TSB
screen printing => Equipment => Topic started by: jvieira on August 05, 2015, 06:56:42 PM
-
So, I was just on facebook and saw Ryonet is releasing a single point LED exposure unit. I am now confused if this new type of unit is better than the "standard" LED strip units.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPrTKcvMu04 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPrTKcvMu04)
Thoughts?
-
Highlights:
Single spectrum high powered UV light.
Integrated Bluetooth and app.
Customizable presets.
High quality halftone scales and exposure guides.
450 watts single source spectrum LED.
7 second exposure time.
Sharper detail.
Max screen size 25×36.
http://www.ryonetblog.com/fx-exposure-unit/ (http://www.ryonetblog.com/fx-exposure-unit/)
-
We've had a few posts here that have talked about the Saati unit.
-
Couldn't find any
-
The latest
http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15345.msg147448.html#msg147448 (http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15345.msg147448.html#msg147448)
-
We've had a few posts here that have talked about the Saati unit.
Says "single source" though. In the video it looks like a circular array of leds which would mean it's not the Saati unit, right?
-
That looks like an LED cluster, not so much a point source and I'm not so sure about that reflector design, looks like it would diffuse the light to me but if it was engineered perfectly to work with the cluster spacing/location I suppose it could perform similar to a good MH reflector.
The claimed % halftones at 85lpi on a 230 is certainly impressive. If true, I doubt that expo is happening at 7s. I can't see a PP emulsion holding that but I know some diazo added emulsions perhaps could. Diazo sensitized emulsions have long expos on LED compared to MH.
Why would you ever need a bluetooth app to fire up an exposure unit? Are you playing music through this thing? Taking phone calls?
-
We've had a few posts here that have talked about the Saati unit.
Says "single source" though. In the video it looks like a circular array of leds which would mean it's not the Saati unit, right?
I thought he said "single spectrum".
Sent from my SM-G900H using Tapatalk
-
We've had a few posts here that have talked about the Saati unit.
Says "single source" though. In the video it looks like a circular array of leds which would mean it's not the Saati unit, right?
I thought he said "single spectrum".
We've had a few posts here that have talked about the Saati unit.
Says "single source" though. In the video it looks like a circular array of leds which would mean it's not the Saati unit, right?
I thought he said "single spectrum".
Says both.
This exposure unit has a single source LED light that gives off 450 watts.
Highlights:
Single spectrum high powered UV light.
-
The latest
[url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15345.msg147448.html#msg147448[/url] ([url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15345.msg147448.html#msg147448[/url])
I did find this one but it's not the same thing at all. There's another thread on here with a PDF file that shows it's two different things. Plus, that one is just the LED, not a complete unit. The Ryonet thing is the whole thing ready to go
-
Why would you ever need a bluetooth app to fire up an exposure unit? Are you playing music through this thing? Taking phone calls?
EXACTLY! I was thinking just that! that's just adding tech for the sake of it, I can't see a single advantage of having a bluetooth app or an app at all. They claim a 7 second exposure. There's not even time to leave the room
Still, it is suggested it works better than the strips as it's closer to a MH BUT when we're talking about exposure times of 10 seconds or less (most LED units on PP) is there any place for improvement? Maybe in quality (even though I've been reading the regular units don't have a problem with quality).
I was just about to pull the trigger on a (certainly) more expensive unit but now i'm on the fence
-
Why would you ever need a bluetooth app to fire up an exposure unit? Are you playing music through this thing? Taking phone calls?
EXACTLY! I was thinking just that! that's just adding tech for the sake of it, I can't see a single advantage of having a bluetooth app or an app at all. They claim a 7 second exposure. There's not even time to leave the room
Still, it is suggested it works better than the strips as it's closer to a MH BUT when we're talking about exposure times of 10 seconds or less (most LED units on PP) is there any place for improvement? Maybe in quality (even though I've been reading the regular units don't have a problem with quality).
I was just about to pull the trigger on a (certainly) more expensive unit but now i'm on the fence
I will only tell you what many have found out. All LED exposure units are not the same. Many have learned the hard way. Just a FYI.
-
I do realize that and I know of M&R quality. It's still the place to go and I'm seriously considering the Starlight as I told you.
This is just something new and I was asking if there's any advantage of having a single point LED unit as I can't see any.
-
In my opinion yes there is an advantage to a single POINT unit, in any type, BUT...
There are industry leaders who have LED units out right now that aren't performing as described which would make me HIGHLY skeptical of a Ryonet branded LED exposure unit. The main issue with LED units is the ability to penetrate the emulsion through to the squeegee side and fully crosslink the emulsion so you don't have scumming on the inside of the screen. If you coat your screens with the round edge of the scoop coater, chances are, you'll run into issues with exposure times being WAY off what the manufacturers are claiming.
All that being said, even though I haven't seen one in person, I believe the M&R unit is a good few leaps and bounds ahead of the competition and is worth the extra $$.
-
I was going to start a new thread (I will at some point) but I can briefly talk about the Starlight I got to shoot 5 screens on a few weeks ago. We set it up right next to the Vastex, plugged it into the same outlet, and we shot 5 screens, all different mesh counts and spot colors, fine lines and halftones. The longest exposure was 6 seconds and the fastest was 4 seconds. None of the screens had scumming on the inside of the screen, and I was able to spray out the finer details with much much less effort compared to the Vastex. I can get rid of the scumming on the Vastex if I increase the exposure time to 25-30 seconds, but then I lose the ability to get the fine detail out. The vacuum draw down on the Starlight was about 12 seconds, exposure 5 seconds, which means the single screen Starlight outperforms the double screen Vastex by almost double the production rate. Vastex: 2 screens=90 seconds Starlight: 1 screen=18 seconds, roughly 50 seconds to shoot 2 screens including taking the 1st one out and putting the second one in. Starlight wins in detail, vacuum draw down, exposure time, blanket quality (our vacuum blanket on the Vastex already has air leaks and is dry rotting in the corners), control panel/operational features, viewing lights, and probably a few other areas I can't think of right now. In simple terms, Starlight=what I thought LED was going to be Vastex=A disappointment in just about every area. I feel bad saying those things, but I have to be honest, I have to give the facts as I see them and not prop up a decision I made to make myself look good. I made a bad decision on our latest equipment purchase, it sucks, but I'm making the best out of it.
-
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
-
First off, I own a Starlight and love it. I think companies are jumping on LED units and trying to make theirs stand out in one way or another. I think Ryonet just wanted something different. The bulb, based on the video, looks like a cluster. I think affordability makes up people's minds more often than not.
-
Ill keep my Starlight, seems like it was a good choice at the time and remains one.
-
I'm all for anything that helps the noobs make better screens... anything to stop the, why does my 4 fl bulb unit not burn a good screen in 1 minute questions would be a good thing.
(Oops, sorry wrong forum, we really don't have a lot of that here)
-
I personally like the idea of a light by itself, like the Saati, to replace the old Violux 5000S we use (metal halide). We have a great old wall unit that works great, so we really would only need a light. As for the Ryonet, in the video it looks like an array, not a single LED. The Saati looks like it's 3 LED's. While not a true point source, it's in the neighborhood; it would be nice to see a stand alone light that could replace the old units on a stand. Of course, the reviews help, but final testing is what it's all about. I don't how to talk about a single piece of equipment without some sort of comparison to another, as that helps purchase decisions...
Steve
-
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
I am afraid its business as usual!
It comes down to your one word Darryl.
Respect! Or lack There of.
winston
-
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminating direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
Don't lump this in with how Anatol has been treated. Though they are apparently working hard to shake a less-than-stellar reputation, they earned that rep fair and square, and some folks are a mite wary and/or dubious.
Don't pull back from here too much buddy, I'll miss your often creative punctuation. LOL! ;)
-
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminatory direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
Don't lump this in with how Anatol has been treated. Though they are apparently working hard to shake a less-than-stellar reputation, they earned that rep fair and square, and some folks are a mite wary and/or dubious.
Don't pull back from here too much buddy, I'll miss your often creative punctuation. LOL! ;)
LOL Frog I ain't going to far I'd put you out of punctuation correction work, yeah I know this crowd has a few vet's here and some of us think we are vets(me). Yeah winston is correct Rich & company have gain respect and you'll never here me put them down, but I still like to hear about other equipment companies product at least 5 post before they get compared to Smurf Crew LOL
-
Darryl, My position is the same as yours on the matter.Frog, Regardless of who, Ryonet markets to, it is their choice to continue or expand those markets.In all honesty, very few of my customers read this, or any other board, for that fact.they are most of the times, just to busy to spend time on forums.They would average 500-1000 screens per day.IMHO if you want this board to grow, many competing companies should be encouraged, to participate / advertise.It is good for This board, It is good for the Industry.Darryl, I always enjoy your post/insight. You have my respect!winston
(EDIT) note. I came in to edit the QUOTES to break them up so you could see who's quoting who. It was a little jumbled.
