Re: Different Formats for Different Countries -- Variable Density

Philip Homburg spake thus:

> In article <4546760e$0$13826$822641b3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> David Nebenzahl  <nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>>In the case of printing, I have *never*--not once--been in a situation 
>>where it would be advantageous--or even possible--to divide a 
>>measurement by 10. Not even if one is printing something 10-up on a 
>>sheet does this ever arise. So much for the vaunted advantage of metric 
>>measure.
> 
> So, if you have a roll of paper, is the length listed in inches? (Is
that
> called a web-press?)

Yep, although we dispense with the hyphens; it's just a web press. (The 
paper is the web.)

> Are billboards sized in inches?

Yep.

>>Every single shop I've worked in over here, including one I owned, used 
>>inches and fractions of inches exclusively. 
> 
> How how do you deal with the weight of paper. Is that the weight per
> square inch.

Now *that* is a mess under our system; every type of paper has what's 
called a "basis weight", which is the weight of 500 sheets (a ream) at 
the "basis size", which of course is different for every type of paper. 
So we have, for example, 50 lb. "offset" or text paper, which is 
(approx.) the same weight as 20 lb. bond. Go figure.

But we still manage, and it really doesn't make that much difference. 
Why? Because you never have to do arithmetic with the weights; they're 
simply used to specify weights of paper, and everyone in the trade 
(designers & printers) knows what they are. (Unless, of course, you're a 
paper manufacturer or wholesaler and have to figure ****pping costs or 
something.)

>>Even carpenters and cabinetmakers, who one would imagine would have more

>>op****tunities to divide a length into equal parts which might 
>>conceivably be easier with metric measures, happily, easily and 
>>accurately use feet, inches and fractions of inches. Also not likely to 
>>change in the forseeable future.
> 
> And I guess they also buy their wood in inches?

Yep. 2x4s (nominally 2 x 4", actually 1-1/2" x 3-1/2" due to planing), 
and almost everything flat comes in 4x8' sheets.

>>>The same thing with the ISO paper series. You always know the name of
the
>>>size one bigger or smaller than the one you are currently using. 
>>>If you layout for A3, you can just proof on A4. Or print two A4s on an
>>>A3 and put a staple in the middle.
>>
>>Well, we primitives over here have the same thing. For instance, two 
>>letter-size sheets (8-1/2 x 11") fit exactly on one tabloid sheet (11 x 
>>17"). And remembering a small number of paper sizes doesn't tax one's 
>>brain too much.
> 
> So what is one bigger than tabloid of one smaller than letter?

If I understand your question, that would be 17 x 22", long a standard 
size of paper.


-- 
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)