"He who marches out of step hears another drum." ~ Ken Kesey
Quote from: Inkman996 on June 24, 2011, 11:10:19 AMAs CTS becomes more popular and saturated in the industry I wonder if quality for film will drop because of the drop in demand.Or will it be more like the transfer industry and the influx of DTG? They had to step up their game to remain competitive.
As CTS becomes more popular and saturated in the industry I wonder if quality for film will drop because of the drop in demand.
I measured it few months back. My 50% read 53% or so on the film. It read 72% on the shirt!
Quote from: blue moon on June 24, 2011, 10:10:31 AMI measured it few months back. My 50% read 53% or so on the film. It read 72% on the shirt!How did you measure this?
betalog 130 densitometer. It reads both transmissive and reflective. 'will gladly read your films and shirts if you'd like!
Quotebetalog 130 densitometer. It reads both transmissive and reflective. 'will gladly read your films and shirts if you'd like!Still measures in the visible spectrum though.
If you are linearising then uv and visible are equivalent because a 50% dot will stop 50% of the 100% value. So the 130 will be fine, it won't tell you whether your film stops 99.5% or 99.7% of the uv spectrum.
Did I read that the non-WP was actually better?
From MK162 - OK, so I tested WP and non-WP. I forgot to turn off my linearization tools, which is fine actually but I tested 20-80% and with the non-WP i was dead on for everything, with the WP films, I was 20% high on 20, 10% on 40, 7% on 60 and 5% on 80. So clearly there is more gain on these than the non-wp. This is strictly on the film, not on the print. I turned off my dot gain compensation so I could get an accurate reading and know what I was shooting for.Maybe I didn't understand the results here. Quite understandable -