TSB
screen printing => General Screen Printing => Topic started by: Shawn (EIP) on February 29, 2012, 11:11:21 AM
-
http://www.davisint.com/t-control%20ink%20costs.aspx?utm_source=DiNEWS2&utm_campaign=DiNEWS&utm_medium=email (http://www.davisint.com/t-control%20ink%20costs.aspx?utm_source=DiNEWS2&utm_campaign=DiNEWS&utm_medium=email)
This really has me thinking about banning 110's from the shop.
-
[url]http://www.davisint.com/t-control%20ink%20costs.aspx?utm_source=DiNEWS2&utm_campaign=DiNEWS&utm_medium=email[/url] ([url]http://www.davisint.com/t-control%20ink%20costs.aspx?utm_source=DiNEWS2&utm_campaign=DiNEWS&utm_medium=email[/url])
This really has me thinking about banning 110's from the shop.
nice find, thanx!!!
pierre
-
[url]http://www.davisint.com/t-control%20ink%20costs.aspx?utm_source=DiNEWS2&utm_campaign=DiNEWS&utm_medium=email[/url] ([url]http://www.davisint.com/t-control%20ink%20costs.aspx?utm_source=DiNEWS2&utm_campaign=DiNEWS&utm_medium=email[/url])
This really has me thinking about banning 110's from the shop.
The lowest mesh I have in the garage is a 160
Even with a tool like this.. folks will keep their 110's because they like how it prints verses learning how to apply emulsion correctly to a higher mesh screen to create a better print with less ink. "It works for me" will always trump education and fact.
You can also take a swatch of fabric.. run it through the dryer and weigh it on a gram scale. Print it then weigh again. Multiply the difference by how many shirts you're going to print and you'll know how much ink to order to replenish stock. This is a great way to price metallic inks as the ink volume can change dramatically from an 80 mesh to a 110.
-
we use 110 for special effects and such.
screw davis.
-
works for me.
Also, you have to take into account how fast you can run a 110 mesh with the opacity you get. Of course this matters more for auto printers. If I spend an extra few cents a tee in ink, but can crank an extra 2 dozen shirts out per hour, what makes more sense.
Once again, it's like your tape scenario, it seems cheaper to put down less ink, but is it really?
-
Speaking of fast. I have been in a few different shops lately and notice how slow people are printing. I know a job can run 30% faster just by looking at the art and setup. I remember our presses flying or "apparently flying' compared to what I see lately. I would guess they were printing double the speed that I see many doing these days. Maybe it's the press types. I don't know the differences in speed between brands. I used to love the sound of the presses. It sounded like stuff going on. Action, Machinery operating at capacity and shirts flying out the door. Kshingka...vrswooooshpT pssst Kshingka...vrswooooshpT pssst Kshingka...vrswooooshpT pssst.
-
I noticed our print speeds are slower. I haven't been able to pinpoint why either. I've tried just about every variable.
-
Awesome! Thanks!
-
There are a ton of variables if you want to start talking about 110's, 156's, ink deposit amount versus stencil thickness like John mentioned. I know that just because you print with a 110 doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be a thicker ink deposit than a 156 or even a 195, stencil thickness plays a huge role, thread thickness, tension, the artwork, etc. So saying that using a 110 instead of whatever mesh count will cost you more ink isn't true unless you factor in all the other variables that affect the ink deposit.
For example, I've got some 150/48's that will cost me more in white ink to run than some of our 110's if we used the same design on them. I always keep a 150 with a thick stencil, 50-70 micron eom that will lay down some serious ink and you'd be lucky to get to 700 shirts with a gallon on a decent sized print. I prefer to use a more open mesh count so I can print with very little pressure and keep the ink on top of the shirt instead of in it. You can get the appearance of a more opaque print even though it might be thinner overall than what you did with another mesh count.
I understand John's comments but you couldn't get our 110/80's, 110/71's, 135/48's or even the 150/48's out of my shop without some serious firepower. I'm way more versatile with a low mesh count screen and can do more with it than a 195 or 230. At least I don't have to have a really thick layer of ink through a 110/71 if I don't want to, but there isn't all that much you can do with a 195 or 230 because even with the thickest stencil you're going to have to use too much pressure to print with and end up losing a ton of your ink inside the shirt, or god forbid take some pressure off and double stroke.
