This set of Notebooks started out as a small collection of information in a logical position within the website. Then it just grew. It is now relatively large and completely illogical, but perhaps more useful.
For a survey of pantographs as used in the various stages of typographical matrix making, see the pantograph section of the CircuitousRoot boook Making Matrices . This includes a survey chapter on all types of pantographs, to put them in context .
As the general organization shown above now indicates, the term "pantograph" indicates (primarily) three kinematically unrelated kinds of machines (which have been used for many purposes) and has been used to describe other kinds of machines as well.
When pantographs are used for machining/cutting/engraving, they require sharp cutters. There are at least five distinct kinds of cutters: guided single-point engraving cutters (very rare), omnidirectional drag-engraving points, and rotary cutters. (Rotary cutters, in turn, come in several forms: D-bit or single-lip cutters, pyramidal cutters (most common in matrix engraving), and multi-point cutting tools resembling (or identical to) milling cutters.) These cutters in turn require cutter sharpening machines (which were often made by the makers of the pantographs). For information on sharpening machines used for everything except diamond drag-engraving cutters, see the CircuitousRoot Notebook on Cutter Tool Forming and Sharpening.
(In addition to these several types of more or less conventional cutting tools, pantographs have been used with other tools as well. Gorton sold a spark erosion unit. Alexander sold a vibrating pen engraver. CNC units today employ a variety of more modern cutting tools, including abrasive waterjets, plasma cutters, and lasers. I don't actually know if any of these were applied to pantographs, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that they were. )
A Chronology of Pantographs
One of the peculiar ironies of the history of the pantograph is that while it is set of diverse kinds of machines with a long history and wide application over many fields, within particular fields enthusiasts in that field tend to think of it as unique to it. This Notebook simply attempts to lay out chronologically all known pantographs. (This is of course an impossible task, but even a reasonable approximation may be useful.)
Machines patterned after some models of the Deckel.
Barr, for Working Patterns (L&M) [UK]
[NOT DONE] In-house development at Linotype & Machinery, Ltd. (UK) by Mark Barr. 1900. For cutting working patterns for subsequent use in punch engraving. [NOTE: Surviving information is in Legros & Grant and in Barr's GB patents.]
[TO DO: Barr developed half a dozen distinct pantographs (and several other improvements in pantographs, including a microphonic annunciator for detecting engraving tool contact) around the turn of the 20th century. Some of these were 3-D machines which were more closely related to the brocade machines of the engine turners. They did not seem to find application, but are interesting.]
(Mark Barr also filed for two GB patents on his own in 1899, Nos. 8,245 and 8,246 (see also US 651,691 and US 663,153), for the photography of moving objects. In these he described himself as an "Electrical Engineer")
Benton's Four-Bar (Horizontal) Pantographs
These are discussed along with Benton's Single-Arm (Vertical) pantographs, below . For all that Benton's vertical single-arm pantographs have received the most attention, his horizontal, four-bar linkage 1899/1905 "Optomechanical" pantograph may be the cleverest.
A simple low-relief 3-D pantograph duplicator intended for hobby woodworking. It's an almost forgotten machine, but rather nice for what it is. I was lucky enough to be able to save one from giant rats and dumpsters (yes, the dumpsters were oversize, too).
The Central Type Foundry Pantograph
This would have been a very early application of pantograph engravers to making typefounding matrices. It would appear that this machine was imported from Germany in 1880 by the Cincinnati Type Foundry, but not used successfully there. It was later purchased by Gustave Schroeder and used by him to cut DeVinne for Central.
History, classification, and bibliography (but no reprints).
Primarily information related to the model P1-2 "Pantomill" 2-dimensional pantograph engraving machine, because that's what I have.
At some point the Inland Type Foundry (St. Louis, 1895-1912) sold a pantograph engraving machine to Genzsch & Heyse (Hamburg, Germany). The details of this machine are obscure. Nicholas J. Werner mentions it in his "Address" to the St. Louis Club of Printing House Craftsmen .
