Hubbry Logo
PhototypesettingPhototypesettingMain
Open search
Phototypesetting
Community hub
Phototypesetting
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Phototypesetting
Phototypesetting
Phototypesetting
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Part of a series on the
History of printing
Techniques
Woodblock printing200
Movable type1040
Intaglio (printmaking)1430
Printing pressc. 1440
Etchingc. 1515
Mezzotint1642
Relief printing1690
Aquatint1772
Lithography1796
Chromolithography1837
Rotary press1843
Hectograph1860
Offset printing1875
Hot metal typesetting1884
Mimeograph1885
Daisy wheel printing1889
Photostat and rectigraph1907
Screen printing1911
Spirit duplicator1923
Dot matrix printing1925
Xerography1938
Spark printing1940
Phototypesetting1949
Inkjet printing1950
Dye-sublimation1957
Laser printing1969
Thermal printingc. 1972
Solid ink printing1972
Thermal-transfer printing1981
3D printing1986
Digital printing1991

Phototypesetting is a method of setting type which uses photography to make columns of type on a scroll of photographic paper.[1][2] It has been made obsolete by the popularity of the personal computer and desktop publishing which gave rise to digital typesetting.

The first phototypesetters quickly project light through a film negative of an individual character in a font, then through a lens that magnifies or reduces the size of the character onto photographic paper or film, which is collected on a spool in a light-proof canister. The paper or film is then fed into a processor, a machine that pulls the paper or film strip through two or three baths of chemicals, from which it emerges ready for paste-up or film make-up. Later phototypesetting machines used other methods, such as displaying a digitised character on a CRT screen. The results of this process are then transferred onto printing plates which are used in offset printing.

Phototypesetting offered numerous advantages over the metal type used in letterpress printing, including the lack of need to keep heavy metal type and matrices in stock, the ability to use a much wider range of fonts and graphics and to print them at any desired size, and faster page layout setting.

History

[edit]

Background

[edit]

Phototypesetting machines project characters onto film for offset printing. Prior to the advent of phototypesetting, mass-market typesetting typically employed hot metal typesetting – an improvement introduced in the late 19th century to the letterpress printing technique that offered greatly improved typesetting speed and efficiency compared to manual typesetting (where every sort had to be set by hand). The major advancement presented by phototypesetting over hot metal typesetting was the elimination of the metal type altogether, which was not needed by the offset printing process. This cold-type technology could also be used in office environments where hot-metal machines (the Linotype, Intertype or Monotype) could not. The use of phototypesetting grew rapidly in the 1960s when software was developed to convert marked-up copy, usually typed on paper tape, to the codes that controlled the phototypesetters.

1950s and 60s

[edit]

Initial phototypesetting machines

[edit]
An Intertype Fotosetter, one of the most popular "first-generation" mass-market phototypesetting machines. The system is heavily based on hot metal typesetting technology, with the metal casting machinery replaced with photographic film, a light system and glass pictures of characters.

In 1949 the Photon Corporation in Cambridge, Massachusetts, developed equipment based on the Lumitype of Rene Higonnet and Louis Moyroud.[3] The Lumitype-Photon was first used to set a complete published book in 1953, and for newspaper work in 1954.[4] Mergenthaler produced the Linofilm using a different design, and Monotype produced Monophoto. Other companies followed with products that included Alphatype and Varityper.

To provide much greater speeds, the Photon Corporation produced the ZIP 200 machine for the MEDLARS project of the National Library of Medicine and Mergenthaler produced the Linotron. The ZIP 200 could produce text at 600 characters per second using high-speed flashes behind plates with images of the characters to be printed. Each character had a separate xenon flash constantly ready to fire. A separate system of optics positioned the image on the page.[5]

100 photosetting units tps 6300 and tpu 6308

Use of CRT screens for phototypesetting

[edit]
Linotype CRTronic 360

An enormous advance was made by the mid-1960s with the development of equipment that projects the characters from CRT screens. Early CRT phototypesetters, such as Linotype's Linotron 1010 from 1966, used the same type of film negative for the font source as traditional optical phototypesetters did, but by instead scanning the font negative via a flying spot scanner array to a video signal, which was then displayed on the CRT to be exposed to the photographic paper or film. Later CRT phototypesetters used high-resolution digitized font data stored in a frame buffer which was used to render the font characters directly to the CRT.

Alphanumeric Corporation (later Autologic) produced the APS series. Rudolf Hell developed the Digiset machine in Germany. The RCA Graphic Systems Division manufactured this in the U.S. as the Videocomp, later marketed by Information International Inc. Software for operator-controlled hyphenation was a major component of digital typesetting. Early work on this topic produced paper tape to control hot-metal machines. C. J. Duncan, at the University of Durham in England, was a pioneer. The earliest applications of computer-controlled phototypesetting machines produced the output of the Russian translation programs of Gilbert King at the IBM Research Laboratories, and built-up mathematical formulas and other material in the Cooperative Computing Laboratory of Michael Barnett at MIT.

There are extensive accounts of the early applications,[6] the equipment[7][8] and the PAGE I algorithmic typesetting language for the Videocomp, that introduced elaborate formatting[9]

In Europe, the company of Berthold had no experience in developing hot-metal typesetting equipment, but being one of the largest German type foundries, they applied themselves to the transference. Berthold successfully developed its Diatype (1960), Diatronic (1967), and ADS (1977) machines, which led the European high-end typesetting market for decades.

