Template talk:History of printing
Print history taskforce
List of members by topic and era
- Parhamr—descriptive prose about technology, diagram creation and editing, copyediting
- Printmaking, historical
- Johnbod—writes about fine arts, books and fashion, particularly 500–1800 Europe
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Media
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Technology
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Graphic design
- User:Dicklyon—editor, media contributor, technically oriented. Largely focuses on photographic articles but there is certain overlap into print. —Parhamr 19:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- User:DGG (details needed) —Parhamr 19:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- User:Bine maya—appears interested in media studies
- User:Andrew c—appears knowledgeable, experienced, etc.
- User:TonyTheTiger—has contributed to an excessive number of good/featured articles
- User:Planetneutral—organizing champion
- User:Camitava—History, technical stuff
Role of templates
- printing device: photo, date, inventor, location, improved/replaced/superseded by…, substrate/media, imaging process, imaging medium
- Category:Applied science and technology infobox templates
- Series template
- history, topics, people, technology … details!
How can this be organized? —Parhamr 05:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Why is the text size so small on this template? Rhapsodyindrew 17:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
I can't find a way to add stencil printing to the template list of subject. The main article on stencil printing is IMHO a stub. I know a lot about this subject, but best of all I know my own limitations. There is a chaotic mixture of facts and things I believe to be facts in my mind. So I prefer not to write too much about it in the main articles and to leave this to true experts. Anyhow stencil printing is one of the oldest printing techniques, developed independently in different cultures, often as a way to repeat ornaments on fabrics. By combining single-character calligraphy stencils it was probably one of the earliest forms of moveable type printing in Japan. Stencil printing machines played a major role a.o. in students uprises in the 1960's. Maggy Rond (talk) 12:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- You should be bold, and just write up the page. Pour out all you know, and if possible cite sources. Then depend on other editors to clean it up as necessary. lk (talk) 07:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I've tried to make the template smaller and less obtrusive. It looks good on firefox, but still is pretty bad on IE. Anyone who knows more about how these templates work care to take a stab at it? lk (talk) 07:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I added the date 1450 in parentheses for the invention of movable type, because if someone is referring to this template while investingating other questions, the date given in the 11th century will needlessly confuse. Since the invention of movable type in China did not have a notable influence, whereas its independent invention in Europe 400 years later did, the European date must at least be given in parentheses. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 12:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I believe it's wrong to draw only attention to (disputable) western dates. For example read the History section of Screen-printing. This clearly is an ancient Asian technique, yet the template only mentions the date of one Western patent. It's too easy to fool ourselves and all Wikipedia readers into the false impression that most inventions are modern and Western. Maggy Rond (talk) 09:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Isn't the cylinder seal a type of printing mechanism? Shouldn't it be added to this template?--SkiDragon (talk) 05:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC) Gay —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Is "3D Printing" really printing?
It is my feeling that the phrase "3D Printing" was first used as a convenient way to describe the process, which is analogous to using a desktop printer but is not really "printing." While the term is still commonly used, the industry usually uses the term "additive manufacturing." I wonder if this really belongs in the history of printing.IAbookman (talk) 14:10, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
In what way Giclee is separate from inkjet?
Giclee is just a fad word to make injet prints sound artsy. No reason to keep it in the list of printer technologies evolution 188.8.131.52 (talk) 02:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
- I rm'ed Giclee, its coined name, the process is inkjet. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 19:13, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm not a printing expert, but I had the "impression" (sorry) that Letterpress printing was "the primary way to print and distribute information until the twentieth century." Shouldn't it be listed here? Kendall-K1 (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
I have removed the following items.
|label25=3D printing |data25=1981 |label27=Digital printing |data27=1991
Digital printing does not state this year in its body and I cannot find any way in which it is distinct from solid ink, laser or inkjet printing. 3D printing is a fabrication technique that has nothing to do with the transfer of print.Ethanpet113 (talk) 04:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Not included in the list
There many other print methods that are not included the list, including some that were dominant in their time. (see Line printer and Impact printer for some of them.) What is the criteria for inclusion in the list. If we listed them all, I think the nav box would become unwieldy. Are the categories based on the method of type/image arrangement or by method of ink/contrast application, or both? Maybe dot matrix could be changed to the broader category of impact printers. Sparkie82 (t•c) 01:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)