Maschinenfabrik Michael Kampf KG. Bad Homburg, Germany. A Kampf engraver is illustrated in Southall's Printer's Type in the Twentieth Century , p. 24.
Note: Rehak, in Practical Typecasting, p. 100, mentions a "Deckel-Kampf" engraver. I'm not sure that he isn't conflating the Deckel and the Kampf; I can find no indication that there was ever a connection between these two companies.
Leavenworth [US] (Wood Type, From 1834)
In 1834, William Leavenworth, possibly in collaboration with A. R. Gilmore (who is otherwise unknown) developed a pantograph-controlled rotary engraving machine (aka pantograph router) for making wood type. This was the earliest use of such a machine in America. There is a continuous chain of successive businesses from this point to the end of the commercial wood type business with Hamilton. It is presumed that Leavenworth's pantograph was the model for the later models a few of which are documented, but the detailed history of the evolution of the pantograph for wood type making has never been researched (and it is unlikely that sufficient information survives to do so).
Unrelated to the later pantograph engraving machine for wood type of Edwin Allen. I am aware of no evidence that any of the pantograph engraving for wood type, estabalished since the 1830s, had any influence on the various developments of pantographic engraving machinery for the production of metal type in the 1880s.
Georges-Auguste Leschot (1800-1884), Switzerland (worked in Geneva). Pantograph developed ca. 1839-1844. A horizontal-format four-bar pantograph engraving / light milling machine for the watchmaking firm of Vacheron & Constantin. This was used for the production of uniform watch plates, and had a significant influence upon the industry. (As late as 2013, the firm ran an advertisement in periodicals for the rich, such as Barron's, illustrating this machine.)
At least one of the pantographs of Ferdinand Lotz in the 1870s bears a striking resemblance to Leschot's machine.
It is a notion of mine (for which I cannot yet provide sufficient evidence) that the Leschot pantograph engraving machines probably influenced German pantographs of the mid-19th century and, therefore, (a) the first pantograph matrix engraving done in America, by the Central Type Foundry in 1882, (b) the pantographs of Wiebking, and through him the Ludlow Typograph Company .
Lewis (Keystone Type Foundry) [US]
In the 1903-1906 timeframe, James W. Lewis patented three pantographs. The first two were derivatives of Benton's single-arm machines (and acknowledged as such). The third was a more original design, and its patent (unlike the other two) was assigned to the Keystone Type Foundry. Because of this, I'll group all of Lewis' machines here.
Ludlow Typograph [US]
Together with the Central machine (because it was the first) and the several Benton machines (because they were the best known) this is one of the three most important typographical pantographs ever. Yet it almost unknown; until 2013 there weren't even any published images of it.
See Wiebking-Hardinge / Ludlow, below.
New Hermes Engravograph [US]
The late Jim Rimmer used an Ogata RS-260 pantograph engraver (made in 1973) for engraving his matrices. (See Richard Kegler's film, Making Faces, on Rimmer's work. See also Rimmer's book Pie Tree Press. (Kentville, Nova Scotia, CA: Gaspereau Press, 2008): p. 67.)
H. P. Preis. These (or at least the ones I've seen pictures of) are benchtop machines of the same general scale as the New Hermes. They appear to be more substantial in their construction, though.
Paul Hayden Duensing writes that the Preis "is well-suited to the private [type]founder's needs and is surprisingly accurate." ("Private Typefounding in the U.S.A." in The Printing Art, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Summer 1973): 25), so it has been used for typographical matrix engraving.
After 1888. We know of this machine only from a brief comment in one article by N. J. Werner. It was a one-off machine built in St. Louis probably for matrix engraving (but possibly for working pattern engraving; it isn't certain).
The late Jim Rimmer used a Taylor-Hobson pantograph engraver for engraving his working patterns, but not his matrices. (See Richard Kegler's film, Making Faces, on Rimmer's work.)
