Rotary printing press

The rotary press was invented in the mid-1800s by Robert March Hoe. Rotary presses have evolved somewhat to accommodate automation through electricity, the core machine remains more or less unchanged. The typical rotary press functions by passing a substrate (the material to be printed onto) between two rotating drums. One of the drums will be partially submerged in a large inkwell. This drum will have the image to be applied to the substrate curved over its surface, either on a specialized plate or the drum itself will be engraved with the image. As the drum turns toward the substrate, its surface is scraped by a doctor blade. The function of doctor blade is to ensure that excess ink does not reach the substrate. At the point of contact between the substrate and the inked image, the second drum or impression cylinder presses the paper against the inked drum, creating the image transfer. Rotary printing presses are used to do three main types of printing: rotogravure, flexography and offset printing.

These are some diagrams that I felt best help me to understand the process visually:

This is a more old fashioned design:

This is a more modern and commonly used press:

This diagram demonstrates the way that the technology works:

Offset lithography

Offset lithography is a more complex process than rotogravure, however by far the most common. It shares as much with lithography as with rotary printing. In this process, a zinc lithographic plate is used on the plate cylinder. As the plate cylinder rotates, water is applied to the plate and then ink is applied. The lithographic plate is treated in such a way that water will be attracted to the areas of the plate where no image should be printed. This water will repel the ink in those areas. The image portion of the plate is treated to repel water and only the ink will stick to it. The ink image is transferred onto an offset cylinder, which is typically made of rubber. The rubber picks up the ink. The substrate is then pressed between the offset cylinder and an impression cylinder where the ink is transferred to the substrate.

It is extremely cost effective for medium to very long print runs. The intial expense is in making metal printing plates, but once these have been created and loaded on to the press, they can produce one or one million prints. The cost of the paper and ink is relatively very small.

There are two ways of printing using this technique. The first is process, or CMYK printing. CMYK refers to the four ink colours used (cyan, magenta, yellow and black, known as in print language as key).

By using these four colours it is possible to print almost every colour of the spectrum. It is suitable for the vast majority of colour printing and since the press is always loaded with these four colours of inks, it is surprisingly inexpensive. The image is split down into the four colours, then four plates are made (one for each colour).

The other common use of offset litho machines is called spot colour printing. This is used where precise colour matches are needed.

Here, inks are specially mixed according to a formula guide (most commonly Pantone®, but other guides exist) and are loaded into the stations of the press. The diagram above shows a two-colour letterhead being prepared with precisely-mixed green and purple inks.

Although it may seem strange, full colour process is often cheaper than spot colour printing. This is because spot colour printing is more labour-intensive.

Mac workshop - Illustrator

Primary research > Dumpster diving

.....watch this space

Uk Freegans.com

This is some information from a website called 'UK Freegans' http://freegan.org.uk/ which is the most helpful and enlightening website I have found with regards to trying to understand this movement.

I used to work for a well known supermarket chain, and I know that every product chucked out has to be signed for in detail. Even if the product is well within its sell by date but is simply damaged. Even fruit and vegtables must be accounted for. Even the staff weren't allowed to take home food, even if it were for their pets! I found this policy extremely wasteful and frustrating when you actually see how much perfectly edible food is wasted on a daily basis. Therefore I think that despite 'dumpster diving' being illegal, I think that that food being salvaged is better than it being left to rot. However I have to consider the counter arguments; other than it being illegal! From working for this supermarket, I actually know that the bins are checked on a random inspection basis and if there are items missing from the bin that are  on the list, then there are consequences - potentially at the staffs expense. So is that really fair?

These are some extracts from the FAQ section of the website. I found this information really interesting, particularly the information about vegans who will eat non-vegan food from bins based on the principal that it is already produced and is now waste....

1) What is a freegan?
A freegan is someone who tries to live simply, reducing their consumption and the pressure they place on the environment, through such things as recycling, sharing resources and using one’s time to help others.

