OldTools Archive

Recent Bios FAQ

264194 Don Schwartz <dks@t...> 2017‑12‑11 Thumb screw wanted
I have a pr. of wing dividers made by Wm. Johnson Mfg. of Newark, New 
Jersey which is in need of a thumb screw to secure the setting. I tried 
all of my loose odds and found nothing that fit. The local Bolt Supply 
House agreed that an 8-32 almost fits, but jams up quite quickly, and 
suggested it may be an 8-28 which is not available here due to lack of 
demand. ;-(

The sales person suggested that even though it is an American tool, that 
it may be a British standard threading. Can anyone shed light or point 
me to a supply house, or maybe spare an extra? It's a decent tool, with 
a fine adjustment screw, and I'd like to put it to use.

Don

-- 
"You can tell a man that boozes by the company he chooses"
The Famous Pig Song, Clarke Van Ness
264196 John Ruth <johnrruth@h...> 2017‑12‑11 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Don,


Another possibility is that this is a "Sellers Thread" - fractional sizes below
1/4" which are just not the same as the numbered sizes.


Do you have the years in which Wm. Johnson operated in Newark? That would be a
clue because WIlliam Sellers presented his threading system at the Franklin
Institute on   September 15, 1864.  If your wing dividers are after that date,
but before the adoption of the current threading system, then Sellers threads
are likely.


In addition to oddball diameters and threads per inch, the thread profile is
somewhat different than the current standard with regard to the peaks and
valleys, although the slopes are still 60 degrees.


"Of threads, and threading systems, there is no end!"  [  (tm) John Ruth ]


Victor Machinery is a good source for odd threading dies and taps.


John Ruth

Who collects odd taps and dies.


________________________________
From: OldTools  on behalf of Don Schwartz 
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:34:53 PM
To: old tools
Subject: [OldTools] Thumb screw wanted


I have a pr. of wing dividers made by Wm. Johnson Mfg. of Newark, New
Jersey which is in need of a thumb screw to secure the setting. I tried
all of my loose odds and found nothing that fit. The local Bolt Supply
House agreed that an 8-32 almost fits, but jams up quite quickly, and
suggested it may be an 8-28 which is not available here due to lack of
demand. ;-(

The sales person suggested that even though it is an American tool, that
it may be a British standard threading. Can anyone shed light or point
me to a supply house, or maybe spare an extra? It's a decent tool, with
a fine adjustment screw, and I'd like to put it to use.

Don

--
"You can tell a man that boozes by the company he chooses"
The Famous Pig Song, Clarke Van Ness

------------------------------------------------------------------------
OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.

To change your subscription options:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Foldto
ols.swingleydev.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Foldtools&data=02%7C01%7C%7C6a40b1bd7b
6f48cce37f08d540e78788%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486285519
645578&sdata=Z43Qx%2BcEbaOca%2FppvHq%2B0b1yItb3VA7BFQgweblUvlM%3D&reserved=0">ht
tps://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Foldtools.swingle
ydev.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Foldtools&data=02%7C01%7C%7C6a40b1bd7b6f48cce37f0
8d540e78788%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486285519645578&sdat
a=Z43Qx%2BcEbaOca%2FppvHq%2B0b1yItb3VA7BFQgweblUvlM%3D&reserved=0

To read the FAQ:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswing
leydev.com%2Farchive%2Ffaq.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7C6a40b1bd7b6f48cce37f08d540e787
88%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486285519645578&sdata=BU986d%
2BhiX4qN3TG3KqJMijjZhx0dKixWbsFhdDSECA%3D&reserved=0">https://eur03.safelinks.pr
otection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswingleydev.com%2Farchive%2Ffaq.html&dat
a=02%7C01%7C%7C6a40b1bd7b6f48cce37f08d540e78788%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaa
aa%7C1%7C0%7C636486285519645578&sdata=BU986d%2BhiX4qN3TG3KqJMijjZhx0dKixWbsFhdDS
ECA%3D&reserved=0

