DIY Letterpress - From Scratch to Prototype

DIY LETTERPRESS FROM SCRATCH TO PROTOTYPE

As a kid, I’ve always been fascinated by building things.

As everybody, I started my way with small plastic blocks, creating new worlds. For a while I forgot what it tasted like to create things, those were my dark years of middle school.

Now, growing as a designer, I have the precious opportunity to continue to build, tinker, hammer down and sand matter, guided by some crazy idea.

And this project is exactly one of those crazy ideas. I got fascinated some time ago by the ancient methods of printing. Books, as we know them, are the result of a century-long transformation and adaptation. Of course, a long way has come from Aldo Manuzio’s De Aetna. But it is surely interesting to examine more closely how this art was born. And, eventually, bring its methods in the 21st millennium.

But first, a bit of history.

ADANA3D A HOMEMADE LETTERPRESS

A PROJECT BY FILIPPO SANZENI

FREE PRESS

PRINTING, INK THAT LASTS Before the printing press, books were produced by scribes (at first, primarily based in monasteries, although by the 12th century there were many lay copiers serving the university market). The process of writing out an entire book by hand was as labor-intensive as it sounds: so much so that a dozen volumes constituted a library, and a hundred books was an awe-inspiring collection.

This remained true until the invention of movable type, the perfection of which is attributed to Johannes Gutenberg (although the Chinese had it several centuries earlier, and a Dutch fellow named Coster may have had some crude form a decade earlier).

Gutenberg, although a man of vision, did not personally profit from his invention. He worked for over a decade with borrowed money, and his business was repossessed by his investors before the first mass-produced book was printed, the Gutenberg Bible of 1454, printed in Mainz by Fust and Schoeffer.

Gutenberg’s basic process remained unchanged for centuries. A punch made of steel, with a mirror image of the letter is struck into a piece of softer metal.

Molten metal is poured into this, and you get type. The type is put into a matrix to form the page of text, inked, then pressed into paper.

Within several decades typesetting technology spread across Europe. The speed with which it did so is impressive: within the first fifty years, there were over a thousand printers who set up shops in over two hundred European cities.

Typical print runs for early books were in the neighborhood of two hundred to a thousand books.

Many groups sought to control this new technology. Scribes fought against the introduction of printing, because it could cost them their livelihoods, and religious authorities sought to control what was printed. Sometimes this was successful: for centuries in some European countries, books could only be printed by authorized printers, and nothing could be printed without the approval of the Church. Printers would be held responsible rather than authors for the spread of unwanted ideas, and some were even executed. But this was a largely futile struggle, and most such restraints eventually crumbled in the western world. One of the most famous printers was Aldo Manuzio.

ALDO MANUZIO’S LOGO

Amazingly, the printing press and the science of typecutting had only minor refinements from the late 1500s to the late 1800s. Towards the end of this period, the industrial revolution brought major innovations in printing technology. Rotary steam presses (steam machines in 1814, rotary machines in 1868) replaced hand-operated ones, doing the same job in 16% of the time; photoengraving took over from handmade printing plates.

Typesetting itself was transformed by the introduction of line-casting machines, first Ottmar Mergenthaler’s Linotype

(1889), and then the Monotype machine. Essentially, line-casting allowed type be chosen, used, then recirculate back into the machine automatically. This not only introduced a huge labor savings in typesetting, (again, on the order of the 85% reduction in printing time), but also rendered obsolete the huge masses of metal type created by the previously existing type foundries.

While typesetting and printing speeds increased phenomenally, so did the speed of punchcutting. In 1885, Linn Boyd Benton (then of Benton, Waldo & Company,

Milwaukee) invented a pantographic device that automated the previously painstaking process of creating punches. His machine could scale a drawing to the required size, as well as compressing or expanding the characters, and varying the weight slightly to compensate for the larger or smaller size--- this last being a crude form of the “optical scaling” done by skilled typographers making versions of the same font for different sizes. In optical scaling, the thickest strokes retain the same relative thickness at any size, but the thinnest strokes are not simply scaled up or down with the rest of the type, but made thicker at small sizes and thinner at large display sizes, so as to provide the best compromise between art and readability.

