. Supposedly capable of of pumping out a “glossy” magazine in a few seconds “on demand”. It was limited by the CPU power of the computers available. (A Sun SPARC Station didn’t have enough grunt to keep the printer fed)

THis was an interesting one because it promised a better model for magazines. Newsagents could get away with only ordering one of each magazine and ordering a replacement for the next days run if it had sold during the day.

It’d allow more titles with less waste and unlimited back issues.

Not sure what ever happened to them. They may have been bought out by HP by the looks of things.

» Nick said: { Aug 6, 2007 - 12:08:06 }

Yeah, it’s a lovely idea - but…

Having worked in a couple of offices which had high volume copying or risographing machines running from time to time, my mind boggles at the potential for jams and breakdowns.

Looking at the picture, there are way too many moving parts for that machine not to break down constantly, and libraries and bookstores are not going to have the technical staff on site to repair and service it effectively.

I have a tenner that says the machine is out of service about 20-30% of the available time, and that servicing cost blowouts kill its rollout into general use.

» Chris Lawson said: { Aug 7, 2007 - 07:08:26 }

I agree in principle, Nick, but it depends on how much they’ve spent on the mechanics. Modern daily newspapers run much more complex printing presses with very little downtime. Of course, modern newspaper companies can be worth billions of dollars and they can’t afford to miss their printing deadlines or the entire distribution system falls down, so the owners are willing to spend a fortune on the engineering. Having said that, even cheap engineering can be very reliable. I’m always amazed at how reliable even cheap Korean cars are, for instance, especially when you consider how bloody complex they are. Ever seen the inside of a gearbox?

» Stephen Dedman said: { Aug 7, 2007 - 08:08:23 }

I’m with Chris on this one. Granted, putting paper into a machine tends to complicate matters, but I seem to be spending far less time unjamming photocopiers and printers than I used to do. And the machines certainly haven’t become any more expensive: I frequently see photocopier/printer/fax machine combinations selling for less than the cost of the ink cartridges inside.

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.