OldTools archive: https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=h
ttps%3A%2F%2Fswingleydev.com%2Fot%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C6a40b1bd7b6f48cce37f08d54
0e78788%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486285519645578&sdata=Mz
vtTU4WrgXTHL0Z8%2BA5H910QMDhDsYNRlUR9Zrz3Uo%3D&reserved=0">https://eur03.safelin
ks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswingleydev.com%2Fot%2F&data=02%7C0
1%7C%7C6a40b1bd7b6f48cce37f08d540e78788%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7
C0%7C636486285519645578&sdata=MzvtTU4WrgXTHL0Z8%2BA5H910QMDhDsYNRlUR9Zrz3Uo%3D&r
eserved=0

OldTools@s...
264203 Kirk Eppler <eppler.kirk@g...> 2017‑12‑11 Re: Thumb screw wanted
From DAT:

Work From 1830
Work To 1957
Tools CARPENTER TOOLS,FARM TOOLS,LEVELS,MARKING GAUGES,SAW
TOOLS,SAWS,SCREWDRIVERS,SHAVES
Text Info The original William was succeeded by William Jr. ca. 1864;
William Jr. ran it until ca. 1910.

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:51 PM, John Ruth  wrote:

>
> Do you have the years in which Wm. Johnson operated in Newark? That would
> be a clue because WIlliam Sellers presented his threading system at the
> Franklin Institute on   September 15, 1864.  If your wing dividers are
> after that date, but before the adoption of the current threading system,
> then Sellers threads are likely.
>

-- 
Kirk Eppler In HMB, CA
264204 Don Schwartz <dks@t...> 2017‑12‑11 Re: Thumb screw wanted
It's always more complicated , isn't it?

Googleing suggests the company was in business from 1830 until 1938 when 
it was sold to C.S. Osborne & Co., also of Newark. It was engaged in 
making masons' and carpenters' tools, as well as gardening and leather 
tools.

Don



On 2017-12-11 3:51 PM, John Ruth wrote:
>
>
> Another possibility is that this is a "Sellers Thread" - fractional 
> sizes below 1/4" which are just not the same as the numbered sizes.
>
>
> Do you have the years in which Wm. Johnson operated in Newark? That 
> would be a clue because WIlliam Sellers presented his threading system 
> at the Franklin Institute on  September 15, 1864.  If your wing 
> dividers are after that date, but before the adoption of the current 
> threading system, then Sellers threads are likely.
>
>
> In addition to oddball diameters and threads per inch, the thread 
> profile is somewhat different than the current standard with regard to 
> the peaks and valleys, although the slopes are still 60 degrees.
>
>
> "Of threads, and threading systems, there is no end!"  [  (tm) John Ruth ]
>
>
> Victor Machinery is a good source for odd threading dies and taps.
>
>
> John Ruth
>
> Who collects odd taps and dies.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* OldTools  on behalf of Don 
> Schwartz 
> *Sent:* Monday, December 11, 2017 5:34:53 PM
> *To:* old tools
> *Subject:* [OldTools] Thumb screw wanted
>
> I have a pr. of wing dividers made by Wm. Johnson Mfg. of Newark, New
> Jersey which is in need of a thumb screw to secure the setting. I tried
> all of my loose odds and found nothing that fit. The local Bolt Supply
> House agreed that an 8-32 almost fits, but jams up quite quickly, and
> suggested it may be an 8-28 which is not available here due to lack of
> demand. ;-(
>
> The sales person suggested that even though it is an American tool, that
> it may be a British standard threading. Can anyone shed light or point
> me to a supply house, or maybe spare an extra? It's a decent tool, with
> a fine adjustment screw, and I'd like to put it to use.


