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

Re: [PPLetterpress] Re: About Kissing...

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange
    Hi again No, there are still plenty of services offering photomechanical engraving, this doesn t have anything to do with the process itself. There are a
    Message 1 of 92 , Oct 1, 2007
      Hi again

      No, there are still plenty of services offering photomechanical
      engraving, this doesn't have anything to do with the process itself.
      There are a number of photoengravers listed in the suppliers section
      here. It is more that certain techniques are no longer practiced. For an
      up to date (1969) view of the industry (and what it once was) see
      Letterpress Platemaking by F. G. Wallis and R. V. Cannon, Library of
      Industrial and Commercial Education and Training, Pergamon Press. Great

      I really did not say they were the best but rather that the industry had
      reached its zenith at this point (Inland Printer can simply be seen as
      representative). And this despite the fact that the 1930s was a period
      of economic decline due to the devastating back to back recessions known
      as the Great Depression. I would say that the 1920s were more a
      remarkable and expansive period. Examine the pages of the 1923 ATF
      Specimen catalog. This would be the last of ATF's big catalogs. Note
      the expansion of the Monotype and Linotype typeface offerings during
      this period and then how it begins to drop off in the 1930s.

      The decline is very apparent by the 1940s. In its recovery following
      WWII the industry began to focus on technology that would ultimately do
      away with letterpress as the primary means for printing production. By
      looking through the various directories of type design production one
      can easily discern that typefaces designated for metal began dropping
      off by the late 1950s and new typeface offerings were more and more
      designated for photo processes. El Lissitzky's prediction was realized:
      "Letterpress belongs to the past. The future belongs to...
      photomechanical processes." By the 1960s and into the early 1970s, the
      artifacts of letterpress, presses, type, etc., were flooding the used
      printing equipment market.

      One of the reasons letterpress survives is that it is a stabilized
      technology. It is not subject to change nor can the equipment be
      outdated. It is already obsolete. Whatever remains of it is functional,
      and only dependent upon those materials of production which, as well,
      have been preserved [metal type AND metal type casting as for instances]
      or built upon [the photopolymer plate process]. It may not be what it
      once was but that hardly matters as long as folks are capable of using
      it, and one hopes, capable of using it well. Ultimately the printed page
      is the final arbitrator. In that regard, letterpress need have no shame.


      Lisa Davidson wrote:
      > Hi, Gerald,
      > I see, yes. You're completely right, of course. What do you mean
      > by "A specific for instance would be
      > photomechanical engraving of the range and quality produced prior to
      > displacement from lithographic techniques"? prior to displacement
      > from . . . . sorry! if this means that litho techniques displaced
      > photomechanical engraving, yes, is the photomechanical engraving
      > simply not done anywhere now because it needs tanks of acid, etc., or
      > can you still get it somewhere?
      > Also, why is 1930's Inland Printer best? did it improve from 1920's
      > and 1910's?
      > Thanks,
      > Lisa
      > On Sep 30, 2007, at 3:36 PM, Gerald Lange wrote:
      > Lisa
      > Good question I thought, but my reference was obviously to the type of
      > production that went into the making of The Inland Printer at the time
      > period indicated. I don't know of any letterpress produced trade journal
      > of that quality produced in the last thirty years, if not the last forty
      > years....
      > *****
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Lisa Davidson
      I m sorry, but what is the difference between trimming and cutting? ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 92 of 92 , Oct 3, 2007
        I'm sorry, but what is the difference between trimming and cutting?

        On Oct 3, 2007, at 12:46 PM, David Goodrich wrote:

        > At an APHA of NY meeting last night where we were privileged to
        > peruse a
        > number of volumes from the ATF collection in the Columbia University
        > Library, I found a small printed slip of paper inside the cover of the
        > Kelmscott Press' "Golden Legend" that read:
        > IF this book is to be bound, the edges of the leaves should only be
        > TRIMMED,
        > not cut. In no case should the book be pressed, as that would
        > destroy the
        > "impression" of the type and thus injure the appearance of the
        > printing.
        > W. MORRIS
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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