Freeganism is about climbing out of the socio-economic system and living with a new motivation. Rather than working for money, as in the current system, freegans occupy their time giving and receiving for free.
2)  How many freegans are there?
No one knows! Very few people currently think of themselves as freegans. However, many people are currently practicing the ideals of freeganism in at least some aspect of their lives. What we call ourselves is far less important than what we do. (Please check out the meet-up section of this site. :0)
3) What are the benefits of being a freegan?
Having a clear conscience and a sense of purpose and peace.
4) Are all ‘freegans’ vegans?
Although freeganism grew largely out of the vegan movement, not all freegans are vegans. Some vegans no longer find that the same arguments (e.g. inhumane treatment of animals) apply when it comes to using animal products that have already been produced and are now being wasted.

The direct impact of a freegan lifestyle on animals, people and the environment is less than that of even the strictest vegan who buys their food, as often large amounts of energy go into the production of vegan products for the market place.

Many freegans continue to follow a vegan diet for health and/or ethical reasons.
5) Isn't freeganism just another term for 'dumpster-diving'?
No! It is often wrongly assumed that freeganism is simply taking food from bins. This assumption is propagated by the media, who have an interest in covering the more sensational aspects. It has been said that "defining freeganism as 'dumpster diving' is similar to defining vegetarianism as eating asparagus." Dumpster diving is just one aspect of a much larger ideology.
6) Why are products thrown out?
(The list below mainly relates to food items, and is by no means complete. If you know of any reasons that are not listed here, please email us at: ukfreegans@gmail.com)

(i) The packaging itself has been damaged or soiled.

(ii) The food is part of a case which has had one or two items damaged or soiled (e.g. one broken drink tin that spills on the other tins in the carton).

(iii) The food is nearing (or has passed) the sell-by or use-by dates. (Often products are thrown out when the sell-by date expires, which means that perfectly edible/usable products that have not reached their use-by date are being wasted. It is also worth noting, that the sell-by and use-by dates often do NOT reflect the natural life-cycle of the product. A perfect example is something like honey, which can last for years past what supermarkets deem its best-before date).

(iv) The food did not sell quickly enough before a fresh shipment arrived.

(v) Sometimes there is 'seasonal-specific' branding on various products (e.g Christmas wrapping; Easter eggs etc.). Once the festival/season 'expires' product ranges are often thrown out because shoppers lose interest in these items. Packaging plays an enormous part in why and what people buy.

(vi) On a similar note, if a product line is withdrawn, or the branding is evolved to incorporate a new 'image', or new marketing strategy, this may be anothe reason that perfectly usable items are thrown out. New or experimental product lines that fail to sell are discarded in this way.

(vii) Some products have competitions on the packaging. Likewise, if the competition ends before the product is sold, this may be a factor in why products are thrown out (and often in large amounts).

(viii) Occasionally there are product recalls, usually as a result of health and safety concerns. Usually such items (especially when they are serious) are well publicised. So, freegans, as with anyone else who bought the product in the first place, will probably have been made aware.

(ix) Especially relating to non-food items, if someone returns something that they buy, often this means that the shop chucks out the item, even if there is no fault with it.

(x) Supermarkets/retailers way up their decision-making, not on 'best use of resources' but using economic criteria. They often believe that the amount of money it would cost them to recycle is not economical. This is where waste is an intrinsic component of capitalism/consumerism. It becomes more profitable to destroy resources. Freegans see that we need to have more criteria (and more rational/ethical ones at that) factored into the decision-making process. Cost to such things as the environment in which we have to live should clearly take precedence in any choice that individuals/organisations make in such things as discarding resources.

(xi) The main reason items are thrown out is due to selfishness, greed and short-term thinking, which leads to the irrational nature underlying many, if not all, of the reasons cited above.
7) Do some supermarkets/retailers waste more than others?
Yes, however some retailers are also better than others at hiding their waste, so it is difficult to make an accurate assessment. From our experience, family businesses tend to waste less, as it is easier to avoid responsibility for wrong actions in a larger organisation where others can take the blame.

Larger supermarkets, such as Morrisons, often have press departments, and this can be the source of some incredible hypocrisy. Morrisons have blatantly lied that they do not waste any food, because they mark down their prices!

Other supermarkets, such as Marks and Spencer, heavily over-prepare and over-package food, which expires more quickly, causing greater wastage.

Certain sandwich chains, such as E.A.T., used a marketing ploy, advertised on all packaging, claiming that they donated unsold sandwiches to charity. Despite this, freegans still found their produce in the bin, and E.A.T. have since removed this claim.

