> I figured words might not cut it. What I meant is that the side view is
> different from the top view:
>
>
> |\/|\/|\/|\/|\/| | | | | | |
> | | | | | | | | | | | |
> | | | | | | | | | | | |
> | | | | | | | | | | | |
> | | | | | | | | | | | |
> |/\|/\|/\|/\|/\| | | | | | |
>
> side top
>
> (What I have drawn is the convex edges -- the (convex only) folded corners
> of bellows material, not the "shadow view".)
>
> Does this make any more sense? If not, no matter. If you can duplicate
> the file folder you're home free.
Yes, I see what you mean. Only the sides will have the extra double fold
needed to make this work.
> I think you're right about stacking. All my folders from 35mm to 4x5 use
> the beveled corners (and steep tapering). My Graphic Views use square
> corners and gentle tapering. There may be some reason steep tapering
> doesn't work with square corners?
I found that making the "square corner fold" seemed a bit harder to make.
It is possible that it is even harder with a steep taper. I don't think
that it would be impossible though.
- Wayde
(wallen@boulder.nist.gov)