Blades does not accept this explanation. He thinks that the engraving for the red and the blue ink was done on one block, which was not printed with ink, but was embossed in the paper as a guide to the colorist. He says that his examination of the two-colored initial letters of a Bible made by Sweynheim and Pannartz in 1467 proves that they were not printed, but embossed, in the white paper; that the paper mask on the frisket was left uncut over the engraving, so as to shield the white paper from the ink, and to deepen the indentation of the engraved lines; and that the illuminator made use of this indentation, as he would of a pencil drawing, to guide his pen or brush when laying on the colors. He further says[302] that a similar operation was carelessly done in parts of the _Psalter of 1457_; that some of the spiral lines, finials and ornaments were left uncolored, but that the process was plainly exposed by the indentation of the engraved lines. It is not necessary to accept Blades’ opinion that the coloring was done entirely with pen or brush: the few uncolored lines in the initials of the _Mentz Psalter_ may be regarded as blemishes occasioned by an accidental overlapping of the mask on the frisket. Savage’s statement that the blocks were printed with ink is too positive to be disputed. Nor is it necessary to accept the hypothesis of Bernard that the blocks were engraved in two pieces and mortised, that they might be printed by one impression. We may rightfully suppose [p458] that Schœffer tried to imitate the work of the illuminator by the imitation of his method. To engrave the initial and the ornament around it on one block, to paint the letter in one color and the ornament in another, and to print both colors by one impression, seemed the surest way to do the work. That this was the intention of the designer of the letters is evident from the manner in which the colors are divided. Contrary to the usage of the illuminators, who were fond of interweaving colors, each color was kept apart in a mass, that it might be inked with greater facility. And this inking was probably done with a brush. Blue ink was painted on the letter, and red ink on the ornament, at a great sacrifice of time, but with neatness and without any interference of the colors.[303] It should not surprise us that exact register was secured, but it was more a feat of painting than of printing.[304] Setting aside the colors, the workmanship of the _Psalter_ is not neater than that of the _Bible of 42 lines_. The right side of every page is much more ragged[305] through bad spacing; typographical errors[306] are more frequent; the lines are often bowed or bent in the centre from careless locking up. The presswork is not good; the pages are dark and light from uneven inking, and the types have a grimy appearance, as if [p459] they had been inked with foul balls and printed on over-wet vellum. The colophon or imprint attached to this book says: