TSB
screen printing => Screen Making => Topic started by: DouglasGrigar on June 01, 2011, 10:58:04 PM
-
Just to start off - I do not nor does the company I am associated with sell the Shur-Loc mesh panels.
I do have to confess that I have a very good working relationship with Sherri and Jim Larson, I do not work for them, they have never been a client and I have never received any money from them for any services or promotion. I do think they are great folks, have never had any problems with them and always try and make time to say howdy when they are about. I just like the products and the people.
So some myths:
Price - I have actually seen things like this...
there are supposed benefits you hear from the salesperson and the reality. A piece of mesh under five dollars converted to a Shur-Loc panel sells for over twenty dollars. You are paying over fifteen dollars for the supposed benefits of the panel.
(**Revision) Using the same mesh to mesh comparison the price I calculated was lower than fifteen dollars, price for converting your mesh is less than 10 bucks per panel. Price comparison must be same quality and brand mesh to be accurate. I will be visiting this question with Shur-loc at the next show.
Chemical use
Use of acetone, ketone, MEK, napthas, esters, or toluene may cause the adhesive to to dissolve and release the mesh in the middle of a run.
Some things are just strange, who in their right mind is giving the outside edges of their frames a bath in acetone or lacquer thinner? The esters we use most in screen printing are vegetable oil based I have yet to see a frame with a Shur-Loc panel change at all with exposure to the vegetable oil products, and have yet to see any problems with the common reclaiming chemicals.
Because I and most of us try and not take a bath in screen opener (RPG in a can) and don’t tend to spray in into the frame edges I have not run across a problem yet.
Ease and time
Shur-loc panels take half a minute to insert and I can insert cut mesh into a roller frame in under a minute.
Try five seconds for the Shur-loc panel, and for inserting cut mesh in under a minute, well I leave that to the intrepid reader. Interesting how corner softening time, and how parallel the threads are was not mentioned.
Mesh to frame corners
Simple answer is a question “does mesh stabilize or not?” The selling point of retensionable frames was the benefits of stable mesh for thousands of consistent prints - so a pre-softened panel can be made with the correct corner softening from the beginning. SEFAR has lots of information about this as does SGIA including thread diameter and how the threads do not change diameter consistently.
They mix cheap mesh to rook the customer
Shur-loc uses the cheapest mesh to make the highest profit. They don’t tell you the mesh because they change mesh to the cheapest available at the moment.
Jim told me that one mesh is the “default” this mesh was a name brand we all recognize and unless someone requests another mesh this default name brand mesh is used. If you call Jim and ask him (as some obviously do not) he will tell you the exact mesh and is happy to use even your mesh if you wish.
Use and benefits
You have to use the same mesh for as long as possible to get the most out of your mesh. You cannot print well without maximum tension and very thick threads.
What is the most profitable thing in your shop?
Easy answer, anything that gets the most (quality) product out to the customer in the least time.
Now we can get into long threads on the board over exactness of dots, EOM, print speed, the pros and cons of thin (s), medium (T or M) , and thick threads (HD) and for this we need an end, something that translates to business, promotion and profit. Your customer can see a moiré pattern in the screen, ragged edges from malformed and blocked high end dots, but can they see deposit layer - and do they care? Not that in any way am I advocating low quality printing, only that the traditional tunnel vision over equipment and techniques needs constant review. Of course funny numbers by someone trying to downgrade perceived industry competition or threats is problematic. Lots of traditionalists are also ignoring or covering up some real and valuable data like the fact that maximum tension is not always the best tension for a given ink.
Why bother?
Because the Shur-loc panels have a place, and will as I see it now make an impact similar to retensionable screens - the full range of applications to help make a profit are not known yet.
-
What is the most profitable thing in your shop?
That's what it all boils down to. I can load mesh very intuitively and properly in not much time at all. But even a few hours a month are better spent generating artwork or working with clients or hell, even taking a break for minute to recharge, in terms of the company's net income and ultimately it's profitability and long-term viability. That's not going to be the case for a shop with more staff that could be easily trained to load bolt mesh when there's "nothing else to do", it's just our unique situation.
One thing you got wrong- panels are much more expensive, (just in terms of cost for them, not including labor and that) than bolt mesh. I know, I just ordered another 30 of 'em with Murkami S mesh and I'm here to tell ya it would've been astronomically cheaper to buy the same amount of bolt mesh and use my existing locking strips.
The shur-loc people have been top notch to work with so far. They even went as far as to send us sample panels to fit our odd frame size of 25x30. The big drawback, aside from price, that I see of panels is the fixed corner softening but they more or less nailed that as well. I simply specified the tension I wanted.
It's funny, I find myself being a heavy user this year of a few things I found silly not very long ago- dip tanks and mesh panels so far. I wonder what's next?
-
One thing you got wrong- panels are much more expensive, (just in terms of cost for them, not including labor and that) than bolt mesh. I know, I just ordered another 30 of 'em with Murkami S mesh and I'm here to tell ya it would've been astronomically cheaper to buy the same amount of bolt mesh and use my existing locking strips.
Have you measured that cost to actual mesh use per screen, when I did over a year ago it was about seven bucks...
I have not checked this again, and do not even know what current mesh prices are, have you checked?
-
Have you measured that cost to actual mesh use per screen, when I did over a year ago it was about seven bucks...
I have not checked this again, and do not even know what current mesh prices are, have you checked?
I would think you'd need to calculate what the per-screen cost is to install a given piece of bolt mesh, from start to finish with the labor involved vs. the cost of installing a panel of the same mesh.
(also making sure you factored in the total time to get each screen to the same tension)
Problem is, this can vary wildly from shop to shop, as the skill and cost per hour for each employee is different, as well as the speed that a given employee can install bolt mesh. With training I'm sure most people could install and tension a panel to about the same speed. Bolt mesh is a different animal. I'm fairly good at it these days and pretty quick, but I have seen it take forever with some people where as others have it nailed.
But...anyone that says they can install bolt mesh faster than a panel though, they are straight up smoking crack.
;)
-
One thing you got wrong- panels are much more expensive, (just in terms of cost for them, not including labor and that) than bolt mesh. I know, I just ordered another 30 of 'em with Murkami S mesh and I'm here to tell ya it would've been astronomically cheaper to buy the same amount of bolt mesh and use my existing locking strips.
Have you measured that cost to actual mesh use per screen, when I did over a year ago it was about seven bucks...
I have not checked this again, and do not even know what current mesh prices are, have you checked?
Here is our mesh cost.
-
OK.
here is my take on it...I agree with DOUG...
I used to do bulk mesh till i did a real time study for MY business....we were at about 18 min total for bulk mesh to get it cut, put in with splines, corners softened ( and not all equal I might add) stretched and then taped....
now move to shur-loc panels and that time is down to under 5 min....
do simple math...13 min of printing is over 100 shirts...13 min of cleaning screens is about 4-5 screens....i could go on and on but i think you have the idea...
