Ink manufacturers and LOW mesh counts

[jvanick]

multiple ink manufacturers (both plastisol and waterbase) lately have been telling us to underbase with 110's ...  99% of the jobs we do are 160S... I know that the 160S will put down more ink than say a 156, but does it truly put down as much as a 110?

heck, even before we had S-mesh, we only used 156's for underbase... didn't even own any 110's until we started doing a lot of hoodies and wanted a REALLY thick ink deposit.

what gives?

[Orion]

This may help with your question. Second column page 1

[Colin]

Heavy volume of ink deposit with bleed blockers = better bleed resistance than a thin deposit.

[alan802]

Pull out your handy dandy mesh spec sheet and it will tell you everything you need to know about what mesh count can do what compared to the others.  Murakami's Smartmesh chart is great.

[Dottonedan]

I know printers who don't have a 110 in the shop. They print every type of job other shops do and also do discharge and plastisol.  It's all in the print technique. Some start with 156 and up. I'll have to also clarify that they may be a shop that has plenty of room on press and are more geared to use an additional screen to gain brighter opacity. This is still not a common thing in the industry out of the small numbers I've seen, but I've probably seen about 4-5 that do this.


The last screen print shop I worked in, we only used 110's for special affects like puff and glitter. If we really wanted to lay it down we would use a 60 mesh. Underbases even for flat solid vector art like logo's were done with 156 or 180.  If I were doing sim process on sweats, we would use 156 on base and 230 top colors...Tee shirts for sim process was 230 base and 305 top colors. Occasionally a 350 mesh on some things. but if the sweat was going to be a red sweat, we would use 110 and LB ink. I think the whole drive was geared towards softer hand and 110 on a base just works against the soft hand approach.


I think too many people get too comfortable using them because that's what the go to screen was when starting into the business. Sure, it can be used every day but it doesn't have to be used on an average job.


Special affect inks,
1 color bright whites (one hit)
50/50's where low bleed inks are required.


An ink CO would love everyone to use 110's all the time.

[ScreenFoo]

multiple ink manufacturers (both plastisol and waterbase) lately have been telling us to underbase with 110's ...  99% of the jobs we do are 160S... I know that the 160S will put down more ink than say a 156, but does it truly put down as much as a 110?

heck, even before we had S-mesh, we only used 156's for underbase... didn't even own any 110's until we started doing a lot of hoodies and wanted a REALLY thick ink deposit.

what gives?

My guess is that they're suggesting what's easy.

FWIW, I run 125/70's and 150/48 pretty well interchangeably, the 150/48 always puts down a smoother underbase, and is often more opaque.
From what I've observed on press, I would guess that is more a result of better mat down than increased ink thickness, since theoretically the 30 or so microns thicker the 125/70 is should result in a thicker deposit, but I have no fancy gauges to tell you that for sure.

[alan802]

A few weeks ago we were running out of screens and we printed a white design on black shirts through a 110/81.  The 110's don't get much action around here these days but I was so surprised by the hand and softness of the print.  If someone would have showed me the shirt without having any knowledge of how it was printed, no way I would have guessed it was with a 110.  It was not at all a thick print, it was actually thin.  I thought the screen was mis-marked. I wish I had a test print of that so I could send it to anyone who thinks there's no place for a 110 in a textile shop.  Since I've gotten fully staffed I can do little things like testing inks and mesh so I might just try and replicate that job and do some printing and measuring.  IF I get around to this and anyone would like a sample print let me know.  I'll send out a few prints to anyone wanting to see/feel it and give their feedback.

[bimmridder]

They just want you to buy more of their ink!

[Dottonedan]

A few weeks ago we were running out of screens and we printed a white design on black shirts through a 110/81.  The 110's don't get much action around here these days but I was so surprised by the hand and softness of the print.  If someone would have showed me the shirt without having any knowledge of how it was printed, no way I would have guessed it was with a 110.  It was not at all a thick print, it was actually thin.  I thought the screen was mis-marked. I wish I had a test print of that so I could send it to anyone who thinks there's no place for a 110 in a textile shop.  Since I've gotten fully staffed I can do little things like testing inks and mesh so I might just try and replicate that job and do some printing and measuring.  IF I get around to this and anyone would like a sample print let me know.  I'll send out a few prints to anyone wanting to see/feel it and give their feedback.

I can imagine if one were to print it with attention, balancing out opacity with hand, then yes, you can get a nice soft printout of it by laying it up on top of the shirt with a semi hard squeegee. The more common thing to go to a 100 tho is to lay it down heavy intending to cover/block the shirt easily. Many people don't realize thy can get opacity in different ways. The same theory applies to using a 305 as an underbase. It's all in how you print with it.  A fine wood craftsman has many tools to do the same job. Cut wood. That might be a chain saw, and ax, a spoon knife ect. You would think a chain saw would lay it down thick, but using a chain saw (110) can be an art form.

[Rockers]

150-S for underbase, even on hoodies. Occasionally we use 225-S as well for underbasing, but generally we are happy to use  150-S.