N.B., the machine is the "Taylor-Hobson." The firm is "Taylor, Taylor & Hobson."
The Varigraph [US]
A template-driven movable pantograph drawing machine. (This is a link up one level, where I consider it in the general chapter on "Typefounding, Lettering, & Printing.")
Wiebking-Hardinge / Ludlow [US]
The pantographic matrix and punch engraving machines developed by Robert Wiebking and Henry Hardinge (along with the successor of these machines at the Ludlow Typograph Company) are among the great lost technological items of history. With these machines Wiebking engraved many of Goudy's early types, and they enabled the success of the Ludlow and 20th century newspaper display advertising. But almost nothing is known about them. They were developed out of a 19th century German pantograph made in Berlin and brought to the US by Herman Wiebking. This machine was developed by his son, Robert Wiebking and Henry H. Hardinge (co-founder of the great Hardinge lathe company) into one or more very successful machines in the early 1890s. While there were other typographical engraving machines in the 1890s independent of Benton's, Wiebking's were by far the most successful. They were kept secret, however, and not documented.
Bergeron (Medallion/Portrait Lathes)
Chicago. Late 19th century. Employed for matrix engraving.
The Ballou employs a single (vertical) arm, together with horizontal elements to translate its motion to a cutting tool. These bars look at first like a four-bar linkage, but they are not because two of the four elements are not pivoted but instead are sliders.
Barr, for Punches (L&M) [UK]
[NOT DONE] In-house development at Linotype & Machinery, Ltd. (UK) by Mark Barr. 1900.
It is an oversimplification to speak of "the" Benton pantograph. Linn Boyd Benton designed at least five distinct pantographs, some of which were four-bar machines and some of which were single-arm machines. He will be remembered primarily for his vertical-format single-arm pantograph engraving machine for type-making. This was not a single design, however, but a series of machines in at least two major technical revisions developed for three different type-making purposes (patrix engraving, punch engraving, and matrix engraving).
Although they are of widely varying design, I'll collect the Notebooks on all of Benton's pantographs here (whether single-arm or four-bar).
A later version of the Engravers' & Printers' Machinery Co. Model C, originally designed by William S. Eaton in 1902. See Eaton and Related (Engle, Glover, Cronite).
Eaton and Related (Engle, Glover, Cronite)
Machines associated in some way with William S. Eaton. Includes: the Stephen D. Engle single-point cutting tool machine (possibly never manufactured; see also the Francis), the Eaton-Engle drag machine (made by Eaton & Glover), the New Century (patented by Eaton and W. T. Goodnow, made by Eaton & Glover), various Engravers and Printers Machinery Co. (Sag Harbor) machines (including the ones used by Frederic W. Goudy to engrave the matrices for many of his types).
Engle / Eaton-Engle
This machine was unusual in that it employed a single-point cutting tool which was not only moved by the pantograph mechanism but guided in its cutting by the operator (rotary and drag tools, by way of contrast, are omnidirectional). See also the Stephen D. Engle machine.)
Eaton & Glover
Hollerith (Card Punch)
Janvier Die Sinking Machines [FR]
The Janvier was a very early 20th century development of the much earlier "medallion lathe." It was a single-arm pantograph in a horizontal orientation adapted particularly for "die sinking" as used in coining.
Lanston Monotype Machine Company [US]
The first machines used by the Lanston company were Benton pantographs on lease. See Patricia Cost, The Bentons.
By the 20th century, they were using machines of their own manufacture. Very little is known about them. One photograph which appears in Wilkes indicates that they were Pierpont machines, or at least very like Pierpont machines.
Lewis (Single-Arm Machines) [US]
In the 1903-1906 timeframe, James W. Lewis patented three pantographs. The first two were derivatives of Benton's single-arm machines (and acknowledged as such). The third was a more original design, and its patent (unlike the other two) was assigned to the Keystone Type Foundry. Because of this, I'll group all of Lewis' machines together in the Lewis section of the Four-Bar Linkage Pantographs" group, above.