It should be noted that these are just a few examples of a problem that exists to a differing extent within ALL retailers, where waste is often not accidental but intentional.
8) Isn’t it dangerous to rummage around in bins?
Many people are not aware that the vast majority of discarded products are of good quality and still in their original packaging. The main thing with such practices as skipping is to use one’s common sense. You may wish to use gloves or other protective clothing while rummaging around bins, depending on personal preferences. It is wise to wash food and other consumables afterwards, either in plain water, or with a thin wipe of bleach water to kill off any germs. If packages are puffed up, it usually means that there is a build-up of bacteria, so it is wise to leave these items where you find them. A helpful saying to keep in mind is, ‘If in doubt, chuck it out!” Fish, meat, cooked rice and dairy products, all need to be treated with caution.
9) What are the legal ramifications of such things as dumpster-diving?
Raiding bins from the back of supermarkets is a legally grey area. If supermarkets want to be difficult, they could charge you with trespassing, or even with stealing, in certain cases. It is ironic to hear a store manager claim “Hey, you can’t steal our rubbish!”

We have heard that, legally-speaking, if you take something which someone does not value then it is not stealing. It makes sense that if we throw something away, we relinquish ownership of it. It should then become automatically available for anyone to make use of.

The real ‘crime’ is the (technically legal) stealing of the land by governments and corporations away from local communities, especially in developing countries; the importing of goods half way round the world at great expense to global ecology; and then the needless discarding of often perfectly usable goods and resources back into the ground or atmosphere, leading to pollution and the emission of harmful gasses.

To our knowledge no one has ever been charged in the UK with stealing rubbish. It is likely that this is because supermarkets realise that prosecuting someone for recycling waste would open up an ethical can of worms.
10) What measures do retailers use to prevent people from taking discarded products, and what are their reasons?
Supermarkets adopt a variety of measures to stop people from making use of their waste - everything from pouring blue dye or bleach over the bin, to erecting razor wire fencing, securing padlocks and employing security men.

Supermarkets often cite legal fears as their reason for hiding the waste, however this is usually just a convenient excuse.

In a world where over a billion people are malnourished, is fear of people getting an upset stomach an adequate reason to destroy millions of tonnes of food each year?
11) I've met people who claim to be Freegans, but all they do is dumpster dive. Would you still class these people as Freegans?
It is worth clarifying the distinction between 'scavenging' and 'freeganism', although of course there is some cross over between them. Scavengers may search for resources either out of necessity, or because they want to get something just because it is free. However, freegans see the need to give back as a result of being freed from needing to spend their time working for money (as a result of being able to make use of such things as wasted wealth from skips).
12) What are the positive aspects of skipping?
Finding free resources can provide freegans with time for more positive activities than needing to work for money.

Stores benefit from having less waste that they need to pay to dispose of.

Making use of discarded meat brings purpose to the otherwise needless slaughter of animals.

The environment benefits from having less waste rotting in landfill, or being burnt, leading to the emission of harmful gasses into the atmosphere.
13) What is unjust about the economic system?
(i) Starvation.
The poorest people in the world today are often denied access to their own land. Instead, it is used to grow 'cash crops' such as tea, rubber, and more recently oil for fuel. These replace staple crops like wheat and rice that could feed many more people.

(ii) Overfull landfill sites
The UK sends more waste to landfill than any other European country. It has been estimated that we will run out of landfill sites by 2016. This problem is not just limited to the UK. Other countries that have experienced such 'garbage crises', have suffered serious health risks and riots.

(iii) Carbon emissions.
Many of the products we buy have been transported enormous distances to reach us. Whether by airplane, ship or HGV, by the time they has arrived, it has earned a large carbon footprint. There are also usually emissions involved in agriculture and manufacture. Under the present economic system it costs more to cut down on these emissions than it does to let them continue.

(iv) Deforestation.
Cardboard for overpackaged products and paper for unwanted advertisements need to come from somewhere. Today they are often sourced from clear-cutting of old growth forests in places such as Alaska. The Amazon rainforest is rapidly being diminished by farmers and graziers who have been pushed off their land by large agriculture firms.

Magazines and books that do not sell are often discarded after the cover has been torn off and returned to the publisher. The publisher will then refund the full price of the publication. This is an example of deliberate waste for profit.

