Lets Talk Mechanicals! (2D Prototype Process)

[skye]

So, I was rereading my favorite article in vintage history from Tomart's 147 that talks about the cardback making progress in excellent detail. (I know I bring it up too often, but Tracey and Bill really wrote just an amazing resource with jaw dropping pictures.)

I never really put much thought into it before, but this time the fact that no "mechanicals" have made it to the secondary market really caught my attention. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but what I got from the article is that mechanicals are the step between photo art and cromalins. They are black and white xeroxes of the photo art in its proper ratio along with the text and other elements. They were used to make sure that the text elements were in correct placement with the photo. I think I must have something wrong there, because I don't get how the size difference between the photo art and the cardback is compensated for.

Anyway, isn't it strange that none have survived? It just seems weird that everything other step has made it in some shape or form, but this one thing has not. Searching for them is really hard as the word is so vague, does anyone have an example of what a mechanical looks like in another toy line?

 

[JohnA]

Mechanicals have hit market, just not many. All of the Revenge ones like this:

All of the 2nd Series Droids boards and even some of the playsets have turned up. They're neat pieces but some of them have sold for far more than I think they are worth.

As for the picture ratio, I'd say it was nothing more than shrinking the size down on a copier.

I actually used to do mechanicals for hardcore show flyers years ago, everybody did. We'd make copies of covers and cut them out and lay them out then make final flyers. Pretty cool stuff.

John

 

[AJ_van_Zelst]

So, I was rereading my favorite article in vintage history from Tomart's 147 that talks about the cardback making progress in excellent detail. (I know I bring it up too often, but Tracey and Bill really wrote just an amazing resource with jaw dropping pictures.)

Hmm...I think I have to track down a copy of that one eventhough it's over 2 years old.

-Alex

 

[skye]

Thanks for that, John, I guess I considered those to be more conceptual mock ups rather than real mechanicals. So, those were the mechanicals used to make the 65 back proofs? They were saved because the Revenge text made the designers take note?

Why do you think it says in the article "To date, no known example of a 3-3/4" card back mechanical has surfaced in the collector market." ? I know Tomart's makes mistakes, but that article seems rather unmolested by Tomart's notoriously sloppy editors. It seemed to be pretty close to what I remember from Tracey's panel at C4.

 

[JohnA]

Those cards definitely weren't used for printing but I'd still call them mechanicals. Even my boss and co-worker, who both worked with designers and printers in the 80's, call pieces like that mechanicals. My boss still does mock-ups like that for our designer and calls them mechanicals. I've heard them also called layouts, mock-ups, and pasteups. If you refer to the final piece used to create the print plates then, yeah, I don't recall ever seeing or hearing of one.

John

 

[Mattias_Rendahl]

Good question Skye, I've actually wondered about exactly the same thing. Hopefully Tracey can chime in with some more info. Until then, here's my 2 cents...

Thanks for that, John, I guess I considered those to be more conceptual mock ups rather than real mechanicals.

I agree with John and actually think they can be considered as Mechanicals. I guess different companies and people called it differently. Mock-up, Mechanical, pasteups etc. Same same but different. At least that makes sense to me.

We collectors want to put an exact name into everything, but many names may vary, but the way it was used was probably (in many cases) the same.

So, those were the mechanicals used to make the 65 back proofs?

The Revenge mock-ups can also have been used to determite how large the photography was going to be used. If you look at all original photoarts there's always a percentage point which is meant for the pre-press department. So that they know in which size the photoart shall be scanned and used.

A fun side note, the Chirpa Revenge mock-up was done before the original photoart was done. Because the photo used on the Revenge mock-ups isn't airbrushed yet and Logray is still present. So thats a piece prior to the orig photoart and dont suit the way the article describes a mechanical. But that could be because the wrong ewok was airbrushed out on the first Chirpa photo-art and was behind in the process because of that.

If you refer to the final piece used to create the print plates then, yeah, I don't recall ever seeing or hearing of one.

I'm not sure I understand what that final piece is. Once the Cromalin is made its easy to create the color separations that is needed to *develop* the printing plates. So the final piece actually is some kind of color separations you put on a plate, light them up which made the motif to etch onto the plate. Kind of like developing a photography.

Mattias

PS. the Tomarts article by Bill and Tracey is indeed awesome. Go get it if you dont already have it

 

[grand_moff_aaron]

Wow those are really interesting to see. Thanks Syke for bringing this topic up and John and Mattias for their knowledge. I enjoy seeing and learning about the steps in printing for the reasons listed below.