-- 
"You can tell a man that boozes by the company he chooses"
The Famous Pig Song, Clarke Van Ness
264205 Erik Levin 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Don Schwartz wrote:


> I tried all of my loose odds and found nothing that fit. The local
> Bolt Supply House agreed that an 8-32 almost fits, but jams up quite
> quickly, and suggested it may be an 8-28 which is not available here
> due to lack of demand. ;-(
 I would suspect that imperial measure is a reasonable assumption given the
origin, but the actual thread size, pitch, and form have a lot of options. A
LOT. What I would do is run a soft, formable material into the hole and back out
to get as much information as possible. Thread pitch is easy this way. George
has suggested wood, and it has worked for me, but I have also used a variety of
plastics. You need a material that will form, not break, and hold dimension.

 For the pitch, use a round slightly larger than the ID of the thread. Then you
can check the pitch using a thread pitch gauge. If you don't have one (and can't
borrow one), you can use a caliper and magnifier. Measure as many threads as
possible and divide into the number of threads measured. If you measure five
thread pitches (four untouched thread marks between the caliper points) and the
measure is 0.180", then 5/0.180=27.8, giving 28 threads/inch as the most likely,
with 27 a nut unheard of option, 26 and 30 being unlikely, but possible given
the precision of the technique. The more threads in the measurement, the better.
If you can't get a good measure directly, I have run a chunk of material into
the hole, marked the end for alignment, measured how far it sticks out, and then
backed out 10 turns and remeasured. Quite accurate, though awkward and it needs
a reference surface.

In some cases, you can actually get a good enough cast of the threads to get a
true major diameter, and even see the thread form under a microscope. Don't
count on it, though.
Just for fun, also consider that even though sizes were standardized in the
1860's, many manufacturers didn't adopt the standard sizes (I mean you, Stanley,
and Starrett, and Brown & Sharpe, and, well, most of them) across the board.
0.150" (just under #7) isn't uncommon (Again, I mean you Starrett), and, if in
the 1860's to 1910 range, the numbered size could be old standard
(0.01316*size+0.0578), which makes a #8 0.163" rther than 0.164".  Not enough
difference to matter for most purposes (#8 through #12 are nice this way, number
14 being a dead match), but it can be an issue with screws in old size holes
especially if the thread forms are not close.

That said, if it is a #8, 8-36 used to be fairly common as a fine thread. 8-28
would be a tad course and isn't in any of the tables I have, going back a long
way. 8 40 is not unheard of, but I have only seen it a few times, typically on
adjusters.


*** This message was sent from a convenience email service, and the reply
address(es) may not match the originating address
264206 Kirk Eppler <eppler.kirk@g...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Erik Levin via OldTools <
oldtools@s...> wrote:

> . What I would do is run a soft, formable material into the hole and back
> out to get as much information as possible. Thread pitch is easy this way.
> George has suggested wood, and it has worked for me, but I have also used a
> variety of plastics. You need a material that will form, not break, and
> hold dimension.
>
>
On larger holes I have used aluminum foil by itself.  Soft wooden dowels,
and high end round toothpicks for smaller ones.

I imagine foil over a small toothpick might work if you didn't have plastic
rod available.
-- 
Kirk Eppler in HMB, CA
264211 paul womack <pwomack@p...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Erik Levin via OldTools wrote:
> Then you can check the pitch using a thread pitch gauge. If you don't have one
> (and can't borrow one), you can use a caliper and magnifier. Measure as many
> threads as possible and divide into the number of threads measured. If you
measure
> five thread pitches (four untouched thread marks between the caliper points)
and the
> measure is 0.180", then 5/0.180=27.8, giving 28 threads/inch as the most
likely, with 27 a nut
> unheard of option, 26 and 30 being unlikely, but possible given the precision
of
> the technique. The more threads in the measurement, the better.

It is possible to perform this kind of measurement rather accurately by taking a
macro
photograph of the item with a ruler (or other accurate scale) in shot.

You ideally need a zoom macro lens, so that you can be far enough
away to minimise parallax issues.

Having done this, count the pixels on the largest possible convenient distance
on the scale; this can be used to set the resolution of the image.