1970s

[edit]

Expansion of technology to small users

[edit]
A Berthold Diatronic master plate, showing Futura

Compugraphic produced phototypesetting machines in the 1970s that made it economically feasible for small publications to set their own type with professional quality. One model, the Compugraphic Compuwriter, uses a filmstrip wrapped around a drum that rotates at several hundred revolutions per minute. The filmstrip contains two fonts (a Roman and a bold or a Roman and an Italic) in one point size. To get different-sized fonts, the typesetter loads a different font strip or uses a 2x magnifying lens built into the machine, which doubles the size of font. The CompuWriter II automated the lens switch and let the operator use multiple settings. Other manufacturers of photo compositing machines include Alphatype, Varityper, Mergenthaler, Autologic, Berthold, Dymo, Harris (formerly Linotype's competitor "Intertype"), Monotype, Star/Photon, Graphic Systems Inc., Hell AG, MGD Graphic Systems, and American Type Founders.

Released in 1975, the Compuwriter IV holds two filmstrips, each holding four fonts (usually Roman, Italic, bold, and bold Italic). It also has a lens turret which has eight lenses giving different point sizes from the font, generally 8 or 12 sizes, depending on the model. Low-range models offer sizes from 6- to 36-point, while the high-range models go to 72-point. The Compugraphic EditWriter series took the Compuwriter IV configuration and added floppy disk storage on an 8-inch, 320 KB disk. This allows the typesetter to make changes and corrections without rekeying. A CRT screen lets the user view typesetting codes and text.

Because early generations of phototypesetters could not change text size and font easily, many composing rooms and print shops had special machines designed to set display type or headlines. One such model is the PhotoTypositor, manufactured by Visual Graphics Corporation, which lets the user position each letter visually and thus retain complete control over kerning. Compugraphic's model 7200 uses the "strobe-through-a-filmstrip-through-a-lens" technology to expose letters and characters onto a 35mm strip of phototypesetting paper that is then developed by a photo processor. The 7200 is a headliner machine that read the character width from the filmstrip as the character is flashed onto the photographic paper so the unit knows how many motor pulses to move the paper. The most common unit was a low-range unit that went up to 72 points but there was also a high-range unit that went to 120 points.

Some later phototypesetters utilize a CRT to project the image of letters onto the photographic paper. This creates a sharper image, adds some flexibility in manipulating the type, and creates the ability to offer a continuous range of point sizes by eliminating film media and lenses. The Compugraphic MCS (Modular Composition System) with the 8400 typesetter is an example of a CRT phototypesetter. This machine loads digital fonts into memory from an 8-inch floppy disk. There was a dual floppy which could also be used with a 1 or 2 hard disk option. Additionally, the 8400 is able to set type-in point sizes between 5- and 120-point in 1/2-point increments. Type width could be adjusted independently of size. It had a movable CRT that covered a rectangle about 200 x 200 points and it would set all the characters in that rectangle before it moved the CRT or the paper. Common characters would still be in memory from the previous moves. It would set all the "e" and "t" then go to the next letter while it was decoding any characters it did not have in memory. If there was a size, width or font change the characters would have to be recalculated. It is extremely fast and was one of the first low-cost output systems. The 8400 used up to 12-inch photographic paper and could set camera-ready output. It was a cost reduced version of the 8600 which was faster. The 8600 came standard CRT width of 45 picas and wide width of 68 picas. The 8600 had much more computing power than the 8400 but did not have the memory to store a lot of characters so they were decoded on the fly. The unit would set the characters line at a time as long as they fit on the CRT. Small type may be set 6 to 8 lines before the photo paper was advanced. The paper advance was much faster than the 8400 CRT move or 8400 paper advance. All the fonts were stored on a hard disk. 8600 was a big step forward from the Video Setters which ended with the Video Setter V. Video setter was much like a closed circuit TV system that looked at a character on a glass grid, read its width and then scanned the character onto the photographic paper. The scan rate on the paper was fixed but the scan rate from the grid was changed to account for character size. If the vertical scan from the grid was slowed the character on the paper would be larger. Video Setters were almost all newspaper machines and limited to 45 picas wide with a maximum character size of 72 pints. It was a lot slower than the 8600.

A Linotron 505 CRT phototypesetting machine in Dresden in 1983

For a fast typesetter at the time, the APS 5 from AutoLogic was hard to beat. It had a 64-speed paper advance and did not stop to set type. It figured what needed to be set in a band of data and matched the electronic advance to the mechanical advance. If there were parts of a character that were not included in the band of printing it would be printed in the next band or the band after that. The printing scan rate had to be held constant to prevent overexposing or underexposing the type. White space was not scanned but the beam would jump to the next black position. If it was working on a narrow column the paper speed was faster and if it was on a wide set of columns the paper speed was decreased. With this technology characters larger than the CRT imaging area were printed. It would print about 4000 newspaper column lines per minute whether it was 1 column at 4000 lines or 4 columns at 1000 lines each.

As phototypesetting machines matured as a technology in the 1970s, more efficient methods were found for creating and subsequently editing text intended for the printed page. Previously, hot-metal typesetting equipment had incorporated a built-in keyboard, such that the machine operator would create both the original text and the medium (lead type slugs) that would create the printed page. Subsequent editing of this copy required that the entire process be repeated. The operator would re-keyboard some or all of the original text, incorporating the corrections and new material into the original draft.

