Do you prefer paperback or hardback? Why?

paperback. aesthetics.

Paperback, but I still appreciate older soviet hardbacks that have softened up enough to provide very comfy reading.
t. got 3 volumes of Gulag Archipelago from 1989 for 5$

Compare the two filenames and you'll see who really needs to go back.

Trade paperbacks. Big enough to read, not as thick and cheaply-made as MM, and don't eat up shelf space at such an absurd rate like HC. I go for HC for a really long book sometimes, but generally PB works best for me. With several thousand books, I'm always worried about space.

>With several thousand books

How many have you read?

OP prefers hardblack bareback

That shelf is comfy.

>Do you prefer paperback or hardback?
The French editor La Pléiade has found the perfect middle ground between paperback and hardback.
Their books are quite small and don't weight much, but their quality is extremely good and you have between 1500 and 2000 pages with you. The books are bound and have a leather cover, not to soft, not to rigid.
The only drawback is that is expensive.

always paperback. cheaper and comfier to read. penguin especially.

Here's another picture.

penguin is a shit

In my life? I have no idea. Of the ones I own, about 70%--I get new books constantly, so it's hard to keep up. But a library is a research tool, not just a collection of books you've read.

I have a De Sade from them. Amazing binding quality, and just fine printing.

pocket peperback, feels right in my hands, those Cátedra books feel perfect.

I buy trade paperback as a rule, and for a few select books I buy nice hardcover editions mainly just to look nice on the shelf. I like paperbacks because they're easier to carry around and I don't mind lending them to friends and family.

I read hardback books because when I'm done I can slam them on a table, doesn't matter where I am I have to.

If I had unlimited money, then I would always buy hardcover. It's probably a good thing I don't, because I think I'd spend a third of my day buying books, another third organizing them, and the final third reading. I'd never do anything else again. If I make it to retirement, then that's exactly what I'm going to do.

Paperback with plastic cover. Anything else is absolute brainlet tier. True patrician coming through, make way.

>but I still appreciate older soviet hardbacks that have softened up enough to provide very comfy reading.
What?

I prefer hardback. I read mostly in paperback, but if I really enjoy a book I’ll go to the bother of getting a hardback version. They last longer.

This guy understands the most important aspects of the dilemma.

I see you have Designa. I also have a copy. It's an interesting read. One of my professors wrote a section of it. Dr. Olsen, he was a good guy. Surprised to find someone like him at a hole in the wall college.

any version of kindle honestly. I like physical books too but kindle got to be my favourite.

Paperback since im a cheap fuck and dont care how beat up my books look afterward

Scott Olsen? He did the Golden Section book they reprint in Designa. It's excellent work. Those Wooden Book omnibuses are a great deal, since they each combine material from about a half-dozen of their smaller books with less duplication. Not everything in the books is accurate, but the musing on the universe's strange geometries makes up for it.

Ebooks, then if I liked it used hardcopy from somewhere

Paperback is good for bitch-slapping niggas who disrespect your shit.
Hiding away in your pocket.
Stuffing into shit.
And is more affordable.
Paperback is great! But of course there is the sacrifice of the prestige that comes from owning a hardcover.

You can get pocket sized hardbacks

this, not all hardbacks are huge
pic related fits into my backpack absurdly easily, and it maintains its physical integrity considering its turning 107 this year

Easily paperback

Hardcover. More portable because of durability, easier to hold with one hand, don't have to worry about spine, still shows wear if you're a "muh character" plebe, harder to lose because it actually has weight (ergo you wouldn't misplace it unawares).

Also the amount of mention of "backpacks" and "bags" in this thread is highly disconcerting.

i need it for uni pham, what can i say, do you seripously expect me to carry binders for 4 classes and 2 other textbooks in my arms every monday, wednesday and friday?

ooh got you there

I prioritize large font, the back type is secondary.

Paperback. I don't want to strain my delicate hands and pay overs for the privilege.

>t. Utilitarian and non-creative

Paperback and worn :)
I hate getting a new book because every bend / crease in it annoys me.

But if its an old book and messed up anyway i spend more time enjoying and reading the book rather then worrying how im holding it / bending it .

Doesn't matter as long as its large, I hate mass market paperbacks