It is clear to me that printing my blocks flat on the print bed creates blocks that are the most successful to print with, however the issue of removing them easily from the bed once printed needs to be remedied.
Normally a metal scraper is used to lever the block off the bed, one alternative option I have tried is to grasp the block with a pair of pliers and pull it off the bed that way. This method was unsuccessful, resulting in not just blocks whose sides were damaged by the pliers but some very stubborn blocks that were snapped in half, leaving part on the base and part in the pliers.
Through gaining experience with the blocks I have noticed that it is possible to position the corner of the scraper into one of the drainage holes and work the scraper underneath to free the block, though this works it also damages the surface around the hole leaving it unsightly. I resolve to redesign the body of the block to integrate some form of removable tab that after allowing me to remove it from the bed easily, can then be trimmed and removed from the block.
The results can been seen here where a small rectangle with a sloping face is joined to the block. This allows me to push the scraper directly underneath the tab to free the design from the print bed.
My first iteration was too small and insubstantial to be of use. However by scaling the tab up slightly it works in the desired way and is easy to clip off the block once cured.
I also took this opportunity to add a makers mark to the body, a small de-bossed ODD in the bottom left. It was common for type foundries to mark their wood and metal type with their makers mark, in wood type this was done on the capital A. My makers mark not only unifies the blocks as being set, it makes them recognisable as being produced my ODD Foundry. The consistent placement of the mark on the bodies will also help with orientating blocks to the be correct way up if the design has a top and a bottom.
Open Collab is a experiment in digital collaboration. Throughout the month they put out an open call for submissions on a theme that are the randomly combined with other submissions to create new works of art. This month it was the Typographic Session and they asked participants “to test, showcase and challenge your freshly designed fonts…This session the format is 1200×480px. Using your self-designed font, please try to find a word, that fills the format as good as possible. Feel free to use any language. The result will not only be a beautiful composition of fonts, but also a (hopefully) funny piece of 3-word-dada-poetry.
How to participate
Create a 1200×480px artboard
Adjust the fontsize to the height of the artboard
Find a word, that approximately fills the width
Do not leave margins – they will be added automatically
Export as jpg
Submit work
Best practice
JPG: black type, white bg
Single line of type
Try different color modes” (Open Collab 2021)
With that in mind I created my word “Inner” from my recent Tuscan experiment and submitted it. You can see it below combined with other submissions.
This was a fun experiment to be part of and was a good reason to start producing designs with my components.
Reflecting on the concepts that underpin the design of a logo, Graphic Designer Adrian Shaughnessy in his book Graphic design : A User’s Manual (2009, p.181) notes that “a logo will have to work on numerous platforms, mobile phone screen, website, T-shirt, and at the end of a television commercial. Increasingly, too, logos have to move. The days of the static unchanging logo have gone. Today our logos are expected to be mini movies that tell us stories.” It is this idea of combining movement with the logo to help convey meaning that I wish to explore. When creating my branding it was with the intent that it’s forms would be simpIe and flexible enough to be able to be animated in a variety of ways to further reinforce the key themes of the brand, exploration, accessibility and unexpectedness. The high contrast forms should remain distinct even when manipulated and warped.
Shaughnessy finishes his reflection on logo design by saying the “final development in logo design that designers have to take into consideration is that the era of the monolithic, unchanging logo is over. In our visual culture we want variety and stimulus. Accordingly, the logos of the future are likely to be ever changing and malleable.”. For an author writing in 2009 this has been particularly prescient as you can see this malleability being apparent in much contemporary branding, for instance in Monotypes branding work for Amsteldok as shown below.
Amsteldok Branding (Monotype 2020)
This makes use of a variable typeface at it’s core to create a system of interrelated letterforms that warp and move in relation to each other.
Above Left. An animated gif of a pencil I created in the Animate tutorial Above Right. The Animate tutorial
Previously, in my professional career I have created animations using After Effects, however I found this program to be too complex for the simpler style of animation I was looking to achieve. Instead I looked at using Adobe Animate, a vector based animation program that has a powerful suite of tools suitable to the animation and manipulating of letterforms. Having never used the software, I worked through a series of tutorials that are included with the program and created the animated pencil gif to the above right. Once I felt comfortable with the software, I experimented with some basic styles of revealing letters in the logo as seen to the right. I wanted to play with the idea of different parts of the logo revealing themselves as they are explored. There are still many things to correct, for instance the timing of the reveals and the quality of the movement, but it is an avenue I hope to continue to explore further as the project develops.
Above. My initial test animation for the ODD Foundry logo. The timing needs to be corrected as well as the removal of some thin outlines that not meant to be appearing over the logo.Above. My amended test animation. I have altered the timings at which areas of the logo are revealed.