CRT-based editing terminals, which can work compatibly with a variety of phototypesetting machines, were a major technical innovation in this regard. Keyboarding the original text on a CRT screen, with easy-to-use editing commands, is faster than keyboarding on a Linotype machine. Storing the text magnetically for easy retrieval and subsequent editing also saves time.

An early developer of CRT-based editing terminals for photocomposition machines was Omnitext of Ann Arbor, Michigan. These CRT phototypesetting terminals were sold under the Singer brand name during the 1970s.[10]

1980s

[edit]

Transition to computers

[edit]
A frisket cut on rubylith film used as a master for phototypesetting. Cutting friskets by hand as a continuous, smoothly-cut curve was one of the most challenging aspects of preparing phototypes and dry transfer lettering.[11]

Early machines have no text storage capability; some machines only display 32 characters in uppercase on a small LED screen and spell-checking is not available.

Proofing typeset galleys is an important step after developing the photo paper. Corrections can be made by typesetting a word or line of type and by waxing the back of the galleys, and corrections can be cut out with a razor blade and pasted on top of any mistakes.

Since most early phototypesetting machines can only create one column of type at a time, long galleys of type were pasted onto layout boards in order to create a full page of text for magazines and newsletters. Paste-up artists played an important role in creating production art. Later phototypesetters have multiple column features that allow the typesetter to save paste-up time.

Early digital typesetting programs were designed to drive phototypesetters, most notably the Graphic Systems CAT phototypesetter that troff was designed to provide input for.[12] Though such programs still exist, their output is no longer targeted at any specific form of hardware. Some companies, such as TeleTypesetting Co. created software and hardware interfaces between personal computers like the Apple II and IBM PS/2 and phototypesetting machines which provided computers equipped with it the capability to connect to phototypesetting machines.[13] With the start of desktop publishing software, Trout Computing in California introduced VepSet, which allows Xerox Ventura Publisher to be used as a front end and wrote a Compugraphic MCS disk with typesetting codes to reproduce the page layout.

In retrospect, cold type paved the way for the vast range of modern digital fonts, with the lighter weight of equipment allowing far larger families than had been possible with metal type. However, modern designers have noted that compromises of cold type, such as altered designs, made the transition to digital when a better path might have been to return to the traditions of metal type. Adrian Frutiger, who in his early career redesigned many fonts for phototype, noted that "the fonts [I redrew] don’t have any historical worth...to think of the sort of aberrations I had to produce in order to see a good result on Lumitype! V and W needed huge crotches in order to stay open. I nearly had to introduce serifs in order to prevent rounded-off corners – instead of a sans-serif the drafts were a bunch of misshapen sausages!"[14]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Phototypesetting

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Phototypesetting is a typesetting method that employs photographic techniques to expose images of type characters onto photosensitive film or paper, producing high-resolution columns of text for subsequent printing, thereby replacing the labor-intensive hot-metal processes of earlier eras. Developed in the mid-20th century, phototypesetting marked a significant advancement in the printing industry by enabling faster composition, greater typographic flexibility, and reduced physical weight compared to lead-based systems. The technology's origins trace to 1946, when French engineers René Alphonse Higonnet and Louis Marius Moyroud invented the Lumitype machine, the first practical photocomposer, which projected characters from rotating disks onto photographic material using strobe lighting and optics. Their prototype, refined over years of collaboration with American partners at the Lithomat Corporation (later Photon, Inc.), led to the first commercial demonstration in 1949 and the typesetting of the inaugural book, The Wonderful World of Insects, in 1953. Early phototypesetters, such as the Intertype Fotosetter introduced in 1947, operated by adapting existing mechanical line-casting machines to expose transparent letter matrices onto sensitized paper. Second-generation systems like the achieved speeds of up to 28,000 characters per hour. By the 1960s, third-generation machines eliminated moving parts for character selection, incorporating electronic controls and cathode-ray tubes (CRT) for even higher efficiency, while the 1984 introduction of Adobe's standardized digital input for phototypesetting and imagesetting devices. These systems typically involved raster image processing to convert text into bitmaps, followed by or light exposure onto photographic media at resolutions of 600 dpi or higher, culminating in chemical development to yield reusable negatives or positives. Phototypesetting dominated the industry for about 50 years, transforming composing rooms from noisy, metal-cluttered spaces into quieter, more precise environments and facilitating the integration of with text. However, it was gradually supplanted in the and by direct and software, which eliminated the need for photographic intermediates altogether. Notable machines included the Linotype and Varityper systems, which by the late supported non-proprietary formats and ranged in price from $30,000 for entry-level units to over $1 million for advanced models.

Overview

Definition and Principles

Phototypesetting is a method of setting type that employs photographic techniques to expose images of individual characters onto light-sensitive film or paper, generating negative or positive images suitable for creating printing plates. This process replaced mechanical casting of metal type by using light to project glyphs, allowing for greater flexibility in font sizes and layouts. The fundamental principles of phototypesetting rely on an analog combining and photographic chemistry. A light source, such as a strobe or cathode-ray tube, projects glyphs from a font master—typically strips, discs, or early digital masks—onto photosensitive material through precision lenses that enable and positioning. Mechanical or electronic controls adjust for typographic features like justification, which aligns lines by varying inter-word spacing, and , which fine-tunes spacing between specific character pairs to achieve optical balance. These adjustments occur during character selection and exposure, ensuring even distribution without physical manipulation of elements. The system's allow for scalable output from 4 to 256 points in quarter-point increments, far surpassing the fixed sizes of earlier methods. Key to the process is its high resolution, achieved through precise light modulation and chemical sensitivity, often reaching up to 2,540 (dpi) in advanced systems, which provided sharper detail than . The workflow begins with font storage on masters containing hundreds of characters, followed by electronic or manual selection of text sequences. Selected glyphs are then exposed sequentially onto the moving photosensitive medium, building lines and pages. Finally, the exposed material undergoes chemical development to produce galleys or full pages ready for plate-making, leveraging emulsions for high-fidelity image transfer. This optical-chemical approach emphasized conceptual precision in , prioritizing visual harmony over mechanical constraints.