Dan
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminatory direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
Don't lump this in with how Anatol has been treated. Though they are apparently working hard to shake a less-than-stellar reputation, they earned that rep fair and square, and some folks are a mite wary and/or dubious.
Don't pull back from here too much buddy, I'll miss your often creative punctuation. LOL! ;)
LOL Frog I ain't going to far I'd put you out of punctuation correction work, yeah I know this crowd has a few vet's here and some of us think we are vets(me). Yeah winston is correct Rich & company have gain respect and you'll never here me put them down, but I still like to hear about other equipment companies product at least 5 post before they get compared to Smurf Crew LOL
-
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
Darryl, My position is the same as yours on the matter.
Frog, Regardless of who, Ryonet markets to, it is their choice to continue or expand those markets.
In all honesty, very few of my customers read this, or any other board, for that fact.
they are most of the times, just to busy to spend time on forums.
They would average 500-1000 screens per day.
IMHO if you want this board to grow, many competing companies should be encouraged, to participate / advertise.
It is good for This board, It is good for the Industry.
Darryl, I always enjoy your post/insight. You have my respect!
winston
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminatory direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
Don't lump this in with how Anatol has been treated. Though they are apparently working hard to shake a less-than-stellar reputation, they earned that rep fair and square, and some folks are a mite wary and/or dubious.
Don't pull back from here too much buddy, I'll miss your often creative punctuation. LOL! ;)
LOL Frog I ain't going to far I'd put you out of punctuation correction work, yeah I know this crowd has a few vet's here and some of us think we are vets(me). Yeah winston is correct Rich & company have gain respect and you'll never here me put them down, but I still like to hear about other equipment companies product at least 5 post before they get compared to Smurf Crew LOL
Well, as I said, I don't see the big bash here.
I saw discussion with legitimate points brought up. As I said, here at TSB, inquiring minds seem to want to know.
-
Wow, I don't even know what to say, I don't want to BASH anyone so I guess we better just keep our fingers off the keyboard. Out of all the threads that have bashing going on to have this one be put into that category is beyond me. I'm going to just keep it at that and excuse myself.
-
Wow, I don't even know what to say, I don't want to BASH anyone so I guess we better just keep our fingers off the keyboard. Out of all the threads that have bashing going on to have this one be put into that category is beyond me. I'm going to just keep it at that and excuse myself.
-
Hey Daryl, I hope my joking around didn't come off as negative or bashing. You're correct- don't knock it 'til you've tried it! I just can't help poking fun at goofy things like a bluetooth enabled exposure unit.
Alan's comments aren't bashing, they're honest viewpoints and we should be thankful for them. They could keep another shop from dealing with his issues.
-
it seems goofy, but it would be a great way to stay on top of production numbers rolling off the unit. I am sure has other purposes, but they should certainly explain what they are
-
I figured that "Bluetooth" is the new "Turbo", but of course, I'm far behind the personal tech device curve. ;D
-
Our exposure issues "only" cost us a couple hundred dollars a week, on average. It's getting better but it's by no means fixed and "all good". Nobody has to believe that, and it can be thought of as bashing, but I don't know of any other way to discuss it. I guess I could lie, or just not talk about it, but there is a reason why a lot of us get on this forum and communicate with other shops. I get a lot out of this forum and try to give as much back. If it's considered bashing then so be it. If I would have bought the Starlight and were disappointed and a Vastex was brought in and it performed great, I'd be telling the same story, but the players would be reversed.
-
Seems like it has some useless bells and whistles, but that's what their target customers want because it sounds cool. Doesn't really matter the functionality of it to some.
-
it seems goofy, but it would be a great way to stay on top of production numbers rolling off the unit. I am sure has other purposes, but they should certainly explain what they are
Didn't even think of that, I wonder if that's actually in there though, looked like it was to start expos from the video but maybe it's for the extreme micro manager who wants to watch exposures from his smartphone.
-
The Saati unit I got is a 300w and it' a box of LEDs about 15"x12".
It's not a point light source but works really well. I think they have another unit that is smaller.
I put this into a exposure unit I had and am getting great results. I didn't want to buy a new exposure unit.
I expose PHU for 45 sec. I like this, i don't think you can control 7 sec.
-
the light inside the box looks like the SAATI 450W unit we have here. We've not had the chance to test it yet (and we've had it here for over a month!!!), but we are testing the unit Maxie has and have been using it exclusively for about two weeks now. So far so good.
If the light is indeed the SAATI 450W it is actually a very impressive piece of equipment. To me, it appears Ryonet just built a vacuum frame around it and added the control circuit.
pierre
-
If you don't mind me asking, Pierre,, did you put it inside a box, or on a stand? (I don't know what you normally use for exposure, we are the old school light on a stand/vacuum frame system)
Steve
-
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminating direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
I asked for opinions and I got them. Never expected everyone to say "awesome", "brilliant", etc... You get what you pay for and even though I cannot acess the ryonet pricelist (they have a specific website for Europe with no prices) I know I won't get stellar quality from them.
I was interested mostly because it's the first LED single point unit I saw.
-
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminating direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
I asked for opinions and I got them. Never expected everyone to say "awesome", "brilliant", etc... You get what you pay for and even though I cannot acess the ryonet pricelist (they have a specific website for Europe with no prices) I know I won't get stellar quality from them.
I was interested mostly because it's the first LED single point unit I saw.
Well, it appears that the light unit itself may be of fine quality (and I believe has even already made the rounds in Europe where I figure it's made), but whether it's a true "single point" is another issue. More like a small array with a well designed reflector.
-
Well, it appears that the light unit itself may be of fine quality (and I believe has even already made the rounds in Europe where I figure it's made), but whether it's a true "single point" is another issue. More like a small array with a well designed reflector.
this is where the language barrier comes in ;) that's exactly it
-
If a exposure unit has a reflector it is not a true single source of light. That said even my MH unit has reflectors.
-
I have to admit that I have always liked the pure photopolymers just for the average run of the mill halftone plastisol orders at 45-65 Lpi but I came across an emulsion today that surprised me. Now the exposure time is a little higher than Im used to. It was 30 seconds on a 305 coated 1/1 on an STEll. So that was cool. The 110's coated 2/1 exposed at 40 seconds. It was solid art so you can't go too wrong. So the next test was 55lpi on the 305 coated 1/1 testing my halftone sheet. 1-100% at 55lpi. Still at 30 seconds, boom! It held the 3% dots and 98% and I beat on that thing for a good 5 min "trying" to blow a hole in the emulsion with a high power sprayer. It was soooo cured. I know dual cure was intended for better image res and long production runs of 50k and over but now, I know. Pretty awesome. Yes, 30 seconds is a little long of an exposure for using LED, but boy does that emulsion do its job it was intended for. They were needing production screens but I think I really could have come down to a shorter time and still had been perfect. This was totally baked on the back all the way through to (squeegee) side. Bullet proof and holding small dots.
That looks like an LED cluster, not so much a point source and I'm not so sure about that reflector design, looks like it would diffuse the light to me but if it was engineered perfectly to work with the cluster spacing/location I suppose it could perform similar to a good MH reflector.
The claimed % halftones at 85lpi on a 230 is certainly impressive. If true, I doubt that expo is happening at 7s. I can't see a PP emulsion holding that but I know some diazo added emulsions perhaps could. Diazo sensitized emulsions have long expos on LED compared to MH.
Why would you ever need a bluetooth app to fire up an exposure unit? Are you playing music through this thing? Taking phone calls?
-
Hey Dan,
I just had a really, really long day with office / hospital stuff so I think I missed something. Still not out of the woods. Anyway, what brand? Saati or CCI or someone else? Once you said dual cure in my opinion (and that is all it is) those guys are great. Thank you
-
brandon beat me too it, what was it? That's a very fast expo for LED. I know our film/glass is slowing us down but our diazo added PP emulsion is crazy long exposing compared to that.
-
brandon beat me too it, what was it? That's a very fast expo for LED. I know our film/glass is slowing us down but our diazo added PP emulsion is crazy long exposing compared to that.
What Chris said!
-
If you don't mind me asking, Pierre,, did you put it inside a box, or on a stand? (I don't know what you normally use for exposure, we are the old school light on a stand/vacuum frame system)
Steve
We use a 3140. I just placed the box on the lightbulb glass.
Pierre
-
Sorry, I shouldn't have teased. It's not cool for me to mention any one specific emulsion. I think they all can work but at different times. Shops may choose A brand/type for many reasons. Price, time, durability, image rez. Etc. so we never say this one is better than that one.
-
Just watched the vid. I don't know enough about the makeup of the product one way or the other.
What I can say is "230 mesh cannot output a 5% dot at 85 lpi. People don't even try to claim this on S thread. Sure, you can hold 85lpi on 230, but only down to a certain size dot such as or closer to 15%
The threads are just too thick.
This guy might be saying that yes, you can expose 5% of 85lpi on 230...or a 110 for that matter,.but Printing it thru the mesh onto the tee is going to put you up near 15.
-
My unit had fluorescents, I removed the base and put the 300 Saati lamp on the floor,(at the moment it on two pieces of wood until I fix it up) 32" from the glass.