I know I will not go back to bulk mesh due to the cost added even though the up front cost is more, we save so much more on the back end...
Sam
-
I have recently bought some bolt mesh and stretched about 10 screens and I hated it. It took me forever to get the mesh in properly and soften the corners correctly. I've been using the panels for about 2 years and there is at least a 15 minute difference for me in stretching a fresh panel to frame over bolt mesh. I'm sure if I stretched a hundred frames with bolt mesh I could become as efficient at it as anyone, but damn are the panels fool proof and I'll bet I can load a panel and get the first tension up in 3-4 minutes using the roller master.
Now my experiences in working with Jim and Sherri have been great. When I've seen them at shows they always remember me and the business. I haven't had any experience with getting really specific at the tension levels I'm looking for but I have requested several different types of mesh and they have all came in perfect and all have reached the recommended manufacturer's tension level for that mesh. From what I've heard from Dave (Bimmridder) and a few others it sounds like they have the panel making down to a science and can reach any reasonable request you have for a panel. I've never busted a shurloc panel while tensioning a screen, and unfortunately, 2 of the 10 I've done with bolt mesh split on me because of my incompetence at loading the panel.
-
All very good additional points - thanks folks.
One more to add to the list - removable nature and re-attachment.
So a smaller range of frames could do the job of many, why have a 25 count mesh on a roller frame semi-permanent when you could snap it in then out when finished and replace it with a more suitable mesh for the next job.
Add a stretching table - something I would never do without this all becomes just part of the set-up.
The next two things to watch are:
How the panels work into the industry.
Direct to screen replacement of positives.
Both are “old” news but it has not shaken out yet, I would say that retensionable frames have not fully shaken out yet.
When most of my work is to try and help new people with nothing but 110 white mesh wood frames, no-name SBQ, and an oven heating coil flash that some parasite supplier sold them talking about 5% dots is a world away.
-
One thing you got wrong- panels are much more expensive, (just in terms of cost for them, not including labor and that) than bolt mesh. I know, I just ordered another 30 of 'em with Murkami S mesh and I'm here to tell ya it would've been astronomically cheaper to buy the same amount of bolt mesh and use my existing locking strips.
Have you measured that cost to actual mesh use per screen, when I did over a year ago it was about seven bucks...
I have not checked this again, and do not even know what current mesh prices are, have you checked?
Here is our mesh cost.
That is some inexpensive mesh, it does not compare oranges to oranges but it is very inexpensive mesh at that we would be far-off on price. Mesh at one time was one of the most expensive things in the shop outside of silver film. The changes shocking when I think of them.
I may well have to change my post when I get more data it may go up to - 10 bucks?
-
But...anyone that says they can install bolt mesh faster than a panel though, they are straight up smoking crack.
;)
I thought that myself.
-
I've been using bolt mesh since I made my first roller back in 1992.
It took me a few months to get the hang of it and I was making some great frames, then a nice one-on-one with Don Newman around 1994 and I was a master screen maker soon after. I could have a 156 23x31 in production in 2 days @ 35n all done by hand, one roller at a time. The old stretch and relax technique.
Fast forward to 2002.. I'm making a 60 mesh screen and pulling my hair out, I can't for the life of me get the darn thin locking strip in the channel and after 45 minutes of fussing I get the mesh in and stretched. The screen makes the run and then sits in the rack for 6 months till we use it again.
ISS Show Long Beach 2003... I stop by the Shur-loc booth and about piss my pants laughing as we talk about inserting low mesh counts into rollers. Jim shows my a 36 panel, pops it into the frame on display and rolls it to tension in less than 2 minutes. I buy 4 panels, all low mesh in the realization I can pop em in as needed and I only have to use a single frame to handle my low mesh needs.
2006
I buy 500 mesh panels to equip a new shop. With a Roller Master table and elevated quick tensioning techniques, screens are flying off the table at the rate of 10 per hour. We have all 500 frames rolled and racked in 6 days! It takes 3 months to work harden them all.
2009
I watch a 'screen tech' lay a piece of mesh (more like some cheap ass Chinese filtration fabric) on a frame, not square, and start feeding locking strips in. Then rolls it w/out a tension meter, applies some packing tape to the rails and puts it into production to never be re-tensioned until it meets it's demise with a ripped edge a few months later. This is when I realize the other 750 frames were made the same way and all the floors printing problems suddenly have an answer. I mention shur-loc panels and are laughed out of the office when price comes up.
2011
My days are filled with 40" x 60" Diamond Chase box frames and bolt mesh. It sucks!.. it takes me 20 or more minutes just to put the mesh in, it's really a poor design as theres no way to hold the mesh in place like the newman clips so you're constantly adjusting the locking strip and mesh to get it square. Then theirs the 28 bolts per frame that need to be turned to pull the bars... did I mention I have to use the old stretch and relax technique as the mesh is being pulled one-side-at-a-time uugggggg... I'd take a panel for this frame in a HEARTBEAT!!! They make the bars for the panels and shur-loc can make the panels, put then I've have to buy all new bars ($$$) and the hardware that goes with them ($$$) and then the mesh panels for a company (decal - flat stock) that is in no way ready or able to re-invest thousands of dollars to re-tool it's screen dept.
-
I saw a guy the other day in a shop up here install bolt mesh pretty darn fast. Not as fast as a panel, but certainly fast enough to make it significantly cheaper than buying panels. I think it just depends on how good you are at it. I use panels, as they are just easier for me and faster. But I think someone who has spent 10 years in a screen department at a major operation, could bring bolt mesh up to tension plenty fast enough for it to be a significant cost saver over panels. No to mention you have a little more control over bolt mesh than you do panels.
-
I saw a guy the other day in a shop up here install bolt mesh pretty darn fast. Not as fast as a panel, but certainly fast enough to make it significantly cheaper than buying panels. I think it just depends on how good you are at it. I use panels, as they are just easier for me and faster. But I think someone who has spent 10 years in a screen department at a major operation, could bring bolt mesh up to tension plenty fast enough for it to be a significant cost saver over panels. No to mention you have a little more control over bolt mesh than you do panels.
No one is arguing that point, someone who has put in the time an pain to get very good is, well good - and has a skill.
Now turn to the new person and say “you need to spend the time to develop this skill” - how many hours of lost production are we looking at?
This ties into the “funny numbers” guys, who will talk about every second of production and pushing to get maximum per hour at an automatic - how many hours that could be on press are lost developing that skill?
Using the funny numbers they like to spew out all the time, how many panels will that pay for?
In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king - traditionalism may work and may not, the point is to target the situation to max out the potential for that specific situation. For the one or few man shop developing this skill could be costly for production.