Comparison to Hot Metal Typesetting

Hot metal typesetting, the dominant method prior to phototypesetting, involved casting molten alloys of lead, tin, and into individual characters or entire lines using systems like the for slugs or the Monotype for single sorts, which were then manually or mechanically assembled into pages for . In contrast, phototypesetting eliminated the need for physical type handling by projecting characters optically onto photosensitive or , enabling proportional spacing through precise character width control and allowing instant via editing or re-exposure without recasting metal. This produced lightweight, flexible negatives suitable for offset lithography, unlike the heavy metal forms that required direct impression. Phototypesetting offered substantial efficiency gains, including reduced labor by obviating the sorting, storage, and recycling of metal type, as well as faster production rates—advanced systems achieved up to 1,000 characters per second, compared to 7–10 characters per second for the most sophisticated hot metal machines—though it introduced processing for development. Regarding quality, phototypesetting delivered smoother curves and serifs through photographic reproduction, along with variable font sizes adjustable via optical magnification, surpassing the fixed sizes and mechanical limitations of metal type while facilitating complex layouts with mixed fonts and graphics.

Historical Development

Origins and Early Experiments

The origins of phototypesetting trace back to the mid-19th century, when advancements in began intersecting with technologies. William Henry Fox Talbot, a pioneering , developed the photoglyphic process in the 1850s, patenting it in 1852 as "photographic engraving" and in 1858 as "photoglyphic engraving." This method involved exposing light-sensitive materials to create printable engravings directly from photographic negatives, laying foundational principles for using to reproduce images in printing, though initially focused on illustrations rather than composed text. By the late 19th century, experimenters recognized the potential inefficiency of lead-based for reproduction proofs, leading to conceptual machines that sequentially photographed individual letter images to compose headings on . In 1894, Russian inventor Viktor Afanasyevich Gassiev (1879-1962), a Soviet and Russian engineer and inventor, designed the first model of a phototypesetting machine, which used photographic principles to project characters onto sensitized material; Hungarian inventor E. Porcelt independently proposed the idea of photographic the same year (1894), Gassiev constructed the first such machine in 1895, and a patent was granted to Gassiev in 1900 by the Committee for Technical Affairs. Early 20th-century developments built on these ideas through manual and semi-mechanical prototypes, primarily in . In 1915, the Photoline system emerged as a photographic analog to the Ludlow hot-metal caster, assembling transparent letter matrices in a to expose lines of type onto film, primarily for headlines and display work. During the , German engineers explored film-based type reproduction via patents for optical projection systems; for instance, the Uher typesetter, designed by Hungarian inventor Edmond Uher, employed photographic matrices mounted on a rotating disk illuminated by sources to project characters sequentially. Mergenthaler Linotype Company, known for its hot-metal innovations, conducted experiments in the and to adapt mechanical typesetting to photographic processes, including a 1925 U.S. by R.J. Smothers for Linotype matrices incorporating lenses for phototypographic output. These efforts highlighted the shift toward eliminating metal type in favor of light-sensitive media. The 1940s marked a pivotal phase of prototyping amid World War II constraints, with incandescent lamps commonly used as light sources for exposing characters onto film in experimental setups. Mergenthaler advanced these concepts toward the Linofilm system, developing prototypes that integrated keyboard input with optical projection to compose justified lines on photographic film; initial designs emerged in the late 1940s, focusing on adapting existing Linotype mechanisms for photo output. Key challenges included film shrinkage during processing, which distorted character alignment and spacing, as well as precise optical registration to maintain legibility across varying sizes. These issues, compounded by mechanical inertia from adapted hot-metal components, limited early prototypes to low-speed operation and spurred innovations in stabilization techniques. Influential figures like Uher and Mergenthaler engineers drove these pre-commercial efforts, setting the stage for viable systems.