At the distance I can expose two 23x31 screens.
For one screen I'm sure you could put it closer and shorted the time.
The LED box has two fans in the back so needs a bit of space from the floor/wall.
My unit looks similar to the Ryonet, but it's home made. I have it set up with two timers, after the vacuum works for a set time the light comes on.
I have a air piston on the lid to open and close it.
Some things you have to buy but a exposure unit is so simple I done think it's worth what they are charging.
-
My unit had fluorescents, I removed the base and put the 300 Saati lamp on the floor,(at the moment it on two pieces of wood until I fix it up) 32" from the glass.
At the distance I can expose two 23x31 screens.
For one screen I'm sure you could put it closer and shorted the time.
The LED box has two fans in the back so needs a bit of space from the floor/wall.
My unit looks similar to the Ryonet, but it's home made. I have it set up with two timers, after the vacuum works for a set time the light comes on.
I have a air piston on the lid to open and close it.
Some things you have to buy but a exposure unit is so simple I done think it's worth what they are charging.
We'd like to see pics of your project in the DIY section
-
Here's how I looked at it, look at all the manufacturers of LED units, who can put the most time/money/effort into R&D of this technology? and then mail them your check and move on to other issues.....
we have a starlight.
-
I was going to start a new thread (I will at some point) but I can briefly talk about the Starlight I got to shoot 5 screens on a few weeks ago. We set it up right next to the Vastex, plugged it into the same outlet, and we shot 5 screens, all different mesh counts and spot colors, fine lines and halftones. The longest exposure was 6 seconds and the fastest was 4 seconds. None of the screens had scumming on the inside of the screen, and I was able to spray out the finer details with much much less effort compared to the Vastex. I can get rid of the scumming on the Vastex if I increase the exposure time to 25-30 seconds, but then I lose the ability to get the fine detail out. The vacuum draw down on the Starlight was about 12 seconds, exposure 5 seconds, which means the single screen Starlight outperforms the double screen Vastex by almost double the production rate. Vastex: 2 screens=90 seconds Starlight: 1 screen=18 seconds, roughly 50 seconds to shoot 2 screens including taking the 1st one out and putting the second one in. Starlight wins in detail, vacuum draw down, exposure time, blanket quality (our vacuum blanket on the Vastex already has air leaks and is dry rotting in the corners), control panel/operational features, viewing lights, and probably a few other areas I can't think of right now. In simple terms, Starlight=what I thought LED was going to be Vastex=A disappointment in just about every area. I feel bad saying those things, but I have to be honest, I have to give the facts as I see them and not prop up a decision I made to make myself look good. I made a bad decision on our latest equipment purchase, it sucks, but I'm making the best out of it.
Unfortunately I have to agree with Alan. We too bought a Vastex LED unit and it does disappoint big time. Screens are either underexposed or you can`t hold much fine detail. I would not attempt to burn any halftone screens with it. In the end it`s a Baby Joe 2000 kind of unit as they use LDtronix light bars in the Vastex one too.
If I would have known that before hand I would probably not have purchased it, but then at the time of the purchase we were really busy and were in need of an upgrade and the Starlight had to long lead times back then while the Vastex was available right away. Just glad we kept our 3140 as backup. Now I`m considering asking the guys at M&R if there is any chance of getting rid of the LDtronix light bars and using M&R ones instead even if that means having to change a lot inside the unit.
-
For the few that chimed in b saying they have it have used the Saati "single point" 300, what emulsion are you using? Are you running discharge at all?
We had the unit for a few weeks and ended up returning it In Saati's defence, there was a massive hole punctured in the back/side of our unit. They claimed that was the reason it was existing poorly for us. But then after asking then they never verified for us if the hole in fact did hinder some of the exposure/concentration. Anyway, we use a diazo, Murakami SP-1400 and that Saati unit we had SUCKED exposing that. We had shorter exposure times and better screens on our old 1000W MH unit.
It was a real disappointment to say the least. I even welded up a stand with wheels for it, and painted it black to match!
For the record, we are not CTS yet, so I was using films.
-
Rockers, do you have the upgraded vacuum pump/system in your unit? How long are your vacuum draw down times? In the beginning I was as disappointed in this aspect but overall the inability to do something in getting a nice, full exposed stencil that has always been so easy with the Richmond metal halide is costing us more time than the extended vacuum time.
-
I was going to start a new thread (I will at some point) but I can briefly talk about the Starlight I got to shoot 5 screens on a few weeks ago. We set it up right next to the Vastex, plugged it into the same outlet, and we shot 5 screens, all different mesh counts and spot colors, fine lines and halftones. The longest exposure was 6 seconds and the fastest was 4 seconds. None of the screens had scumming on the inside of the screen, and I was able to spray out the finer details with much much less effort compared to the Vastex. I can get rid of the scumming on the Vastex if I increase the exposure time to 25-30 seconds, but then I lose the ability to get the fine detail out. The vacuum draw down on the Starlight was about 12 seconds, exposure 5 seconds, which means the single screen Starlight outperforms the double screen Vastex by almost double the production rate. Vastex: 2 screens=90 seconds Starlight: 1 screen=18 seconds, roughly 50 seconds to shoot 2 screens including taking the 1st one out and putting the second one in. Starlight wins in detail, vacuum draw down, exposure time, blanket quality (our vacuum blanket on the Vastex already has air leaks and is dry rotting in the corners), control panel/operational features, viewing lights, and probably a few other areas I can't think of right now. In simple terms, Starlight=what I thought LED was going to be Vastex=A disappointment in just about every area. I feel bad saying those things, but I have to be honest, I have to give the facts as I see them and not prop up a decision I made to make myself look good. I made a bad decision on our latest equipment purchase, it sucks, but I'm making the best out of it.
Unfortunately I have to agree with Alan. We too bought a Vastex LED unit and it does disappoint big time. Screens are either underexposed or you can`t hold much fine detail. I would not attempt to burn any halftone screens with it. In the end it`s a Baby Joe 2000 kind of unit as they use LDtronix light bars in the Vastex one too.
If I would have known that before hand I would probably not have purchased it, but then at the time of the purchase we were really busy and were in need of an upgrade and the Starlight had to long lead times back then while the Vastex was available right away. Just glad we kept our 3140 as backup. Now I`m considering asking the guys at M&R if there is any chance of getting rid of the LDtronix light bars and using M&R ones instead even if that means having to change a lot inside the unit.
You would be wasting more money trying to just add our LED'S. I would strongly suggest you not do it.
-
with LED's being pretty new and a lot of people interested in them, I'll bet you can sell the Vastex to somebody to recover your money and buy a new unit for less money and frustration than it would cost you to try to 'modify' yours...
the distance from the LEDs to the screen is critical. 1/4" with the M&R unit can make a difference (I know, I tried to use pieces of 1/2" wood at first when I modified my starlight to be CTS capable.. when I went to aluminum angle pieces with the same thickness of the glass, it worked much better.
-
I have seen this unit in person and in my opinion it is a really really great unit! The exposure app is awesome and it works in milliseconds for really dialed in exposure! The light source simulates a single point and works just as well as the best single point light source on the market but uses a fraction of the energy. This unit kicks ass and when you see it in person I am sure you will all agree.
-
I have seen this unit in person and in my opinion it is a really really great unit! The exposure app is awesome and it works in milliseconds for really dialed in exposure! The light source simulates a single point and works just as well as the best single point light source on the market but uses a fraction of the energy. This unit kicks ass and when you see it in person I am sure you will all agree.
Spotted the Ryonet employee.
-
I have been doing all of the Beta Testing for the FX LED Exporsure unit. Ryonet asked me to handle the production testing before they released to the market. I have enjoyed the unit a lot. I use SP-1400 and I print 100% waterbased inks and discharge. This unit has had great results with exposure keeping detail and making a durable emulsion. 305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I will be performing testing soon with 450 mech at 100+ lpi which I am very confident in the unit to be able to hold all of the halftones.
I have read through a lot of the posts and I am very surprise on how many people resort to bashing a product that has only been out for a few days without even seeing it in person or working with one. I have been working with this unit for over a month now and I have no complaints on the unit at all.
-
I have been doing all of the Beta Testing for the FX LED Exporsure unit. Ryonet asked me to handle the production testing before they released to the market. I have enjoyed the unit a lot. I use SP-1400 and I print 100% waterbased inks and discharge. This unit has had great results with exposure keeping detail and making a durable emulsion. 305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I will be performing testing soon with 450 mech at 100+ lpi which I am very confident in the unit to be able to hold all of the halftones.
I have read through a lot of the posts and I am very surprise on how many people resort to bashing a product that has only been out for a few days without even seeing it in person or working with one. I have been working with this unit for over a month now and I have no complaints on the unit at all.
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please don't take this as bashing the unit. It looks good and I am sure it can do just as good as a MH unit. The times you said in your post make me think it is not nearly as fast as a LED unit should be. My MH can burn faster then that.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
-
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
It is doable. You are coming off a bit harsh man! I have talked with 2 different people/companies printing WB through a 420 or something.
