== Quote from BCS ([email protected])'s article > Hello Strtr, > > I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so > > far. > > > > But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me.. I know it isn't a > > hard-cover, but still: > > > > I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all > > the pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography > > through page 431. Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same > > cutting process, but it looks really sloppy cut. > > > > Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this. > > > Ditto on 431 but only where the isn't text covering it up. Also keep in mind > that more opaque paper would be thicker and the book is not exactly thin > to begin with.
Well, that's the thing, the paper in my MIT press book is quite a bit thinner, but far less translucent. But I also found a Chinese press book which was more translucent (although it was also 3/4 the thickness) Maybe it was mostly the cut which made it look cheap.