The economic impact of all these advances on the type industry cannot be overstated. For example, in the United States, the majority of type foundries escaped a bankruptcy bloodbath in 1892 by merging into a single company, called American Type Founders (ATF). Ultimately twenty-three companies merged into ATF, making it far and away the dominant American type foundry.

Also around this time, the “point” measurement system finally reached ascendancy. In the earlier days of printing, different sizes of type had simply been called by different names. Unfortunately, these names were not standardized internationally; 8-point type was called “Petit Texte” by the French and “Testino” by the Italians. Pierre Simon Fournier had first proposed a comprehensive point system in 1737, with later refinements, but what was ultimately adopted was the later version developed by Francois Ambroise Didot.

PARAGRAPH COMPOSED WITH MOVABLE CHARACTERS

DIGITAL TYPOGRAPHY

But let’s fast forward to modern times, where the biggest revolution since Gutenberg was made.

The earliest computer-based typesetters were a hybrid between photocomposition machines and later pure digital output. They each had their own command language for communicating with output devices. Although these machines had advantages, they also had problems. None of these early command languages handled graphics well, and they all had their own formats for fonts. However, some of these devices are still in service as of 1995, for use in production environments which require more speed and less flexibility (phone books, newspapers, flight schedules, etc.).

In the late 1980s PostScript gradually emerged as the de facto standard for digital typesetting. This was due to a variety of reasons, including its inclusion in the Apple Laserwriter printer and its powerful graphics handling. When combined with the Macintosh (the first widely used computer with a what-you-see-is-what-you-get display) and PageMaker (the first desktop publishing program), the seeds were all sown for the current dominance of computer-based typesetting.

Most high-end typesetting still involves printing to film, and then making printing plates from the film. However, the increasing use of high- resolution printers (600-1200 dots per inch) makes the use of actual printing presses unnecessary for some jobs. And the next step for press printing is the elimination of film altogether, as is done by a few special systems today, in which the computer can directly create printing plates.

THIS IS HOW A DIGITAL FONT LOOKS LIKE

Today, although PostScript predominates, there are a variety of competing page description languages (PostScript, HP PCL, etc.), font formats (Postscript Type One and Multiple Master, Truetype and Truetype GX) computer hardware platforms (Mac, Windows, etc.) and desktop publishing and graphics programs. Digital typesetting is commonplace, and photocomposition is at least dying, if not all but dead. Digital typefaces on computer, whether Postscript or some other format, are generally outline typefaces, which may be scaled to any desired size (although optical scaling is still an issue).

There has been considerable economic fallout from all this in typography.

Although some digital type design tools are beyond the price range of the “average� user, many are in the same price range as the mid- to highend graphics and desktop publishing programs. This, combined with the introduction of CD-ROM typeface collections, has moved digital type away from being an expensive, specialized tool, towards becoming a commodity.

As a result of both this and the brief photocomposition interregnum, the previously established companies have undergone major shakeups, and even some major vendors, such as American Type Founders, have failed to successfully make the digital transition, and gone bankrupt instead.

FROM IDEAS TO MADNESS The initial concept was quite simple: analyze Gutenberg’s press, scale it down and build it with wood. My first thought went to this primitive press mainly because it is structurally simple: you have a big press, operated by a lever, that squeezes a big sheet of paper on a matrix, previously inked with some sort of rollers.

This design could be simply achieved with a metal frame and a bottle press.

But it wasn’t really interesting in my perspective, as it relied on a massively produced hydraulic press, one that you can buy for cheap online. Not a very big challenge, huh?

The great idea came after I visited the Typographical Museum in Lodi, a lovely town just north from Milan. They have an impressing array of letterpresses, platen machinery and other really interesting presses.