Sergey, in Russia was pulling off 95 lpi and his stuff was killer!
-
But Alex, have you seen it in person? That does seem pretty far out there considering. I won't go as far as to say it's impossible but wow, I'd love to know more about it and get my hands on it. On a similar note, I'd like to see someone printing some of the WB inks I've tried through a 420, not impossible probably but I'd love to see it. And Sergey is on a manual and I thought he was running 305's?
-
I an not a Ryonet employee! :)
-
I don't know. I think maybe, he's addressing a post I made just this morning pertaining to 100lpi. http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777 (http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777)
In my case tho, I was referring to using 100lpi of the I-Image for screen printing on paper for poster etc. In addition, in his defense, he didn't actually describe what substrate he would be intending that 100lpi for.
Now, the negative is, similar to the Video touting to hold a 5% dot of an 85lpi (mesh on a 230) is out of place.
Here, this gentleman indicated using a 305 (and holding all the halftones) on an 81lpi. A note about people indicating they are using an extreme lpi on a lower mesh. When they do this, often yes, it can be done. It can be done using an 81 lpi on a 305, but no. Not even with dual cure, can you actually print the "full" tonal range. It just don't compute. That is simply because of the math in the mesh thread size versus the math in the dot size of an 80lpi (in the lower ranges (as most of us know here). So yes, some do actually claim to expose and print 81, and even 100lpi but the lower sized (highlight dots) and the shadow dots cannot be held and get blocked by mesh thread at a specific size ratio.
This is where people get tripped up. They mention that "they are holding" the 5% in an 85lpi. Whats that mean tho? That simply says yes, my exposure unit can EXPOSE IT ...AND IT WASHED OUT. In truth, you can hold 100 lpi and wash it out...on a 110 mesh. That doesn't mean it's going to print on a tee. That is not saying that I can expose it, hold it in the screen, AND, I can push ink thru those areas...and it's getting printed on the tee.
There are a few shops that advertise printing with 85 lpi and even 100lpi. What they are actually doing tho, is using the mid tone ranges and stretching that out across the art. In other words, those that do actually use 85-100lpi don't actually claim to use anything less than a 15% dot or above 75% in the shadow tones in that 85 lpi. I can see the benefits (since yes, you can hold from 15% to 75% and THAT is what they are working with. These smaller dots (as compared to a 55-65) mid tone range provide great image detail on press.
So, all in all we do smell something. Maybe it's just some half truths. I'm open to be corrected. If I'm wrong, I don't mind being wrong as long as I get to understand where and how got there so I don't tell someone else the wrong information.
D
I have been doing all of the Beta Testing for the FX LED Exporsure unit. Ryonet asked me to handle the production testing before they released to the market. I have enjoyed the unit a lot. I use SP-1400 and I print 100% waterbased inks and discharge. This unit has had great results with exposure keeping detail and making a durable emulsion. 305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I will be performing testing soon with 450 mech at 100+ lpi which I am very confident in the unit to be able to hold all of the halftones.
I have read through a lot of the posts and I am very surprise on how many people resort to bashing a product that has only been out for a few days without even seeing it in person or working with one. I have been working with this unit for over a month now and I have no complaints on the unit at all.
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please don't take this as bashing the unit. It looks good and I am sure it can do just as good as a MH unit. The times you said in your post make me think it is not nearly as fast as a LED unit should be. My MH can burn faster then that.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
-
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
It is doable. You are coming off a bit harsh man! I have talked with 2 different people/companies printing WB through a 420 or something.
Sergey, in Russia was pulling off 95 lpi and his stuff was killer!
Alex,
I understand that it is doable to burn a screen at that LPI. I also know people are doing it. I just know this guy is not. The guys that are at the top of their game like that will ways justify what they are saying. When they are talking about that type of high quality work they tell you about the lose and would never say "burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones". Maybe this guy is that good but he is leaving out alot of detail. Leaving out detail like that is what a sales person will do to get you exited about the possibilities.
I am only "being harsh" so our fellow members get the truth and not spend money on a lie or part lie.
-
I don't know. I think maybe, he's addressing a post I made just this morning pertaining to 100lpi. [url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777[/url] ([url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777[/url])
In my case tho, I was referring to using 100lpi of the I-Image for screen printing on paper for poster etc. In addition, in his defense, he didn't actually describe what substrate he would be intending that 100lpi for.
Now, the negative is, similar to the Video touting to hold a 5% dot of an 85lpi (mesh on a 230) is out of place.
Here, this gentleman indicated using a 305 (and holding all the halftones) on an 81lpi. A note about people indicating they are using an extreme lpi on a lower mesh. When they do this, often yes, it can be done. It can be done using an 81 lpi on a 305, but no. Not even with dual cure, can you actually print the "full" tonal range. It just don't compute. That is simply because of the math in the mesh thread size versus the math in the dot size of an 80lpi (in the lower ranges (as most of us know here). So yes, some do actually claim to expose and print 81, and even 100lpi but the lower sized (highlight dots) and the shadow dots cannot be held and get blocked by mesh thread at a specific size ratio.
This is where people get tripped up. They mention that "they are holding" the 5% in an 85lpi. Whats that mean tho? That simply says yes, my exposure unit can EXPOSE IT ...AND IT WASHED OUT. In truth, you can hold 100 lpi and wash it out...on a 110 mesh. That doesn't mean it's going to print on a tee. That is not saying that I can expose it, hold it in the screen, AND, I can push ink thru those areas...and it's getting printed on the tee.
There are a few shops that advertise printing with 85 lpi and even 100lpi. What they are actually doing tho, is using the mid tone ranges and stretching that out across the art. In other words, those that do actually use 85-100lpi don't actually claim to use anything less than a 15% dot or above 75% in the shadow tones in that 85 lpi. I can see the benefits (since yes, you can hold from 15% to 75% and THAT is what they are working with. These smaller dots (as compared to a 55-65) mid tone range provide great image detail on press.
So, all in all we do smell something. Maybe it's just some half truths. I'm open to be corrected. If I'm wrong, I don't mind being wrong as long as I get to understand where and how got there so I don't tell someone else the wrong information.
D
I have been doing all of the Beta Testing for the FX LED Exporsure unit. Ryonet asked me to handle the production testing before they released to the market. I have enjoyed the unit a lot. I use SP-1400 and I print 100% waterbased inks and discharge. This unit has had great results with exposure keeping detail and making a durable emulsion. 305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I will be performing testing soon with 450 mech at 100+ lpi which I am very confident in the unit to be able to hold all of the halftones.
I have read through a lot of the posts and I am very surprise on how many people resort to bashing a product that has only been out for a few days without even seeing it in person or working with one. I have been working with this unit for over a month now and I have no complaints on the unit at all.
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please don't take this as bashing the unit. It looks good and I am sure it can do just as good as a MH unit. The times you said in your post make me think it is not nearly as fast as a LED unit should be. My MH can burn faster then that.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
Dan said it much better then I did. I don't have the time to write it up like Dan. Good post Dan.
-
and now, I'll quote and comment.
Winston/Darryl,
It's no secret (it's right here in black and white) unedited that this really never started out, nor currently is as a bash fest. Sure, there will always be 1 or 2 out of 10-20 that will read something else out of it. Been that way for...well, since the internet.
What you see here, are savvy people discussing what they see in the vid. They talk about what they read and see and then, just like you two assumed or read BASHING, these folks read and see....what they see. Much of what they see...seems feasible to argue...or question and if anything, "talk about" on a forum. That's what we do. We review, we question, we answer, we dig deeper for more correct answers and hopefully, we answer others correctly. So yes, someone posting up a new product will get talked about. Isn't that what someone put it here for?
Sometimes, people say, Well, if you'e let other manufactures in here...or, ...if you weren't always just touting BLUE, others might show up. That's just not true. We've offered, encouraged, and even personally invited others here. Some came and couldn't hold their own. The thing is, sometimes others don't want to be brought up in a conversation for various reasons and some for more obvious reasons. Now, I've also heard from a couple people still on this forum such as Darryl that (every time someone promotes a product, they get compared to M&R). Really? Well, yes, they do. Why is that really? It's more than likely because a very large portion of ANY forum, is going to have M&R products. Most all have "something" that is M&R and someone may not like them for what ever reason, but they can never doubt the over all reputation of that Co. So why compare to M&R? Well, why compare Trump to Oboma? Because these two are currently the ones being talked about or are in question. We all know when you're on top, you're a target or maybe the bench mark etc. This place is not an M&R forum but like any forum, or screen print related site where printers gather, it's going to have people on it that own something M&R. You can see banners here for other manufacturers. Why is it that most of the talk can be having to do with M&R then? Probably because there is a ton of equipment out there owned by screen printers who go to forums...that own an M&R. Why is everyone always posting nothing but praises? Well? Thats a good thing right? Actual owners praising the quality and the service. It's no secret that most are very happy...Tho there are some that are not, I'm sure. When another product gets put out there, and M&R has one of those products that do the same thing, it's going to be compared to them. It's kind of obvious isn't it? It's just the way it is. It's life and there isn't anything wrong with that. When someone needs seps, and they look at different separators, I'm not compared to a beginner artist/separator. I'm compared to other good separators. I'm sure that when someone wants a dryer worked on, they may compare you to someone else that is known for being as good.