So correct me if I am wrong, but those photos on the cardbacks in John's post are just photocopied and then glued on or attached to the card? Very interesting. I wonder with all of today's computer technology if they would still be done that way?

I worked in a print shop for about a year and ran a small press for a newsletter but never did any pre-production or layout stuff like this, just made some of the plates. Guess I should have paid more attention when I was there! -oh well

 

[Mattias_Rendahl]

So correct me if I am wrong, but those photos on the cardbacks in John's post are just photocopied and then glued on or attached to the card?

Well, not exactly. It's weird, if they are photocopied they are photocopied from a printed piece. Because it has raster, both the image and the name plates. I actually think the mounted layers are B&W printed (not photocopied) using some kind of an old simple black & white printer used in pre-press deparments. And it's printed on thick, almost photo quality paper. Awesome pieces imo. Now, if I only could figure out what the handwritten numbers on the tape was for.

I wonder with all of today's computer technology if they would still be done that way?

[/QUOTE]
No. Not near it. It would be done in the computer all the way and then sent directly to the printer. Much faster, craftsmanlike it's not comparable of course.

Mattias

 

[JohnA]

If you refer to the final piece used to create the print plates then, yeah, I don't recall ever seeing or hearing of one.

I'm not sure I understand what that final piece is. Once the Cromalin is made its easy to create the color separations that is needed to *develop* the printing plates. So the final piece actually is some kind of color separations you put on a plate, light them up which made the motif to etch onto the plate. Kind of like developing a photography.

You're still not mentioning a step, and *that* is the one Skye refers to. There's a step between art and cromalin. The art had to be laid out and created somehow. I'm assuming there was some sort of cardback template where the names and numbers and, of course, art where added to and then photographed to create a cromalin. Maybe something like this Paploo card? FWIW I'd love to get that one. I think there's another out there, right?

So, how do we go from cromalin to separation sheets? (Links added for others, not you

)

John

 

[skye]

If you look at all original photoarts there's always a percentage point which is meant for the pre-press department. So that they know in which size the photoart shall be scanned and used.

I understand that, but then, how did they match that with the "Star Wars" and "Kenner" logos? My Chewie art is at 92%, so, did they have 8% too big versions of the text lying around to lay over the art while making the mechanicals?

That is awesome info about the Chirpa with Paploo in it, but that just confuses things further. If those B+W images were not taken from the actual photo art, how were they useful?

I love questions like this because I have learned so much that I am more confused then when I asked the question.

 

[JohnA]

I understand that, but then, how did they match that with the "Star Wars" and "Kenner" logos? My Chewie art is at 92%, so, did they have 8% too big versions of the text lying around to lay over the art while making the mechanicals?

No, I assume they shrank the art to 92% and laid it in a 100% template. The Kenner logo was probably placed over the art when it was scanned down.

That is awesome info about the Chirpa with Paploo in it, but that just confuses things further. If those B+W images were not taken from the actual photo art, how were they useful?

They were. He said they brushed out the wrong image for Chirpa so that one was behind schedule. In a case like that they'd use either that image or another FPO (for placement only).

John

 

[Mattias_Rendahl]

I understand that, but then, how did they match that with the "Star Wars" and "Kenner" logos? My Chewie art is at 92%, so, did they have 8% too big versions of the text lying around to lay over the art while making the mechanicals?

That number means that the Chewie photo-art needed to be scanned in 92% to fit the "100%" SW and Kenner logos. The photo-art isn't 92% of its supposed size., rather 108%. So, the photo-art was done in any size. Preferably in a larger size than needed, both because it's easier to airbrush details onto a big picture, but also it's always better to reduce a piece than enlarge (the quality gets more compressed which means it looks much better). hrm, hope that made sense.

I've seen large photo-arts that was meant for catalogs and was only going to be used as small pictures. They had 10-20% written on it. Sometimes there's also another number, i.e. 133 which refers to how many lines the picture is going to be printed in. The more lines the better quality. 133 line is common for magazines (like Toy Fair), I think newspaper is around 60 or so. Sorry for the slightly sidetrack...

Mattias

 

[Mattias_Rendahl]

Ah, John beat me to it. On both of the questions

Mattias

 

[JohnA]

Mattias,

Don't miss my question above Skye's. I'm curious about how the separations happen.

John

 

[BryanSimmons]

I'm assuming there was some sort of cardback template where the names and numbers and, of course, art where added to and then photographed to create a cromalin. Maybe something like this Paploo card? FWIW I'd love to get that one. I think there's another out there, right?