Analyzing the compact platen letterpresses, I realized that would be a good design to consider. They are reasonably small and lightweight machines, very easy to operate and maintain. Moreover, some of them were used during the Second World Wars by Italian partisans to print anti-fascist propaganda.

I just couldn’t resist to the romantic charm of the story.

LETTERPRESS MANUFACTURED BY ZINI IN ITALY

As reference I used the glorious British Adana 8x5, a letterpress sold from the late Fifties. I wanted to link the ancient tradition of hand printing with modern technologies, so I decided to use 3D printing. Hence, the name Adana3D. I started to sketch a lot on random pieces of paper, trying to figure out the best possible configuration of all the elements. Even if there were basically three pieces -matrix, platen, pressing mechanism-, this step took me a huge amount of time.

Eventually, I decided to break the machine in three sections, one that would absorb the blows and be the housing of the matrix, a central part constituted by the platen and its mechanism and a third part, the block that would support the mechanism.

THE BRITISH ADANA 8x5, IN ITS DISTINCTIVE BRIGHT RED

3D MODELING AND FLATTENING Once all the ideas were on paper, I started the 3D modeling. The two blocks were modelled in Autodesk’s 3DS Max, then processed in a special software called Pepakura Designer.

This one is a pretty neat piece of code, as it allows you to import .obj files and to flatten them on a single or multiple pieces of paper. By doing so I was able to print out all the faces of the polygons and to create some paper mock ups, to see if the proportions were ok and if everything was behaving the way I expected. As always, a couple of details had to be changed (i.e. the slot running through the second block was too shallow), but nothing major.

3D MODELING...

...AND FLATTENING

CONCRETE, PAIN AND BLISS Then I started some research on the materials I was going to use. As I said previously, the initial concept was to print every part with a 3D printer. After a quick research, I understood that the whole project would be slightly above 1600 Euros (around 3000 USD), nothing that I could afford. So I rewinded my mind and focused on bringing down the price of the final press.

I thought that wood could be a pretty good and cheap alternative.

Unfortunately, after a couple of days I had to give up this idea: the big manufacturers weren’t able to cut such small chunks of wood, while the carpenters thought for some reason that I was plain crazy.

CONCRETE - IT’S EVERYWHERE

For a brief moment I considered using epoxy resin, but when I realized that the exothermic reaction which occurs when you mix the chemicals would probably melt the mould, I decided to give cement a shot.

It was the first time I was working with this material, so I made some research: concrete is an artificially engineered material made from a mixture of portland cement, aggregates (such as sand or gravel) and water. It is the most commonly used construction material in the world. When water is added to portland cement, the silicates combine with the water, rapidly at first.

The process slows down but never completely stops if there is moisture present. If concrete sets in one day, it will be more than four times as hard after a week, six times as hard in a month, and more than eight times as hard after five years.

SMOOTH BLEND OF WATER AND CEMENT

Before adding water, portland cement is usually mixed with aggregates, typically sand and gravel, to make concrete for walls, floors, pillars, roadways or sidewalks. Ratios in the construction industry vary from 1:2:3 (cement:sand:gravel) to 1:2:4 to 1:3:5.

As the cement dehydrates it hardens, holding the aggregates together, including any steel reinforcing. The concrete should be kept damp for several days (small items for as long as a week) as most of the curing/hardening takes place then.

Luckily, concrete has great strength in compression, but little tensile strength.

If your project needs to have thin and long shapes made of concrete, you should consider adding steel wire and mesh to reinforce the structure, particularly in unsupported spans.

Even alkali-resistant glass fibres are sometimes added for tensile strength, substituting for steel rebar.

In the first 24 hours most shrinkage cracks occur, which is why polypropylene fibres can be added to the original mix. Glass fibers serve the same purpose. They prevent these cracks from becoming too large.

Concrete has also a downside: as it is highly alkaline, so it is easy to get chemical burns on you.

Especially if, like me, while you are adding water to the portland cement, you decide to stir the mixture with your bare hands, because it looks like like clay.

Actually, even its texture feels like clay.

