Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

engraver's test press

Expand Messages
  • lisaxdavidson
    In a book about collotype (Wilson), I just read that an engraver s proof press is ideal for collotype if you don t have the rubber-blanket type of press. I
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      In a book about collotype (Wilson), I just read that an engraver's proof press is ideal for
      collotype if you don't have the rubber-blanket type of press. I see that Vandercook calls its
      offerings "engravers' test presses," but I think they probably mean presses for photo-
      engravers, not hand engravers. Because for hand engraving I think you would need far
      more pressure than a V. could give. Am I right about this? But then Wilson wrote his book
      well into the Vandercook era, and he must have known what they called themselves, so I
      can't tell.
      Thank you,
      Lisa
    • Gerald Lange
      Lisa Yes, you are correct in regard to the Vandercook definition. Though Wilson (and others) have suggested the Vandercook as a possible collotype press, it is
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Lisa

        Yes, you are correct in regard to the Vandercook definition.

        Though Wilson (and others) have suggested the Vandercook as a possible
        collotype press, it is not. The better choice is an actual collotype
        press or an iron hand press. Extreme control over ink viscosity and
        roller technique is crucial for the production of collotypes and the
        Vandercook just isn't up for it.

        Gerald


        >
        >
        > In a book about collotype (Wilson), I just read that an engraver's
        proof press is ideal for
        > collotype if you don't have the rubber-blanket type of press. I see
        that Vandercook calls its
        > offerings "engravers' test presses," but I think they probably mean
        presses for photo-
        > engravers, not hand engravers. Because for hand engraving I think
        you would need far
        > more pressure than a V. could give. Am I right about this? But
        then Wilson wrote his book
        > well into the Vandercook era, and he must have known what they
        called themselves, so I
        > can't tell.
        > Thank you,
        > Lisa
        >
      • Lisa Davidson
        Hi, Gerald, Interesting -- so the hand inking required for an iron hand press is actually more exact and reliable than Vandercook mechanical inking . . . .
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 3, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi, Gerald,

          Interesting -- so the hand inking required for an iron hand press is
          actually more exact and reliable than Vandercook mechanical
          inking . . . . surprising. The Kent Kirby book is very much about
          hand inking too.

          Thanks,

          Lisa


          On Aug 3, 2008, at 9:25 PM, Gerald Lange wrote:

          > Lisa
          >
          > Yes, you are correct in regard to the Vandercook definition.
          >
          > Though Wilson (and others) have suggested the Vandercook as a possible
          > collotype press, it is not. The better choice is an actual collotype
          > press or an iron hand press. Extreme control over ink viscosity and
          > roller technique is crucial for the production of collotypes and the
          > Vandercook just isn't up for it.
          >
          > Gerald
          >
          > >
          > >
          > > In a book about collotype (Wilson), I just read that an engraver's
          > proof press is ideal for
          > > collotype if you don't have the rubber-blanket type of press. I see
          > that Vandercook calls its
          > > offerings "engravers' test presses," but I think they probably mean
          > presses for photo-
          > > engravers, not hand engravers. Because for hand engraving I think
          > you would need far
          > > more pressure than a V. could give. Am I right about this? But
          > then Wilson wrote his book
          > > well into the Vandercook era, and he must have known what they
          > called themselves, so I
          > > can't tell.
          > > Thank you,
          > > Lisa
          > >
          >
          >
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Gerald Lange
          Lisa Well, yes, that has been my experience. You can t be switching out multiple sets of rollers and multiple inks on a Vandercook for one print. Simple as
          Message 4 of 5 , Aug 3, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Lisa

            Well, yes, that has been my experience. You can't be switching out
            multiple sets of rollers and multiple inks on a Vandercook for one
            print. Simple as that. And that is what is required. You would have to
            dispense with the press's roller system altogether. A bit cumbersome to
            adequately hand ink on a Vandercook. Which is not a problem so much as
            the cylinder pressure is. Essentially, its single line pressure is
            inadequate and its singular direction force will tend to rip the
            collotype matrix off of its base. Not so good. You simply can't get the
            kind of uniform pressure required as from an iron hand platen press.

            The Kirby book basically sucks. Or blows. You pick. I can't image how
            you would be able to produce a collotype based solely on that book. Or
            trust the information given in it. We came to the conclusion that Kirby
            had not done multiples and was basically one of those grant track folks.
            There has been previous information posted here regarding the better
            bibliographic sources.

            This is a very difficult process. I have done it (as part of the
            editioning of a book), and am very appreciative of the experience (there
            is none better for informing one about the variances of the printing
            process), but I can state with some certainty, I would never ever do it
            again.