How about the idea of keeping the panels and removing them, replacing them with clean and going back to clean and reclaim the panels when time is slow in production? An act of simply delaying the process to fit within the schedule.
How quick is it to re-insert the cut mesh back into a frame?
I am the heretic just throwing ideas out there.
-
I saw a guy the other day in a shop up here install bolt mesh pretty darn fast. Not as fast as a panel, but certainly fast enough to make it significantly cheaper than buying panels. I think it just depends on how good you are at it. I use panels, as they are just easier for me and faster. But I think someone who has spent 10 years in a screen department at a major operation, could bring bolt mesh up to tension plenty fast enough for it to be a significant cost saver over panels. No to mention you have a little more control over bolt mesh than you do panels.
In thinking of this I came to the conclusion that if one does not pop many screens than the time to install panels over bolt mesh is a non sequitur.
If one works at a shop that pops a lot of mesh then the cost savings of the bolt mesh is a no brainer.
The time factor here is in the initial installation of mesh. When retightening the mesh there is very little difference between the two.
This is one of those things that the industry needs to educate (NOT sale) the end user on.
While there is a very specific need for retens, the honest fact of the matter is they are not necessary to print high end art.
This industry needs to quit selling things and start sharing the basic thought processes to print any level of art on a shirt.
The only way to make it today is to cut costs. You do not need a Corvette to go to the store. If you want one and can justify the costs of one against your bottom line than by all means get one. Just know that you can get to the store just as well on a bicycle.
OK Let me have it. 8)
-
In thinking of this I came to the conclusion that if one does not pop many screens than the time to install panels over bolt mesh is a non sequitur.
If one works at a shop that pops a lot of mesh then the cost savings of the bolt mesh is a no brainer.
The time factor here is in the initial installation of mesh. When retightening the mesh there is very little difference between the two.
This is one of those things that the industry needs to educate (NOT sale) the end user on.
While there is a very specific need for retens, the honest fact of the matter is they are not necessary to print high end art.
This industry needs to quit selling things and start sharing the basic thought processes to print any level of art on a shirt.
The only way to make it today is to cut costs. You do not need a Corvette to go to the store. If you want one and can justify the costs of one against your bottom line than by all means get one. Just know that you can get to the store just as well on a bicycle.
OK Let me have it. 8)
I am on your side, I value new and creative over outdated traditionalism. Any choice made on facts and a clear understanding of the cost structure is a good choice.
An example, you could buy a bunch of used wood frames with mesh similar to a drunken co-ed on the Vegas strip and end up spending lots of production time lining up the job and then never getting it to line up (the mesh stretches out of registration). The choice of the cheap wood frames became a liability.
If a newbie chooses to use panels in his one man shop and then pull the panels rather than reclaim is that a bad choice? If that increases his print time when he is likely already up to his neck, if he includes the price in the job and knows his profit margin and cost structure - could anyone call that a bad choice?
I am just the heretic.
-
In thinking of this I came to the conclusion that if one does not pop many screens than the time to install panels over bolt mesh is a non sequitur.
If one works at a shop that pops a lot of mesh then the cost savings of the bolt mesh is a no brainer.
The time factor here is in the initial installation of mesh. When retightening the mesh there is very little difference between the two.
This is one of those things that the industry needs to educate (NOT sale) the end user on.
While there is a very specific need for retens, the honest fact of the matter is they are not necessary to print high end art.
This industry needs to quit selling things and start sharing the basic thought processes to print any level of art on a shirt.
The only way to make it today is to cut costs. You do not need a Corvette to go to the store. If you want one and can justify the costs of one against your bottom line than by all means get one. Just know that you can get to the store just as well on a bicycle.
OK Let me have it. 8)
I am on your side, I value new and creative over outdated traditionalism. Any choice made on facts and a clear understanding of the cost structure is a good choice.
An example, you could buy a bunch of used wood frames with mesh similar to a drunken co-ed on the Vegas strip and end up spending lots of production time lining up the job and then never getting it to line up (the mesh stretches out of registration). The choice of the cheap wood frames became a liability.
If a newbie chooses to use panels in his one man shop and then pull the panels rather than reclaim is that a bad choice? If that increases his print time when he is likely already up to his neck, if he includes the price in the job and knows his profit margin and cost structure - could anyone call that a bad choice?
I am just the heretic.
I think that a newbie would be better off with static frames. I would encourage the newbie to learn to print correctly at all steps of the process. If this is done then the static frames would hold their tension longer. I do not think I would be comfortable giving a 16 year old driver a Corvette right outside the DMV.
I am not totally against Retens, I just ask that people use their common sense and learn how to print first. There were phenomenal prints off wood frames with the mesh stapled on LONG before Retens hit the market.
There are a lot of other places to spend the money that would benefit the end user ahead of retens.
Once again I feel that the suppliers and manufacturers have done the industry a disservice by not educating them on what we are all trying to do...Print a shirt.
-
I'll horn in with my two cents. Started with roller frames almost from the get-go. I can't tell you how much bolt mesh I've wasted with tears trying to get screens as tight as I like. Started using Shurlocs and have never had an issue with them. The corner softening is spot on . . . much better than I could ever get with loose mesh and the strips no matter how well I followed instructions, measuring to ensure mesh alignment, the whole ball of wax. I bought a bunch of 156, 195 and 230 Sefar bolt mesh off eBay at a really good price. Heard a "rumor" that Shurloc would make up panels from customer mesh, so I called them. Sent in all but about half of my 230. Crapped when I got the bill, even at $7 a panel, because they got a lot more finished panels out of the bolt mesh than I ever could tearing it by hand. All I can say is it's a first rate product, not cheap, but worth every penny for ease of use and the assurance that you can tension them up to spec.
I also use a Newman frame table, so meshing and retensioning frames goes quickly and accurately. I can't count the times in my life I've wasted time and money trying to cheap out on tools. For those with the skill to load bolt mesh and get the results they want, my hat's off. For me, the frames, panels and table have been money well spent to eliminate a variable.
Pitman Graphics
www.pitmangraphics.com (http://www.pitmangraphics.com)
-
I think that a newbie would be better off with static frames.
I could not agree less.
Why build an inventory of anything in your shop that is not the best equipment you can afford? Used roller frames can often be had for less then the cost of new static frames, and if they are Newmans they will last for many years. Most of my frames look like they were used in a warzone and they work perfectly.
I think any newbie should learn from the first print stroke that this is SCREEN printing. Your printed results are ONLY as good as your screen. Eliminate any screen problems as a variable, and then you have a clearer picture of what your strengths and weaknesses are in regards to developing your printing skill.
Note: I have several static frames here but I have relegated them to single color print duties and usually dark inks on light garment at that. Once you've printed with properly tensioned screens it's painful to go back. Sometimes LITERALLY painfull when pushing heavy inks.