Anyway, if you are foolish enough to stir the compound barehanded, remember that it will burn your skin.

Heads up: the only way to counter the alkaline nature of concrete is to pour vinegar on the affected area (because of its acid nature, it acts like the perfect enemy of cement).

By any means, avoid all contact with your skin wearing proper safety equipment.

And also, vinegar burns like hell.

Trust me.

MOULDS, BOLTS AND LEAKS Using the templates I printed before, I finally made some moulds with styrofoam. I chose this high density material because it offers a nice, non-sticky surface for the portland cement, is quite affordable (circa 4 Euros per square meter in my local hardware store) and is very easy to cut, even with a sharp cutter.

Remember, cutters, exacto knives, heated saws an almost all sharp equipment is dangerous. Use it at your own risk and please use your brain and some kind of protection. Try not to dismember yourself.

FINISHED MOULD, BEFORE AND AFTER THE POURING OF THE CEMENT

After the moulds were assembled with some hot glue, the process of making the two main supports was quite fast forward: I poured the concrete, stuck some bolts in it so it would be easy to attach the blocks on the base and waited overnight for the compound to cure.

Alas, I made a mistake and used only a little hot glue (mainly because I ran out of it in the middle of the second mould), that resulted in a bursted out mould.

Somewhat I managed to fix the mistake, but the rear block doesn’t look as good as the front one.

Pro tip: mix as little water as you can with the cement powder, as the final compound will shrink according to the amount of water you pour in it. I don’t have the perfect recipe, I proceeded with some trial and error. The final material should be thick and semi-solid, circa the same consistency of caramel. Yum.

CHEATSHEET THAT SHOWS MORE INFORMATION ON THE WATER/CEMENT RATIOS

HAMMERING THE NIGHT AWAY

I FOUND ONLY BLACK PROFILES, SO I USED A WHITE MARKER

Next, I started focusing on the platen. Initially I was planning on attaching it directly to the front block through a metal pivot. Analyzing better the situation, I realized that this idea would incur into some serious problems, mainly because, as I was using cement, the pivot had to be submerged into the block while the compound was poured, resulting in a non rotating pivot. Pretty useless. I briefly caressed the idea of using some ball bearings to enable the mechanical rotation, but the high price of such small-sized bearings and my lack of knowledge in soldering drove me off.

I settled on something less flashy, following the K.I.S.S. principle (not the band, the acronym means “Keep it Simple, Stupid”): a couple of black hinges from the local hardware store and the trick was done.

For the flat part, the one that will ram onto the matrix, for a matter of simplicity and workability, I used L-shaped metal profiles, cut down to the proper length and bolted tight. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the access to clamps and a drill press, so everything hat to be done with a Dremel, sand paper and a lot of time.

Actually, the first time I built this part I made badly my calculations and the platen was some centimeters too short. The second time I got it right and also managed to fit in a third hinge that would help me attaching this part to the articulated joint I was planning for the next phase.

FINISHED PLATEN. NOTICE THE HINGE AT THE CENTRE

JOINT OPERATIONS NOT that kind of joint, you silly mind.

Next in my schedule was the central junction and the mechanism that would make the letterpress, well, a letterpress.

The frame is made of four steel bars bolted together, steel rods as reinforcement and handles, a couple of long screws and loose bits.

The layout is quite simple, as you can see from the blueprint:

WORKING ON THOSE JOINTS

FINISHED JOINT, ATTACHED TO THE BODY

There was quite a bit of drilling, assembling, cursing, disassembling, cutting, sanding, reassembling. You know, the standard procedure.

Again, please operate in a safe environment, trying to reduce possible injuries.

Don’t cut metal nearby any socket or power source, as it may blow up. Don’t be like me.

THOSE SPARKS LOOK UNSAFE

WORKING THE MATRIX Finally, I had to worry about the matrix.

I wanted to print one of my piece of poetry –if they can be even called poetry– so the selection process was quite simple. Unfortunately, as the matrix is only 9x11cm, I simply couldn’t squeeze in a lot of text. So, instead, I went for a short quote from Graham Greene, “Heresy is only another word for freedom of thought”.

