Printing & Copying

Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt.

Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur?

This guy snowy270 is so mean for copying my favorite site.He copied cranberryk's site!Im so mad! :( If any of you like cranberryk's site coment and tell me how bad you fell about this.Heres a link to Snowy's site so you can talk to him :twisted: http://snowy270.wordpress.com/.

PS:Im still mad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey guys if you want to copy anything from my site please ask me.Heres a copysape banner and also if you want to copy my pictures you can do that without asking.

Further to my recent post on whether self publishing companies rip authors off here: http://selfpublishingnews.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/the-print-on-demand-audit-trail/, a visitor to this blog, Dean, made a useful observation.

Dean said:

'Here’s an easy way to check if your publisher is telling the truth about your sales levels. Order a certain number of copies for yourself, for friends, family or for reviews. Buy them from anywhere but direct from your publisher, and then see if these copies show up on a future royalty statement.

This is a cheap, simple and easy way to check up on your publisher without your publisher being any the wiser as to what you’re up to. Nobody can dispute evidence obtained this way, and it beats guesswork any day.

I’m glad to say when I’ve done this (once in a blue moon) my copies have always shown up on my account, so like the author of this article I agree most major pod firms are honest. I also agree that most authors don’t think before they point their finger.

So if any author is concerned their publisher is taking them for a ride on royalties then I’d recommend them to take this simple first step. It’s worth it just for peace of mind if you’re that much of a fretter.'

My response to Dean is:

'That’s a very good point and it will work a lot of the time and give you a good general idea of whether your publisher is being honest with you. Like you say, it’s cheap and easy - but it’s not completely fail-safe. I know I’m now being pernickity, but one has to be, because accusing a company of cheating authors is a very serious accusation that you obviously want to make sure you get right. Don't be like the screaming banshee I mentioned in the previous article who slandered AuthorHouse to anyone who'd listen, as well as every other company she ever self published with, because she was so deluded.

Though your suggestion will often work to the letter, there can be genuine reasons why there may be inconsistencies between what your publisher tells you and what you/your mates bought, especially if your book sells well. (In which case most authors don’t question their figures anyway as they’re happy - it’s generally only the minority of authors who are told they’ve only made a handful of sales who refuse to believe it and scream ‘liar!’ at their publisher.)

Supposing you ordered 10 of your own books from amazon in February, but these books were not actually printed until March. Or 5 were printed in February and 5 were printed in March. Or whatever. Most self publishing companies using print on demand will calculate the 'sale' based on when the book is actually printed and dispatched and not when the order is originally placed on amazon. So 10 sales may be split over two months on your royalty statement, reflecting when they were printed, not when they were ordered. It would be unfair to demand to see a block of 10 sales all happening in February as proof of your publisher's honesty - unless this is actually what happened.

If your book sells well, places like amazon may buy stock in before sales to the public are actually made. So in December you may have 175 sales showing on your statement as sales made in December, but many of these books may not be going straight out to customers, they could be stock reserves to supply all the new FUTURE orders amazon anticipates. So the 10 copies you bought in February may have come out of the 175 copies ALREADY printed in December. As the 10 copies were not newly printed in February or March they will never show on the royalty statement on these dates. But you don’t lose any money as you already have had your royalty. You’ll have been paid the royalty on this sale based on your December sales when the publisher sold the 175 to amazon of which the 10 was a part.

Another complication is returns. Even if you’ve not made your book returnable (most pod books aren’t returnable), the supply chain can still get lumbered with returns. So you may have sold a book in November, been paid a royalty on it when it was printed and sent out, but the actual book got returned to amazon. Amazon will then credit the customer and put it back into stock as they can’t return it to the printers for a refund, and so they’re delighted when your order comes in February as they can finally get rid of it! You’re obviously not going to be paid twice on the same book. In this scenario your 10 copies bought in February might be 100% accurately reflected as ‘February - 9 sales’. Your publisher is not conning you of one book sale!

Also take into the equation that calendar months and sales or accounting months will also vary.'

A number of self published books have managed to achieve financial and/or critical success. Several of them have even scooped literary awards. But an indie or self published book will never get one of the major book awards as things presently stand, simply because the major book awards are a completely closed shop.

For example, the Whitbread Children's Book of the Year, the last time I looked at any least, was not open to self published books. Many other awards have similar exclusions. Other book awards are only open to a select group of four of five publishers. The Richard and Judy Book Club on British television - a lucrative deal for its publisher sponsors - only takes books from a certain few publishers: it's basically a thinly veiled advert for the publishing houses that sponsor it (they're hardly going to promote another publisher's book!). I'm not saying the books put forward are not good or worthy of praise, but The Richard and Judy Book Club is certainly not a balanced or fair representation of all the best summer reads out there, despite what they lead the public to believe. The Richard and Judy Book of the Year and The Richard and Judy Viewers Choice award is also based only a vote from a base of the select few books from the select few publishers - so it's not a level playing field to begin with.