Not to mention re-tensionable frames:
Reclaim easier
De-haze easier
Use less ink
Require less print pressure
Reduce fatigue when printing manually (this is HUGE for newbies)
Allow lower off-contact
Provide better registration
Greatly reduce ink build up printing wet-on-wet
On and on and on....
Why would a newbie want to skip all of these benefits??
If I was able to go back to all the shop I've worked at and learned at, and do it all over again, there would not be one single static frame used. To think of all the evenings I spent putting ice on sore wrists from trying to jam ink through a low tensioned screen...and all of the 100's of man hours spent trying to reclaim and de-haze all that hopelessly loose mesh...
-
WTF Sonny...really? yeah lets waste money buying something that we will not keep...that makes no sense what so ever in the real world of business. I would tell everyone to buy retens and more specifically newmans since they are the best on the market...but your point is to buy substandard equipment to learn to print correctly? really?
so should someone start off using substandard equipment so they can learn to print right? how about having the right tools for the job....?
sam
-
Have you measured that cost to actual mesh use per screen, when I did over a year ago it was about seven bucks...
I have not checked this again, and do not even know what current mesh prices are, have you checked?
150/48 for example...
By the yard, yields 2 screens: $16 or $8 per screen
By the panel: $29.30 per screen
And that's at the first qty discount for the panels, mesh is at single yard prices.
So that's what, 73% more than bolt mesh. You could count the lock strips but that's a one time purchase.
And yes, if you throw in labor time it probably works out to be a good deal with the panels in that you can work on something else instead but it takes me about 15-20 minutes max to load a screen carefully, square to the roller with corners softened specifically for the mesh count and tension I'm going for. We're talking a few hours a month here. What I can't afford with our print schedule these days and our small library of 30 screens is to have a popped screen mid run and have spend that additional half hour to remove the busted mesh, reload and go. The panels are going to kill it in scenarios like that. Also, with a small screen library, I can now detension screens and load in different panels if that needs to happen without losing mesh. This is why I went with the panels.
Tensioning takes the same amount of time whether you use panels or bolt mesh. You have to "seat" the bolt mesh a little more carefully but no big difference there.
I think I have now officially spent more time debating this issue than it would've took to load hundreds of screens with bolt mesh. :o
-
WTF Sonny...really? yeah lets waste money buying something that we will not keep...that makes no sense what so ever in the real world of business. I would tell everyone to buy retens and more specifically newmans since they are the best on the market...but your point is to buy substandard equipment to learn to print correctly? really?
so should someone start off using substandard equipment so they can learn to print right? how about having the right tools for the job....?
sam
My quote is simply that if one prints with the proper set parameters then excessive pressure is eliminated. Eliminate excessive pressure and you eliminate the first need for a roller.
The tighter you get a frame the more EXACT the press parameters become.
Most presses will not hold the parameters for screens over 30-35n.
-
What you say is true and yet not true.
Point in case:
Requires less squeegee pressure. Tighter screen requires less pressure to deflect than a loose one? The amount of off contact to print properly with a static is an infinitesimal amount more than with a reten.
The only thing retens have going is if done correctly they do give a constant parameter in tension.
All I am saying is that the cost for printing with retens is a bit much for someone coming out of the gate.
Yes there are many used retens on the market...I wonder why.
Not trying to start a fight here, just trying to get the understanding of why and why not.
150/48 for example...
Mine is $8.50 a yard which equals $4.25 a frame
-
Have you measured that cost to actual mesh use per screen, when I did over a year ago it was about seven bucks...
I have not checked this again, and do not even know what current mesh prices are, have you checked?
150/48 for example...
By the yard, yields 2 screens: $16 or $8 per screen
By the panel: $29.30 per screen
And that's at the first qty discount for the panels, mesh is at single yard prices.
So that's what, 73% more than bolt mesh. You could count the lock strips but that's a one time purchase.
And yes, if you throw in labor time it probably works out to be a good deal with the panels in that you can work on something else instead but it takes me about 15-20 minutes max to load a screen carefully, square to the roller with corners softened specifically for the mesh count and tension I'm going for. We're talking a few hours a month here. What I can't afford with our print schedule these days and our small library of 30 screens is to have a popped screen mid run and have spend that additional half hour to remove the busted mesh, reload and go. The panels are going to kill it in scenarios like that. Also, with a small screen library, I can now detension screens and load in different panels if that needs to happen without losing mesh. This is why I went with the panels.
Tensioning takes the same amount of time whether you use panels or bolt mesh. You have to "seat" the bolt mesh a little more carefully but no big difference there.
I think I have now officially spent more time debating this issue than it would've took to load hundreds of screens with bolt mesh. :o
You are assuming there is some “debate” on this issue, you would assume I would worry about being wrong, or that I and others are not getting some value from the exchange of views.
I looked up 230 with the same mesh I know is the default and the numbers I got are not near that, but that is just fine even taking inexpensive mesh as a comparison and a huge increase in the price I continue to support the idea and product.
Your ability to seat and tension mesh is not comparable to a newbie or even a new customer and the panels have benefits, we don’t have to even use a product in a particular shop to understand the possible value in the correct place.
-
Point in case:
Requires less squeegee pressure. Tighter screen requires less pressure to deflect than a loose one?
It's not about deflection, it's about the transfer of ink to the substrate. Ink will pass through highly tensioned mesh much easier than a low tension mesh, as the open area is maximized. Side benefit - since the tension is high, the off contact is very low, requiring even less pressure. Double win.
The amount of off contact to print properly with a static is an infinitesimal amount more than with a reten
Sorry but that is flat out wrong. The tension on static frames can be all over the place, requiring various level of off contact from screen to screen. With a nice set of correctly tensioned re-tens, the off contact is not only minimal, it is consistent from screen to screen. (valuable point whan using central off contact on some presses)
The only thing retens have going is if done correctly they do give a constant parameter in tension.
Well, this is the only thing, then I think most would agree it is the MOST important thing, as it affects everything about the screen.
Honestly I can't really believe this is even open to debate. If static frames were a viable long term choice than most shops would stock them and stop there. Re-tens, in my humble opinion, stomp static frames into the dirt.
-
Honestly I can't really believe this is even open to debate. If static frames were a viable long term choice than most shops would stock them and stop there. Re-tens, in my humble opinion, stomp static frames into the dirt.
You are assuming any resistance to the “new” idea of retensionable frames ever stopped.
I don’t see any resistance to the “new” panel idea stopping any time soon.
There is no doubt that the benefits of higher tension mesh can be tested, and repeated.
It does leave the question, where will the hybrid screens fall into place in your view.
-
Come on Sonny. Isn't screen printing about? Having statics increases this vs. Retens. With retens you can set the newtons in order to have constants thus leading to repeatability on many fronts.
