TSB
screen printing => Equipment => Topic started by: Evo on May 27, 2016, 09:23:48 PM
-
Ok, simple topic. Which iImage with exposure unit works best with diazo and dual cure?
And yes I did search. I'm not a n00b.
:o
-
Ok, simple topic. Which iImage with exposure unit works best with diazo and dual cure?
And yes I did search. I'm not a n00b.
:o
STE 1 or STE II. The STE is really for photopolymer emulsion
-
A non nOOb answer from the most non nubie in the industry, and within an hour.
Can't wait to upgrade one day too ????
-
Ok, simple topic. Which iImage with exposure unit works best with diazo and dual cure?
And yes I did search. I'm not a n00b.
:o
STE 1 or STE II. The STE is really for photopolymer emulsion
Thanks Rich.
For diazo, is the STE I workable or would the STE II give us better results? (better exposure and detail) Or is it just a difference in speed and production throughput?
-
A non nOOb answer from the most non nubie in the industry, and within an hour.
Can't wait to upgrade one day too ????
Me too, I'd love to step up from our ST to an STE or STE2
-
No STE experience but from a starlight shop that runs all diazo added emulsions- you'll want whichever model has basically a starlight installed in a bay, not the scanning bar models.
Expo times for diazo added emulsion are long on the starlight, you don't want this slowing down your CTS throughput. We're finally making the last steps to shift to CTS and went with standalone imaging and exposure for this reason.
You may be able to do what at least one shop I've been in does and post expose on a metal halide light source.
-
No STE experience but from a starlight shop that runs all diazo added emulsions- you'll want whichever model has basically a starlight installed in a bay, not the scanning bar models.
Expo times for diazo added emulsion are long on the starlight, you don't want this slowing down your CTS throughput. We're finally making the last steps to shift to CTS and went with standalone imaging and exposure for this reason.
You may be able to do what at least one shop I've been in does and post expose on a metal halide light source.
This really is sound advice. We have an STE II, and it can slow things up quite a bit.
-
Me too, I'd love to step up from our ST to an STE or STE2
so what's a good reason to change from an ST to the STE or STE2?
We have no issue moving screens from the I-Image to the exposure unit, and then exposing them there while the I-Image works on the next screen.
-
Didn't they remove the led strip on the new models now?
-
Ok, simple topic. Which iImage with exposure unit works best with diazo and dual cure?
And yes I did search. I'm not a n00b.
:o
STE 1 or STE II. The STE is really for photopolymer emulsion
The STE I has a full exposure in the rear to expose diazo and photopolymer emulsions. We removed the front LED bar on the STE I hense I= one exposure unit. It's the one you should get.
Thanks Rich.
For diazo, is the STE I workable or would the STE II give us better results? (better exposure and detail) Or is it just a difference in speed and production throughput?
-
The STE I has a full exposure in the rear to expose diazo and photopolymer emulsions. We removed the front LED bar on the STE I hense I= one exposure unit. It's the one you should get.
Thanks Rich.
Ahh. Noted. We are also looking at the Starlight / ST combo, as we do have some screens that need to be done with films still. (neck labels for an ASPE press, etc)
-
The STE I has a full exposure in the rear to expose diazo and photopolymer emulsions. We removed the front LED bar on the STE I hense I= one exposure unit. It's the one you should get.
Thanks Rich.
Ahh. Noted. We are also looking at the Starlight / ST combo, as we do have some screens that need to be done with films still. (neck labels for an ASPE press, etc)
Just fyi, they have a special attachement for those screens!
-
We do indeed
Sent me you email and I will send you a link
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
We do indeed
Sent me you email and I will send you a link
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really? For tiny screens? These are like 9x16 frames...
-
One more question, aside from production speed, is there an advantage of two heads over one with the imager? Is there better durability with dual heads?
-
Speed
-
One more question, aside from production speed, is there an advantage of two heads over one with the imager? Is there better durability with dual heads?
Strictly for speed. All else remains the same. They are not redundant as they work in unison and cannot be fired separately.
-
We do indeed
Sent me you email and I will send you a link
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really? For tiny screens? These are like 9x16 frames...
Yup, as small as 8x10.
Have not tried smaller but do not see why we could not build a jig for it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
We do indeed
Sent me you email and I will send you a link
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really? For tiny screens? These are like 9x16 frames...
Yup, as small as 8x10.
Have not tried smaller but do not see why we could not build a jig for it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmm.... 8)
-
One more question, aside from production speed, is there an advantage of two heads over one with the imager? Is there better durability with dual heads?
Strictly for speed. All else remains the same. They are not redundant as they work in unison and cannot be fired separately.
Thanks! This is very helpful.
-
One more question, aside from production speed, is there an advantage of two heads over one with the imager? Is there better durability with dual heads?
Strictly for speed. All else remains the same. They are not redundant as they work in unison and cannot be fired separately.
Just a thought- if you could work it out in the firmware and rip to allow these units to fire on 1, 2 or 3 heads that might be a nice competitive advantage since shops running I image units would have a little built in redundancy on the print heads.
-
One more question, aside from production speed, is there an advantage of two heads over one with the imager? Is there better durability with dual heads?
Strictly for speed. All else remains the same. They are not redundant as they work in unison and cannot be fired separately.
Just a thought- if you could work it out in the firmware and rip to allow these units to fire on 1, 2 or 3 heads that might be a nice competitive advantage since shops running I image units would have a little built in redundancy on the print heads.
They are electronically stitched together so position of print would be way off.