Your comments

Okay I am an idiot. Yes it works perfectly. My brain had decided that “width” was thickness. The moment I put in the width (as it says to do!) it works. User error!!!

If crop texture ends up being the way to go is it possible that the values can be mm? This way I can subtract 25mm?

Thinner books would be great.

Regarding the hard cover books to spread transformation, are you saying that you can simply edit the book manually and get to that point?

I was also curious about something. I am a typesetter so I typically do the interior of a book so I am left with a pdf of say 600 pages. The book that I demonstrated above, is a full colour book on the inside why my cover designer did the cover.

I want to do an open spread of the book, with a number of pages, turning over, I have to tediously add one page at a time. 

I do realise that this iteration of the software is feature complete so I am not expecting anything for version 5, but I was wondering if in the future there would be any value in the ability to add a pdf of the entire interior of a book and then boxshot would not only know how many pages (because the pdf had 600 pages), but a person could more easily choose a nice spread of images and when adding pages that are “turning” already have the images on both sides of that page? So let’s say I have the book open in the middle of the book, the user would see pages 300 and 301 already and then if chose to add another “page” already turning, then it would have page 302 and 303 already on that page without having to add them manually. Anyway crazy feature request for version 6 or 7 perhaps :-)

Anyway, I just want to say again how awesome this release is (especially now that the bug is not a bug but rather my own mistake – I guess that’s what happens when I test things in the middle of the night – yeah it’s 3:10am right now!)

regarding the spine thickness

here are the assets: https://we.tl/t-CVUbivejaC

and here is a video explaining what I am doing: https://www.screencast.com/t/InvUOqwHwpfi


Regarding the 3cm overlap. I see what you are saying. However, what I was hoping could happen was that Boxshot would crop the extra space. The issue is that I will receive from the graphic designer the artwork with lots of bleed (more than necessary for boxshot and even crop marks). I don’t want that extra bleed to be compressed, but simply not to be used. So if only 5mm of the 30mm is needed, can the extra 25mm be cropped?

I appreciate that I could fix this in the crop texture button but the units there are pixels rather than mm.

Regarding the 2mm thickness. This is the smallest thickness a printer will print a book with a flat spine. Any thinner would become a magazine-bound book. Hence choosing 2mm as a minimum. It’s not important for my work, but it happened to come up so I thought I would mention it.

The documentation indicated that I could change the hardcover book to a spread or did I misread that?

one more request/bug: I tried to do a small book (A6) cover with a thickness of 2mm, but the minimum is 5mm…

There seems to be a bug in the fit to images with a hardback book. I typed in 3cm for the thickness and it changed it to 9.4cm. 

The cover artwork was 38.6×24.3. If I put in 3cm, it already knows the height is 24.6 from the pdf and the width of the page should be 17.8.

However, when I hit Fit to images, it gives:

width: 14.6

height: 23.5

and changes the thickness to 9.4cm!

This bug is on both hard back and paperback. Unless I am not using this correctly?

Also Windows gave me loads of warnings when I tried to download this. I’m guessing this is a beta issue.

The wrapped artwork is exactly what I need, but you have limited it to 1.5cm. For the job I was dealing with, the printer needed 2cm and the crop marks are out of this extra 2cm, so I need to wrap the artwork even more. Is it possible to allow more than 1.5cm? I would prefer 3cm if this is at all possible.

Feature-wise this is so perfect, I am so happy you were able to make this work.

this update looks bloody amazing!

Honestly, until I started the beta testing, the need for bleeding so that you could render over the edge never occurred to me! The level of detail that you have gone into to make this look good is really amazing.

I suspect that the 5% stretch won’t make any difference in real life. 

I will make some time to upload some renders (I have a lot, but will select some nice ones).

I will submit a separate idea as you suggest.

Yes this would only work though if a person saved the pdf with bleed. I guess the smart option would be, if at all possible, for it to “read” the bleed value of the pdf. Now let’s see the bleed value was 20mm because that’s what the printer required, but boxshot only needed 5mm, then it would only take 5mm of the 20mm bleed.

If boxshot cannot read the bleed value from the pdf, then the person would then create the artwork with say 5mm bleed specially for boxshot and then write in boxshot “5mm”

I have loads of images for your gallery: here is one: https://we.tl/t-IhkQSu4D9a

I just want to add, that even using the 5% stretch with a version without bleed makes a really beautiful 3D render. I think the approximation is extremely convincing and certainly good enough for my clients. It’s just my OCD that wants it perfect, although I doubt anybody can tell the difference.

This is really very very good. Kudos!

“we may limit bleeds by the distance between the artwork on the outside of the cover and the paper block inside the book”
this seems to be the correct approach in my eyes :-)

I have created 3 pdfs: https://we.tl/t-g1fPBxgWYE

The first is called spread cropped (good for client).pdf: If the user only has this, then there is no artwork to wrap in which case I understand the logic of using a percentage. The problem of course is that the client cannot see if the writing on the spine is too close to the top of the spine.

The second pdf is called spread with 5mm bleed (good for boxshot).pdf. In this PDF there are no crop marks. If Boxshot is able to detect the bleed from the trim, then there is no need for the “Artwork wrapping level” as it would wrap whatever there was. If there was 20mm of bleed, it would simply know that the distance to hard cover was say 3mm, the edge radius, 1mm and the cover thickness another 2mm, so if I have understood how the calculations work, it would only use the first 6mm of the 20mm of bleed. If the bleed was only 5mm as in the example sent to you, then there would be 1mm missing. I guess the Artwork wrapping level could be use to “fudge things” when it wasn’t absolutely required to be perfect.

The third pdf is the same but with crop marks in case that is useful to you.

Finally, I have understood the joint width to be a separate value from the front cover, is this the case

Here is a screenshot of my InDesign:

https://we.tl/t-jQ8g94lSTX

There are 5 InDesign pages.
❶ is the front

❷ is the joint 

❸ the spine

❹ joint again 

❺ back

Is this how Boxshot sees the joint? or is the joint part of the front? in other words, for me, the front is 102mm and the joint is 8.5mm, or should it be that the front is 110.5mm and from that the joint is 8.5mm?

here is a cover, the dimensions are front: 165mm×102mm, joint: 8.5mm and width: 27mm

normally, I wouldn't create the image with crop marks for boxshot, but I have here to show the issue.


spread test 2.pdfbug.boxshot5