I just didn't feel the "bashing" term was a justified statement. If something just isn't right...and you state that it isn't right and explain how it's not, ....that's not "bashing", That's informing. Sure, some people are a little more colorful than others, but that's people. Just today, my son is ticked at my wife. Why? Because she said something that didn't mean a thing to her, but it rubbed him the wrong way. We are all different in how we see things.
That's all.
Dan
Darryl, My position is the same as yours on the matter.Frog, Regardless of who, Ryonet markets to, it is their choice to continue or expand those markets.In all honesty, very few of my customers read this, or any other board, for that fact.they are most of the times, just to busy to spend time on forums.They would average 500-1000 screens per day.IMHO if you want this board to grow, many competing companies should be encouraged, to participate / advertise.It is good for This board, It is good for the Industry.Darryl, I always enjoy your post/insight. You have my respect!winston
(EDIT) note. I came in to edit the QUOTES to break them up so you could see who's quoting who. It was a little jumbled.
Dan
I know I should shut up here, but I'm going to toss my 2 cent in, I agree with Alan the starlight I tested in my shop blew me away, and if we had heavy production going on everyday I would have ordered one that day. With all that said, you guys are doing what you normally do bashing!!!! before you even had a change to work with this unit Ryonet is promoting, this is the reason I'm pulling back from the forum some, take a read of the post so far and tell me what you've read. I apologize if I've hurt anyone's feelings, but dang can't we ever have a complete post without tossing M&R in the mix when talking about another companies equipment, I did look at the vid and the unit looks very interesting maybe a few things for glam that has nothing to do with exposure, I'll wait until someone puts it in there shop for real production and that will tell the tail.
I don't see a major bash-fest here. What I see mostly is input from a very different forum crowd than Ryonet generally markets to (though in all fairness, they didn't start this thread).
Unlike TSF, our crowd is generally more experienced, and criticism tends to be from a fairly discriminatory direction. They don't believe everything they hear, or take all claims at face value.
Don't lump this in with how Anatol has been treated. Though they are apparently working hard to shake a less-than-stellar reputation, they earned that rep fair and square, and some folks are a mite wary and/or dubious.
Don't pull back from here too much buddy, I'll miss your often creative punctuation. LOL! ;)
LOL Frog I ain't going to far I'd put you out of punctuation correction work, yeah I know this crowd has a few vet's here and some of us think we are vets(me). Yeah winston is correct Rich & company have gain respect and you'll never here me put them down, but I still like to hear about other equipment companies product at least 5 post before they get compared to Smurf Crew LOL
-
I would like to pose a question to this group. What light source makes a better stencil, single point or multi point?
-
Rockers, do you have the upgraded vacuum pump/system in your unit? How long are your vacuum draw down times? In the beginning I was as disappointed in this aspect but overall the inability to do something in getting a nice, full exposed stencil that has always been so easy with the Richmond metal halide is costing us more time than the extended vacuum time.
We bought our unit in late 2014, apparently that was already the upgraded version.
Still it takes a good 20 sec for the pump to draw down the blanket completely, it`s pretty noisy too. I just read the product sheet for the Vastex LED again yesterday just so that I could go to bed feeling really disappointed. It`s says "Expose very fine detail and halftones" which is just not true, at least not in our case.
-
I would like to pose a question to this group. What light source makes a better stencil, single point or multi point?
I guess I will play.
The best light source is a single point or single direction light in the correct wave length for the emulsion. The reason for this is so the light does not undercut the film.
Here is questions for you...
Would a point light source or multi source light be better for a Direct to screen setup?
What kind of light is LED light?
OK I will answer this one:
LEDs are “directional” light sources, which means they emit light in a specific direction, unlike incandescent and compact fluorescent bulbs, which emit light and heat in all directions. For this reason, LED lighting is able to use light and energy more efficiently in many applications.
Now one more question... Why would a LED exposure unit need to be Point light if the light only travels in one Direction?
For the record I don't subscribe to LEDs being only one directional. A single LED will not shoot a fine beam of light. This means it does have an array of light. I maybe wrong.
-
In my opinion a point light source will always make a better screen at optimal exposure time.
-
It's true that any light source is going to have some kind of span of residual light outside the path. I believe tho, that an LED has the least out of the options by a large difference and when comparing one LED exposure system to another, there are still some great differences yet. Add to that, the spacing and then also the total number of these lights.
I don't knock whats out there. I think there should be price point options. Some need a lower cost hammer while others need something better, so they pay a little more. Some of these other lower cost LED systems might be a good choice over the old Flo bulbs if you can't yet afford something better. Will each of these LED sources be everything you're looking for? No, not all the time, so dig deep and compare and weigh it out.
-
I still believe that any of these lower cost options will produce better screens than FL units.
We here are so used to top of the line, wanting to get the best results possible with what we have. Many smaller shops and more advanced basement/garage printers could benefit greatly from something affordable.
Would be curious of the retail price on this unit tho.
-
I still believe that any of these lower cost options will produce better screens than FL units.
We here are so used to top of the line, wanting to get the best results possible with what we have. Many smaller shops and more advanced basement/garage printers could benefit greatly from something affordable.
Would be curious of the retail price on this unit tho.
I believe 4k for a tabletop unit. I think Workhorse leads the pack in affordability at around 2500
-
At 4k for a tabletop unit, that's quite pricey...
-
Indeed it is. I expected it to be a lot cheaper.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I don't see the point in this. Why do you need a notification after a 30 seconds exposure? We are currently taking 10 minutes per exposure, THAT would take an app, but 30/40 seconds? And what is there to control on an exposure unit aside from time? And you need to be close to it, it's bluetooth, not wireless.
-
Indeed it is. I expected it to be a lot cheaper.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I don't see the point in this. Why do you need a notification after a 30 seconds exposure? We are currently taking 10 minutes per exposure, THAT would take an app, but 30/40 seconds? And what is there to control on an exposure unit aside from time? And you need to be close to it, it's bluetooth, not wireless.
That`s cool though. Maybe the app can as well place the screen on the glass of the unit lower and lock the lid and so on. Vorsprung durch Technik. Anyway, I`m pretty certain that exposure unit won`t be any worse then the Vastex we got.
-
I would like to pose a question to this group. What light source makes a better stencil, single point or multi point?
When I started, I used a NuArc Carbon Arc Lamp, and that was a true point source, like the Sun. A tiny little point of light that could injure your eyes if you stared at it, very powerful. From there, I graduated to 5K Metal Halide because it was much safer to use (carbon arcs give off ozone and other bad things) and it worked great, and still does. The smaller and more powerful the source, the technically better your stencil will be due to the basic principles of light geometry. That being said, I'm sure the unit in question works fine, it reminds me of the Richmond, and probably the 3140, which I've never seen up close, but a light in the bottom of the box with the screens lying horizontally above it in a vacuum frame. We know a properly built LED unit like the Starlight (many kudos on this board) will do an excellent job, so this question is moot to me... I will say that some claims are a bit fishy to me, which I tend to see as selling something shiny to the less initiated, but not totally evil. Nor do I see any real bashing, at least not as I see it...
Steve
-
Wow I missed quite a bit here! Sons birthday party weekend and let's say I was out mowing the grass last night by headlight!
The only thing I was trying to say was this new guys came on and was saying he was achieving amazing results(lpi) and he got jumped on. It was the same when Sergay came on with his amazing prints and said they were on a manual and NOT using CTS.
When I read that it inspired/motivated me. I had always read 55lpi, MAYBE 65lpi if you are feeling frisky. I'm guessing(totally an assumption) that Sergaey either haven't been told that it didn't believe it, so he set his bar higher. It really got me excited, what else has I read we COULDN'T do? We have probably half a dozen custom discharge/waterbase/plastichatge/plastisol whites and underbases we use now because we wanted to try to take it further.
As far as the unit in question here, it's interesting. Aside from that, if Al from Murakami doesn't say it is the real deal, I'll stick with what I got. I can see why some people are so skeptical, Ryonet hasn't exactly been known for high-end cutting edge intentionally developed products. More the starting out, and learning market. But who says they can't start to make a change? They got the $$$$. You got to start somewhere. It is pretty chicken crap that they will post videos and promo stuff but not back up a technical thread like this that screams for insight from developers.
We as a group don't always make it real easy for new people to join in. Hell, I was a lurker for a few years. There was Dottonedan who regularly writes novels in his posts, and his fellow author Alan. Frog had been around since TSPMB, Bimmridder was made out to be the nicest teddy bear you ever met(come to find out that was beer influenced) and I was afraid Brandt was going to bitch slap me after I said HI. After meeting all of you guys,(Alan you still owe me a date a believe) come to find out you are all real good guys and screen printing geeks like myself.