Linotype & Machinery Ltd. [UK]
MacKellar, Smiths & Jordan
There is evidence that by 1896 the MacKellar, Smiths and Jordan type foundry used a vertical-format single-arm pantograph which was not one of Benton's.
Mergenthaler Linotype [US]
The Mergenthaler Linotype Company leased Benton machines before the amalgamation of Benton's typefoundry into ATF. After that point, their in-house pantograph engraving machine development diverged. In this Notebook, I'll collect information about the post-Benton Mergenthaler machines. Note that Mergenthaler later had a close working relationship with Stempel
Were these the ones used by Linotype after the recall of the Benton machines following Benton's move to ATF?
This style of machine is completely unlike either the "four-bar linkage" or the "single-arm" machines. It consists instead of an X-Y (thus "Cartesian") motion controlled by some proportional mechanism (such as chains, or gearing). I should emphasize that the use of the term "Cartesian" to describe these machines is not standard. I just needed some name for them, and it seemed better than anything else I could figure out.
Edwin Allen [US] (Wood Type, From 1836)
An independent re-invention of the pantograph engraving machine as applied to the manufacture of wood type. I know of no technical details of this machine, the kind of pantograph it was, or its appearance.
Unrelated to the earlier pantograph engraving machine for wood type of William Leavenworth. I am aware of no evidence that any of the pantograph engraving for wood type, estabalished since the 1830s, had any influence on the various developments of pantographic engraving machinery for the production of metal type in the 1880s.
Beeler (Metal Type)
Charles H. Beeler. By 1899. For changing the proportions of metal type during manufacture; possibly a later machine for automatically generating back-slope and italic letterforms from roman patterns. It is not known if this machine was used commercially, or if so by whom. If it was, the MacKellar, Smiths and Jordan type foundry would be the most likely candidate.
Beeler concluded his career at the Lanston Monotype Machine Company. Whether there was any connection between him and the development of the pantograph engraving equipment they used after they progressed from leased Benton machines is not known.
I have come to believe that this machine never existed.
Swiss. Rehak mentions this machine in Practical Typecasting, p. 100. I have been able to discover nothing further about any such machine.
Little Pioneer [?]
This machine may be a "ghost"; I'm not sure if it really existed. The only reference I have been able to find for it is a citation by Theo Rehak in his Practical Typecasting, p. 100, where he observes that it was used by Goudy. Now, for his Working Pattern engraving, Goudy used a (1) a Deckel machine prior to the 1939 destruction of his workshop by fire, (2) his matrix engraving machine, briefly, from ca. 1939 to 1943 when he was able to obtain another industrial pantograph, and (3) a industrial pantograph, type yet unknown, from Sept. 1943 on. For his matrix engraving, Goudy consistently used one of three machines manufactured by the Engravers' and Printers' Machinery Co. of Sag Harbor, NY (closely resembling their Model D). So if a "Little Pioneer" exists, it could only be either Goudy's 1943 Working Pattern engraving machine or a model (not manufacturer) name for his matrix engraving machine. As of 2012, Google knows absolutely nothing about a "Little Pioneer" machine (other than its indexing of Rehak's book).
It is no doubt presumptuous to say that certain machines which are in fact traditionally called pantographs are "not really pantographs," especially when I'm classifying a number of machines as pantographs which often are not called pantographs. Yet at least one machine (the overhead apparatus on electrical streetcars) is known as a "pantograph" yet performs none of the scaling function associated with all other kinds of pantographs. It's called a "pantograph" because it looks a bit like one, not because it acts like one. It certainly isn't wrong to call it a pantograph (especially when trying to communicate with streetcar enthusiasts who know it by that name), but it is useful to understand what it is and is not doing.
