Author Topic: Experience with WM Inks?  (Read 8107 times)

Offline Denis Kolar

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
Experience with WM Inks?
« on: May 16, 2011, 09:31:31 AM »
Does someone have experience with WM inks and Chromaline Chroma Blue emulsion.
I got some samples of Chroma Blue photopolymer emulsion and WM white ink.
Emulsion is a bit slower exposing than Xenon, but it holds a lot better on screen. Or, should I be looking at dual cure to have a better control on detail?
Also, does it help that this one has 50% solids content, and what does it mean to me (newbie here)?

Thanks


Offline Homer

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3203
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2011, 09:40:11 AM »
is it the PC-701? I have a gallon of that here to try, haven't used it yet... I use CT-R exposes way faster. SBQ @ 45.00 /gallon. . .can't beat it.

WM had a white ink that was awesome but I had to take out another mortgage on the house to buy it. it was another "magic in a bucket" used for everything, cotton, blends and everything in between. .
...keep doing what you're doing, you'll only get what you've got...

Offline Denis Kolar

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2011, 10:11:23 AM »
http://www.chromaline.com/listing.aspx?CID=8
It is the first one on the top Chroma Blue.

WM white is $72/ gallon. A bit pricey over the Xenon. But what kills me with Xenon is the shipping, there is no-one close to me that sells Xenon, other than that, I love it.

Offline sportsshoppe

  • !!!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • A way of life.
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2011, 10:19:46 AM »
I am wondering what kind of emulsion you have that is Xenon brand... As for the shipping I mentioned to Sonny that most of my suppliers give free shipping on orders over some $150 (WM Plastics) and others $200 is the limit. The free shipping is a good incentive to buy there products, I know some say they hike the original price but it looks the same to me.

Offline Denis Kolar

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2011, 10:27:22 AM »
I am wondering what kind of emulsion you have that is Xenon brand... As for the shipping I mentioned to Sonny that most of my suppliers give free shipping on orders over some $150 (WM Plastics) and others $200 is the limit. The free shipping is a good incentive to buy there products, I know some say they hike the original price but it looks the same to me.

I had Xenon Plastofast that I did not like. They are working on it to fix some issues. If they fix that plastic/gummy feel to it, I could give it a shot again (it was not underexposed). The supplier I'm using is giving 50% of UPS if I order $250 or more, but last time shipping was $14 only (7 after 50%). The sample order from Sonny was $27 for shipping, and it was not any heavier than the other one.

Offline sportsshoppe

  • !!!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • A way of life.
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2011, 10:38:01 AM »
I have some of the 903WR dual which is not bad for the price and I also purchased some QXL Xenon (purple) and have had problems with re-claiming. It is like gum when you try to reclaim. I talked to sonny and he said I may be over curing so I cut back from 3.5 to 2.0 on my plate maker 1000k. The results was the same a bugger bear to re-claim. I use to use Ulano QLT but I was trying to cut corners. I like the dual cure price, but like the re-claim of the QLT, what is a printers supposed to do.

Offline alan802

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3535
  • I like to screen print
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2011, 04:57:25 PM »
I have used chromablue for years and have exposed probably 5K screens using it.  It's a good pure photo emulsion that has done everything we ever asked it to do.  We changed over to kiwo one coat for about a year then we have recently went back to the chromablue.  It's a high solids emulsion, which I prefer an emulsion around 50%.  I have more control over what I can achieve with my stencil thicknesses with a higher solids content.  I can have a thin stencil if I want as well.  The low solids content emulsions are difficult to attain a thick stencil with and not worth my time. 

I recently tried out a quart of the WM Plastics white ink and it has so much puff additive in it that it's ridiculous.  I pfp'd our company logo on a few shirts, sent it through the dryer and the damn print was raised up about 2-3mm from the shirt.  There was so much puff in it I thought my guys were playing a joke on me.  And the opacity was not really that good either.  You'd think with that much puff in it that the print would have been bright white and opaque, but no.  Needless to say I was really disappointed with their white ink, it down right sucked.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it -T.J.
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it -T.P.

Offline Homer

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3203
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2011, 05:34:15 PM »
Alan -are you back using QCM? I am throwing in the towel on the Xenon white. Too many problems to deal with, back to Quick white. . I heard One Stroke has a new white that is supposed to be for cotton AND blends, I may look for a sample. .
...keep doing what you're doing, you'll only get what you've got...

Offline Denis Kolar

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2011, 05:41:38 PM »
I have used chromablue for years and have exposed probably 5K screens using it.  It's a good pure photo emulsion that has done everything we ever asked it to do.  We changed over to kiwo one coat for about a year then we have recently went back to the chromablue.  It's a high solids emulsion, which I prefer an emulsion around 50%.  I have more control over what I can achieve with my stencil thicknesses with a higher solids content.  I can have a thin stencil if I want as well.  The low solids content emulsions are difficult to attain a thick stencil with and not worth my time.  

