This project technically blows my mind. Thank you for sharing.

As far as the debate goes, the way I see it, letterpress is simply the term used for the relief printing of a type high form on a cylinder or platen press. Now, originally when the term was born, that form consisted of metal movable type that was cast from a mold. So, if you want to stay true to the line your drawing between “letterpress” and “platepress” where your definition of “letterpress” is the authentic letterpress, then you shouldn’t print any wood, zinc, magnesium, or copper cuts either. Which, ironically, I noticed you do print those.

Although, I think drawing a line in the middle of the term letter/press is a little pretentious. If you were to draw such lines, then several lines would have to be drawn. Which would phrase your considered definition of letterpress as “typepress.” After all–since we’re playing with words–it’s movable type–also known in sets to be a typeface that is typeset which creates an art form known as typography, not letters from a letterface that is letterset to create an art form known as letterography.

Now, there is something to be said for someone who still produces their forms with handset type, the classical way. I just don’t believe claiming the word letterpress is it. I think all there is to claim is the process of hand-setting type. Once that type is set, it’s a form that is printed with the same process as any other form regardless of it’s material or make-up.

Innovation is what brings it all together for me. Movable type is a tool set who’s origin can be traced back to Chinese engraved ceramics and wood. Evolving from ceramics and wood to molded metal shows innovation in the materials and methods used for creating movable type. This innovation was meant to create more efficient, consistent, faster, and affordable movable type with better capabilities, and it is within that time of innovation that the term letterpress was created. That same innovation brought on etched zinc and copper. Which would also drive the innovation for photopolymer. Photopolymer is merely the latest step in the same innovation that brought you metal cast type from Chinese engraved ceramics.

So, to me, it would be erroneous to deny zinc, copper, linoleum, photopolymer, or any other material that a form could be created with in the category of “authentic letterpress.” Because to do so, you would be denying the very innovation on which letterpress was born.

That being said, I respect both of you, greatly. It’s also cool to see someone keeping it old school. Aside from the debate, I would like to locate some of the low profile gauge pins you speak of. I’ve been hunting for some without any results. Got a link?

That said, I deliberately chose not to elaborate on my position in your forum. That would be rather graceless. Suffice to say, you do fine work, and the art and design is all quite interesting, but it is relief printing rather than ‘letterpress’ per se. Yes yes, it’s a matter of degree, and to an extent semantic in nature, but I stand by my position. We can duke it out some time when I’m home for the holidays. We’ll raise a glass to Tim Gartman then get down to brass tacks (which i understand are made of some base metal now days, though still called ‘brass tacks’…)

As regards inky fingers, have you found that while hand feeding, Swingline rubber finger tips allow a certain amount of contact without smudging, especially if one employes moderate inking. Given the results, it appears you were conservative with the ink.

In the final analysis, every job to a greater or lesser extent is an exercise in problem solving and this appears to have been successfully solved.

Remind me some time to tell you about die-cutting 1000 round flexi-discs to take their diameter down by a 1/16″ so they could be glued on top of CDs. Dropping to two gauge pins, no tongues, similar to your run here with a ~1/32″ pin clearance… fun.

For those not familiar with Interrobangs position, he would insist that printing with photopolymer/metal plates is not actually letterpress, but is instead “platepress” – which is why his comment here is particularly snarky and erroneous. Our position is that plates are just another tool for achieving letterpress results. For any craft, there are different tools. And different tools make different marks and are used for varying purposes. We have deep admiration for folks that are keeping alive the handset elements of letterpress. But photopolymer and metal plates are just another means to an end which truly make letterpress (yes LETTERPRESS) commercially viable for contemporary design. Saying it is no longer letterpress simply because we employ different tools is grossly mistaken. That’s like saying a carpenters woodwork really isn’t woodwork because they choose to use a power saw instead of a hand saw.

As to the comments about this particular job setup – setting the tiny form at the top of the platen was in this case very necessary. With the tongue depressors artwork coming within a sixteenth from the edge meant that there was not a surface to grab with the fingers that didn’t contain ink. We solved this by positioning the form toward the top, which enabled us to put a finger on the bottom side of the depressor and “flick” it a short distance from the platen to a pile on the feed board without touching the printed surface. But yes, after a decade of printing we are aware of the strength of the platen being in the center, which of course is the typical way to set up.

Our lower gauge pins would not work in this case. The thickness of the material combined with art work so close to the edge meant that we could not have a “pin” or tongue in place on the guide to hold the wood stick in place while the press closed. But by using thicker guides/gauges the stick rested in place without falling down into the press.