A pantograph works by copying an original. Generally, originals were made either by the user of the pantograph or by its manufacturer (especially when these patterns were "copy types" and the pantograph was used for engraving lettering).
As of the catalog "Master Copy Type" (Monrovia, CA: Artco Engraving Machine Accessories, 2009) this company sold "copy type" for pantographs. I can no longer find this information on their website, however. ( http://www.artcotools.com/ )
General works on pantographs, without extensive reference in them to pantograph engraving. [At present just a chapter from a 1915 volume on mechanism.]
On Engraving (with Pantographs)
General works on machine engraving which have useful bits about pantograph engraving.
Fischer, Ernst. "Ueber Pantographen" In Carl, Dr. PH. ed. Repertorium für Physikalische Technik für Mathematische und Astronomische Instrumentenkunde. Vol. 1 ["Erster Band"] (München, Königsreich Bayern [Munich, Kingdom of Bavaria]: R. Oldenbourg, 1866).
Carl, Dr. PH., ed. Repertorium für Physikalische Technik für Mathematische und Astronomische Instrumentenkunde. Vol. 1 ["Erster Band"] Atlas [of plates, 1 through 37] (München, Königsreich Bayern [Munich, Kingdom of Bavaria]: R. Oldenbourg, 1866).
In German. This is a brief history of the pantograph which describes several German, French and Swiss machines not widely known in America (Mailäander, Friedrich Holler (Nürnberg), Breithaupt (Cassel), Ertl & Sohn (München), Adrien Gavard (Paris), J. Goldschmidt (Zürich)).
This has been digitized at least five times, but none of these digitizations contain useful plates (two omit the "Atlas" volume of plates entirely, while three do not fold the plates out in).
Digitized by Google from the University of Ghent copy. This copy lacks the plates as originally bound. Here's an extract of Fischer's article: repertorium-fur-experimental-physik-vol-1-1866-google-ghent-pp257-276-pdf273-292-fischer-ueber-pantographen-NO-PLATES.pdf
Digitized by Google from the Harvard University copy. As bound in the 19th century, this copy is missing not only its plates but also its title page and most of its front matter. (This is not the worst I've seen from this source; the bindery employed by Harvard in the 19th century was criminally incompetent.) Here's an extract of Fischer's article: repertorium-fur-experimental-physik-vol-1-1866-google-harvard-pp257-276-pdf263-282-fischer-ueber-pantographen-NO-PLATES.pdf
Digitized by Google from the University of Michigan copy. Nominally this includes the "Atlas" volume of plates, but the plates were not folded out so as to be visible when photographed, and none of the plates in question are actually present in this digitization. Here is an extract of Fischer's article together with the title page and contents page of the "Atlas" of (now blank) plates: repertorium-fur-experimental-physik-vol-1-1866-google-mich-pp257-276-pdf267-286-fischer-ueber-pantographen-PLATES-SCANNED-AS-BLANK.pdf
Digitized by Google from the Oxford University copy. Nominally this includes the "Atlas" volume of plates, but the plates were not folded out so as to be visible when photographed. By chance, a few fragments of them are visible. Here is an extract of Fischer's article together with the title page and contents page of the "Atlas" of (now lost) plates, with fragments. repertorium-fur-experimental-physik-vol-1-1866-google-oxford-pp257-276-pdf269-288-fischer-ueber-pantographen-PLATES-FRAMENTS-ONLY.pdf The icon above left links to this extract, as it is, alas, the most complete available.
Also digitized by Google from the U. Penn. copy and available via The Hathi Trust. This digitization nominally includes the "Atlas," but, again, the plates were not folded out and are useless.
Pellehn. "Der Pantograph." (1903)
Pellehn, G. "Der Pantograph." Deutsche Mechaniker-Zeitung. Jahrgang 1903, in No. 10 (15 May): 85-90, No. 11 (1 June): 93-95, No. 12 (15 June): 105-107, No. 13 (1 July): 113-117), and No. 14 (15 July): 14-125-129. In German. This gives a brief history of the pantograph and lists a number of 19th century German pantographs not commonly encountered in the anglophone literature.
