From Voice ~ Topics: print design, typography

Design as Slow-Motion Train Wreck

I work with type—the kind of type actually cast in metal or carved from wood.

My design process involves taking a quick sketch or mental picture down to my press room, where I’ll open drawers and cases, set type in a composition stick, move things around on the bed of the press and pull proof after proof. After a while, if I’m lucky, I start to get somewhere—usually after I’ve thrown out the sketch, the mental picture and several rounds of type.

In the many years that I’ve been involved, one way or another, in letterpress, I’ve had many conversations with designers about working with wood and metal type. Some of them start to take on a hallowed, reverential tone. Often one of us (not me) will get a faraway look in their eyes, and words like “wonderful,” “craft,” “art” and “beauty” start coming up.

I try not to give into the urge to snort a sardonic laugh. At this point in the conversation, I, like most letterpress people I know, will quickly trot out my excess equipment and ugly broken-down type, and try to make a quick sale before the mood fades—we all recognize the signs of someone who is teetering on the edge and who only needs a nudge to fall deeply into the dream of letterpress. It’s not every day you get a chance to unload all those cases of Park Avenue and Ultra Bodoni.

And just as many other letterpress people I know, I have also happily cleared the dusty type and rusty presses out of the basements of many designers and experimentalists who have flirted with letterpress, only to come to the slow realization that it ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. Usually those people sit upstairs, slumped in a rocking chair, staring out the kitchen window with a distant expression, while a couple of sweaty, dirty, true believers haul the offending lead out of the bowels of their house.

I don’t mean to say that letterpress isn’t about art or craft or beauty—but those things can often come at the cost of many hours of almost soul-crushing disappointment and maddening frustration. Every successful letterpress piece I manage to pull off—every card or broadside or poster or letterhead or jam label—is almost always the end result of a few compromises, dead ends and workarounds. It’s rare that my “vision” of a beautiful piece hasn’t been ground under the heels of the many little failures along the way.

Often the “perfect” font is too big or too small, or won’t fit in the measure, or is a figment of your imagination that you have been looking for, unsuccessfully, for years. On a computer, a couple of key strokes will take care of most problems like that. There aren’t many designers these days who have to try to figure out ways to deal with the fact that the font they want to use doesn’t have enough E’s (that’s where the expression “out of sorts” actually originated) or that a field mouse just had babies in the M quad compartment. Also, some early-19th-century display fonts were designed without figures and sometimes without punctuation. Many have been used so often (or pounded half to death, as I like to say) that the characters are worn, broken, gone or crushed to the extent that they are no longer type height and won’t print. And of course, there’s no way of knowing any of these things without actually setting the type first.

When I work on a piece, designing on the bed of the press as I go, a pile of failed attempts accumulates on the stone, lines of type that wouldn’t work for one reason or another. I’ve learned to leave them there until after I’m done because I can make so many attempts that I’ll sometimes forget which fonts I’ve already tried, and then reset the same line over and over in the same damned font. Maybe one part of my brain is hoping that this time it’ll fit! Those who don’t learn from their failures are doomed to reset them.

The letterpress person who hasn’t found herself bent over a comp stick at 3:00 a.m. with tears streaming down her face just isn’t trying hard enough.

I think that’s one of the reasons why so many letterpress people have fallen for the false god of computer-generated photopolymer type—and although it saddens me, I can’t really blame them. It takes a certain kind and depth of mania to put up with “real” type.

But having to work around the many failures has led to places I wouldn’t otherwise have found. It forces you to try things and think in ways that you wouldn’t have to if you could use any font you wanted in any size. The limits and frustrations and problems of trying to make the type work has sometimes led to beautiful, elegant solutions that I would never have found on my own. And I have rarely ended up with a piece that I didn’t like more than my original concept.

The photopolymer crowd tends to write off us type fanatics as Luddites. While they opt for the clean, easy way out, we sweat and swear over wood and iron, going blind from fiddling with six-point thin spaces—our lead-stained fingers digging down into the crannies of old type cases, scrabbling through the dusty mouse turds to fish out the last comma, our breath smelling of type wash fumes and that spicy wood mold that infects ancient type cabinets, and our feet numb from long hours of standing on cold concrete basement and garage floors, only to run out of lowercase A’s three words from the end of the paragraph. Yet we love every minute of it.


About the Author: Ross MacDonald’s illustrations have appeared in Vanity Fair, The New York Times, The New Yorker and Rolling Stone. He has also worked on many movies as an illustrator, prop maker and consultant on historic and period printing, paper and documents. Ross lives in Connecticut with his wife, two kids, two dogs, three cats and a large collection of 19th-century type and printing equipment. www.ross-macdonald.com

  1. link to this comment by khadija Wed Mar 21, 2007

    i think what you have done here with type is simply awesome. Given a chance would love to learn this technique.
    its more like appreciating a handwritten letter over an email.. :) great work!