(v) Exploitation of workers.
Many of the products we enjoy are manufactured by underpaid workers operating in unsafe conditions. This situation is largely a result of the unfairly weighted rules that govern international trade.

(vi) War/Fighting over resources.
The recent gulf war was an illustration of how even the agressors in modern conflict admit that wars are fought over resources. Cheap oil is an integral part of the illusion of wealth that we have in modern society, and continual growth comes at the cost of human lives.

(vii) Creation of articifical needs
Rather than the market being driven by consumer demand, dishonest marketing and advertising techniques are used to sell people products and services that they do not need, and probably would never have wanted if left to their own devices.

(ix) Built-in Obsolescence.
Modern products are deliberately manufactured to either break, need updating or need upgrading soon after they have been bought. This is done in order to sell more products to generate more profit.

(x) Debt
Debt is a widespread form of modern day slavery, and our current system depends on and fosters it. Most inhabitants of the world today - from individuals to entire nations - are enslaved by debt.

(xi) Distancing from reality.
We are deliberately distanced from the means of production, which are responsible for most of the above injustices. This is in order to stop us from becoming disillusioned with participation in the economic system.
14) What do you think about 'ethical' purchasing schemes, such as Fairtrade?
Such schemes are often run with the best of intentions, however there are always flaws. Sometimes guidelines are cynically disregarded, and the scheme is nothing more than a marketing ploy for the retailer. At other times the markup on the selling price of the product is grossly out of proportion to the extra wage given to the producer. In cases such as these, a better way to help the poor is to buy the cheapest product and to donate the saved money directly to them. And the same problems with huge enviromental and human costs of transport and waste exist when purchasing goods from remote locations. What is the difference between a Fairtrade banana in the bin and a regular banana?

What people in developing countries need rather than our money is the food and resources that are being exported from their own countries.

The bottom line is that even the fairest system that involves people being motivated by profit, is still a system built on greed and distrust. Such a system will fail to deliver what is necessary regardless of any good intentions.
15) Do freegans use money at all?
A long-term goal of freeganism is the complete restoration of society without the need for a monetary system forcing people to buy or do things. However, it is important to be realistic. In working towards this goal, freegans see that it is likely that there will be occasions when using money may in fact lead to a wiser use of resources overall (e.g. if we spend a lot of time/fuel looking for free food we may be guilty of wasting more resources).

The fact that people and entire civilisations have survived without money is proof that money is not a necessity as people are conned into believing. The best way to test whether we need something is to live without it. We are only imprisoned by something we refuse to let go of.
16) What are the most common criticisms of freeganism?
(i) Aren't ‘freegans’ just ‘free-loaders’?

True freeganism involves giving back to the world. Through making use of such things as waste, while being content to live simply, freegans are actually freed to use their time investing in relationships; putting back into the local community; and seeking to make the world a better place. If we are recklessly consuming the world’s resources without giving back, then we need to consider whether we are the real ‘free-loaders’.

(ii) Why should freegans benefit from government services such as the NHS without paying tax?

Almost everyone in the UK pays tax of some kind, be it income tax or V.A.T. The amount of money earned, or tax paid, is not a fair indication of someone's contribution to society. Should a volunteer nurse who works in a developing country be more entitled to NHS benefits, than (for example) a wealthy, tax paying tobacco company executive?

Freegans believe basic necessities of life such as food, clothing, education and health, should be made accessible to everyone. This includes fat cats, wage slaves, the unemployed and drug addicts. Once we start excluding groups of people access to basic necessities, we are on a very slippery slope indeed.

(iii) Isn't freeganism just a term for vegans who 'cheat'.

(See: 'Are all freegans vegans?')

(iv) Aren't freegans who bin-raid taking food out of the mouths of those who can't afford to buy it?

There is more food thrown out in the UK than there are hungry people to eat it. The irony of the suggestion that food be donated to charities, is that often the charities themselves are forced to throw away food, because they are given more than they can effectively redistribute.

The poorest people in this country are rich in comparison to the vast majority of the world, where much of the food that is found in the bins orginated. We need to question who is really taking food from the mouths of those who can't afford to buy it.

When we make use of wasted wealth, we can redistribute any existing wealth to those in need.

(v) Aren't freegans dependent on the system they criticise?