What my novel(thanks for the inspiration Dan and Alan) is trying to say is - that dude said he was doing way high lpi designs, who knows if he was/is holding under 5% or over 95%. I don't care one way or another. If he is, that's sweet and maybe with a warmer welcome we all may learn something new.
Geesh, getting sentimental like that, must be my time off the month! ???
You guys let me know when Printa releases their laser exposure unit and I'll be interested again!
-
I don't know. I think maybe, he's addressing a post I made just this morning pertaining to 100lpi. [url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777[/url] ([url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777[/url])
In my case tho, I was referring to using 100lpi of the I-Image for screen printing on paper for poster etc. In addition, in his defense, he didn't actually describe what substrate he would be intending that 100lpi for.
Now, the negative is, similar to the Video touting to hold a 5% dot of an 85lpi (mesh on a 230) is out of place.
Here, this gentleman indicated using a 305 (and holding all the halftones) on an 81lpi. A note about people indicating they are using an extreme lpi on a lower mesh. When they do this, often yes, it can be done. It can be done using an 81 lpi on a 305, but no. Not even with dual cure, can you actually print the "full" tonal range. It just don't compute. That is simply because of the math in the mesh thread size versus the math in the dot size of an 80lpi (in the lower ranges (as most of us know here). So yes, some do actually claim to expose and print 81, and even 100lpi but the lower sized (highlight dots) and the shadow dots cannot be held and get blocked by mesh thread at a specific size ratio.
This is where people get tripped up. They mention that "they are holding" the 5% in an 85lpi. Whats that mean tho? That simply says yes, my exposure unit can EXPOSE IT ...AND IT WASHED OUT. In truth, you can hold 100 lpi and wash it out...on a 110 mesh. That doesn't mean it's going to print on a tee. That is not saying that I can expose it, hold it in the screen, AND, I can push ink thru those areas...and it's getting printed on the tee.
There are a few shops that advertise printing with 85 lpi and even 100lpi. What they are actually doing tho, is using the mid tone ranges and stretching that out across the art. In other words, those that do actually use 85-100lpi don't actually claim to use anything less than a 15% dot or above 75% in the shadow tones in that 85 lpi. I can see the benefits (since yes, you can hold from 15% to 75% and THAT is what they are working with. These smaller dots (as compared to a 55-65) mid tone range provide great image detail on press.
So, all in all we do smell something. Maybe it's just some half truths. I'm open to be corrected. If I'm wrong, I don't mind being wrong as long as I get to understand where and how got there so I don't tell someone else the wrong information.
D
I have been doing all of the Beta Testing for the FX LED Exporsure unit. Ryonet asked me to handle the production testing before they released to the market. I have enjoyed the unit a lot. I use SP-1400 and I print 100% waterbased inks and discharge. This unit has had great results with exposure keeping detail and making a durable emulsion. 305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I will be performing testing soon with 450 mech at 100+ lpi which I am very confident in the unit to be able to hold all of the halftones.
I have read through a lot of the posts and I am very surprise on how many people resort to bashing a product that has only been out for a few days without even seeing it in person or working with one. I have been working with this unit for over a month now and I have no complaints on the unit at all.
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please don't take this as bashing the unit. It looks good and I am sure it can do just as good as a MH unit. The times you said in your post make me think it is not nearly as fast as a LED unit should be. My MH can burn faster then that.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
Honestly, this post or quote I must say is very one sided. If you have been to the trade show in the past year then you would have seen the high halftone count on 305 mesh screens being printed at ISS. Virus Inks, the same inks I for 4 color process, was printing 102 lpi at ISS Long Beach and hold all of the dots and it was with a white underbase. Older printers do not accept or want to believe the break through in technology. Virus Inks 4YOU process system is standard at 81 lpi. Waterbased inks have a low viscosity than plastisol, which means that it can print through smaller dots.
Attached is a photo that was printed at 81 lpi on 305 mesh. Before you make claims about something, see if your shop can print it. Some shop have been pushing the envelope just to be different, and honestly it scares the older shops.
-
LMPrinting,
Thanks for posting the print. I love the subject of the shirt. I am building a vintage bike. I hope you didn't take what I said in a bad way. I just read so many posts that people are doing high end work and when you see the work its not even close. LPI is misleading since your output device, driver and rip software can make the dots different sizes. For example when I started over 6 years ago I used Ghost Script to make half tones (it was free). Then I upgraded to Filmaker and the dots were way smaller. I would guess 30 to 40 percent smaller for the same LPI. Then you have dot gain and all the other issues most people don't even know about. Then you have dots that don't or cant wash out at the higher LPI. I have done work up to 65LPI just to see if I can do it. I can. My set up is rather dialed in. I still can do some fine tuning and need to do some adjusting for Dot gain. To be honest I don't want to go too much farther into the high-end printing arena. I make good money with high quality, mid range designs for corporate and businesses.
I hope you stay on this board and offer up some more info from your work on high end high LPI work.
Thanks Jon.
-
Nice print. Though it's a nice print, it says nothing about what dots are being held. Maybe it was 81 lpi on a 305. That then leaves the smallest dots to be in the 15% area and nothing below. It's a matter of the threads being too large that block the ink from getting printed, not the ink it's self. That's why you see no faint (small) tones/dots in the brightest areas. In fact, it looks washed out or posterized in those areas and would be an intentional or planned act by an experienced separator and printer.
It's cool to do 80-100 lpi and get really small dots that make up everything in between the drop offs at highlight and shadows, but we here just like to straighten out what people might get miss directed to believe. We wouldn't want the newbs to go out there printing sheets of film at 100 lpi and then wonder why everything is plugging up. Even those mid tones need adjusted so that they show more depth.
We've seen some really interesting prints from Mark Gervais (shown recently at ISS) making use of waterbase inks and discharge using 60lpi and very low mesh like 135, 160 and 225 using S mesh. A link to a video was posted here on this forum. He was using low mesh like this is a similar example. Yes, it's very low mesh with what is considered a very high lpi for those mesh, but he designed the seps to not use low % that would normally be blocked by the threads. You can see in his art that rather than use small dots, he used additional colors such as 11 colors. For a full color image, if he were to have to reduce it to 6 colors, it wouldn't be possible. You'd have to have lighter shades such as 3, 5, 10%'s and you just can't do that on low mesh using small lpi like 65. Same for high lpi like 100 on a regular 305 mesh. Again, it's not the inks, it's the mesh threads at a specific size dot that gets blocked. Probably something near 15% or even higher.
-
Rockers, do you have the upgraded vacuum pump/system in your unit? How long are your vacuum draw down times? In the beginning I was as disappointed in this aspect but overall the inability to do something in getting a nice, full exposed stencil that has always been so easy with the Richmond metal halide is costing us more time than the extended vacuum time.
Alan, the vacuum draw down times are around 25 sec on our unit. What really cost us time is having to redo screens just because fine details did not come out proper.
We shoot CCI HXT 1/1 on a 150-S yellow for around 75 sec. Unfortunately I can`t find the email from Vastex with their exposure times for certain emulsions and mesh counts.
-
Best thing to do is get a 21 step exposure test and make sure you'r on a density of 7.
-
Older guys what? Kind of a broad brush, methinks. A few years ago, one of the artists mistakenly output an 8 color sim process at 85 LPI. We decided to go for it, figuring the worst would be that we remade the films and screens. We ran i on 355, and it prints pretty well, though some extreme ends of the scale we under represented. However, the art allows for that in the end, the customer has reordered a 1/2 dozen times. We run this with plastisol, not WB. A lot of years ago, when I worked in my old shop, a customer came in with their own seps @100 LPI and said, "Just run 'em." Did it go perfectly? No. Did it look like what the guy had been selling right along? Yes. Again, 355 mesh, which was always my go to mesh after reading Joe Clarke and Mark Coudray's "Control Without Confusion" back in the eighties. I've always pushed the envelope a little to get the result, and I've never had a problem listening to what works for someone else, even if it's totally unconventional. Now, if you want to really show the result you claim, show us an extreme closeup of the 3% or 5% dot at 81 LPI or the 100 LPI on the 305 mesh screen, so one can see the threads going through the dots and maybe make a better judgment instead of leaping to conclusions that it can't be done based on our shared past experiences. The post of the shirt is kind of blurry, I'd like to see a really clean one. Maybe this should break off into another thread?
Steve
-
Best thing to do is get a 21 step exposure test and make sure you'r on a density of 7.
if you don't have a stouffer strip and/or other exposure calculator, and you're posting exposure times, you have NO idea what you're doing or how good your screens are.
FYI, I've been told recently by a major emulsion vendor that for the CTS users, that a 6 on the stouffer strip is perfectly acceptable since there's no glass or film involved.
-
OK Stoufer strip.
I don't quite understand that, 7 on the strip is after the glass, its what they say is the correct exposure the emulsion needs to give a good result.
How is this effected by the image being on the screen with a CTS?