  2. link to this comment by Varda Lobanov Wed Mar 21, 2007

    I'm not a letter-press person but thank you so much for your description of tears at 3am. It makes me feel a little more like a success.

  3. link to this comment by Lara Henderson Wed Mar 21, 2007

    This article makes me want to work with metal and wood type, to be that fanatic about it. I feel fortunate to have the experience I do have with photopolymer. It does make letterpress more accessible for the average person.

  4. link to this comment by Erin Collis Thu Mar 22, 2007

    As a design student who has taken a number of classes in printmaking, I can truly appreciate the laborous task that you so painstakingly undergo to create something that comes so easily on a computer. And, I feel as though every designer should go through this process. Having to do things 'the old-fashioned way' whether it be redoing a silkscreen five times because it didn't expose correctly or discovering that you are out of e's, it gives one a true appreciation for the art that we are creating because you are putting part of yourself into it. As these art forms become less and less popular and more and more easily created on a computer, I truly wonder how this will affect the quality of design in the future and if soon we will have a whole generation of designers who put nothing of themselves into their work and expect design to become more about efficiency and less about passion and creating something meaningful.

  5. link to this comment by Preston Lawing Thu Mar 22, 2007

    wonderful article!
    I saw a beautifully letterpress printed broadside recently in a studio that read...

    In 100 years, no one will have your emails lovingly tied and bundled under their bed.

  6. link to this comment by john Mon Mar 26, 2007

    Ross, if you have an old Vandercook presses lying around, I'd love to spread your addiction a little :)

  7. link to this comment by paull Wed Mar 28, 2007

    "The letterpress person who hasn’t found herself bent over a comp stick at 3:00 a.m. with tears streaming down her face just isn’t trying hard enough."

    OR

    you get what you deserve. i'll take my type with pixels please.

  8. link to this comment by Leslie Graham Fri Mar 30, 2007

    Your letterpress work is quite lovely.
    That is all.

  9. link to this comment by Don Williams Fri Mar 30, 2007

    There is nothing new here. The letterpress revival is old news, it’s time to show this technology being used to do innovative design.

  10. link to this comment by Andrew Levin Mon Apr 09, 2007

    Thank you.I found this article to be truly introspective.

  11. link to this comment by Jelmar Geertsma Tue Apr 17, 2007

    Very nice article. I'm a great user of digital type, but I have the luck of being able to work in a letterpress workshop from time to time, so I know the feeling when the e's suddenly seem to have disappeared. I actually had that a while ago, and I had to remove some paragraphs for which I didn't have enough e's. Then print the remaining paragraphs, remove those blocks after printing, put the next paragraphs in place painstakingly, and get the e's from the first ones to the last ones. Silly work, but when the product is finished, it is that much more satisfying.

  12. link to this comment by Michael Huen Thu Apr 19, 2007

    Like they say, "the more limited you are, the more thinking you have to do". I would like to try out the letterpress to learn from this laborious process. Yet I feel this to be very impractical; hence, aren't visual communicators supposed to be communicating an idea or an experience? I feel like people could care less about the quality of a product, than the actual meaning behind something like identity or brand. On the flipside things like punk rock, vinyl recordings, and bohemian crafts do offer a new perspective and taste. Although these things often become obsessed over, turning into over consumption. Let's search for what tie us together other than obsession.

    Wow, I came to a realization.

  13. link to this comment by Nick Sherman Sat Apr 21, 2007

    This is a great recounting of the sometimes unbearable hardships which come with letterpress printing.

    There is still a physicality with non-polymer letterpress work which makes you think differently about how type works. You think about it not as 2-dimensional shapes, but more as 3-dimensional objects, with form, that have to be pieced together into a solid physical structure. I am not saying that one way is any better or worse, just that they are different.

    Being a digital designer as well as a letterpresser has made me respect both approaches as their own separate things, like painting and sculpture.

    What I am extremely interested in, and have begun to play with in my recent experimental wood type system (see http://www.nicksherman.com/design/Intercut for details), is how digital technology can relate to the dimensionality of letterpress, but still retain the qualities of physical composition which are lost with photopolymer.

  14. link to this comment by Marc Norris Mon Apr 23, 2007

    Nice quote Preston. True.

  15. link to this comment by Antone Begay Tue Aug 14, 2007

    I am impressed by the amount of pride you take into letterpress. Its a technique not used so much these days. With all the advancements with computers and such, letterpress has taken a back seat. WIth all the problem that letterpress presents, you seem to stick by it like an old friend. This article has inspired me to look into letterpress more. It puts forth a challenge and a challenge is what i like, running out of certain letters, not having any at all, working hard for what you want, what you see, and in the process working for what you beleive in. Letterpress is certainly an intresting process i would love to learn and try for myself. Well written and explained.

Add a Comment

AIGA encourages thoughtful, responsible discourse. Please add comments judiciously, and refrain from maligning any individual, institution or body of work.
Read our policy on commenting.