Wow: The Espresso Book Machine
Literature Terminator.
From the press release:
Blackwell, the UK’s leading academic bookseller, has unveiled the launch of the 2.0 Espresso Book Machine (EBM) at its flagship store, 100 Charing Cross London. It is the first bookshop installation of its kind within the UK, allowing any book to be selected from an inexhaustible network of titles and prints on demand in just 3 minutes from a digital file onsite, online at www.blackwell.co.uk, or uploaded in person from CDs or flash drives.
This bad boy whips up a book in three minutes. Go on to read more about the implications of such a device.
My take: This is definitely a much more ecologically sustainable process than the standard model of book production, which is exciting. It also completely removes the barrier of entry to producing a book, which, I’d argue, is a very ‘good’ thing; the more art the better. It’s happening all around us; the availability of cheap means of production means that anyone with a computer and a camera can make a movie, anyone with a computer near this behemoth or Lulu.com can make a book, anyone with a computer and Garageband/Audible can make music, etc. Distribution will be the sticking point in media for awhile, and it’s going to get messy. I look forward to help making the mess.
What do you think?
EDIT: Also, a thin treatise on paperback vs. hardback after the jump…
So, in as few words as possible: I’d like to see the disappearance of the hardback book. The only argument I can stand behind for them is that of ‘quality’, i.e. it won’t yellow and fall apart in fifty years. But, c’mon, printing presses are sophisticated (obviously). A high-quality paperback book should last a very long time. They’re more portable, lighter, smaller, less destructive in production, and cheaper. Why not?
Tags: ebm, media, print on demand
Man, Ken, this post made me feel old because I am old. But I like all of your youthful excitement, all of your points are well said and the future is upon us, thank God, and if you really do look like Fernando Verdasco from my Gourevitch/paris review post, we should totally get together for a game of tennis.
I am in favour of this sort of technology. As you say, the more art the better. More books (minus dipshit agents and editors more interested in sales than quality) is an absolute good. While the big presses are all erect over Dan Brown’s latests pile of shit, small presses and self publishers are giving us art (good and bad art).
Good, I say.
I am in favour of this sort of technology. As you say, the more art the better. More books (minus dipshit agents and editors more interested in sales than quality) is an absolute good. While the big presses are all erect over Dan Brown’s latests pile of shit, small presses and self publishers are giving us art (good and bad art).
Good, I say.
Also- I d love hardback books. The trade paperback almost changes my mind, but at least in the case of lovely limited, numbered, signed editions, I love want hardbacks.
Also- I d love hardback books. The trade paperback almost changes my mind, but at least in the case of lovely limited, numbered, signed editions, I love want hardbacks.
I’ve heard some complaints about Lulu lately, and it seems like they’re pretty expensive. I’ve used Lightning Source as my short-run print-on-demand service for the last two Future Tense and they’re real nice. I’m interested to hear if anyone else has opinions about this.
I know that iUniverse, Publish America, and 1st Books and any P.O.D. printer that pretends to be a “publisher” are the absolute worst.
I’ve heard some complaints about Lulu lately, and it seems like they’re pretty expensive. I’ve used Lightning Source as my short-run print-on-demand service for the last two Future Tense and they’re real nice. I’m interested to hear if anyone else has opinions about this.
I know that iUniverse, Publish America, and 1st Books and any P.O.D. printer that pretends to be a “publisher” are the absolute worst.
this is illllllll
this is illllllll
Lulu is expensive I think if you are going to use them for a short run. I use them all of the time for making one or two books of something. Or if I want to print a manuscript and that looks like a book. Then it is great. Also, it is good in terms of publishing your books and getting it distributed everywhere (except brick and mortar bookstores!) at very little cost. There are some things to avoid with them. For instance, if you buy an ISBN number (which comes with distribution) don’t have them list the book in Google Books. List the book in Google Books yourself since you hold the rights. Things like this.
I’ve used short runs before using docutechs (the machines that are used for POD). The difference is that it is more like offset in terms of the options offered to you. You can choose the paper stock, and if you print enough copies, get it printed on a matte cover, and then the cost per copy comes way down. If you are going to print more than 500 copies, last time I checked prices, it made more sense to go offset. If you are going to print more than a couple of hundred, go short run over POD.
In any case, Lulu and I think the Amazon version of POD, are both very close to real POD. The copies are generated pretty much as people ask for them.
POD books are not really bookstore friendly. Although the last couple of years have been really bad for bookstores — I have a couple of experiences of doing readings at bookstores right before they go out of business including old indie stores like Jackson’s Books in Salem (RIP) and it often feels to me like books can basically be sold from street corners — POD is great for this — yet bookstores remain important focal points for readers interested in new books. Despite the fact that it seems like books are bought and sold over the internet, the only time I have ever managed to sell books from a street corner went hand in hand with doing readings at bookstores.
The people who work at bookstores, like librarians, pretty much are the main point of connection, it seems to me between a town and books. And really to work with bookstores, then, a writer needs a distributor at the very least. Once distribution is involved there is warehousing and the movement of copies around and this means hundreds of copies need to be out there, and POD looks less useful and expensive.
POD works ideally distribution is abstracted. A person wants a book. They order it and it is created.
I am hopeful, though, that things like the Book Espresso Machine will make it easier for small business bookstores to deal with the stuff produced by writers currently using POD. I have no idea what this bookstore will look like — where the stock is largely virtual or second hand or what?