 From hereon, most image editing tools will allow you to measure
directly in the units of your choice.

If not, simple pixel distances can be converted using your reference measurement
pro rata. This method allows half-threads and thread "tips" to be referenced
very accurately, since the photograph (and image editor) allow in effect
high magnification and easy manipulation.

  BugBear
264213 "yorkshireman@y..." <yorkshireman@y...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Others have said - we(you that is)  need to find out what the thread is, then
its a case of consulting the manuals, looking for taps of the appropriate size,
or calculating the change wheels for the lathe.

No-one has mentioned the BA range of threads.  I always liked BA.   Mostly
because it has ‘British’ in the name I suppose.


Richard Wilson
Northumbrian Galoot
264214 Dave Caroline <dave.thearchivist@g...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
This "thread" reminds me, I like measuring tools and fleabay showed me
a pitch measuring machine, not complete but that is half the fun

http://www.archivist.info/cnc/screw_error/lamp_screw.php
more pictures at
http://www.collection.archivist.info/searchv13.php?searchstr=pd+pitch
Another toy I use for smaller threads is a traveling microscope
http://www.collection.archivist.info/searchv13.php?searchstr=pd+travelling

Dave Caroline
East midlands
264215 Ed Minch <ruby1638@a...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
How about threading it into a nut til it is flush with the back, then count the
turns til it protrudes an inch?   Or take it to the hardware store and thread it
into that rack-o-marked-nuts.

Ed Minch
264216 Ed Minch <ruby1638@a...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Please ignore - I just got up and did not correlate this morning’s discussion
with the OP.  Pass the spittoon and happy Tuesday

Ed Minch
264219 John Ruth <johnrruth@h...> 2017‑12‑12 Re: Thumb screw wanted
GG's


To recap:  The screw is about modern #8-32 but its too coarse to thread into an
8-32 wing nut.  The bolt vendor suggested something like an 8-28.


This rules out BA threads - BA #3 is very close to #8 at 0.161 diameter, but the
BA 3 thread is  far too fine at 34.79 threads per inch.


Thury Threads?


John Ruth

Metuchen NJ

"Of threads, and threading systems, there is no end!"  [  (tm) John Ruth ]


________________________________
From: OldTools  on behalf of Ed Minch 
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 6:29:05 AM
To: paul womack
Cc: Erik Levin; Porch
Subject: Re: [OldTools] Thumb screw wanted

Please ignore - I just got up and did not correlate this morning’s discussion
with the OP.  Pass the spittoon and happy Tuesday

Ed Minch




> On Dec 12, 2017, at 6:25 AM, Ed Minch  wrote:
>
> How about threading it into a nut til it is flush with the back, then count
the turns til it protrudes an inch?   Or take it to the hardware store and
thread it into that rack-o-marked-nuts.
>
> Ed Minch
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------
OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.

To change your subscription options:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Foldto
ols.swingleydev.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Foldtools&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb09de04875
8e4262651d08d541539b92%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486749703
992247&sdata=iwSjiMaKf7O%2B5fjvnKwd1hGQm%2Bo0IPHPtsBfg5Bbgqk%3D&reserved=0">http
s://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Foldtools.swingleyd
ev.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Foldtools&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb09de048758e4262651d08d
541539b92%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486749703992247&sdata=
iwSjiMaKf7O%2B5fjvnKwd1hGQm%2Bo0IPHPtsBfg5Bbgqk%3D&reserved=0

To read the FAQ:
https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswing
leydev.com%2Farchive%2Ffaq.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb09de048758e4262651d08d541539b
92%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486749703992247&sdata=gXcVeiu
8nQna%2Bnhn1OJxpkAI7pJvBBQsXHqb4Q0u6RI%3D&reserved=0">https://eur03.safelinks.pr
otection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswingleydev.com%2Farchive%2Ffaq.html&dat
a=02%7C01%7C%7Cb09de048758e4262651d08d541539b92%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaa
aa%7C1%7C0%7C636486749703992247&sdata=gXcVeiu8nQna%2Bnhn1OJxpkAI7pJvBBQsXHqb4Q0u
6RI%3D&reserved=0