References
SHAUGHNESSY, A., 2009. Graphic design : a user’s manual. London: London : Laurence King, 2009
Moving on from my first experiments with a square, circle and triangle I decided to explore how letterforms can be influenced by the grid used to form them. I limited myself to working by hand using an isometric grid, marker pen and scissors. I first created a set of shapes based on the grid and then explored their forms by construction an alphabet.
Though there are many overly abstract and awkward forms produced in this experiment it did teach me that the most exciting components to work with were the more awkward shaped ones. The more awkward the shape the more my brain needed to engage to consider how it should be placed.
The current idea for Glint club originates from the exploration of the Glint border and ornament. Writing on the glint club blog in 2015 the authour explains “In April 1956 David Bethel submitted his design for the Glint border & corner to Monotype, the designs becoming B1309/10 in August of the same year. Beatrice Warde was at this time working as the corporation’s publicity manager & developed a self-confessed ‘mania’ for ‘working out combinations’ of Bethel’s new border. Warde went on to invent the Glint Game, encouraging others to ‘experiment & invent’ new Glint combinations, she claimed to have discovered 75 such combinations in collaboration with her personal assistant Sarah Clutton.”
I find the idea of exploring two simple components in all their different permutations compelling. The restrictions of the rules creates a space for intensive exploration, discovering new possibilities for alignment and pattern creation.
Christmas Card using the Glint Ornaments (Glint Club 2015)
Glink
After analysing the forms of the glint ornaments I composed 2 of my own variations and tried to print them alongside some other blocks that were experiments in the creation of halftone blocks. The halftones didn’t work but the glink did.
The forms of glink blocks were also informed by the metal swash ornaments in my own collection. Due to their L shape they can be organised and printed in many different orientations.
This week I have been exploring the use of resin 3d printers to be able to generate printable blocks from home without the need for other tools like laser cutters/routers etc. The results so far have been promising – producing blocks that are sturdy enough to print with regularly at a detail that allows very fine design work to take place. Most interestingly, I feel, is the ability to free the shape of the design from the constraints of it being a conventional rectangular block, as would be the case with most traditional cast or routed methods of creating a printable block. In these designs you can see me experimenting with a range of simple modular forms. The blocks are printed to be type height and are divisions of an inch so can be combined with lead and metal type easily.
These original blocks were based on the elementary shapes as defined by the Bauhaus school, the square, circle and triangle.
The type height EL BlocksAlong with the type height blocks I also printed a selection of blank spacing blocks to help with locking up.
To counter the elephants foot effect I shaved off the lowest 1 mm of each block.
Each year the font foundry Monotype produce a lecture and report that documents the emerging trends in type design that year. Monotype describes it as “our attempt to recognize remarkable typography from the last year, but it’s also an exercise in fortune-telling or, at least, foretelling.”(2021). The designs that I want to produce for this project needs to be relevant and contemporary so I attended the lecture to help guide the aesthetic of the project.
Monotype identified 11 trends:
Block- heads. More soft-serve, please The force / R–Wars The idea, big Hand was here Lateral moves Touchable type Variable speed Virtual is reality Measured austerity Cultivating contrast.
Of the 11 I found the following the most relevant to my initial ideas for the Odd foundry brand and the type I will produce. It is especially heartening to see some of my initial branding for the project stylistically fitting into “The idea, big” as this shows I’m on the right track.
Fig 2. Similar letterforms apparent across multiple typefaces
As shown above in fig 1, different letters are made up of different components. In general a letter will be made of the same components, though the style of these components may change depending on the design of the typeface and its classification, as you can see from fig 2. Indeed it is this collection of definable components from letter to letter that define it as being able to be identified as the letter in question.
Fig 3. Root forms of letters
Within the alphabet there are various letters which have visual similarities to one another, the design of these letters often informs the design of other similar letters. How closely linked these similar letters will be in the design of their letterforms will be based on the learned eye of the type designer when they construct the typeface. A letter needs to be distinct from another similar letter whilst still being stylistically similar to the rest of the typeface.
When analysing a typeface you can find various recurring forms, with the design of one component informing another with regards to how a line terminates, how sharp a curve is and thick a stroke should be. This internal set of rules is defined by the type designer and it is what makes a letterform be recognisable as part of a typeface rather than being a disparate letterform.