Sam
-
It does leave the question, where will the hybrid screens fall into place in your view.
I don't really consider them hybrids, it's just another method of attaching mesh to frame to make a static screen, just with no glue involved.
Roller frames offer infinite adjustment of tension, and therefor can truly be called "re-tensionable".
-
It does leave the question, where will the hybrid screens fall into place in your view.
I don't really consider them hybrids, it's just another method of attaching mesh to frame to make a static screen, just with no glue involved.
Roller frames offer infinite adjustment of tension, and therefor can truly be called "re-tensionable".
So level 2 is not enough? Is not the addition of the green slides qualify as at least partly “re-tensionable”?
How much adjustment is needed after stabilization and the tension desired?
-
Come on Sonny. Isn't screen printing about? Having statics increases this vs. Retens. With retens you can set the newtons in order to have constants thus leading to repeatability on many fronts.
Sam
I agree you can have a consistent range across the board with retens. All I am saying is that one should not tell a printer that they have to have retens to print. I here this everyday talking to customers. So and so said you have to have retens. I think you will agree that there are not any prints that "require" retens.
If you are printing HD then a reten is beneficial. As to the registration issue, if a static is that far out of tension then replace it. You have probably done hundreds if no thousands of jobs with it. I know of some shops that have had the same static screens for ten years or more that are still using them.
-
Not going to get involved in this mess. I know I can use both in a profitable and efficient manner. Just want to let you know about a new product from Nazdar called Panel frame Quick Frames. Rigid frames that use a tensioning tool and I believe no glue. Now I have no idea what tension levels can be achieved that would certainly depend on mesh and other variables but I am intrigued so I am having one sent and will report back.
cheers tp
-
Not going to get involved in this mess. I know I can use both in a profitable and efficient manner. Just want to let you know about a new product from Nazdar called Panel frame Quick Frames. Rigid frames that use a tensioning tool and I believe no glue. Now I have no idea what tension levels can be achieved that would certainly depend on mesh and other variables but I am intrigued so I am having one sent and will report back.
cheers tp
Sounds cool. I think that I have a customer using them. Also, if it is what I am thinking of, then they provide a kit that makes standard static frames into panel frames. I'll find out and update.
-
I have been involved in the old debate over statics versus retens for a few years now, but I'll argue it as a high tension versus low tension because that's what it really is. If static alums were capable of holding even 30 newtons for an extended amount of time then we probably wouldn't have this debate brought up near as often. Here's the story from someone who has used both extensively for years at a time. We started out with statics. Every single day it was something different coming up on press that was a problem, you know, like every single issue that could arise from using low tensioned screens. At that time, I had no idea there were discussion forums dedicated to screen printing, and didn't know that there was so much literature out there that we could take advantage of so we pulled our hair out every day for an entire year.
Once I discovered the ton of screen printing information we began to implement literally ever single different technique I came across to see if it worked better than what we were doing. After dozens and dozens of changes were made, we finally got around to using some of our newman roller frames that we had the whole time but never used. Then I bought a used tension meter and measured our statics. At that time I knew what kind of tension levels were ideal and I was floored when I saw that literally 150 static alums were from 12-20 newtons, even the brand new ones.
I won't go into anymore detail on the back story, but we might go months before encountering any type of issue throughout the entire process from art to teardown, and a huge reason for that is using high tension screens. So therefore, I couldn't disagree with Sonny more, which isn't the first time.
I'm not arguing that you can't get a decent print using static alums, I've done it, seen it done many times, but it's not going to be as good as it would have been through a higher tensioned frame system, and that includes benefits throughout the entire print process (ink deposit, consumption, pressure, speed, setup times, etc.). You'll never learn how to REALLY properly print through 16 newton screens because you're going to be using probably 40-100% more pressure, probably multiple strokes, double the ink consumption, high off contact, slow strokes, I could go on and on.
To argue against the benefits of using high tension screens only tells me that the one doing the arguing doesn't print every day :). And I mean that respectfully of course. I don't care how tight things got around here, we'd never spend another dime on a static alum. I don't have anything against those who use statics or even wood or even those who argue that they are fine for what we do, but I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that if those shops switched to retens or even the shurloc ez's for an entire year, 90%+ would not go back to stretch and glue frames.
I'm assuming that most of us have used at least 2 different types of screens, so how many of you that have used retens for an extended period of time would consider going back to static or wood frames?
Oh yeah, and Sonny, the reason there are so many used newmans out there isn't because statics are that good, it's because Don screwed up and made a product that will literally last forever. And unfortunately, just because you use retens, it won't assure that your business is a success and that you won't be selling off all of your equipment 3 years after you started. The percentage of used roller frames on the market that people are selling because they are moving to stretch and glue is probably extremely small.
We have newman rollers from the first batch ever made, hell, there is a decent chance we have one of the first newmans rollers ever sold. We bought up half of the inventory from a shop that was one of the first to invest in the technology. I was told at one time that the shop was THE FIRST to buy them but I would have to talk to Don to know for sure.
-
Thats right Alan the discussion is about tension. The frame itslef is a means to that end and one primarily of personal preference. True we can all skew the dollar#s in our defense of choice but the bottom line is a good tight screen will perform better than a poorly tensioned one. I was just about to pull the trigger on building my screen stretcher but I'm waiting on that "Rigid Re-ten" first. And yes I use roller frames as well.
best tp
-
Man, this conversation had gone all over the board, lots of ways to look at it for sure.
Doug, I think you might've mis-read a few things from me:
You are assuming there is some “debate” on this issue, you would assume I would worry about being wrong, or that I and others are not getting some value from the exchange of views.
Ok, well I'm not actually sure what you meant by this. I think we're all getting something out of most conversations like this, it gets the gears turning if nothing else. And yeah, I do believe there is some "debate" on the issue, this thread being a fine case in point as well as others. You seem to be the type of man who would live more by an Emerson-esque mantra than one of being worried about being wrong in the exploration of things.
I looked up 230 with the same mesh I know is the default and the numbers I got are not near that, but that is just fine even taking inexpensive mesh as a comparison and a huge increase in the price I continue to support the idea and product.
What I posted are my exact prices- mesh by the yard from my supplier and panels at 25+ from shur-loc. It could be my odd frame size of 25x30 costs a bit more to produce. Those are just hard numbers- the panels are significantly more expensive in up-front cost.
Your ability to seat and tension mesh is not comparable to a newbie or even a new customer and the panels have benefits, we don’t have to even use a product in a particular shop to understand the possible value in the correct place.
Well, I think these panels have a correct place in my shop. Or at least I better if I just dropped that kind of $$ on them. And yes, it took quite some time to get good with loading mesh but I learned a lot about how the mesh and frame interact at tension in the process. That was more valuable than the mesh loading skill probably.