Commercialization in the Mid-20th Century

The commercialization of phototypesetting accelerated in the 1950s as key manufacturers introduced viable production machines, transitioning the technology from experimental prototypes to market-ready systems. The Photon-Lumitype, developed by French inventors René Higonnet and Louis Marius Moyroud, debuted as the first practical commercial phototypesetter with its public demonstration in New York in 1949; the first book typeset using the system, The Wonderful World of Insects, was published in 1953. This machine employed a high-speed rotating drum containing character matrices on film, exposed via stroboscopic flashes to produce typographic images on at rates far surpassing manual or hot-metal methods. In , Morisawa Inc. developed and patented its pioneering phototypesetting system for complex Japanese scripts in 1924, addressing local typesetting challenges and establishing the firm as a regional leader. Initial U.S. adoption followed with American Type Founders (ATF) releasing its Typesetter in 1958, a disc-based system that gained traction among commercial printers despite limited market penetration. By the 1960s, innovations in imaging drove widespread expansion, particularly through cathode ray tube (CRT) integration that enhanced speed and flexibility. Mergenthaler's Linofilm, introduced around 1960, exemplified this shift by using CRT technology to generate characters electronically for film exposure, achieving output rates approaching 1,000 characters per second in advanced models like the German Digiset. These capabilities enabled high-volume applications, such as production; for instance, systems were deployed at major outlets like in by 1964 to streamline page composition. Dr.-Ing. Rudolf Hell's contributions, including the 1965 Digiset—the first fully digital phototypesetter—further propelled adoption by digitizing font storage and exposure processes. The 1970s marked increased accessibility as manufacturers developed compact systems tailored for , reducing operational complexity and enabling smaller shops to transition from letterpress. Cost efficiencies lowered entry barriers, with machines like Compugraphic's models priced comparably to hot-metal alternatives (around $30,000 by mid-decade), allowing non-industrial users such as regional publishers to produce professional in-house. This era saw global proliferation, particularly in and , fueled by cross-licensing of patents from innovators like and scanner specialist John Crosfield, who shared technologies for modest royalties to broaden . Economically, early systems carried high upfront costs—often exceeding those of traditional equipment—but delivered substantial labor savings through , operating at speeds up to 1,000 characters per second and minimizing skilled compositors' involvement.

Expansion and Computer Integration

In the 1970s, phototypesetting underwent significant democratization as manufacturers developed more compact and affordable systems, enabling smaller publishers and in-house operations to adopt the technology without relying on large-scale commercial facilities. Compugraphic's Mini-Publishing System, introduced in 1978, exemplified this shift by integrating keyboard input, storage, and output in a modular setup suitable for low-volume users, such as newsletters and small books, thereby reducing dependency on specialized shops. These systems also began incorporating capabilities, allowing operators to compose full pages directly rather than just lines or paragraphs, which streamlined workflows for trade publications. By the 1980s, the integration of computers transformed phototypesetting from semi-analog processes to fully digital front-ends, where input methods evolved from manual keyboards and Teletype-style tapes to computer terminals capable of real-time editing and hyphenation-justification algorithms. Compugraphic's Modular Composition System (MCS), launched in , featured dedicated minicomputers with storage and interfaces, enabling automated justification software that precursors to tools, such as early programs, would later build upon. This computing shift allowed for greater flexibility in font handling and error correction, with systems like the MCS driving CRT-based typesetters such as the 8400 model to produce high-resolution output at speeds competitive with larger installations. A pivotal event in this era was the widespread adoption of phototypesetting in U.S. trade book publishing during the , where it became standard for producing interiors of novels and works, often comprising over 70% of new titles by mid-decade due to its efficiency in handling complex layouts. Hybrid systems emerged as a bridge during this transition, combining photographic imaging with digital storage—such as magnetic disks for text files alongside film negatives for fonts—to minimize downtime while shops upgraded equipment. Despite these advances, the expansion faced notable challenges, including the persistent need for skilled operators proficient in both and emerging computer interfaces, which created bottlenecks in training and retention. Transition costs were substantial, often exceeding $100,000 for mid-sized shops converting from hot metal systems, encompassing not only hardware but also modifications and software licensing, which delayed full implementation for many printers.

Technical Components

Imaging Technologies

Phototypesetting systems relied on various sources to illuminate character images for exposure onto photosensitive media. Early machines, such as the Monophoto series, employed incandescent lamps paired with condensing lenses and shutters to provide steady illumination through transparent matrices. For higher-intensity applications requiring greater contrast and speed, xenon arc lamps became prevalent, offering bright, short-duration flashes that minimized motion blur during exposure. Over time, the adoption of pulsed xenon flash tubes evolved the toward sharper images, as these sources delivered intense bursts lasting approximately 3 microseconds per character, enabling precise rendering without prolonged exposure that could degrade . Projection mechanisms in phototypesetting utilized optical lens systems to direct through font masters and onto the output medium. Font masters typically consisted of negative strips containing glyphs as transparent characters on an opaque background, allowing to pass selectively to form the image. These lenses facilitated or reduction ratios, often ranging from 1:1 for direct sizing to approximately 2:1 for electronic adjustments, or reductions by factors of four in specialized setups to achieve typographic precision across font sizes like 5-18 points. This optical projection ensured accurate scaling and positioning of characters, with systems like the Photon ZIP 901 using lenses to project reduced images for high-quality output. Control systems managed the precise alignment and sequencing of exposures to compose text. Mechanical stepping mechanisms, driven by or pneumatic controls, positioned the font masters and output incrementally, advancing line by line or character by character to maintain spacing and alignment. Early electronic scanners supplemented this by rendering curved elements, such as in non-sequential font scanning or data dissection, allowing for more complex forms beyond simple linear movements. Resolution in phototypesetting was influenced by exposure duration and properties, directly affecting image sharpness and contrast. Typical exposure times ranged from milliseconds to microseconds per character, with flashes at 3-6 microseconds enabling high-speed operation up to 300 characters per second while preserving . Orthochromatic were commonly used for their sensitivity to and , providing enhanced contrast and fine suitable for typographic , often achieving resolutions of 600 or higher. These factors collectively ensured that phototypesetting produced clear, scalable text comparable to traditional methods but with greater flexibility.