LETTERING - DONE

MIRRORING - DONE

EXPORTING - DONE

EXTRUDING - DONE

Quick tips: write/draw/do whatever you want on a vector software, as Adobe Illustrator, then vertically mirror the expanded letters and export the file in .svg (Scalable Vector Graphic, is a non-proprietary format that can be imported in whichever 3D application).

In 3DS Max, or virtually every other 3D application, import the .svg and extrude the profile on the vertical axis. I recommend an extrusion of 2/3mm, as a bigger extrusion wouldn't affect the matrix. You know, you have to save money and time on the 3D printer.

3D printers work with .stl files (short for Stereolitography), so export the file in that format. Don't worry about textures and materials, as they are not supported in this format.

Finally you can print! But, while we are waiting 2.30/3 hours for the matrix to be printed, why don't we learn something interesting about 3D printing? Yay! For the printing pocess and prep I went to the guys of Fablab Milano, that was right next door my University. How convenient.

There I learned that to print in 3D you really should have the normals flipped in your .stl file. And that geek is good!

FARE LE IDEE - MAKE IDEAS

PRINTING LIKE NO TOMORROW The first thing to note is that 3D printing is characterized as "additive" manufacturing, which means that a solid, three-dimensional object is constructed by adding material in layers. This is in contrast to regular "subtractive" manufacturing, through which an object is constructed by cutting (or "machining") raw material into a desired shape.

After the finished design file is sent to the 3D printer, you choose a specific material. This, depending on the printer, can be rubber, plastics, paper, polyurethane-like materials, metals and more.

Printer processes vary, but the material is usually sprayed, squeezed or otherwise transferred from the printer onto a platform. One printer in particular, the Makerbot Replicator 2, has a renewable bioplastic spooled in the back of the device (almost like string).

DETAIL OF THE HEATED NOZZLE OF THE 3D PRINTER

When the printer is told to print something, it pulls the bioplastic filament through a tube and into an extruder, which heats it up and deposits it through a small hole and onto the build plate.

Then, a 3D printer makes passes (much like an inkjet printer) over the platform, depositing layer on top of layer of material to create the finished product (look closely — you can see the layers). This can take several hours or days depending on the size and complexity of the object. The average 3D-printed layer is approximately 100 microns (or micrometers), which is equivalent to 0.1 millimeters. Some printers, like the Objet Connex, can even deposit layers as thin as 16 microns.

Throughout the process, the different layers are automatically fused to create a single three-dimensional object in a dots per inch (DPI) resolution.

FINISHED MATRIX, READY TO BE INKED (WELL, IT’S ALREADY INKED)

LIVE, PRINT, REPEAT Once the 3D printing is finished, it's time to glue the matrix to the support, spread some ink on it with a rubber scraper, press the lever and have fun!

MY INK ROLLER IS MADE BY PLASTIC, AN OLD SHIRT AND SOME TAPE

AS THE 3D PRINTING PROCESS ISN’T PERFECT, THE MATRIX DOESN’T HAVE AN EVEN SURFACE, THUS THE PRINTS AREN’T CRISP-CLEAR

ON THE OTHER HAND, THE PRINTS DONE WITH A MATRIX I HAD LAYING AROUND ARE PRETTY GOOD

Typesets: Open Sans Regular/Italic/Bold by Steve Matteson, Google, 2011 Euclid Flex Bold by Emmanuel Rey, Swiss Typefaces, 2011 This book is published under GFDL license (GNU Free Documentation License). You may download, copy, modify and redistribute this work, as long as it stays free and maintains this license.

I wish to thank: Museo della Stampa di Lodi, for kindly providing me the ink and their support during my researches The guys from Fablab Milano for the printing service and the additional help and explanation on the process Dario Pizzigoni and TreeD filamentes for their help with the 3D printers and theorical explanations James Clough, for supporting my idea and not telling it was complete crap

free press free knowledge free people