Fig 4. Recurring forms
Broadly typefaces can be divided into two styles, Serif and Sans Serif. In his book on the subject, typographer Bringhurst says a serif is a is simply defined as a “stroke added to the beginning or end of one of the main strokes of a letter. In the roman alphabet, serifs are usually reflexive finishing strokes, forming unilateral or bilateral stops. (They are unilateral if they project only to one side of the main stroke, like the serifs at the head of T and the foot of L, and bilateral if they project to both sides, like the serifs at the foot of T and the head of L.) Transitive serifs-smooth: entry or exit strokes – are usual in italic.”. But there is much historical and stylistic variation within each. In some cases the design of a typefaces individual component can be so distinct it is possible to name the face simply by seeing the component in question. Further expanding on the classfication of serifs, Bringhurst continues by outlining the following terms:
“Abrupt and Adnate Serifs are either abrupt – meaning they break from the stem suddenly at an angle or they are adnate, meaning that they flow smoothly into or out of the stem. In the older typographic literature, adnate serifs are generally described as bracketed.
Bilateral – serifs extending to both sides. There are many descriptive terms for serifs, especially as they have developed in roman faces. They may be not only unilateral or bilateral, but also long or short, thick or thin, pointed or blunt, abrupt or adnate, horizontal or vertical or oblique, tapered, triangular, and so on. In texturas and some frakturs, they are usually scutulate (diamond-shaped), and in some architectural scripts, such as Eaglefeather and Tekton, the serifs are virtually round.” Bringhurst (2004, p.312, p.330)
Fig 5. Serif and Sans Serif Typefaces.
Serif and Terminal Quiz (Dan Smith 1945)
Font Classifications ( RUFFA 2008)
References
RUFFA, G., 2008. The art of wood type. Plainfield, NJ: GRA Pub
SMITH, D., 2017. Excerpt from Arts ABC Volume 1: Square-Serif [viewed May 19, 2021]. Available from: https://www.instagram.com/p/CNCndFgMPce/
BRINGHURST, R., 2004. The elements of typographic style.
LUPTON, E., 2010. Thinking with type. 2., rev. and expanded Ed. ed. New York: Princeton Architectural Pr
I became aware of the work of Ryan Molloy after watching the Letterpress United – Making Type (2020) presentation. A graphic designer, typographer and educator, Ryan presented a series of his experimental typefaces that he designs and cuts using a CNC machine.
What attracted me to Ryans work was his very different perspective on the medium of letterpress printing which I beleive is informed by his background in street art. Much of his personal work shows evidence of the fluid letterforms of graffiti writing (fig 1) which he has then formalised, refined and transferred into his professional work (fig 2).
Fig 1. El Chupo Print (Ryan Molloy 2018).
Fig 2. Arts Cal Poster (Ryan Molloy 2017)
This freedom of movement and experimental approach is also mirrored in his work using letterpress blocks and printing methods. Gblox (fig 3 and fig 4) is a typeface created by cropping into hand drawn letterforms, which are then CNC cut into blocks. The resulting prints merge the non-standard shapes of lettering with the rigid structure of a letterpress print.
Fig 3. Gbloxs (Ryan Molloy 2020)
Fig 4. Gbloxs Print (Ryan Molloy 2020)
With having access to his own router Ryan has been exploring the creation of type that orientates in none standard ways. In my proposal journal I comment that “conventional type for letterpress printing is created to be linear, that is at runs from left to right in a straight line. These type faces are cut into different shaped blocks that interlink to create forms that are normally unheard of within letterpress printing.”
Modular Circular Ornaments (Ryan Molloy 2020)
Some key parts that came out of our discussion were that, like myself and Chris Wilson, Ryan is an educator himself who works with degree equivalent Graphic Design students in the USA. We spoke of the benefits of having access to various tools like CNCs and laser cutters while working as part of a university as well as a desire to be creating new forms of type that push the medium on ward. We discussed how letterpress as a medium will remain attached to 0.918″ being the height of printing blocks until a new style of adjustable press is created that is affordable and accurate enough to replace vintage presses. The part I found most helpful was the understanding that new technologies allow much more freedom and control over the cutting/shaping process. With traditional processes such as pantographs you are limited by the detail of the pattern you use as a template as well as the patience of the operator controlling it. Whereas with a computer controlled CNC the digital pattern can be incredibly detailed due to the high quality modern router tips and the fact that it will be cut via the CNC.
I purchased the Mars 2 alongside some further relevant materials. When a print is made it first needs to be cleaned off the excess resin with a relevant liquid (in the case of the water based resin I have purchased this is water), after that the print needs to be cured under ultraviolet light. Some people leave their prints outside to cure in the sun but with the current unpredictable weather and a need for the prints I create to be consistent across a range of prints I opted for a machine that will wash the print as well as cure it.
Elegoo Mars 2. (Elegoo 2021)
Tinkercad
While waiting for the order to arrive I endeavoured to learn more about the 3d design process but setting myself a series of tasks to complete in tinkercad, this was a method I utilised in the Digital Media unit and I found it very helpful to progress through the relevant tasks.