-
How is this effected by the image being on the screen with a CTS?
they claim that the film itself can affect up to 1 whole step on the strip, and that since there's no film, the 6 is what you shoot for.
Not sure I believe them 100%, as we've been shooting for 7 on all of our screens and having excellent results with most emulsions.
-
How is this effected by the image being on the screen with a CTS?
they claim that the film itself can affect up to 1 whole step on the strip, and that since there's no film, the 6 is what you shoot for.
Not sure I believe them 100%, as we've been shooting for 7 on all of our screens and having excellent results with most emulsions.
put a layer of film between your scale and the screen. that will give you an accurate reading . . .
pierre
p.s. the step 7 is NOT the actual amount of light/energy needed, but it is in the ball park and by figuring out what it is supposed to be exactly, you can then use the scale to insure you have identical exposure all the time. My guess is, depending on the emulsion, correct exposure will be in the 5-10 range.
p.p.s. also, we lack the definition of what is the correct exposure? Photopolymer never fully converts and washing out the screens will realign some of the molecules which will allow for additional linking when post exposed. My understanding is that only 10-20% are linked when we call it fully exposed.
-
How is this effected by the image being on the screen with a CTS?
they claim that the film itself can affect up to 1 whole step on the strip, and that since there's no film, the 6 is what you shoot for.
Not sure I believe them 100%, as we've been shooting for 7 on all of our screens and having excellent results with most emulsions.
put a layer of film between your scale and the screen. that will give you an accurate reading . . .
pierre
p.s. the step 7 is NOT the actual amount of light/energy needed, but it is in the ball park and by figuring out what it is supposed to be exactly, you can then use the scale to insure you have identical exposure all the time. My guess is, depending on the emulsion, correct exposure will be in the 5-10 range.
p.p.s. also, we lack the definition of what is the correct exposure? Photopolymer never fully converts and washing out the screens will realign some of the molecules which will allow for additional linking when post exposed. My understanding is that only 10-20% are linked when we call it fully exposed.
so why are they saying a 6 on the stouffer strip is where we should be for cts vs a 7... that's nearly a 30% difference in exposure time. Seems like going for a 6 would cause underexposed screens.
-
How is this effected by the image being on the screen with a CTS?
they claim that the film itself can affect up to 1 whole step on the strip, and that since there's no film, the 6 is what you shoot for.
Not sure I believe them 100%, as we've been shooting for 7 on all of our screens and having excellent results with most emulsions.
put a layer of film between your scale and the screen. that will give you an accurate reading . . .
pierre
p.s. the step 7 is NOT the actual amount of light/energy needed, but it is in the ball park and by figuring out what it is supposed to be exactly, you can then use the scale to insure you have identical exposure all the time. My guess is, depending on the emulsion, correct exposure will be in the 5-10 range.
p.p.s. also, we lack the definition of what is the correct exposure? Photopolymer never fully converts and washing out the screens will realign some of the molecules which will allow for additional linking when post exposed. My understanding is that only 10-20% are linked when we call it fully exposed.
so why are they saying a 6 on the stouffer strip is where we should be for cts vs a 7... that's nearly a 30% difference in exposure time. Seems like going for a 6 would cause underexposed screens.
I imagine because the results (a 6 or an 8) all depend on the variables such as stencil thickness, emulsion type, film or no film or even dry not less dry, but it probably would be within + or - of 7. I'm no expert on that.
-
305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Since you are beta testing this, can you provide some more hard data- coating method/eom, film or cts, what kind of dot gain linearization/curve are we talking, how many hard steps left on a Stouffer strip, etc.
I think we need something to give us a ballpark to actually compare and qualify some of this. "keep all halftones" really doesn't mean anything to me and I think some of the flack this unit is getting in this thread is coming from some perceiving those comments to mean that 305 is holding properly linearized 1% dots at 81 lpi. I can't really tell what exactly is being claimed here with this FX unit.
I know I poked some fun at the bluetooth thing early on but, I'll say it again, if these numbers are even ballpark near reality you can re-color me a very interested party. Properly exposing a diazo added emulsion on a 180/48 at a minute would be amazing for us.
Also, Dan is correct regarding a standard thread 305 mesh's threads and knuckles blocking much of the tonal range at 85lpi. This is not some old guard v. new thing and need not be built up into an issue like that, it's simple mathematics. That said, I always encourage pushing the envelope and seeing what can be done but some of the "old" rules are good ones and there for a reason.
-
I don't know. I think maybe, he's addressing a post I made just this morning pertaining to 100lpi. [url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777[/url] ([url]http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,15611.msg149777.html#msg149777[/url])
In my case tho, I was referring to using 100lpi of the I-Image for screen printing on paper for poster etc. In addition, in his defense, he didn't actually describe what substrate he would be intending that 100lpi for.
Now, the negative is, similar to the Video touting to hold a 5% dot of an 85lpi (mesh on a 230) is out of place.
Here, this gentleman indicated using a 305 (and holding all the halftones) on an 81lpi. A note about people indicating they are using an extreme lpi on a lower mesh. When they do this, often yes, it can be done. It can be done using an 81 lpi on a 305, but no. Not even with dual cure, can you actually print the "full" tonal range. It just don't compute. That is simply because of the math in the mesh thread size versus the math in the dot size of an 80lpi (in the lower ranges (as most of us know here). So yes, some do actually claim to expose and print 81, and even 100lpi but the lower sized (highlight dots) and the shadow dots cannot be held and get blocked by mesh thread at a specific size ratio.
This is where people get tripped up. They mention that "they are holding" the 5% in an 85lpi. Whats that mean tho? That simply says yes, my exposure unit can EXPOSE IT ...AND IT WASHED OUT. In truth, you can hold 100 lpi and wash it out...on a 110 mesh. That doesn't mean it's going to print on a tee. That is not saying that I can expose it, hold it in the screen, AND, I can push ink thru those areas...and it's getting printed on the tee.
There are a few shops that advertise printing with 85 lpi and even 100lpi. What they are actually doing tho, is using the mid tone ranges and stretching that out across the art. In other words, those that do actually use 85-100lpi don't actually claim to use anything less than a 15% dot or above 75% in the shadow tones in that 85 lpi. I can see the benefits (since yes, you can hold from 15% to 75% and THAT is what they are working with. These smaller dots (as compared to a 55-65) mid tone range provide great image detail on press.
So, all in all we do smell something. Maybe it's just some half truths. I'm open to be corrected. If I'm wrong, I don't mind being wrong as long as I get to understand where and how got there so I don't tell someone else the wrong information.
D
I have been doing all of the Beta Testing for the FX LED Exporsure unit. Ryonet asked me to handle the production testing before they released to the market. I have enjoyed the unit a lot. I use SP-1400 and I print 100% waterbased inks and discharge. This unit has had great results with exposure keeping detail and making a durable emulsion. 305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Part of the unit being app enabled is that soon you will be able to have the app on your phone and be able to control the unit from anywhere. It also will notify you when the exposure is complete if you have to walk away from the unit.
I will be performing testing soon with 450 mech at 100+ lpi which I am very confident in the unit to be able to hold all of the halftones.
I have read through a lot of the posts and I am very surprise on how many people resort to bashing a product that has only been out for a few days without even seeing it in person or working with one. I have been working with this unit for over a month now and I have no complaints on the unit at all.
81 to 100+ LPI waterbase work is impressive, I mean impossible. Why don't you post up a pic of that shirt. Keeping "all the halftones" at that LPI means one of two things. Your setting for LPI is way off or your just full of it. I really don't care to prove you wrong. I want to make sure no one believes this and spends money on the unit only to be disappointed.
Please don't take this as bashing the unit. It looks good and I am sure it can do just as good as a MH unit. The times you said in your post make me think it is not nearly as fast as a LED unit should be. My MH can burn faster then that.
Please post a pic of that shirt in waterbase at 81 lpi.
Honestly, this post or quote I must say is very one sided. If you have been to the trade show in the past year then you would have seen the high halftone count on 305 mesh screens being printed at ISS. Virus Inks, the same inks I for 4 color process, was printing 102 lpi at ISS Long Beach and hold all of the dots and it was with a white underbase. Older printers do not accept or want to believe the break through in technology. Virus Inks 4YOU process system is standard at 81 lpi. Waterbased inks have a low viscosity than plastisol, which means that it can print through smaller dots.
Attached is a photo that was printed at 81 lpi on 305 mesh. Before you make claims about something, see if your shop can print it. Some shop have been pushing the envelope just to be different, and honestly it scares the older shops.
as an official representative of the forum, I'd like to extend you the welcome and assure you that any comments posted in reply to you are just there for sake of pursuing the truth!
We have been schooled before for not believing something is possible and we often need to see it with our own eyes. Thank you also for sharing with us the information on the testing you have done for Ryonet. It is information like that that helps us learn more and progress.
With that being said, I'd like to bring up some information you might not have. As the (what I believe) only SGIA Golden Image winner that actively participates here I can tell you from the perspective of somebody who is pushing the envelope and has been recognized as such. We have just about any measuring device that is used in our industry and have on several occasions corrected or assisted manufacturers with their product. (this is to give you a little bit of perspective about where we are coming from).