I recently tried out a quart of the WM Plastics white ink and it has so much puff additive in it that it's ridiculous.  I pfp'd our company logo on a few shirts, sent it through the dryer and the damn print was raised up about 2-3mm from the shirt.  There was so much puff in it I thought my guys were playing a joke on me.  And the opacity was not really that good either.  You'd think with that much puff in it that the print would have been bright white and opaque, but no.  Needless to say I was really disappointed with their white ink, it down right sucked.

Alan.

Thank you so much. I was hoping to hear that about Chromablue.
I like Xenon white, and the guy I talked just sent me WM sample to try and some Franmar chemicals.
First emulsion I tried was Ulano Proclaim dual cure, but that one was taking forever to expose. Xenon Plastifast is fast but it has gummy feel to it and it is hard to reclaim.

Chromablue takes about 20% more time to expose than Xenon but it is still pretty fast.

Homer, I did try One Stroke white. They have sent me a small sample and I did not like it on manual.

Thanks

Offline ebscreen

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4278
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2011, 07:14:28 PM »
I don't always trust manufacturers on their "solids count". I've
had supposedly high solid count emulsion that was thinner than
others with a lower rating.

Just putting that out there.

Also, the difference between a $45 gallon and a $80 gallon is like
what, $0.20 a screen or something? Not one of those areas to
try and save money that is unless you're printing black on white shirts
all day long. (lucky)

Offline Denis Kolar

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2011, 07:50:32 AM »
Also, the difference between a $45 gallon and a $80 gallon is like
what, $0.20 a screen or something? Not one of those areas to
try and save money that is unless you're printing black on white shirts
all day long. (lucky)

If you are saying $80 for Chromablue, your wrong. I'm paying $59 for a gallon. Also, a sample that I got feels a lot better than the emulsions I have used before and it covers the screen a lot better.

Offline Homer

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3203
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2011, 09:50:45 AM »
my 45.00 gallon of emulsion works better than the 100.00 QTX. . .we go through about 5 gallons every 6 weeks, that coin adds up, and uif it works better for us - it's a win.

 -how many companies REALLY make their own emulsion and how many just relabel it? It's like WP film, I know of a handful of companies that slap a new sticker on the box and say we made it. BS you did. Vinyl is the same way, converters, middlemen.

Dk -what was the name of the One Stroke you tried, they have about 15 different whites. . they supposedly just released a new one.
...keep doing what you're doing, you'll only get what you've got...

Offline killergraphics

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 214
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2011, 10:49:17 AM »
Alan -are you back using QCM? I am throwing in the towel on the Xenon white. Too many problems to deal with, back to Quick white. . I heard One Stroke has a new white that is supposed to be for cotton AND blends, I may look for a sample. .

What problems have you had with the white?

Offline Denis Kolar

  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2871
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2011, 10:49:56 AM »
I got the One Stroke White sample 2-3 months ago.
She said is the brand new white they have. I tried it and put it on the back of the shelf. I will look tonight if I remember.

About emulsion, I would be lucky to go trough one gallon in next 4-5 months. Not a big shop :(

Offline alan802

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3535
  • I like to screen print
Re: Experience with WM Inks?
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2011, 01:52:02 PM »
Alan -are you back using QCM? I am throwing in the towel on the Xenon white. Too many problems to deal with, back to Quick white. . I heard One Stroke has a new white that is supposed to be for cotton AND blends, I may look for a sample. .

I'm using the qcm 159 mixed with some ultrasol G5 that I came across.  This combo is awesome, but I only have a few gallons of the ultrasol and when it's gone, it's gone.  The G5 isn't as opaque as the G4, and the problem I have with the qcm 159 is that it's too short bodied, squeegee climbing SOB, and a too thick to use on higher mesh counts and higher speeds, so I'm mixing them 70/30 to get the best of both inks.  I might start mixing the 158 and 159 in different ratios to meet my ridiculous expectations.

I've just recently went through a gallon of the One Stroke Hybrid white.  I have mixed reviews on this ink as well.  It is awesome to work with, not very short bodied and is not a squeegee climber, and flashes really fast, but it's lacking in opacity for a lot of what we do.  Strictly for an underbase white with colors other than white going on top, I think it's great.  You can print it fast and it does everything average to slightly above average.  I have another gallon of a one stroke white coming in tomorrow, I think it's fast flash pro and I'll post my thoughts on it in a week or 2.

I like a lot of the characteristics of the xenon white, but it has a few deal breakers for us.  The flash time and the squeegee climbing are too much for me to deal with.  On a long run, 100+, you'll likely have almost the whole gallon of ink in the screen by the time the run is over, and the ink will be all over the sq/fb locks and even as high as the chopper bars.  It prints like a dream, covers nicely, mats down the fibers fine, and I think is maybe the best white for a manual press when flash time and squeegee climbing isn't as big of a deal. 

I've been thinking of getting a new gallon of the quick white in here and seeing how it compares, I haven't had any in well over a year, so I bet it's better than it used to be.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it -T.J.
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it -T.P.