OldTools archive: https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=h
ttps%3A%2F%2Fswingleydev.com%2Fot%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb09de048758e4262651d08d54
1539b92%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636486749703992247&sdata=eJ
nNKI%2FXwf00St5zxGMPBLURcAdxkufRCbNNOgSWr0g%3D&reserved=0">https://eur03.safelin
ks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fswingleydev.com%2Fot%2F&data=02%7C0
1%7C%7Cb09de048758e4262651d08d541539b92%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7
C0%7C636486749703992247&sdata=eJnNKI%2FXwf00St5zxGMPBLURcAdxkufRCbNNOgSWr0g%3D&r
eserved=0

OldTools@s...
264222 Troy Livingston <horologist@w...> 2017‑12‑13 Re: Thumb screw wanted
John,

Or something arbitrary. Like others I collect odd taps, dies, and screw 
plates. When repairing an antique clock it is bad form to make the clock 
fit the repair part. I once bought an early electromechanical clock that 
was missing the screws that secured the dial to the movement. Looked 
like all I had to do was make a few 2 x 56 screws and I would be all 
set..... Only they were too big. Sometime later I stumbled on a tap and 
die set which included the 1 1/2 x 56 threads needed.

If you can post the photos or measurements described in earlier posts I 
suspect that someone on the list will have something suitable.

Troy
264223 Don Schwartz <dks@t...> 2017‑12‑13 Re: Thumb screw wanted
On 2017-12-12 7:13 PM, Troy Livingston wrote:
>
> If you can post the photos or measurements described in earlier posts 
> I suspect that someone on the list will have something suitable.
>
> Troy

Thanks to everyone who has responded. I will try to find a suitable 
material to 'capture' the threads as most helpfully described by Erik 
Levin, and will post my results. The Christmas season is descending upon 
us shortly, and I doubt I will get to this very soon. When I made the 
original post, I was hoping for a quick solution. I see now that that 
will not happen, but I am a patient guy. And starting in January is 
another year! If you see me in the big box walking around with calipers 
measuring random suitable odds & sods, you will understand...

Don

-- 
"You can tell a man that boozes by the company he chooses"
The Famous Pig Song, Clarke Van Ness
264224 paul womack <pwomack@p...> 2017‑12‑13 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Don Schwartz wrote:
> When I made the original post, I was hoping for a quick solution. I see now
that that will not happen, but I am a patient guy.
> Don

We set the bar pretty high for "patient" in these parts.

Here's me finding an unusual ruler in 2007:
http://swingleydev.com/ot/get/208109/thread/

Here I am finally identifying it, almost exactly 3 years later:
http://swingleydev.com/ot/get/208109/thread/

   BugBear
264225 Ed Minch <ruby1638@a...> 2017‑12‑13 Re: Thumb screw wanted
BugBear

you mention in yhe post that shrunk rules are metal.  not in ‘Murica

https://www.jimbodetools.com/products/two-foot-boxwood-stanley-no-30-1
-2c-shrink-rule-58106">https://www.jimbodetools.com/products/two-foot-boxwood-
stanley-no-30-1-2c-shrink-rule-58106 <https://www.jimbodetools.com/products/two-foot-boxwood-stanley-no-30-1-2c-
shrink-rule-58106">https://www.jimbodetools.com/products/two-foot-boxwood-
stanley-no-30-1-2c-shrink-rule-58106>


Ed Minch
264242 Thomas Conroy 2017‑12‑14 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Bugbear wrote:

"We set the bar pretty high for "patient" in these parts. Here's me finding an
unusual ruler in 2007.... Here I am finally identifying it, almost exactly 3
years later..." [links elided]

Why,  you old speed demon, you. I have books that I started to bind in 1986 and
completed and exhibited in 2013. And others I started the same year that year
and am still working on---worked on this very year, an fact. See:
http://handbookbinders.org/exhibitions/

and scroll down to the 41st Annual Exhibition of 2013; bindings are alphabetical
by binder's name.  Some of my better work is in the 40th (2012) and the 43rd
(2015) and 44th (2016) Exhibitions, in slightly unflattering photos.