Film and Exposure Processes

In phototypesetting, the primary recording media were high-contrast lithographic or photographic designed for sharp reproduction of text and graphics. These materials typically featured emulsions sensitive to specific wavelengths, often orthochromatic to prioritize and for line work, ensuring minimal tonal gradations and maximum edge definition. The base was commonly for its dimensional stability and resistance to warping during processing, though was used for proofing due to its lower cost and ease of handling. Sizes varied to match system capabilities, from narrow 35mm strips for character fonts in early scanners to larger rolls or sheets up to full pages (e.g., 22 x 28 inches) for direct composition output. The exposure workflow began with the projection of composed images onto the sensitized material within the phototypesetter, followed by post-exposure handling to prepare for development. Contact printing in a vacuum frame was essential for transferring the image sharply to plates or intermediates, where the frame's suction ensured intimate contact between the film negative and the receiving surface, minimizing distortion under intense light sources. Chemical development then converted the latent image into a visible one, using specialized lithographic developers in manual trays for small runs or automated processors for high-volume operations; these processes produced either negatives (clear image on opaque background) or positives (opaque image on clear background) depending on the downstream printing requirements. Development times were typically short, around 30-60 seconds at controlled temperatures (e.g., 68-72°F), to preserve contrast without introducing fog. Output preparation involved formatting the developed film for integration into the printing workflow, often through step-and-repeat mechanisms to replicate elements like logos or pages across larger sheets for efficient plate production. Stripping assembled multiple film pieces—such as text columns, halftones, and color separations—onto carrier sheets in the correct imposition layout, ensuring proper orientation for folding and binding in the final product. This prepared flats were then used to expose offset printing plates via contact in a vacuum frame, transferring the image to photosensitive aluminum or polyester plates for press mounting. Quality control during these processes focused on achieving uniform and sharpness, with dodging techniques applied manually during contact exposures to selectively block or extend in uneven areas, preventing over- or underexposure in dense text regions. A common issue was halation, where internal light reflection caused blurred edges or halos around fine lines; this was remedied by incorporating anti-halation layers in the film's backing, which absorbed and were subsequently washed out during development without affecting the image. Operators monitored using step wedges and densitometers to verify contrast ratios, typically aiming for gamma values above 5 for optimal lithographic .

Types of Systems

CRT-Based Phototypesetters

CRT-based phototypesetters utilized tubes to generate typographic images through an that directed a beam to scan a -coated screen, producing luminous glyphs which were then optically projected onto photosensitive or . These systems operated in either vector mode, where the beam traced character outlines directly (as in Charactron tubes), or raster mode, where the beam filled pixel grids to form glyphs (as in the Linotron series), allowing for precise control over character shapes and sizes under computer direction. The screen converted the beam's into visible light, enabling the exposure of high-resolution images suitable for masters. Prominent examples include the Linotron series developed by Mergenthaler in the and , which integrated raster scanning for efficient character generation from digitally stored fonts. The Linotron models achieved speeds of up to 10,000 characters per second, significantly accelerating workflows compared to earlier mechanical systems. These machines often processed input from , facilitating automated composition from pre-formatted data streams. A key advantage of CRT-based systems was their support for real-time font manipulation, permitting on-the-fly adjustments to , style, and spacing via software, which enhanced typographic flexibility in applications. Compatibility with input further streamlined integration with early computer systems, reducing manual intervention and enabling of complex layouts. However, limitations arose from decay, which could cause residual glow and degrade image sharpness during rapid successive exposures, necessitating pauses or specialized low-persistence phosphors. Additionally, precise of the deflection and optical projection was essential to maintain consistent quality, as misalignment led to distortions in character alignment and resolution.

Laser and Other Advanced Systems

Laser-based phototypesetting systems represented a significant advancement over earlier technologies, utilizing coherent light sources such as helium-neon (He-Ne) or diodes to expose photosensitive with high precision and stability. These systems emerged in the late 1970s, enabling direct imaging without the mechanical or electronic limitations of cathode ray tube (CRT) methods, and were particularly suited for high-resolution output in professional printing environments. A prominent example is the Scitex Dolev, introduced in the late by the Israeli company Scitex, which employed optics to produce film negatives for . The Dolev series, including models like the Dolev 800, utilized red diodes sensitive to wavelengths around 632.8 nm, achieving resolutions up to 4064 dpi for detailed typographic and graphic work. This allowed for faster throughput, such as 202 square inches per minute at 2540 dpi, making it ideal for high-volume commercial applications like magazine . Unlike CRT systems, setups like the Dolev exhibited reduced sensitivity to vibrations, as the stable beam path minimized distortions during exposure. Another influential system was the Linotronic 300, developed by Linotype and launched in , which integrated He-Ne lasers operating at 632.8 nm for exposing film or paper. Capable of resolutions up to 2540 dpi, it supported complex page layouts through raster imaging, bridging phototypesetting with emerging digital workflows and enabling precise reproduction of text and images in . Laser diodes in later variants further enhanced efficiency by providing compact, reliable light sources for consistent output. Beyond traditional lasers, alternative advanced systems incorporated LED arrays to diversify imaging options. For instance, the Agfa Officier P400, updated in 1983, transitioned to LED arrays for 400 dpi output on photographic material, offering a cost-effective alternative for mid-range with lower power requirements than gas lasers. These innovations prioritized precision and reduced mechanical complexity, supporting the shift toward computer-integrated in the .

Industry Impact

Advantages and Adoption

Phototypesetting offered key advantages over , primarily through substantial space savings by eliminating the need for storing heavy physical type cases and matrices, which streamlined operations and reduced overhead. It also provided greater flexibility, allowing operators to mix fonts, sizes, and even incorporate graphics seamlessly without recasting metal, fostering more creative and varied layouts. Furthermore, the technology bypassed the hazards and inefficiencies of molten metal handling, enabling faster production cycles and significantly lower labor costs by accelerating the process several times faster than linotype methods. These benefits made phototypesetting particularly appealing for high-volume needs. Adoption patterns varied by sector, with rapid uptake in the newspaper industry due to its emphasis on speed and daily deadlines. By the mid-1970s, virtually the entire U.S. newspaper sector had transitioned to phototypesetters, enabling expanded page counts and quicker turnaround times that supported broader content distribution. In contrast, book publishing saw slower implementation, as the technology's high initial setup costs and the sector's focus on longer production runs delayed widespread integration until the late 1970s and 1980s. The economic impact of phototypesetting included notable shifts in workforce roles, moving from highly skilled compositors who manually arranged metal type to specialized machine operators who managed photographic and early computer-integrated systems, thereby reducing the demand for traditional craftsmanship while creating demand for technical expertise. The global market for phototypesetting equipment expanded rapidly, with over 100 different systems available by 1972 from major manufacturers, reflecting its growing dominance in commercial printing. Case studies highlight regional differences in implementation: U.S. regional presses adopted phototypesetting en masse in the early to cut costs and boost efficiency for local dailies, often integrating models like the EOM 503 that supported formats. In the UK, such as and others transitioned more gradually, with full adoption accelerating during the 1986 , where phototypesetting enabled non-union operations and modernized production practices.

Challenges and Limitations

Despite its advantages in precision and flexibility over hot-metal typesetting, phototypesetting faced significant technical challenges, particularly in film processing. Dust particles and uneven development were common issues that could degrade image quality, leading to artifacts like streaks or spots on the exposed . These errors often arose from insufficient agitation during development or environmental contaminants in the processing environment, requiring meticulous handling to avoid reprints. Operational hurdles further complicated adoption, as phototypesetting systems demanded dedicated facilities for developing and fixing the photosensitive film. This added layers of complexity, including the need for light-tight spaces, chemical storage, and precise to prevent fogging or incomplete processing. Additionally, the steep for operators stemmed from the intricate justification algorithms used to align text lines evenly; early systems relied on electromechanical relays and binary calculations, which demanded specialized to troubleshoot inconsistencies in line spacing and hyphenation. Economic barriers posed substantial constraints, with high initial investments for equipment and infrastructure deterring smaller operations. For instance, a Monophoto 600 filmsetter cost around £28,000 in 1969, excluding the full system price of £43,000, while ongoing for vacuum frames—used to ensure flat contact between negatives and —and delicate added to operational expenses. These systems were also vulnerable to light leaks, which could expose prematurely and ruin entire runs, necessitating rigorous quality checks. Color handling remained limited until the late , as early phototypesetting primarily produced black-and-white output on photosensitive , restricting its use for multicolored materials without additional separation processes. This lag reflected broader technological constraints in color stability and processing, which only became more accessible and cost-effective in the following decade.

Decline and Legacy

Transition to Digital Publishing

The transition from phototypesetting to digital publishing began in the early with the introduction of Adobe's in 1984, which provided a device-independent standard for rendering scalable text and graphics, fundamentally shifting typesetting from photographic exposure processes to computational rasterization via raster image processors (RIPs). enabled computers to generate high-fidelity output directly for printers and typesetters, eliminating the need for intermediate photographic or paper in many workflows, as RIPs converted vector-based descriptions into bitmaps suitable for exposure. This paved the way for software, such as released in 1987 for the Apple Macintosh, which allowed designers to compose and output pages digitally without relying on specialized phototypesetting equipment or service bureaus. In the 1980s, hybrid systems like imagesetters bridged the gap, with Linotype's Linotronic 300 introduced in 1984 using laser technology to expose film or paper directly from digital data, combining phototypesetting's output medium with computer-driven input for higher efficiency and resolution up to 1200 dpi. These systems marked a transitional phase, as the integration of Apple's printer in 1985—also -based—further accelerated adoption by enabling affordable, in-house proofing and production. By the early 1990s, full digital replacement occurred in most Western markets, with phototypesetting services largely obsolete by 1995 due to the widespread use of technologies that bypassed film entirely. Key factors driving this shift included the rapid decline in prices during the , making personal workstations accessible to graphic designers and small publishers, and the intuitive (GUI) of the Apple Macintosh launched in 1984, which introduced (what you see is what you get) editing that democratized layout and typesetting tasks previously handled by professionals using analog photo equipment. This enabled direct-to-plate workflows, where digital files were sent straight to imaging plates for , rendering phototypesetting's photographic steps redundant.

