my registration unit

[ZooCity]

it would, but it's just another project and dammit -we don't have the time right now. We just hold the screen, pull the blanket down and hope for the best haha  - no issues with that yet, but I do know the vacuum can make the screen shift, it is a problem we are working out. . .I need a solid week off to really think about this concept and fine tune it.

I got to thinking -about Zoo's deal and not putting reg marks on the glass. What if there were, let's say 4 screen sizes in the shop. Could you make 4 different positives with the reg marks made for each size, put that positive on the glass, and hit the same 3 permanent bump stops? Nothing would be on the glass except the stops. you can have a hole punch system for the set up sheet/reg mark positive so you can choose the size you want, lay it down and go to town. . .just thinking here.

That's what I was saying in the other thread. It's just like tri loc except film is the carrier.  The other option for those who can't have anything on the glass would be just like pin loc but again, film is the carrier.  In both cases you rely on the output device and well-punched holes for alignment rather than reg marks.  As stoked as I am about this concept, I'm wondering why no ones done it yet...

[screenxpress]

it would, but it's just another project and dammit -we don't have the time right now. We just hold the screen, pull the blanket down and hope for the best haha  - no issues with that yet, but I do know the vacuum can make the screen shift, it is a problem we are working out. . .I need a solid week off to really think about this concept and fine tune it.

I got to thinking -about Zoo's deal and not putting reg marks on the glass. What if there were, let's say 4 screen sizes in the shop. Could you make 4 different positives with the reg marks made for each size, put that positive on the glass, and hit the same 3 permanent bump stops? Nothing would be on the glass except the stops. you can have a hole punch system for the set up sheet/reg mark positive so you can choose the size you want, lay it down and go to town. . .just thinking here.

That's what I was saying in the other thread. It's just like tri loc except film is the carrier.  The other option for those who can't have anything on the glass would be just like pin loc but again, film is the carrier.  In both cases you rely on the output device and well-punched holes for alignment rather than reg marks.  As stoked as I am about this concept, I'm wondering why no ones done it yet...

Been thinking about what you said, and I'm not sure I would like the punched holes in the film.  The printer could partially misfeed and a shift of only 1/64 inch would throw it off while I feel more trusting in the "once it's printing, the registrations will correspond to the art for all films" frame of mind.  Lasers, not considered.

[ZooCity]

I feel more trusting in the "once it's printing, the registrations will correspond to the art for all films" frame of mind.

So if we already trust in the inkjet to make films that can be registered, why not trust it to go another step?

Here's the thing, if it is kicked out a 64th of an inch or feeds really crooked you can know most of this with a quick inspection on the light table prior to aligning them on the screens.  Just stack up the punched films one at a time and check it out.  It's a good habit to have anyway. 

Now if it's off a real minor amount you may not catch this on the light table but then again, you may not catch it in the finished print (and nor will you customer) either which is just fine sometimes and not a good thing at all other times.  So don't forget you can still use reg. marks and align and tape them yourself to "carrier sheets" (your own punched film) for 4cp jobs and the like where a tiny shift is going to throw colors off and drive you nuts.  The added security is there if you need it during pre-press.  In fact, you could use both the pins and the reg marks and then do your final tweaking on-press with the micros which would probably yield a more accurate print run anyhow. 

I think this would only be a system for those who aren't expecting every run to be dead on when you hit the screen clamps.  To me, that's a little pie-in-the-sky, there's just do many variables that have nothing to do with the pre-press film alignment once you get on press.  Really, once that screen makes it to press there's nothing but a slew of variables trying to frustrate that perfect registration- press calibration, clamp pressure, squeegee pressure, stroke length and speed, blade angle, size and type, mesh count, thread diameter and tension as it relates to ink rheology and let's not forget the substrate. 

We all know that ours is a game of controlling variables but I say don't be a control freak about it, let what's going to happen do it's thing and just keep on your toes.  So my goal is to make everything that happens prior to that on-press tweaking as rapid and error-proof as possible.  Besides a CTS system I don't think it could get a whole lot faster than this. 

[screenxpress]

there's just do many variables that have nothing to do with the pre-press film alignment once you get on press.  Really, once that screen makes it to press there's nothing but a slew of variables trying to frustrate that perfect registration- press calibration, clamp pressure, squeegee pressure, stroke length and speed, blade angle, size and type, mesh count, thread diameter and tension as it relates to ink rheology and let's not forget the substrate. 

Dayum,  I was looking forward to making one too as the cure-all.  You've almost bursts my bubble.

Regarding the printer.  I do feel more comfortable that one the printing starts, that the image and registrations are all in the right spot, but you raise some really good points with the light table pre-registration.