Tom ConroyBerkeley
264243 Ed Minch <ruby1638@a...> 2017‑12‑14 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Some really lovely work in there, Tom.  I could not find any names associated
with the pieces.

Ed Minch
264244 Thomas Conroy 2017‑12‑14 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Ed Minch wrote: "Some really lovely work in there, Tom.  I could not find any
names associated with the pieces."


I've struggled for years to get proper bibliographical entries for the catalog
entries. The problem is that the members who design the catalogs are usually
interested in visual things, not texts. By the time I get one to understand the
need, she has resigned and the next designer has to be educated from scratch.
The 40th anniversary piece in scarlet is Donn Byrne's Destiny Bay (1928),
stories set among the Anglo-Irish gentry before WWI; a favorite book of mine,
though no longer well known. The two in the 41st show, that were sitting so
long, are T.H.White's The Sword in the Stone and The Witch in the Wood. When
White wrote The Once and Future King he cannibalized these; most of The Sword in
the Stone was kept, except that he replaced a couple of funny episodes with
dreary sententious preachy boring ones. Most of The Witch in the Wood was simply
cut to get rid of the funny scenes. It  TWITW is as good as TSITS,  but I don't
think its has ever been reprinted and it is (due to White's hatchet job) almost
unknown. Strange, but common enough, that a writer should have such poor
judgement of what his best work is. My delay in completing the two bindings was
because I had done the covers but couldn't figure out what to do with the
spines. Once I got the breakthrough it went fast.
Thank you for the compliment.

Tom
264245 Dragon List <dragon01list@g...> 2017‑12‑15 Re: Thumb screw wanted
what was the breakthrough, tom?

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Thomas Conroy via OldTools <
oldtools@s...> wrote [snipped per FAQ]:
264248 Thomas Conroy 2017‑12‑15 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Bill asked: "what was the breakthrough, tom?"
I ran horizontal lines across the spines, ending them with small circles, level
with the ends of the half-circles on the covers.The cover design is basically a
traditional one, used in France for semi-opulent work, in the 16th through early
19th centuries. I simplified a bit, and followed my own sense of proportion.
When I did the covers I didn't realize how common the design was, I had just
seen one or two and liked it. My teacher's practice would have been to put just
the title on the spine, but that seemed inadequate to me. I wanted something to
tie the covers together. When I went back to historical examples, they had scads
of parallel decorative rolls across the spines, or sometimes single big central
panels. The idea on those old bindings was to give the maximum appearance of
luxury when the book was shelved. But these seemed to me to be to busy for the
covers, and in any case they didn't actually tie together the whole package---
in the 18th century and earlier, no one considered the covers and spine to be
one subdivided unit that needed to be tied together. The superficially best idea
would be to use one big lozenge (diamond) on the spine; but this causes problems
with getting straight lines to look straight on a curved surface, and it left
no-place good to put the title. The final idea hit everything right: simple,
tied things together, left a good space for fitting in the title, good
proportions possible.

Tom Conroy
Berkeley
264250 Claudio DeLorenzi <claudio@d...> 2017‑12‑15 Re: Thumb screw wanted
I was about to say the same as Ed.  I liked several of the designs, but
couldn’t see the maker info anywhere.
Do you have a gallery/ photos of your work online somewhere?  I admit to my
ignorance about the profession.  I didn’t even know that the binder decided
on the cover designs.
Cheers
Claudio
264251 Thomas Conroy 2017‑12‑15 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Claudio said: "I was about to say the same as Ed.  I liked several of the
designs, but couldn’t see the maker info anywhere."