Tinkercad provides various short tutorials on how to create commonly made items. (Tinkercad 2021)
The tasks I set my self to complete were
Draw a square
Draw a cube
Set cube to 1inch x 1inch x 0.918inch (Type Height for letterpress printing)
Add letter to cube
Hollow cube
Support cube
Add drainage holes
Mars 2 3D Printer Calibration and Tests
Levelling the print bed of the Mars 2, the white rectangles on the rear of the machine are the extra carbon filters I purchased.
Once the printer arrived there were various assembling and calibrations to be done. Much of this is documented very well in the materials that come with the machine and after levelling the print bed I attempted my first print with the test model provided, a chess piece. While printing this piece I kept the space well ventilated and used gloves while handling resin. After a roughly 2 hours the piece had finished printing successfully and I washed and cured it using the wash/cure unit.
A time lapse of the rest model being printed
The finished models upside down on the print bed
Using the Wash/Cure unit to wash the prints in warm water. The Wash/Cure unit uses a vortex of water to remove excess uncured resin from the prints.
Once dried the models are placed in the Wash/Cure unit and the mode is changed to “cure” along with a timer being set. The machine rotates the models and shines uv light at them.
The final printed model after curing.
Testing the Test print
Structurally the piece is very solid, the resin doesn’t feel brittle and the surface feels relatively smooth to the touch. With being in lock down I have limited tools to test the durability of the print, however it withstood multiple drops onto a concrete floor without shattering which is important for a printing block as they can easily be knocked off a table in a print space.
Print Angles
The test piece was printed flat on the print bed but a technique that is often used for more complex prints is to angle them off the print with a series of thing supports holding the piece in the air. In his video “My favorite way to 3D print perfect resin bases for my minis. Something I discovered printing dice?” (2020), maker 3dprintedpro shows that the reason for this is that apparently when things are printed directly on the print bed they can be hard to remove, with so much of the print being in direct contact with the print bed. When the initial layers are attached to the bed they are intentionally overexposed to create a good adhesion to the print bed, this overexposure can cause a slight variation at the base of the print where the overexposed resin expands slightly. This is colloquially called “elephants foot”. Also for complex prints with overhanging parts when printed flat you run the risk of not it printing incorrectly if not angled and supported in the right manner.
With the print process taking a while and me not having any blocks designed for print yet, I downloaded a selection of coins/tokens/model bases (essentially flat objects with a design on one surface) with which I can experiment with print angles to see which method of printing will work best – flat on the bed or at an angle with supports.
Initial Tests
Angled Designs
I placed a selection of designs on the print bed and varied their angle of elevation, then placed supports around them to connect them to the bed. The prints were successful and similar to the eye, but when viewed closely you could see and feel a stepped pattern across the top surface of the token caused by the angle of the layers being printed. Interestingly prints that were only angled slightly from the print bed had the worst examples of stepping, with it be very pronounced even to the eye.
Flat Designs
Using the same token designs as the last experiment, I printed a selection flat on the print bed. With printing something so shallow the print was completed very quickly (around 25 minutes). However I found that when placed in the wash/cure unit to wash the prints that there was a lot of excess resin. The wash/cure unit cleans the print via creating a whirlpool of water that the print is placed into. Evidently, this doesn’t clean a print sufficiently when the design is shallow and on the print bed. For the next prints I will try cleaning the prints by hand in water with a small scrubbing brush. The quality of the prints was very good but they were very hard to remove from the print bed, to remove a print you lever it off with a metal tool much like a paint scraper. With so much force being exerted upon them, when they did separate from the bed they ricocheted off the cleaning surface and onto the floor, so some means of removing them from the bed needs to be considered if this is the way I choose to print future print.
Printing a Design as Veneers
With the flat design taking so little time to print, and my skills in Tinkercad progressing, I also experimented with printing a selection of thin designs that could be mounted onto a block of material (for instance mdf) to bring them to type height. My research shows that this is something that other printers have done, as shown in the previous post.
Though the print was ready very quicky the resulting prints were so thin that once cured and dry they have warped and curled. I tried heating them in warm water and clamping them to correct this but the prints remained unsuitable for printing.
It is my hope with this project that I can devise a method of production that minimises the amount of post production needed before printing with the blocks. Printing a design as a veneer in this way and then mounting it was always going to have involved accurately cutting and mounting them on to wood. Something that in the current lockdown with minimal access to tools will be very difficult so I will progress with my aims of accurately printing a type height block.
References
3DPRINTINGPRO, 2020. My favorite way to 3D print perfect resin bases for my minis. Something I discovered printing dice? [viewed March 7, 2021].