I hope that as publishing evolves, and more and more excellent traditionally published authors choose to go, or are forced to go, the self published route as their work is not viewed commercial enough by the big boys, that book awards, just like bookshops, will have to become more open to the new market, and the tide of public opinion. In the meantime, I won't hold my breath.

Any self publishing author out there in the meantime shouldn't despair - aren't, indeed, many things in life effectively closed shops? (I'm not a cynic, I'm just realistic) - and instead focus their efforts on smaller, more achievable prizes such as competitions run through Writer's Circles, and other regional prizes, which can be a great place for the self publishing author to scoop themselves up some acclaim. However, authors should be wary of any competition that asks for more than a couple of quid as a judging fee. Aren't these, indeed, vanity outfits in disguise? I had a discussion along these lines with the head of the local Writer's Circle. She'd been so suckered into the competitions circuit where a judging fee is expected, that she refused to believe that some writing competitions are a con, and run as businesses to get the cash flowing in with little real care as to the quality of the entries or indeed the winner. She was deeply offended that I'd even suggest a thing. Because, I guess, she'd then have to admit she'd been 'had' and her many prizes were not real. I, in fact, know for certain some writing competitions are a con because they are run by Vanity Presses. Almost everybody that enters wins a prize, and are then encouraged to buy the expensive, poorly produced poetry or short story anthology that is produced with the winning entries. Because the poor suckered author thinks he's won, and has something to be proud about, he buys lots of copies for friends and family. Shame. I'm really angry when I see it done to anyone - but especially children, probably because I remember my own bitter experience at the age of seven where my hopes were elevated to the heights to swiftly come tumbling down when my parents had the sense to realise I'd been hooked by a Vanity Press 'Writing Competition'. Every time I warn the poor deluded author this, I'm not thanked for my efforts. Such is the nature of self delusion.

Vaticination: Peter Sloterdijk's Foams (Sphären III: Schäume) is going to change the future of the social sciences. Well, it first needs to be translated into the current imperial languages (American English, Standard Mandarin and Modern Arabic). Available so far in French and Spanish.

The instructions said 30 minutes. Took more like an hour and a half, but the Lyson bulk ink system is now installed on my Epson R2400. The lid does close but I've left it open on this picture to show how it fits in. The instructions were pretty clear and the process isn't difficult, just long-winded and slow.

When it came to doing the nozzle checks and cleaning I thought that I'd installed it incorrectly as it took about 12 cleans and checks before I got a good nozzle check print. The instructions said it should only take 4-5 but that wasn't how it went for me.

I've done my first print out to compare colour between the original Epson Ultrachrome K3 inks and these Lyson Photochrome R24 inks and the results are pretty good. I was always aware that I'd need to tweak my printer profiles to get output that matched the colour of the Epson inks and the bulk system comes with a really helpful CD with sample profiles and tips to help get you going. If you click the test print image on the right you'll instantly see that the yellow balance will need altering but, apart from that, the results are pretty well matched to the original Epson inks.

With some tweaking I think I'll be able to match the output to the original inks, so so far so good!

A lot of people probably missed this so i'm reposting it to provide a speech covering Dr. Ron Paul's positions.  He's a lesser known candidate who's often ignored by the Media, but has a strong following on the internet. This speech may become a piece of history, and its up to you whether or not you're willing to put the time in to educate yourself.

Bob Barr's opening speech for Dr. Paul at CPAC

Ron Paul at CPAC part 1

Ron Paul at CPAC part 2

Ron Paul at CPAC part 3

According to Glenn Beck your 2nd Amendments are up for grabs if Hillary or Obama are sworn into the presidency. I saw this on his show last night (2/27/08) John Stossel a recently coverted Libertarian? Since when did that happen? i wonder who got him to cross over from liberal democrat to libertarian. The 2nd video is Presidential candidate Ron Paul's stance on gun control. John Stossel in December did an interview with Ron Paul about several issues and although Stossel seemed boggled by Dr. Paul's responses there was definetely an underlying level of admiration at least by my own perceptive qualities. Ron Paul ran as a Libertarian candidate for president in 1988.

Glenn Beck/John Stossel on 2nd Amendment rights

Ron paul on the 2nd Amendment