No! It could be said that the system is dependent on freegans to slow down its own self-destruction. The system is destroying the very things we are ALL dependent on - the earth and its inhabitants.

Freegans would like to see the end of waste and dumpster-diving itself. Freegans currently make use of the waste produced by the economic system because it would be a waste not to do so. We need to realise that freeganism is a viable alternative to the current system and not a reaction to it.

If more people live simply, there is more to go around.

If more people reduce waste, there is more to go around.

If more people share what they don't need with those who do, there is more to go around.

If more people give their time helping others, there is more to go around (and we get more done!)

(vi) If everyone was a freegan, wouldn't society would cease to function?

No, it would start to function, and function sustainably!
17) What are the weak points of the freegan ideology?
Because it is not possible to define freeganism by a set of rules, it is limited to the sincerity of the person practising it.

There are some people who admire the concept of freeganism, but lament that they have yet to meet a true freegan!
18) How does being a freegan help the world?
Greed-fuelled over-production and over-consumption is destroying the planet and the people who inhabit it. Freeganism is a way out of these problems because it re-prioritises production, consumption and work according to NEED.

Greed and instant gratification blind us to what the real needs are and how we can fill them.

The law in terms of 'dumpster diving'

Because dumpsters are usually located on private premises people may occasionally get in trouble for trespassing while dumpster diving, though the law is enforced with varying degrees of rigor. Dumpster diving per se is often legal when not specifically prohibited by law. Abandonment of property is another principle of law which applies to recovering materials via dumpster diving. Police (and possibly other) searches of dumpsters and like discards are also generally not violations; evidence seized in this way has been permitted in many criminal trials. The doctrine is less well established in regard to civil litigation.

Companies run by private investigators specializing in dumpster diving have sprung up as a result of the need for discreet, undetected retrieval of documents and evidence for civil and criminal trials. Private investigators have also written books on "P.I. technique" in which dumpster diving or its equivalent "wastebasket recovery" figures prominently.

• In the United States The California v. Greenwood case in the U.S. Supreme Court held that there is no common law expectation of privacy fordiscarded materials. There are however limits to what can legally be taken from a company's refuse. In a 1983 Minnesota case involving the theft of customer lists from a garbage can, Tennant Company v. Advance Machine Company, the owner of the discarded information was awarded$500,000 in damages.

• Dumpster diving in England and Wales may qualify as theft within the Theft Act 1968 or as common-law theft in Scotland, though there is very little enforcement in practice.

• In Italy, a law issued in 2000 declared dumpster diving to be legal.

• In Sweden, the contents of a dumpster is the property of the owner of the dumpster so taking items from a dumpster is technically theft.

• In Germany, the contents of a dumpster is the property of the owner of the dumpster so taking items from a dumpster is technically theft. However the police will routinely disregard dumpster divers due to the zero value of the items - there is only one case known of an actual prosecution: the thieves were arrested on assumed burglary as they had surmounted a fence and the supermarket owner made a complaint on theft later.

• In Canada, The Trespass to Property Act - legislation dating back to the British North America Act of 1867 - grants property owners and security guards the power to ban anyone from their premises, for any reason, permanently. This is done by issuing a notice to the intruder, who will only be breaking the law on return. A recent case involved a police officer who retrieved a discarded weapon from trash as evidence; the Judge ruled it as legal without a warrant, so some have speculated this is enough backing for anyone to raid garbage.

• A Belgian dumpster diver and eco-activist nicknamed Ollie was detained for a month for dumpster diving accused of theft and burglary. He was arrested on 25 February, 2009, for taking food out of a dumpster of AD Delhaize in Bruges. His trial evoked protests in Belgium against restrictions of taking discarded food.

Article from : The Steamboat Pilot & Today > "We didn't want this"

I am extremely interested in the practice and principal of 'freegansim'. However, a lot of these practices are very questionable, especially 'dumpster diving', or 'skipping' in the uk. It is actually illegal in most countries due to the fact that these dumpsters are usually on private property, however little enforcement is put in place so it is actually easy to get away with. This is an article about two poor guys that got caught and the consequences that could have to be faced:

Steamboat Springs — One of the owners of a fresh produce store said Saturday that it is absurd that two men are in jail for taking spoiled fruit and vegetables from the store’s trash area.