            Gerald
            http://BielerPress.blogspot.com

            Lisa Davidson wrote:
            > Hi, Gerald,
            >
            > Interesting -- so the hand inking required for an iron hand press is
            > actually more exact and reliable than Vandercook mechanical
            > inking . . . . surprising. The Kent Kirby book is very much about
            > hand inking too.
            >
            > Thanks,
            >
            > Lisa
            >
            >
            > On Aug 3, 2008, at 9:25 PM, Gerald Lange wrote:
            >
            >
            >> Lisa
            >>
            >> Yes, you are correct in regard to the Vandercook definition.
            >>
            >> Though Wilson (and others) have suggested the Vandercook as a possible
            >> collotype press, it is not. The better choice is an actual collotype
            >> press or an iron hand press. Extreme control over ink viscosity and
            >> roller technique is crucial for the production of collotypes and the
            >> Vandercook just isn't up for it.
            >>
            >> Gerald
            >>
            >>
            >>> In a book about collotype (Wilson), I just read that an engraver's
            >>>
            >> proof press is ideal for
            >>
            >>> collotype if you don't have the rubber-blanket type of press. I see
            >>>
            >> that Vandercook calls its
            >>
            >>> offerings "engravers' test presses," but I think they probably mean
            >>>
            >> presses for photo-
            >>
            >>> engravers, not hand engravers. Because for hand engraving I think
            >>>
            >> you would need far
            >>
            >>> more pressure than a V. could give. Am I right about this? But
            >>>
            >> then Wilson wrote his book
            >>
            >>> well into the Vandercook era, and he must have known what they
            >>>
            >> called themselves, so I
            >>
            >>> can't tell.
            >>> Thank you,
            >>> Lisa
            >>>
            >>>
            >>
          • Robert Tauber
            Gerald, Lisa, et al. - I learned how to print collotypes from Kent Kirby and have done numerous editions of books and broadsides with many collotypes numbering
            Message 5 of 5 , Aug 4, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Gerald, Lisa, et al. -

              I learned how to print collotypes from Kent Kirby and have done numerous editions of books and broadsides with many collotypes numbering from twenty or so copies to well over one hundred copies using a Vandercook, all with excellent results --- one broadside was a true duotone, utilizing two different hand rollers (soft and hard) with two different viscosity inks (loose and stiff).

              Collotypes are tricky; printing them is much like blowing bubble gum bubbles all day long.

              Bob Tauber
              Logan Elm Press
              614-688-3973
              tauber.1@...


              From: Gerald Lange
              To: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:01 AM
              Subject: Re: [PPLetterpress] Re: engraver's test press


              Lisa

              Well, yes, that has been my experience. You can't be switching out
              multiple sets of rollers and multiple inks on a Vandercook for one
              print. Simple as that. And that is what is required. You would have to
              dispense with the press's roller system altogether. A bit cumbersome to
              adequately hand ink on a Vandercook. Which is not a problem so much as
              the cylinder pressure is. Essentially, its single line pressure is
              inadequate and its singular direction force will tend to rip the
              collotype matrix off of its base. Not so good. You simply can't get the
              kind of uniform pressure required as from an iron hand platen press.

              The Kirby book basically sucks. Or blows. You pick. I can't image how
              you would be able to produce a collotype based solely on that book. Or
              trust the information given in it. We came to the conclusion that Kirby
              had not done multiples and was basically one of those grant track folks.
              There has been previous information posted here regarding the better
              bibliographic sources.

              This is a very difficult process. I have done it (as part of the
              editioning of a book), and am very appreciative of the experience (there
              is none better for informing one about the variances of the printing
              process), but I can state with some certainty, I would never ever do it
              again.

              Gerald
              http://BielerPress.blogspot.com

              Lisa Davidson wrote:
              > Hi, Gerald,
              >
              > Interesting -- so the hand inking required for an iron hand press is
              > actually more exact and reliable than Vandercook mechanical
              > inking . . . . surprising. The Kent Kirby book is very much about
              > hand inking too.
              >
              > Thanks,
              >
              > Lisa
              >
              >
              > On Aug 3, 2008, at 9:25 PM, Gerald Lange wrote:
              >
              >
              >> Lisa
              >>
              >> Yes, you are correct in regard to the Vandercook definition.
              >>
              >> Though Wilson (and others) have suggested the Vandercook as a possible
              >> collotype press, it is not. The better choice is an actual collotype
              >> press or an iron hand press. Extreme control over ink viscosity and
              >> roller technique is crucial for the production of collotypes and the
              >> Vandercook just isn't up for it.
              >>
              >> Gerald
              >>
              >>
              >>> In a book about collotype (Wilson), I just read that an engraver's
              >>>
              >> proof press is ideal for
              >>
              >>> collotype if you don't have the rubber-blanket type of press. I see
              >>>
              >> that Vandercook calls its
              >>
              >>> offerings "engravers' test presses," but I think they probably mean
              >>>
              >> presses for photo-
              >>
              >>> engravers, not hand engravers. Because for hand engraving I think
              >>>
              >> you would need far
              >>
              >>> more pressure than a V. could give. Am I right about this? But
              >>>
              >> then Wilson wrote his book
              >>
              >>> well into the Vandercook era, and he must have known what they
              >>>
              >> called themselves, so I
              >>
              >>> can't tell.
              >>> Thank you,
              >>> Lisa
              >>>
              >>>
              >>





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.