Sorry it took me two tries to get the question. I assumed that the pdfs on the
Hand Bookbinders of California site were reproductions of the printed catalogues
of the exhibitions, but my antiquated and inadequate computer won't open most of
them. The 40th Exhibition does open for me, and that is indeed a facsimile of
the print catalogue, with each photo captioned with the name of the binder, the
name of the book, the size, and a cobbled-together description that does not (at
least in my case) reproduce what was said on the entry form. The descriptions
should, but do not, include the author, the date, the publisher, the
illustrator, and the form of illustration. The slideshow for the 39th Exhibition
doesn't have captions, but I hope and assume that there is more information in
the pdf. The most recent couple of catalogues have not yet been put up on the
website, I think so as not to interfere with catalog sales.

The majority of the books in these shows are "design bindings," individual
unique bindings responding artistically to the work itself but also to the
particular edition in hand, both the illustrations and the typography. Not
knowing the edition that was bound is horrible, especially in the case of a work
like the Fleurs du Mal which has appeared in many fine editions as well as
dozens of ordinary ones. Typically, design bindings are done in full leather
(usually goatskin, under various names). Unfortunately, the only online photosI
have of my work are in the HBBC Exhibitions.

Recent exhibitions have contained growing numbers of fine edition bindings and
"artist's books." Fine edition bindings would normally be on fine-press books,
in small editions of typically a dozen to a couple of hundred copies; the
edition binding will be identical on each copy, but will be of more artistic
sensibility, better materials, and more careful technique than a trade edition
binding---especially nowadays, with trade bookmaking right down the toilet.
"Artist's books" may be unique or run in small editions, but the point is that
one artist is the maker of the entire object, illustrating and printing as well
as text (if any). Artist's books draw on the technique of traditional binding,
printing, and calligraphy, sometimes on photography or painting, but they
usually attempt to stretch the meaning of what a book is---sometimes to the
point of having nothing at all like tet or intellectual content. You get the
same sort of solipsism (nihilism?) on the lunatic fringe of artistic wood
turning.
Tom Conroy
264252 Tim moore <blind.moore@g...> 2017‑12‑15 Re: Thumb screw wanted
Some context.
Even the bookbinder had trouble opening this site.
Which is too bad, since i would like to see more.
Don't they have a collection at the Reed library?
Tim
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thomas Conroy via OldTools 
Date: Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: [OldTools] Thumb screw wanted
To: Dragon List 
Cc: Old TOOLS 


Bill asked: "what was the breakthrough, tom?"
I ran horizontal lines across the spines, ending them with small circles,
level with the ends of the half-circles on the covers.The cover design is
basically a traditional one, used in France for semi-opulent work, in the
16th through early 19th centuries. I simplified a bit, and followed my own
sense of proportion. When I did the covers I didn't realize how common the
design was, I had just seen one or two and liked it. My teacher's practice
would have been to put just the title on the spine, but that seemed
inadequate to me. I wanted something to tie the covers together. When I
went back to historical examples, they had scads of parallel decorative
rolls across the spines, or sometimes single big central panels. The idea
on those old bindings was to give the maximum appearance of luxury when the
book was shelved. But these seemed to me to be to busy for the covers, and
in any case they didn't actually tie together the whole package--- in the
18th century and earlier, no one conside
 red the covers and spine to be one subdivided unit that needed to be tied
together. The superficially best idea would be to use one big lozenge
(diamond) on the spine; but this causes problems with getting straight
lines to look straight on a curved surface, and it left no-place good to
put the title. The final idea hit everything right: simple, tied things
together, left a good space for fitting in the title, good proportions
possible.

Tom Conroy
Berkeley

------------------------------------------------------------------------
OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.

To change your subscription options:
https://oldtools.swingleydev.com/mailman/listinfo/oldtools

To read the FAQ:
https://swingleydev.com/archive/faq.html

OldTools archive: https://swingleydev.com/ot/

OldTools@s...

Recent Bios FAQ