I agree wholeheartedly with most of the points you've made but still think, in caveman terms:
- Panels expensive, mesh cheap
- Panels convenient, mesh less convenient
-
Alan
it is about high vs low tension, but it is also about maintaining that tension...just like my screen door at home...it is nice and tight and even with slight pressure ( read my kids heads looking out the door) you do not notice the stretching the first week or even month but by fall when we put in the storm window panel we have to have the screen re-installed....that is what happens with statics...so in the long run it cost more and more for those statics...
sam
-
I'm not arguing that you can't get a decent print using static alums, I've done it, seen it done many times, but it's not going to be as good as it would have been through a higher tensioned frame system, and that includes benefits throughout the entire print process (ink deposit, consumption, pressure, speed, setup times, etc.). You'll never learn how to REALLY properly print through 16 newton screens because you're going to be using probably 40-100% more pressure, probably multiple strokes, double the ink consumption, high off contact, slow strokes, I could go on and on.
To argue against the benefits of using high tension screens only tells me that the one doing the arguing doesn't print every day
I am not so sure there is any real indication that anyone is arguing that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. (edited for a big typo - my mistake)
I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.
I don't care how tight things got around here, we'd never spend another dime on a static alum.
A reasoned targeted choice I would support 100% (so do you consider the EZ frame a static, retensionable, or hybrid?)
I don't have anything against those who use statics or even wood or even those who argue that they are fine for what we do, but I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that if those shops switched to retens or even the shurloc ez's for an entire year, 90%+ would not go back to stretch and glue frames.
This depends on the frustration level - EZ only one user I have found stopped using them over frustration (long story) roller retensionable is another story and at percentages you would be shocked over.
I'm assuming that most of us have used at least 2 different types of screens, so how many of you that have used retens for an extended period of time would consider going back to static or wood frames?
I have one wood frame in my personal collection as a sample, and a handful to a dozen static aluminum the other approximately 150 screens are a mix of roller, 4 square bar, and hybrid (most roller).
the reason there are so many used newmans out there isn't because statics are that good, it's because Don screwed up and made a product that will literally last forever. And unfortunately, just because you use retens, it won't assure that your business is a success and that you won't be selling off all of your equipment 3 years after you started. The percentage of used roller frames on the market that people are selling because they are moving to stretch and glue is probably extremely small.
They will not last forever in some shops - you should see some of the abuse I see out there.
Don’t count on that last part - you are forgetting frustration as a factor, panels, and stretch tables lesson that frustration greatly, the numbers of reverted shops would drop to much lower percentages (and would have) with panels and tables.
Of course none of this negates your underlying expression of the facts and your experience.
-
I agree wholeheartedly with most of the points you've made but still think, in caveman terms:
- Panels expensive, mesh cheap
- Panels convenient, mesh less convenient
And there is nothing wrong with that because it puts a point on the choice of this product.
So:
Mongo very sad with much work, not go home and see willowy long hair good smelling cave mate in long time...
Mongo must try and make things go faster, find way to not do slow stinky work and stay on Pushy-pushy make many heap big pretty shells...
Mongo have new shiny thing that take many shells to have, must figure if shiny thing make more shells with more pushy-pushy than cost...
Mongo wish make time for fuzzy foamy rotten seed water in heap big drink horn...
;)
-
Doug, I think you might've mis-read a few things from me:
You are assuming there is some “debate” on this issue, you would assume I would worry about being wrong, or that I and others are not getting some value from the exchange of views.
Ok, well I'm not actually sure what you meant by this. I think we're all getting something out of most conversations like this, it gets the gears turning if nothing else. And yeah, I do believe there is some "debate" on the issue, this thread being a fine case in point as well as others. You seem to be the type of man who would live more by an Emerson-esque mantra than one of being worried about being wrong in the exploration of things.
I’m wrong all the time, if I hold an idea of how something works and it is wrong, I have no problem whatsoever in changing that view to one that better reflects the facts. I think I drive some people crazy with questions, testing, and the like but I don’t want to present things that are “wrong” I want the facts. I love stories, myths, BS sessions and just useless conversation over dinner but I don’t want any of that to be placed into the “facts” section unless it deserves to be there.
In a case like this subject we come against variables that change the application of particular items - there are facts and there are reasonable, logical, and dare I say it profitable applications that can change due to the variables this is the part that makes presenting a position difficult.
What I posted are my exact prices- mesh by the yard from my supplier and panels at 25+ from shur-loc. It could be my odd frame size of 25x30 costs a bit more to produce. Those are just hard numbers- the panels are significantly more expensive in up-front cost.
As presented this is true, nitpicking the details is not going to help, the final decision needs to be rational, well researched, and logical - this you will see again and again - there is no wrong choice if made with rational, logical, informed procedures. Of course that choice will not fit every application.
The sad part is how many decisions we (me included) make on emotion, reaction, and ignorance.
-
They will not last forever in some shops - you should see some of the abuse I see out there.
The majority of screens I have in the shop are used Newman M3's I picked up from a large shop that closed down. Many are dented, they were put through a screen washing machine that had chemicals strong enough to strip the powder coating off, they were over/under torqued, banged up, and worked daily on a mis-adjusted Roller Master table that had a broken regulator.
All of these frames are still in use and with very little fuss, stay flat and hold high tension. I picked them up for about $15 each.
Add bolt mesh, (average is about $9-$10 a screen) and you have a very, VERY desirable screen inventory for the cost of most static frames. Once the mesh is stabilized and the corners are properly taped off, I can expect that screen to be in service for tens if not hundreds of stencils.
Thing is, when the static frames loose tension or pop, (I have about 8-10 here) I need to send them out to have them re-stretched. This, along with shipping, costs at least $12 a screen. And they don't reclaim anywhere near as well as the rollers do. The low tension mesh hangs on to emulsion, stains and ghosting where the rollers for the most part are clean and clear.
Panel frame "hybrids", to me, have no benefits over glued static frames. No way to work harden and max out the tension? No thanks.
Panels on roller frames? Once my business grows to the point where I hire someone to stretch screens, I will give them a long look. Until then the bolt mesh works wonders in my hands.
-
I've made multiple comments about EZ frames or hybrids or whatever you want to call them, so my opinion is probably nothing most haven't heard already, but I love a good discussion.
EZ frames are NOT static frames, truly they aren't, why? Because the panels are designed to take the mesh to manu's spec for optimal performance and that's just what they do. I can spot check 5 or 10 frames with the same mesh and find the tension within a few newtons, and the tension does stabablize, which is something maybe others don't realize about EZ frames. Even tension arcoss our frames is now better now than I could ever honestly say about my rollers or statics. I know many here will tell that their rollers are spot on all the time, and I say more power to them.