-
Low mesh will always have it's place in the shop, just not so much as it used to. I'm using roller mesh so I'm a little limited in the counts I can use so I make my art work around the mesh counts. The N128 prints just like any 110 on the market and will allow you to hold up to 50 line underbase if you happen to use halftone bases. I prefer to use the N166 for my underbase screens as I can hold better detail when it comes to some dot on dot stuff. If I really need a heavy print, I have some N128 panels I can stretch up but they put down to much ink for me.
-
This really only shows how little we spend on ink per job. Ink is not the place to save money guys. Ink is cheap.
-
I agree, but every time I cheap out, it bites me in the butt.
-
Wouldn't it be better to say that his calculator figures out how much ink gets laid down per pass (given all variables are kept the same). And IF you can get a good looking print with a higher mesh then you save money.
But just because it only cost only .02 cents vs .06 cents a print on a 230 vs a 110 doesn't mean it will lay down enough ink to make a good print. Obviously most people "generally" get that... but this calc only really provides a look at how much ink is getting laid down each pass not how much per print or garment.
Like already mentioned EOM and pressure make a huge difference in all of this also. Take a 110 with a thinner EOM and a light pass like Alan was speaking of and you will probably put down less ink than a 156 with a thicker stencil and more pressure.
But then again, I am still struggling to print a one hit black on white so I really have no business commenting here. :)
-
Nice thanks
-
This really only shows how little we spend on ink per job. Ink is not the place to save money guys. Ink is cheap.
yeah there's plenty of other areas to save time or money. But ink isn't cheap like it used to be. When ink is 30 bucks a gallon it's cheap.. when it's 100 bucks a gallon or your shop uses 5 to 10 gallons of ink a day, you start to think about ink deposit more than you used to.
-
I don't have any of the 128 or 166. The only thing I've tried is the 102 and today I stretched up 3 brand new M3's with 205 roller mesh so I'll get to see what that is all about. I have narrowed my mesh choices down to two brands/types, the murakami S thread and the newman roller mesh. I've never stretched a new frame in my life until today and I'm still getting used to the bolt mesh and I got the 205 up to 50 newtons and managed to keep the corners just right. I busted a 180/48 murakami yesterday trying to stretch it but I think there was something in the channel that I didn't get on one of my old frames. I could get used to stretching new frames all the time, it is nice.
-
Ironically, this far more expensive ink could be why you see slow print speeds and simultaneously a need for more open meshes. I've never pulled a single print with phthalate-laden ink but I'd wager those plasticizers made for easier printing ink. Why else would you manufacture it with such a nasty family of chemicals?
Probably also why it was cheaper to some degree. Manufacturers rarely have to pay the true cost of making their product. When you consider the actual cost to us as a group, a nation, an economy, whatever, of the health and environmental damage done those old school inks were the most expensive of all. But that's crazy anti-business talk, right? I must not want people to have jobs or something going around saying things like that.
I love open mesh counts. We use a wide range of tpi to print regular old prints going from 90/71 to 330/30. The really open ones take skill to print with correctly. Is it harder on the auto as well?
-
we had an employee that would have printed 4CP through a 110, and probably made it worked. Ok, so not really, but he loved 110's, and he was amazing with them.
-
I don't have any of the 128 or 166. The only thing I've tried is the 102 and today I stretched up 3 brand new M3's with 205 roller mesh so I'll get to see what that is all about. I have narrowed my mesh choices down to two brands/types, the murakami S thread and the newman roller mesh. I've never stretched a new frame in my life until today and I'm still getting used to the bolt mesh and I got the 205 up to 50 newtons and managed to keep the corners just right. I busted a 180/48 murakami yesterday trying to stretch it but I think there was something in the channel that I didn't get on one of my old frames. I could get used to stretching new frames all the time, it is nice.
A trick I use on higher mesh is to cut out strips from scrap mesh and double layer the channels.
-
I don't have any of the 128 or 166. The only thing I've tried is the 102 and today I stretched up 3 brand new M3's with 205 roller mesh so I'll get to see what that is all about. I have narrowed my mesh choices down to two brands/types, the murakami S thread and the newman roller mesh. I've never stretched a new frame in my life until today and I'm still getting used to the bolt mesh and I got the 205 up to 50 newtons and managed to keep the corners just right. I busted a 180/48 murakami yesterday trying to stretch it but I think there was something in the channel that I didn't get on one of my old frames. I could get used to stretching new frames all the time, it is nice.
A trick I use on higher mesh is to cut out strips from scrap mesh and double layer the channels.
that's the smartest thing you've ever said. . . that will solve my problem. . .never thought of that. . .
and now back to the slipknot :P