Wow, how have I missed this through all these years.

And where does that Revenge template fit in the process. It's almost the reverse of that Chirpa template.

 

[skye]

I think I'm starting to get it. I guess my confusion is that my impression was that the mechanical was made directly from the photo art. It makes sense that there was another step.

If that is correct, there must have been another copy or xerox of the original art at 100% that was used to make the mechanicals?

Or, am I just being thick?

The article lead me to believe that the mechanical was printed all on the same card stock with no overlays or glueing. Having never held one in person, I always just assumed that the Revenge Mock ups John posted above had the B+W glued on and not printed on. That makes them even cooler.

 

[JohnA]

I always just assumed that the Revenge Mock ups John posted above had the B+W glued on and not printed on. That makes them even cooler.

They are glued on.

John

 

[Mattias_Rendahl]

So, how do we go from cromalin to separation sheets?

I was hoping someone else would answer that question, because I think it’s quite difficult to explain

But I’ll try to explain how I have learned how it worked...

Today it’s of course very simple, but with the old-school technique you used a pre-press camera (I’m sure there’s a better word for that). Depending on when in time, you used different techniques. One way was to photograph the layout/picture 3 times, each using separate different filters. Here you used the primary colors (RGB) as filter-colors and with quite complicated process you were able to get each color (CMYK) filtered/separated and then you simply developed it like any film. It would approx look something like this color key:
http://theswca.com/index.php?action=disp_item&item_id=48705

Or you used a special film in the pre-press camera that was very sensitive for all colors, the result of that was 4 films with different shades of grey. And each film of course represented the 4 different colors Cyan, Magenta, yellow and Black.
Here’s Markus neat sep. sheets, all in b&w/different grey shade (click the picture for more):


And then the films were used to develop the printing plates

Mattias

 

[skye]

I always just assumed that the Revenge Mock ups John posted above had the B+W glued on and not printed on. That makes them even cooler.

They are glued on.

John

lol. I would feel stupid, but I'm having too much fun talking about this stuff!

For clarity, and for everyone that may be reading this and not have the tomarts in front of them allow me to paraphrase it (I know they are not too mellow about reproducing their stuff, but hey, I've done enough advertising for the article.)

-The photo art was copied in black and white at the proper ratio and put onto a piece of art board
-the text, logo and stuff was added on that art board by being positioned onto transparent plastic overlays to ensure good placement.
-Special instructions were written on a sheet of onionskin paper and put on top
-the whole mechanical thing was done by a different company than the one that did the photo art.
-after that it was sent off to the color separators...

I think I get it better now. In the article the info is spread over two sections, so it was not entirely easy to digest. Seeing the Revenge mechanicals really helped me to visualize it.

 

[Bill_Wills]

Thanks for the kind words Skye. As to your question, as I recall, I believe the statement that no 3-3/4" mechanicals had surfaced was in the context of production pieces. I can see how it isn't very clear. I have never seen a mechanical for any production cardback. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't exist. There might be some tucked away in collections that haven't been made public.

 

[Bill_Wills]

I would consider a true mechanical to be a complete blueprint for the films used to create the plates, so I'm not 100% certain I would consider those Revenge pieces a mechanical in the strictest sense. Just my opinion.

How cool would it be for a mechanical for a 12 back to surface? That would be absolutely amazing.

 

[skye]

I would consider a true mechanical to be a complete blueprint for the films used to create the plates, so I'm not 100% certain I would consider those Revenge pieces a mechanical in the strictest sense. Just my opinion.

Glad to have you post here, and thanks for the clarification. So, out of curiosity, what is missing from those Revenge pieces to make them mechanicals in the strictest sense?

 

[Dax]

So correct me if I am wrong, but those photos on the cardbacks in John's post are just photocopied and then glued on or attached to the card?

Well, not exactly. It's weird, if they are photocopied they are photocopied from a printed piece. Because it has raster, both the image and the name plates. I actually think the mounted layers are B&W printed (not photocopied) using some kind of an old simple black & white printer used in pre-press deparments. And it's printed on thick, almost photo quality paper. Awesome pieces imo. Now, if I only could figure out what the handwritten numbers on the tape was for.

Mattias

Well I can't help with the numbers, their secret eludes me I'm afraid, but I do have a theory regarding the black and white images. From the detail that Mattias provided I suspect that they were produced using the Agfa Copyproof system or if not that then something very similar to it. In the graphics industry Agfa's Copyproof system was simple and quick to use and was ideal for mock-up / layout productions and could even be used to produce colour separation negatives.