For us though, from frame to frame we are very consistent in EOM, tension, exposure and printing "behavior". That's been huge. And the EZ frame offers simplicity and freedom from monotonous tasks like multiple tensionings, removing chemical resistant tape, frame flatness. They are also fast to restretch, nearly no frames without mesh, ever. We have a fast paced work environment, we turn a lot of jobs pretty much all the time, so this is where the EZ frame shines for us, they've been one of the best products I've ever used.
And to statics, well they are fine for some things, but c'mon, if you want to have some kind of control and understanding of why, where, how and so on, statics are not going to help, more like confuse you because they are inconsistent.
My opinion and my personal results, I honestly think EZ frames have out performed our rollers in most every way. Maybe it would be different if I could have kept one fully trained employee on the roller frames all the time, but reality has been far different and more difficult. I do not enjoy the burden of retraining or the investment in time to teach someone to stretch rollers (or the continual endless cost of the maintainence), and very few employees in my experience have had the patience to really do the job right. Most haven't wanted to keep rollers at optimal tension because they don't want to pop screens, so they just settle below what it should be to "get by". Sure I could micromanage the process, but who wants their boss up their butt about something they perceive as not so important? Is trying to preach tension as gospel worth my time or shoud I be concentrating on or improving other things? I know my time is better spent elsewhere, so the EZ frame is more than a happy medium for us. Just my opinion though.
-
Panel frame "hybrids", to me, have no benefits over glued static frames. No way to work harden and max out the tension? No thanks.
Someone has given you some misinformation about how this frame works and the adjustments available.
What more tension do you want than level 3 (EHT) any next step is mesh failure? (Based on the terms Standard Tension - ST level 1, Advanced Tension - AT level 2, and Expert/High Tension - EHT level 3).
Post adjustment does allow secondary tensioning with the EZ frame back up to EHT/L3.
Panels on roller frames? Once my business grows to the point where I hire someone to stretch screens, I will give them a long look. Until then the bolt mesh works wonders in my hands.
And you would consider yourself a skilled technician not a newbie - is this correct? And how does this relate to the frustration factor we have to deal with in connection to retensionable frames?
-
this is a great read that I had to set aside as we are buried with work. . . So sorry for taking so long to post, as I think my perspective here is the one missing. Why do I think that? We are a startup shop where money is tight and a learning curve is extremely steep. I also don't think many would question our ability to produce some pretty impressive work. So we are short on money, had to learn to print (started about two and a half years ago) and are trying hard to do all the right things (proper techniques, right equipment and so on . . . ).
The reality:
Limited budget, never held a squeegee. Let's start a screenprinting shop! Huh? With no experience???
I had to learn every single aspect of screenprinting in a very short time. The amount of frustration is absolutely mind boggling. Trying to read the articles, and comprehend somehow all the industry terms and trying to make sense out of them, requires insane amounts of patience and dedication. It was not long ago that I spent 4 hours trying to figure out where to place the print (first paying order). First film took hours to print, first half tone positive took 12 hours!!! Squeegee angles, push pull, underbase, flash times, over cooking, undercuring . . . the list goes on. Imagine what Alan went through, but having ZERO screenprinting experience and having to solve those issues!
We still use statics for most of our work! We have EZ Frames and the high end stuff gets printed with them. Every single advantage mentioned before stands. They are an all around better product than statics. Anybody arguing that is insane. But the reality is, for a shop starting up, there is no money to buy the expensive screens. The argument of buying used does not hold water here as somebody just learning will not know if the problem is with the equipment or the user. We bought new statics from Hirsch and they sold us good quality screens. Now try to imagine somebody who never printed before trying to learn the trade, manage the shop and find customers. How much time do you think I had to learn how to stretch, reten and maintain the Newmans? Add to that the aggravation that comes with learning how to do it, and statics are a clear winner. An important point here though is that we had good screens all put in play at the same time and using the same mesh. Doing this with tired and mismatched screens would have been crazy.
Fast forward a year . . .
Knowing that statics are not an answer and trying to improve the print quality, we purchased some EZ frames. We ordered the "S" mesh wanting to go and do the right thing from the start. Well, that was a mistake, a costly one at that for somebody still in the startup mode. After popping all the mesh within about a month (12 screens) I realized that we are not ready for something like it. I was still learning how to print and the frustration of mesh breaking for no apparent reason was infuriating! In one case, I was holding a screen in may hand and talking to somebody. Two min into the conversation, the mesh popped, right in my hand. There was no pressure on the screen at all and I was standing still when it happened. Shortly afterwards, EZ Frames were retired to be revisited down the line. The only reason they were not sold is that I knew they were the right way to do things and that we would have to make changes to accommodate the best practices. Most other shops would have sold them. So as Douglas keeps repeating, we were back to statics due to aggravation . . .
About a year later we bought more frames and more panels and managed to pop most of them rather quickly, but we have a small number in rotation that is holding up to slow but continuous use. It is time to order new screens and I will order some panels and try to reintroduce them into rotation. I think we have slowly learned how to handle them and we should have much better success this time around.
So to recap, good statics will still produce a good print (anybody wanting prof PM me and I'll send you some samples). But they have to be good statics. Not everybody would benefit from starting with newmans. With the only option being used retens and new statics, retens would have put us out of business. There just wasn't enough time and patience to tackle such a task. Statics were also cheaper for a startup shop. So there is a time and place for the statics, but in the end, as we progress, retens become more and more necessary.
-
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.
Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?
-
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.
Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?
I'm hoping to find that out for myself real soon.... I just received 2 yards of 110,160,230 "S" mesh to use on some 20 x 28 newmans that I'm putting together.
I've got about 20 PanelFrames in rotation.... every time I put a tensionmeter on them I think "these are too low"... yet they print fine. I don't know what Sefar thread is in them, but the ink clears better than most statics I've used. So, maybe the mesh opening (thread size) is as critical as the tension ??
-
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.
Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?
Yes you read that right. The thinner threads allows more ink to pass through at a lower tension than a thick thread high tension thread.
Check out the tech sheet and look at the numbers yourself:
http://www.murakamiscreen.com/documents/MeshGuidefromCatalogweb.pdf (http://www.murakamiscreen.com/documents/MeshGuidefromCatalogweb.pdf)
-
So to recap, good statics will still produce a good print (anybody wanting prof PM me and I'll send you some samples). But they have to be good statics. Not everybody would benefit from starting with newmans.
I agree that a decent static frame will produce a nice print. The first shop I ever worked at did shirts for art museum gift shops with wood frames. These were 4CP and duotone prints of some very famous paintings and photographs, and the prints were beautiful.
However, if they had been done on nicer screens with proper tension, the shop would have reaped the benefits. Less ink usage, lower off contact, less wiping the ink buildup during production, easier reclamation, etc etc. We could have produced who knows how many more prints in less time with better screens.
