Hardcover vs. Paperback?

[Chrano]

Hi all, just a had a quickie question. I just started reading fantasy maybe bout a year or more ago. I have read all the Tolkien books, also A song of Ice and Fire and some other good ones I got based on recommendations on these forums

Anyway, I was wondering what type of books you all prefer, Hardcover or paperback. Most of the books I have bought are hardcover. No particular reason I guess, I just think they look nicer. Only drawback is they take up more room then paperback obviously.

[Richardb]

Nothing looks better than a few hundred hardbacks lined up on the bookshelves...
But, sometimes you gotta also buy the paperback to carry to work, on planes, etc...

[Brahm_K]

I prefer to read a hardback- but the problem is that theyre very expensive and take up a lot of space. So, I buy paperback, except for when new books in series I like come out and for history books.

[cougs]

As far as reading goes, I prefer trade paperbacks over hardcover. They have the same quality paper as a hardback, but they open up easily, making them a joy to read (imo), and look really nice on a shelf.

Reading:
1st - Trade/Quality/Large paperback
2nd - Mass Market
3rd - Hardcover

Collecting:
1st - Leather
2nd - Trade/Quality/Large Paperback
3rd - Hardcover/Library
4th - Mass Market

[FitzChivalry]

I usually read mass market paperback, mostly because they are cheaper, but also because they fit on my shelf better.
I don't understand though why some books get stuck in the Trade Paperback stage and never get to mass market, books of authors like Jeff Vandermeer, Patricia Mckillip, Jeffrey Ford, Jeffrey E. Barlough and many others. Talking about the US market where i do most of my purchases, some of those can be found in the british equivalent of mass market paperback in the UK.

[Hobbit]

Old topic!

Earlier discussion HERE and HERE.

(I'm sure I've said there for me it's hardback: but definitely not trade paperback, if I can help it!)

Hobbit

[shadow9d9]

Paperback for me.. I need to be able to bend the book to hold it comfortably. Hardbacks suck.

[manephelien]

Paperback for me.. I need to be able to bend the book to hold it comfortably. Hardbacks suck.

I have small hands, so paperbacks are a lot more comfortable to read. They're also quite a bit cheaper than hardbacks. However, if it's a book I really want, I'll buy it in hardcover.

[intensityxx]

For reading, I prefer ebooks (Sony Reader) for its light weight and so I can adjust the size, font, etc.

I really hate thick, dark, smashed-together text in mmpbs, and I find that sometimes UK books are the worst offenders. (Doesn't that bother you guys too?)

Because trade paperbacks often have better vertical spacing, whiter paper, nicer fonts, and lighter weight, I like them the best of physical books.

I used to prefer hardcovers, but once I became a "mouse potato", my wrists became too sore to hold hardcovers.

[redhead]

I have small hands, so paperbacks are a lot more comfortable to read. They're also quite a bit cheaper than hardbacks. However, if it's a book I really want, I'll buy it in hardcover.

ah, so that explains why i love paperbacks over hardbacks! I've got teensy little kid hands!

oh trade paperbacks, how do i love thee, let me count the ways
- fits in my purse
- fits my little kid hands
- doesn't weigh anything
- you ever dropped a hardback in the bathtub??

I get hardbacks from the library, but usually buy paperbacks.

[Hobbit]

trade paperbacks, how do i love thee, let me count the ways
- fits in my purse
- fits my little kid hands
- doesn't weigh anything

RED: you sure you got that right? If so, your handbag must be huge!

Trade Paperback - the text block of a Hardback. Same size as a HB, same cover, just not a hardback.

Mass Market Paperback: the usual paperback. Gets bent, folded bashed. Doesn't handle regular mauling, you know the one...

Because trade paperbacks often have better vertical spacing, whiter paper, nicer fonts, and lighter weight, I like them the best of physical books.

Intensity: If only that were true! Quite often here in the UK, Trade Paperback means cheap PB paper in a HB size. All the problems, none of the benefits....

(Just don't get me started on deckled edges....)

And if you want books I really love: leather bound, gilt edged.... Easton Press are fabulous!

Hobbit

[xghostsniperx]

Mass Market Paperback, definitely. When I first got really into fantasy (well, just generally any reading that wasn't for school) I was really picky about having all hardcover books because I knew they'd last longer and they look better as well.

Now I realize that Paperbacks are more my thing. Easier to read, easier to carry, and much cheaper. To me, books are meant to be read, not collected (not to nock those who like collecting books), so I really don't care about the look of them on the shelf at all.

[Obtuse]

Paperbacks

Mainly because they are cheaper. I don't mind spending extra for quality when it comes to some things, like electronics for example, but spending extra for a HB doesn't increase the quality of the read. I don't think I could justify shelling out the extra cash for HBs unless I was absolutely loaded.

[Hobbit]

The cost concept has been mentioned before; in my experience you can buy HB's as cheap as Trades or even MMP's if you time it right and shop around. And it does become much cheaper of course when they split the HB into two MMP's.

The big advantage of this is that can be up to a year before the MMP appears. Depends how long you can wait.

Hobbit

[Obtuse]

True, Hobbit, true, but then you have to balance the cost of that time spent shopping around for deals on the HBs against the benefits of the format; a very subjective thing. For me, it just isn't worth it. As I alluded to, I don't find that reading HBs impacts my enjoyment of a book and I'm not concerned with collecting, so...

The wait for the MMP's has on occasion been as issue. If you promise not to tell anyone, I'll admit to having splurged on a HB a couple of times when I just couldn't wait.