This has been digitized twice by Google, but both digital versions have issues.
One is a digitization of the University of Chicago copy. This is available as a PDF; the icon above left links to an extract from that PDF of just the five issues which contain Pellehn's article. It is a Google Books digitization of normal (that is, poor but workable) quality. The confusing thing about it is the (a) the University of Chicago bound their original together with Zeitschrift für Instrumentenkunde and then (b) cataloged the combined volume as Vol. 23 of " Messtechnik" (under which title Google lists it). Also, as was so often the case in the 19th century, the original binder wanted to pretend that this was a book rather than a journal, and so discarded not only the advertising pages for each number but also the introductory pages which contain the actual masthead for each number.
The other digitization is from the Stanford University copy. It is, confusingly, filed by Stanford under Zeitschrift der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Mechanik und Optic, but at least it includes all of the pages for each number. The real problem is a bug in Google Books which will not permit the direct download of a PDF of this public domain book. I was able to assemble a copy via the pysheng utility, but the image quality of the on-screen pages that it gets is even worse than the PDF version. But it does put the series of articles in the full context of the issues of the journal. Here is an extract of the five issues: deutsche-mechaniker-zeitung-google-stanford-1903-nos-10-14-pellehn-pantograph.pdf
Huff. "R & I Industry Scrapbook." (2003-2004)
In 2003-2004, Kristin Huff wrote a series of six articles under the general title "R & I Industry Scrapbook" for The Engravers Journal [sic, no apostrophe] ("R & I" is the Recognition and Identification industry). Huff's emphasis is on the development of engraving machinery for the jewelry trades, rather than on heavier industrial engraving and industrial pantograph use (let alone the rather specialized field of typographical punch, patrix, or matrix engraving). Still, this is a good overview of the field. Part 2 has some interesting history of 19th and early 20th century pantographic engraving machines such as the Francis and some Eaton-Glover machines. (The unidentified "mystery engraving machine" shown in the color photograph at the end of Part 2 is an Eaton-Engle Engraving Machine manufactured by The Eaton-Glover Co., NY.) The subsequent parts focus on later computerized and laser engraving equipment.
Huff's articles are in copyright, so I cannot reprint them here. They are available online, though, at the Engravers Journal website:
Well, the Gorton P1-2 and the Deckel GK 21 qualify as a CircuitousRoot machine, used for my typefounding hobby, but the New Hermes Engravographs are Singing Lemur Jewelry machines, used by my wife, Rollande Krandall, in her business. I get to play with them, but these are working machines.
Deckel GK-21, s/n 6,703
This is a link to the Notebook on the Deckel GK 21 Pantograph Engraving and Profiling Miller, s/n 6,703, at CircuitousRoot Notebook in the ../../ Machine Shop set of Notebooks.
Gorton P1-2, s/n 41,693
This is a link to the Notebook on the Gorton P1-2 "Pantomill," s/n 41,693, at CircuitousRoot Notebook in the ../../ Machine Shop set of Notebooks.
New Hermes Engravograph IL-K, s/n 24,913
A "pivoting" rotary-spindle machine.
New Hermes Locomotive Engraver, s/n 60,733
Yes, really. Well, sort of. It is a machine which came out of the EMD locomotive plant in Illinois. It was used to engrave serial numbers on locomotive parts. It bears no model designation, but is probably a modified model ITX. It has been modified for serial number engraving in a very interesting way.
All portions of this document not noted otherwise are Copyright © 2011-2013 by David M. MacMillan and Rollande Krandall.
Circuitous Root is a Registered Trademark of David M. MacMillan and Rollande Krandall.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons "Attribution - ShareAlike" license. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ for its terms.
Presented originally by Circuitous Root®
Select Resolution: 0 [other resolutions temporarily disabled due to lack of disk space]