On Wednesday, Giles Char lé, 24, of Somersworth, N.H., and David Siller, 27, of Wayne, Pa., pleaded guilty to misdemeanor trespass and were sentenced to spend six months in Routt County Jail and pay $15 in restitution to Sweet Pea Produce. The men were on their way to the Rainbow Family of Living Light Gathering in North Routt County when they were arrested June 26.

The men admitted that they jumped a fence and took fruits and vegetables from the garbage area at Sweet Pea. They originally were charged with felony second-degree burglary and misdemeanor theft. They accepted the plea agreement offered by Assistant District Attorney Kerry St. James, they said, because they did not want to risk being convicted of a felony.

“Once I found out what these guys were being charged with, I contacted (St. James),” said Jonathon Hieb, who owns Sweet Pea with Katherine Zambrana. “I told him, ‘We’re not behind this prosecution. We don’t want anything to do with it.’ I thought for sure my input would have some kind of bearing, but he wasn’t hearing any of it.”

Hieb said St. James told him he was going to make an example of the men.

On Friday, St. James said it was the men’s decision to accept the plea agreement. He would not comment on suggestions that he was trying to make an example of Charlé and Siller. St. James was not available Saturday for comment. Neither was his boss, District Attorney Bonnie Roesink.

Hieb said police contacted him the night of the incident. Police said a neighbor had reported suspicious men at the store after hours.

When first contacted by police, Hieb said he would press charges. He said the men were found with a Sweet Pea Produce bag, which generally only could be acquired from inside the store. He didn’t want them released until he knew what might be missing from or damaged inside the store.

But Hieb said an inspection showed the men never entered the store and must have found one of the store’s bags in the trash area. When police gave Hieb and Zambrana paperwork to fill out and offer their side of what happened, Hieb and Zambrana declined and said they did not want to press charges.

“Immediately — the next day — we said, ‘We don’t want anything to do with this,’” Hieb said.

Hieb said he later learned from Wayne Westphale, the men’s attorney, that they were facing felony charges. Hieb said he agreed with Westphale’s suggestion of 10 to 20 hours of community service as an appropriate punishment. Westphale could not be reached Saturday for comment.

“These guys jumped over the fence and got some over-ripe produce. What they did, at most, was a temporary slip of judgment,” Hieb said. “These guys are not criminals. For them to be in jail is ridiculous.”

Charlé most recently worked as a social worker. Siller is an Americorps volunteer and a yoga instructor. Both men had plans to go to graduate school, family and friends said.

The men could have accepted a lesser jail sentence.

“They had a choice between accepting a deferred felony with 90 days in jail or a misdemeanor conviction with six months in jail,” St. James said Friday. “It came down to whether they wanted a felony conviction with less jail time or a misdemeanor with more jail.”

St. James also asked Judge James Garrecht to fine the men $42 for each day they serve in jail, the standard cost of care for inmates. Garrecht refused.

Kris Hammond, a Steamboat Springs attorney, met with the men when they sought a second opinion in their case. Hammond, like Westphale, advised the men to plead to the misdemeanor and accept the six-month sentence.

“The way I put it to them was, ‘Could you win your case? Yes. But am I willing to gamble a felony conviction that you’re going to win? No,’” Hammond said Saturday.

Hammond said there really was no choice. If they pleaded guilty to the felony, he said, the men faced four years of supervised probation before their records would have been cleared. Also, they would have had to apply for an interstate transfer to serve their probation outside of Colorado.

“Defendants are given these kinds of choices every day,” Hammond said. “This one is particularly egregious, but the same kind of thing goes on in a lot of cases.”

Shaune McCarthy Charlé, Giles Charlé’s mother, said the men talked to several attorneys, who all advised them to take the misdemeanor deal.

“We’ve been working on this all summer long,” she said. “We just felt like we were completely helpless. Everyone said there was no hope, no hope, no hope. We’re absolutely flabbergasted by what has happened.”

Hammond said there is little recourse for the men now, barring a decision by the DA’s office to amend the agreement and shorten the sentence.

“My job is to defend my clients no matter what,” Hammond said. “The DA’s job is to seek justice, not just a conviction. It’s hard to see the justice in this.”

Call Scott Stanford at 871-4221 or e-mail him at sstanford@steamboatpilot.com