Author Topic: Standards  (Read 3521 times)

Offline mooseman

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2215
Re: Standards
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2013, 09:46:56 AM »
First off if the standards are set by us the printers there would be no standards simply because we can never agree on how to do the same thing, TSB is prime evidence of that.

Could you imagine Socalmf, Blue moon, and god help us Homer heading the committee...the nut kicking would be brutal!

Think about what happened at SPOF when a controlling entity took over ...don't kid yourself it could happen to an industry with a set of stay between the lines standards.
If you allow the manufacturers to establish the standards you will end up with a whole new definition of the acceptable oil spots / square inch allowed based on the comfort and influence of the shirt manufacturer.

Every manufacturer would lobby for what they have and the competition does not as a standard refocusing the competitive field from innovation to conformity.
Standards protect the unknowing, when you can not fend for yourself a standard will step in for you, great if you are looking for the MPG lousy if you are looking for muscle car performance.
 
I would submit to you the equalization of NASCAR, sponsor big $$ have castrated that sport so severely where every sponsor gets equal TV time and the fans get a 3 hour commercial at 200 MPH .

Manufacturers break their necks to produce the products that advance our interest with a strong focus to push the edge. Look at  suppliers like Action Engineering throwing a new product almost every month , while this would most likely continue the focus would come off advancement and focus instead on compliance.

In an industry that is basically the textile staining equivalent of an outlaw motorcycle club creating standards would grey the otherwise full body color of the core of the industry...the guys and gals printing on the front line.

But if this is to happen the acid test for the standards committee would be the definition
of a universal all purpose white ink........have at it boys and girls, we all could use the great white ...white.

In a industry of rebellious consumers salted with a large dose of independent thinking standards just seem like a no salt and pepper diet, real advancement will always come from a  laissez faire menu
mooseman
DUE TO CIRCUMSTANCES COMPLETELY WITHIN MY CONTROL YOU SHOULD GET YOUR OWN TEE SHIRT AND A SHARPIE MARKER BY NOON TOMORROW OR SIMPLY CALL SOMEONE WHO GIVES A SHIRT.


Offline mimosatexas

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4221
  • contributor
Re: Standards
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2013, 05:40:03 PM »
You're describing over-standardization, which I don't think anyone here wants.  Some standards are a good thing though.

Offline ebscreen

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4274
Re: Standards
« Reply #17 on: October 21, 2013, 12:38:22 PM »
Hear hear Mooseman!

Offline ebscreen

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4274
Re: Standards
« Reply #18 on: October 21, 2013, 05:45:37 PM »
As a railroad conductor once told me regarding his craft "200 years of tradition unimpeded by progress".

Offline alan802

  • !!!
  • Gonzo Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3535
  • I like to screen print
Re: Standards
« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2013, 10:14:42 AM »
I think there are around 50 variables that we can control rather easily and creating standards for those would be challenging but I think it would be worth it.  I know things are different from shop to shop but, if we use a 150/48, at .10" off contact, with the same ink, same speed, squeegee blade and angle, same stencil thickness, etc. it will print the same no matter what press it's on or where we're at, in my opinion.  There are techniques that probably aren't universal and don't translate from shop to shop but if we take a job from one shop to another, assuming the presses are similarly capable, the ink deposit should be the same if the variables are the same.  I know I've given advice only to hear that it didn't work and I am always disappointed when I hear that but I don't assume it's just something that happens, I know there is a variable out of whack somewhere in the process.  It's probably one of the big 50 that is being overlooked.  Can we get those variables in line from shop to shop?  Not all of them, but the one's that matter the most I think we can.
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 tonypep

  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 5645
Re: Standards
« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2013, 10:34:36 AM »
On occaision I'll bet most would agree that we sometimes replicate a technique to the 11th degree only to find inconstent results. This is Chaos Theory at it's best. Something is happening but we can't identify it. Internal standardization and procedurilization is the only way to manage and minimize this to be sure. But from shop to shop? Sure some tenets remain true and consistent but others not so much. Ambient temperature, relative humidity, are just two of hundreds (thousands?) of variables that can trip you up.

Offline Gilligan

  • !!!
  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 6853
Re: Standards
« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2013, 10:51:26 AM »
Good thing about standards, there are so many to choose from!

Offline mk162

  • Ludicrous Speed Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 7836
Re: Standards
« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2013, 11:41:39 AM »
and gilligan, i bet yours are pretty low. ;)