My understanding is that the physical limitation of the properly calibrated halftone with 55lpi on 305/34 mesh is 3%. This is the standard 305 rather than the thin thread version. 3% is the smallest opening where the hole is not blocked by the mesh. Anything below that can potentially open but will have interference with the mesh threads and will not show 100% of the dots. So printing something of that size can be done, but will not be clean.
As you can probably figure out by now, the issue is not in the ink, but rather in the stencil. Thinner waterbased ink might be able to get through the partially blocked opening, but even then you will see only parts of it which in turn will not be correct.
pierre
-
How is this effected by the image being on the screen with a CTS?
they claim that the film itself can affect up to 1 whole step on the strip, and that since there's no film, the 6 is what you shoot for.
Not sure I believe them 100%, as we've been shooting for 7 on all of our screens and having excellent results with most emulsions.
put a layer of film between your scale and the screen. that will give you an accurate reading . . .
pierre
p.s. the step 7 is NOT the actual amount of light/energy needed, but it is in the ball park and by figuring out what it is supposed to be exactly, you can then use the scale to insure you have identical exposure all the time. My guess is, depending on the emulsion, correct exposure will be in the 5-10 range.
p.p.s. also, we lack the definition of what is the correct exposure? Photopolymer never fully converts and washing out the screens will realign some of the molecules which will allow for additional linking when post exposed. My understanding is that only 10-20% are linked when we call it fully exposed.
so why are they saying a 6 on the stouffer strip is where we should be for cts vs a 7... that's nearly a 30% difference in exposure time. Seems like going for a 6 would cause underexposed screens.
think of the step scale as a thermometer. It will always give you the same temperature so you can repeat your cooking process every time. Now think of the emulsions as different kind of meat, pork, beef and lamb all have to cook to a different temperature to be done. Our emulsions similarly vary based on the chemistry and thickness. Even our light source will impact the results (think convection vs broiling ovens). . .
Richard is die hard believer in the solid step 7 and he tried to explain it to me on several occasions, but it seems to be over my head. Like some others (that also don't agree with solid 7) I believe multiple exposure times with microscope inspection are the start and then trial by fire to confirm it. Unfortunately there is no tool that measures the percentage of crosslinking, I've asked, looking to buy one, but alas none exist.
pierre
-
One more little wrinkle to think about with the Stoufer Strip step 7 idea...
Thread diameter can have an effect on how well that step 6/7/9/ - whatever - adheres to the mesh when being beat on with a pressure washer/hose/spray out implement of choice.
The thinner the thread, the easier it is to spray out/off the mesh. This then causes you to expose longer than potentially needed.
Also, the longer you soak the screen, the more tender that "Solid Step" becomes......
-
To further clear up any questions I might have had about the stats: Yeah, when I hear 81lpi and holding all the halftones I start thinking about the exposure calculator I have that I can't even see the halftones in the 2% and barely can see the 4% with the naked eye. I pretty much draw the line at holding halftones that I can't see without a loupe, so my negativity is not meant to take personal, it's more of a physical limitation of my own body more than the limitations of the tools and equipment we're working with.
I'm going to get a taste of these super high halftones in a few weeks. I'm going to try and develop some 120lpi on a 305 with cap film. Wish us luck.
-
For those of you who have not had the pleasure of looking at the 85+ LPI HSA sim process prints.....
There is still Visible moire in the lower tonal areas.
Yes, they may be able to keep these awesome dots.... but they are not printing them. Everything Dan talked about is right there on the shirt for us to see.
It gets shrugged off as "The general public wont see it."
-
just for grins a bit back, we did a 1 screen white discharge job on a 305 with 85 lpi... it was a job for my band and I was curious as to what would happen... if it didn't work out right, we would have just re-shot the screen and went on.
everything said about the ends of the range getting lost is dead on... we lost everything below about 12%... (some of the dots ended up on the mesh, but the majority of them were not there.. and on the high end, everything above 80% was gone. if we would have been running multiple screens for greys and brighter whites, I'm sure it wouldn't have been an issue, but on this print, it didn't look good at all.
however, what I will say is that for whatever reason, the fades of the 20-60% in the middle of the art were much smoother and didn't look halftone at all... not sure why the interaction of the halftone dots and the shirt worked that way, but it did.
so, 85lpi, with seps designed to handle it, I could see being a useful technique, especially if you ditch the expectations of 20% and below, and 80% and above, AND everything is calibrated.
-
One could argue that we occasionally slide the slippery slope of technical masturbation here. Here is a 65 line/dot 305 mesh with a DC base from 5 ys ago. No I do not have Stouffer strips, EOM calculators and haven't touched a loop in ys but we know we can do this and it is enough.
-
One could argue that we occasionally slide the slippery slope of technical masturbation here. Here is a 65 line/dot 305 mesh with a DC base from 5 ys ago. No I do not have Stouffer strips, EOM calculators and haven't touched a loop in ys but we know we can do this and it is enough.
Impressive job but registration is off ;)
-
I know its a MP ;)
-
Why are his lips so shiny. He is freaking me out...
-
Why are his lips so shiny. He is freaking me out...
too much chap stick on photo shoot day...or maybe it's lip gloss :-X
orrr maybe he's made of wax...
-
He does have a little uncanny valley thing going on...
-
305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Since you are beta testing this, can you provide some more hard data- coating method/eom, film or cts, what kind of dot gain linearization/curve are we talking, how many hard steps left on a Stouffer strip, etc.
I think we need something to give us a ballpark to actually compare and qualify some of this. "keep all halftones" really doesn't mean anything to me and I think some of the flack this unit is getting in this thread is coming from some perceiving those comments to mean that 305 is holding properly linearized 1% dots at 81 lpi. I can't really tell what exactly is being claimed here with this FX unit.
I know I poked some fun at the bluetooth thing early on but, I'll say it again, if these numbers are even ballpark near reality you can re-color me a very interested party. Properly exposing a diazo added emulsion on a 180/48 at a minute would be amazing for us.
Also, Dan is correct regarding a standard thread 305 mesh's threads and knuckles blocking much of the tonal range at 85lpi. This is not some old guard v. new thing and need not be built up into an issue like that, it's simple mathematics. That said, I always encourage pushing the envelope and seeing what can be done but some of the "old" rules are good ones and there for a reason.
For exposure times. Currently using Diazo emulsion on a 180 mesh it would be at about 1:00. I am still fine tuning an exact time. I have been testing some photopolymer, Textile PHU, as well and a 225/40 S Mesh is at 7 seconds, and calculations put 305 mesh with photopolymer at about 2-3 seconds. Hard exact numbers for exposure times are being compiled.
We are based in Bozeman, you guys are welcome to come down and see the unit for yourself if you want.
-
305 mesh is burning 81 lpi, keep all halftones, is at 35 seconds. 230 mech is at 45 seconds and holds all halftones at 55 lpi. 180LX mesh is burning at 1:00.
Since you are beta testing this, can you provide some more hard data- coating method/eom, film or cts, what kind of dot gain linearization/curve are we talking, how many hard steps left on a Stouffer strip, etc.
I think we need something to give us a ballpark to actually compare and qualify some of this. "keep all halftones" really doesn't mean anything to me and I think some of the flack this unit is getting in this thread is coming from some perceiving those comments to mean that 305 is holding properly linearized 1% dots at 81 lpi. I can't really tell what exactly is being claimed here with this FX unit.
I know I poked some fun at the bluetooth thing early on but, I'll say it again, if these numbers are even ballpark near reality you can re-color me a very interested party. Properly exposing a diazo added emulsion on a 180/48 at a minute would be amazing for us.
Also, Dan is correct regarding a standard thread 305 mesh's threads and knuckles blocking much of the tonal range at 85lpi. This is not some old guard v. new thing and need not be built up into an issue like that, it's simple mathematics. That said, I always encourage pushing the envelope and seeing what can be done but some of the "old" rules are good ones and there for a reason.
For exposure times. Currently using Diazo emulsion on a 180 mesh it would be at about 1:00. I am still fine tuning an exact time. I have been testing some photopolymer, Textile PHU, as well and a 225/40 S Mesh is at 7 seconds, and calculations put 305 mesh with photopolymer at about 2-3 seconds. Hard exact numbers for exposure times are being compiled.
We are based in Bozeman, you guys are welcome to come down and see the unit for yourself if you want.
Thanks for the invite! If I ever get a chance to get away I'll pm you and we can setup a time to hang. There's not many shop's printing wb ink, let alone HSA in the area that I'm aware of at least it would be great to talk with another one.
So that 180 @ 1min with diazo, what step on the Stouffer is that holding?
-
that is very interesting information!
-
Diggin' up an old one here - what's the verdict?
Ryonet's FX Led Exposure Unit is on sale right now. It's about the same price for us as the big Starlight would be.
Anyone been using the FX Led unit a while and have any feedback?