Lulu is expensive I think if you are going to use them for a short run. I use them all of the time for making one or two books of something. Or if I want to print a manuscript and that looks like a book. Then it is great. Also, it is good in terms of publishing your books and getting it distributed everywhere (except brick and mortar bookstores!) at very little cost. There are some things to avoid with them. For instance, if you buy an ISBN number (which comes with distribution) don’t have them list the book in Google Books. List the book in Google Books yourself since you hold the rights. Things like this.
I’ve used short runs before using docutechs (the machines that are used for POD). The difference is that it is more like offset in terms of the options offered to you. You can choose the paper stock, and if you print enough copies, get it printed on a matte cover, and then the cost per copy comes way down. If you are going to print more than 500 copies, last time I checked prices, it made more sense to go offset. If you are going to print more than a couple of hundred, go short run over POD.
In any case, Lulu and I think the Amazon version of POD, are both very close to real POD. The copies are generated pretty much as people ask for them.
POD books are not really bookstore friendly. Although the last couple of years have been really bad for bookstores — I have a couple of experiences of doing readings at bookstores right before they go out of business including old indie stores like Jackson’s Books in Salem (RIP) and it often feels to me like books can basically be sold from street corners — POD is great for this — yet bookstores remain important focal points for readers interested in new books. Despite the fact that it seems like books are bought and sold over the internet, the only time I have ever managed to sell books from a street corner went hand in hand with doing readings at bookstores.
The people who work at bookstores, like librarians, pretty much are the main point of connection, it seems to me between a town and books. And really to work with bookstores, then, a writer needs a distributor at the very least. Once distribution is involved there is warehousing and the movement of copies around and this means hundreds of copies need to be out there, and POD looks less useful and expensive.
POD works ideally distribution is abstracted. A person wants a book. They order it and it is created.
I am hopeful, though, that things like the Book Espresso Machine will make it easier for small business bookstores to deal with the stuff produced by writers currently using POD. I have no idea what this bookstore will look like — where the stock is largely virtual or second hand or what?
On a few separate occasions I had the opportunity to talk with veterans of music and film on the new tools we young artists have, and their effects on the industry and quality of the respective art form.
There seemed to be a common concern:
Mostly everyone I spoke with expressed disdain to the idea of any joe shmoe being able to create something and distribute it to the masses quickly and easily, because it ensured that the industry would be diluted with “talentless” content. Someone even alluled to the fact that “Youtube is destroying music”, which is ironic since that seems to be a primary source of music history for me these days. God knows I wouldn’t spend my whole day watching Papa Joe Jones clips in the *library, and it’s not like WMG is tweeting about their catalog (yet).
I understand the fear. More “bad” content could eventually make “ok” content sound “good”, and “good” content sound “amazing”, thus forever lowering the bar of excellence, and the paychecks.
( A DJ acquaintance of mine calls this the “Serato Effect”; due to new technology like Serato’s Scratch Live, DJs don’t think out their sets anymore because they don’t have to carry vinyl. My mentor has assured me that sucka DJs have always existed though, and that’s what battling is for. I’d love to see authors battle. Ken, Blake, make this happen.)
At the same time though, there’s information immortalized out there to combat this. It seems to have the reverse effect for me; I can’t watch a drummer and be impressed any more unless he’s as good or better than Papa Joe Jones.
I’m all for with this technology. Make more books, quicker, and cheaper. It’s not like authors are known for being happy and making lots of money anyways, that is until they make the book into a movie.
*If you have any influence or knowledge over a library or library systems, how dope would you be if you figured out a way for libraries to suggest related content really quickly, web 2.0 style. Make it pretty with iphone/blackberry apps k thnx.
On a few separate occasions I had the opportunity to talk with veterans of music and film on the new tools we young artists have, and their effects on the industry and quality of the respective art form.
There seemed to be a common concern:
Mostly everyone I spoke with expressed disdain to the idea of any joe shmoe being able to create something and distribute it to the masses quickly and easily, because it ensured that the industry would be diluted with “talentless” content. Someone even alluled to the fact that “Youtube is destroying music”, which is ironic since that seems to be a primary source of music history for me these days. God knows I wouldn’t spend my whole day watching Papa Joe Jones clips in the *library, and it’s not like WMG is tweeting about their catalog (yet).
I understand the fear. More “bad” content could eventually make “ok” content sound “good”, and “good” content sound “amazing”, thus forever lowering the bar of excellence, and the paychecks.
( A DJ acquaintance of mine calls this the “Serato Effect”; due to new technology like Serato’s Scratch Live, DJs don’t think out their sets anymore because they don’t have to carry vinyl. My mentor has assured me that sucka DJs have always existed though, and that’s what battling is for. I’d love to see authors battle. Ken, Blake, make this happen.)
At the same time though, there’s information immortalized out there to combat this. It seems to have the reverse effect for me; I can’t watch a drummer and be impressed any more unless he’s as good or better than Papa Joe Jones.
I’m all for with this technology. Make more books, quicker, and cheaper. It’s not like authors are known for being happy and making lots of money anyways, that is until they make the book into a movie.
*If you have any influence or knowledge over a library or library systems, how dope would you be if you figured out a way for libraries to suggest related content really quickly, web 2.0 style. Make it pretty with iphone/blackberry apps k thnx.
dewey decimal
dewey decimal
[…] > Blog Archive » Wow: The Espresso Book Machine Tags: independent, indie, pod, publishing, self Posted in Computers And Technology […]