Cultural and Technological Influence

Phototypesetting profoundly influenced by enabling unprecedented flexibility in layout and , surpassing the rigid constraints of hot-metal . This allowed for precise control over character spacing, , and scaling, fostering experimental approaches that integrated text and imagery more dynamically. For instance, publications like Emigre magazine, which began in 1984, leveraged the transition from phototypesetting services to early digital tools, creating custom bitmapped typefaces that challenged traditional notions of and . These innovations built on phototypesetting's photographic precision, which had already expanded creative possibilities in the and by adapting classic font libraries—such as those from Monotype and Linotype—to film formats, thereby standardizing masters that later informed digital font development. In the printing industry, phototypesetting marked a pivotal shift toward , replacing labor-intensive manual processes with photographic and early computerized systems that streamlined production workflows. Invented in the late and commercialized in the , it initiated the era of "cold type," reducing costs and errors while influencing subsequent digital standards, including the portable document format (PDF) through its emphasis on reproducible, high-fidelity image transfer in pipelines. This legacy extended to , where phototypesetting's modular font handling and scalable output prefigured digital techniques for personalized, data-driven print runs in modern workflows. Culturally, phototypesetting democratized by making high-quality more accessible to independent creators and smaller operations, as a single photographic matrix could replace entire cases of metal type, drastically lowering compared to earlier methods. This affordability empowered self-publishers and alternative presses during the mid-20th century, broadening the dissemination of diverse voices in print media. Today, its artifacts are preserved in dedicated archives, notably the Museum of Printing in , which houses the world's largest collection of phototypesetting equipment and , ensuring the technology's role in history remains accessible for education and research. Echoes of phototypesetting persist in modern initiatives, where high-resolution scanning of photo galleys and film negatives from the era facilitates the preservation and revival of analog in digital formats. Projects digitizing historical newspapers and books often employ advanced scanning to capture these galleys, converting them into searchable, editable files that inform contemporary design software and archival databases. This process not only safeguards typographic heritage but also influences current variable data and PDF-based workflows by providing high-fidelity source material for AI-assisted restoration and reproduction.

References

  1. https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=867
  2. https://museumofprinting.org/news-and-events/history-of-phototypesetting/
  3. http://theinventors.org/library/inventors/blphototypesetting.htm
  4. https://www.britannica.com/technology/Fotosetter
  5. https://www.usitc.gov/publications/701_731/pub2281.pdf
  6. https://www.digitalcheck.com/phototypesetters-printing/
  7. https://apmub.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/monotype-and-phototypesetting-andrew-boag.pdf
  8. https://www.dsource.in/course/digital-typography-1/phototypesetting
  9. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/MONO/nbsmonograph99.pdf
  10. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/publications/bls/bls_1774_1973.pdf
  11. https://pressinspection.com/2024/08/18/photocomposer/
  12. https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=2872
  13. https://www.britannica.com/topic/printing-publishing/Photocomposition
  14. https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Printing
  15. https://www.britannica.com/technology/Photoline
  16. https://linotype.wiki/pages/linotype_history_phototypesetting
  17. https://www.britannica.com/technology/Linofilm
  18. https://www.duxburysystems.org/downloads/library/history/1971_grunwald.pdf
  19. https://www.britannica.com/topic/printing-publishing/Phototypesetting
  20. https://www.printing-museum.org/en/about/message/list/202409251.php
  21. https://museumofprinting.org/blog/anatomy-of-atf-type/
  22. https://metaltype.co.uk/wpress/the-linofilm-system/
  23. https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=4776
  24. https://typenetwork.com/articles/morisawa-100th-anniversary
  25. https://multimediaman.blog/2015/05/31/john-crosfield-1915-2012-printing-press-automation/
  26. http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/2018/09/102740425-05-02-acc.pdf
  27. http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pdf//compugraphic/brochures/Compugraphic_Modular_Composition_System_Brochure.pdf
  28. https://www.tug.org/tug2016/walden-digital.pdf
  29. https://repository.uclawsf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=hastings_comm_ent_law_journal
  30. https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nbsspecialpublication295.pdf
  31. https://patents.google.com/patent/US3710707A/en
  32. https://guides.library.illinois.edu/litho-topic-hub/background/printing-process
  33. https://www.geocities.ws/richware4/quality/filmpro.pdf
  34. https://patents.google.com/patent/US4475458A/en
  35. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6603&context=facpub
  36. https://www.britannica.com/topic/printing-publishing/Offset-plate-making
  37. https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1948/product/1658
  38. https://www.prepressure.com/prepress/history
  39. https://www.boggsequipment.com/product/scitex-dolev-800p-imagesetter/
  40. https://www.prepressure.com/prepress/history/events-1984
  41. https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/For-Linotronic-Machine-HNS-Recording-Film_631060608.html
  42. https://www.computerhope.com/jargon/p/phototyp.htm
  43. https://centaur.reading.ac.uk/79821/12/19020676_Lekka_thesis_redacted.pdf
  44. https://leadfellasblog.home.blog/2019/10/23/phototypesetting-rip-part-2/
  45. https://soozisgrownuplife.com/2023/02/18/how-did-wapping-change-british-newspapers-in-the-1980s/
  46. https://www.ilfordphoto.com/common-processing-problems/
  47. https://alexanderslawsonarchive.com/trends-in-phototypesetting-provide-new-problems/
  48. https://tangiblemediacollection.com/artifacts/photon.html
  49. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/PUBLIC/DOT/REFERENCES/DOT09C
  50. https://computerhistory.org/blog/postscript-a-digital-printing-press/
  51. https://blog.globalgraphics.com/what-is-a-raster-image-processor-rip/
  52. https://www.quark.com/about/blog/40th-anniversary-quark-part-one
  53. https://whattheythink.com/articles/55522-day-typesetting-industry-died/
  54. https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/personal-computers/17/306
  55. https://collections.museumsvictoria.com.au/articles/1527
  56. https://www.printmag.com/daily-heller/the-daily-heller-revolutionary-digitization/
  57. https://typography.guru/video/history-of-phototypesetting-and-the-second-revolution-in-type-r136/
  58. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZmfV5gpd3o
  59. https://d-nb.info/1186853778/34
  60. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-C13-d96969a41ec3bbc8bf97149e2d13af01/pdf/GOVPUB-C13-d96969a41ec3bbc8bf97149e2d13af01.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.