Effectively it was a massive vertically mounted camera used in a darkroom where the Copyproof negative was placed in the 'back' of the camera, the item you wanted to copy was placed on a flat field and you then dialed in the ratio of enlargement or reduction, focused the camera, then calculated the exposure time and that was basically it. You 'shot' the negative, matched it with a copyproof positive, fed the two through a chemical processer then waited about a minute, peeled the sheets apart and voila, instant print. Give it a rinse in water, feed through a dryer and then cut and paste to your hearts content. An experienced operator could produce a finished print in only a few minutes which was fantastic for the day.

I'm not sure if that level of detail helps or is just a bit of overkill but it's out there for whoever wants it.

 

[Mattias_Rendahl]

I actually think the mounted layers are B&W printed (not photocopied) using some kind of an old simple black & white printer used in pre-press departments. And it's printed on thick, almost photo quality paper.

Well I can't help with the numbers, their secret eludes me I'm afraid, but I do have a theory regarding the black and white images. From the detail that Mattias provided I suspect that they were produced using the Agfa Copyproof system or if not that then something very similar to it. In the graphics industry Agfa's Copyproof system was simple and quick to use and was ideal for mock-up / layout productions and could even be used to produce colour separation negatives.

Effectively it was a massive vertically mounted camera used in a darkroom where the Copyproof negative was placed in the 'back' of the camera, the item you wanted to copy was placed on a flat field and you then dialed in the ratio of enlargement or reduction, focused the camera, then calculated the exposure time and that was basically it. You 'shot' the negative, matched it with a copyproof positive, fed the two through a chemical processer then waited about a minute, peeled the sheets apart and voila, instant print. Give it a rinse in water, feed through a dryer and then cut and paste to your hearts content. An experienced operator could produce a finished print in only a few minutes which was fantastic for the day.

I'm not sure if that level of detail helps or is just a bit of overkill but it's out there for whoever wants it.

Fantastic! That's exactly what I suspected. Great info Dax (if you're into this kind of stuff

), thanks a lot for the input and the superb description.

Mattias

 

[DarthZilla71]

Great topic Skye, I just got Tomart's AFD #147 a couple of days ago, after your recommendation in another thread, and that statement about no 3 3/4" mechanicals surfacing really made me more curious about the creation of the cardbacks.

A qustion I have is, would the mechanicals get returned to Kenner at some point and then destroyed or did the company they were outsourced to dispose of them once the Cromalins were made?

-Mark

 

[Tracey_Hamilton]

First off, thank you Skye and Mattias for the kind words about the article. Secondly, I can't believe I missed this thread, so sorry for the extremely late post. Probably doesn't surprise you John though does it?

Anyway, not too much to add to what's already been said, just a brief reiteration and some random thoughts...

Skye, the photo art was resized by the printer to the specs on the mechanical as John and Mattias stated. And as John said, the designers just used a copier. Some elements may have been created to scale, such as the star field back ground. The type was professionally set to scale as it translated directly to the final films.

As far as survival, my guess is any mechanicals were kept at the printer with the corresponding films and then got pitched with them. Aside from a small batch of films from an Earth find several years back, I don't know of any vintage films in existence for the actual cardbacks (US anyway).

I would guess that early on the mechanicals were really important and more sophisticated than later in the line. Once they got the process in motion and the overall look hammered out, they probably did just use existing cardbacks and glued on new black and white photos, logos, nameplates, etc. as John and Mattias mentioned with the Revenge mock-ups.

Also, as Mattias mentioned, films were generated by a special pre-press camera using a complex system of filters. The films were broken out into four ink colors - cyan, magenta, yellow and black, then used to burn the actual printing plates. Spot or pantone colors were also used in the Droids and Ewoks line to expand color choices. The cromalins were generated from the final separations. So, the final films were made before the cromalin. What I'm not totally clear on is if all of the camera ready elements were compiled and then shot on film, or if each of the pieces were shot on a separate piece of film and then stripped together? I tend to the think the former. The films from the Earth were complete as if they were generated from a single color image. There was one piece of film that had a new line of type stripped in, but that was because of a last minute change in the wording. Portions of that ROTJ Paploo Proof Card on the Archive could actually be camera ready artwork. How cool would that be? One thing's for sure, the early mechanicals were truly works of art and would be a beauty to behold!

John is right in that they had a camera ready template of the border and logos that was used for all of the cardbacks, which I assume was to scale.

Dax, great info on the Agfa Copyproof system. Thanks for sharing that!

Again, sorry for the late ramblings.

Tracey