Newbies need to be taught that better screens = better production. Most any screen can produce a nice print. Good screens can produce more of them over time.
I have no problem with a new shop buying some statics. I have a problem with a sales person telling them that's all they will need. (margin-driven advise)
It's all about education and printers should be armed with the facts to make the right decision for what works best for THAT shop. I wish the internet had been around when I started printing. I'd have been a thorn in the shop owners side, this is sure. :)
-
I am not so sure there is any real indication that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. I predict this is going to reappear again and again it will focus on specific application.
Am I reading this right? Big opening with lower (but proper) tension is possibly more important than high tension? SHould we start another topic?
I'm hoping to find that out for myself real soon.... I just received 2 yards of 110,160,230 "S" mesh to use on some 20 x 28 newmans that I'm putting together.
I've got about 20 PanelFrames in rotation.... every time I put a tensionmeter on them I think "these are too low"... yet they print fine. I don't know what Sefar thread is in them, but the ink clears better than most statics I've used. So, maybe the mesh opening (thread size) is as critical as the tension ??
Yes and no - I made a typo but the general idea you started down is correct.
How about this:
I am not so sure there is any real indication that anyone is arguing that the facts of higher tension exist and that the benefits range from essential to miniscule. (edited for a big typo - my mistake)
Yes there are benefits of hight tension, but there are other variables to contend with (outside of whoring frame sales).
And yes there is more than a few sources indicating that the best print with a given ink is not always maximum tension and it is a flat out fact that open thin thread mesh has print qualities that you will not get with thick threads at even excessive tension.
My fault for having several ideas at one time and typing.... :-[ I wanted to indicate that thankfully there was not a big blow out drag out over this as we have seen before and everyone was at least contributing to the conversation and considering variables.
How many of you remember the arguments on Scott’s boards on this issue where it blew up out of proportion. Remember how some new people were berated until anger and frustration started to boil out of control (and some guilty parties make this SOP for some reason).
There is no reason to berate a new person - and thanks for piping up with the frustration story, it is not uncommon. This is the type of person I deal with every day - some dork who has “been printing for a billion years” almost guarantees that a shop is about to go out of business.
Tears people, tears of frustration, and I am not kidding it happens all the time, the first few days with a shop in shambles and it starts the first day.
Adults under the impression that this stuff can’t be that hard or difficult (it is not it just takes time and some direction or some pain).
-
back to some more facts . . .
So, as stated, wider opening seems to trump (or so some of us believe) the tension. "S" mesh at lower tension is said to provide a better print.
But there is more than one factor at play here. The "S" thread is thinner and thus has a lower theoretical volume of ink deposited. Also, having a lower tension, it will flex more and stretch more and who knows what else that I can't think of right now. How do these factors influence the quality of the printed image from the opacity and sharpness perspective?
What about the ability to cover the hills and valleys of teh weave?
Are we laying down more ink at the expense of sharpness?
At what point is the thinner screen too soft and loses the advantage to a thicker tighter mesh?
OH, and I just came back from the dark room and one of the EZ panel frames popped while drying. I checked the tension on the remaining screens and it is at 24N, so they are not too tight. This is really starting to PISS me off! If I was to switch to the EZ frames with 225's and 330's right now, I would be breaking one screen per day. That is just not an option!
-
Tears people, tears of frustration, and I am not kidding it happens all the time, the first few days with a shop in shambles and it starts the first day.
Adults under the impression that this stuff can’t be that hard or difficult (it is not it just takes time and some direction or some pain).
not crying yet, but very, very unhappy!
-
back to some more facts . . .
So, as stated, wider opening seems to trump (or so some of us believe) the tension. "S" mesh at lower tension is said to provide a better print.
But there is more than one factor at play here. The "S" thread is thinner and thus has a lower theoretical volume of ink deposited. Also, having a lower tension, it will flex more and stretch more and who knows what else that I can't think of right now. How do these factors influence the quality of the printed image from the opacity and sharpness perspective?
What about the ability to cover the hills and valleys of teh weave?
Are we laying down more ink at the expense of sharpness?
At what point is the thinner screen too soft and loses the advantage to a thicker tighter mesh?
OH, and I just came back from the dark room and one of the EZ panel frames popped while drying. I checked the tension on the remaining screens and it is at 24N, so they are not too tight. This is really starting to PISS me off! If I was to switch to the EZ frames with 225's and 330's right now, I would be breaking one screen per day. That is just not an option!
Make sure you talk to jim and sherri about this issue - You should be able to talk to them about changes to prevent this - and by the way this is not rare with very high tensions, ask anyone who goes for L3 on a regular basis...
To get some of your answers you can take thin (S) medium (T/M) and a thick (HD) and tension them to their respective same level of tension (L1, L2, L3) each at the same targeted tension.
Then print with the same technique for reasonable to good EOM, pick a design and print that same design with all three. I dare say you will be surprised, one thing people miss is restriction of ink flow and how that impacts the print.
If you wanted to take that to the next level you could print and highest level tension, then go to L2, then L1 and print same design same ink - again you will likely be surprised. There is a reason the thin threads are making an impact at the moment and gaining use in the wild.
-
2 part post:
Part the first...
Pierre, I have 150s and 225s on M3 rollers right now @ about 24 newtons as well. They are holding strong and not having the popping issues your referring to. Previously I had them up a little higher and this was stressing out the mesh at the knuckles, giving me the same frustrations you're experiencing. I think this is why:
I went over to more S mesh after giving the high-tension thing a go (60n on many screens and 45n as a bottom end). In the process of going high-ten I took a good hard look at every point in it's travel that one of our screens could get damaged and this includes the squeegee blade and the substrate beneath and it includes "atmospheric" things like heat and whatnot. After adjusting the process to be "mesh-safe" we stopped popping the high-ten screens. Now, we don't pop the S thread screens either except in extreme screw up situations like poking a thumbnail into the screen while pulling tape, etc.
The S mesh is simply delicate. It appears to benefit from "strength in numbers" (like 305 v. 330) at the same thread diameter in resisting blowout but here we're sacrificing open area to get some extra security which is maybe not the best move.
So go through every little point of travel of your screens and make it a friendly territory for your mesh.
*one note is that even a 4n difference in tension can be enough to stress those thin threads out and bust a screen. our tension meters may not be in calibration with each others so I guess keep that in mind.
Part the second...
What are you seeing for tension on your aluminum statics with S mesh? I'm curious as to where they stabilize at. Believe this or not- I actually miss using statics! They're light, easy to handle, square on the edges for pre-press alignment, clamp well on the press, no maintenance, durable along the frame/mesh contact area thanks to that nasty-ass cyanoacrylate glue they're built with and, if well-made, flat and true. No extra retensioning steps just print to reclaim to coat. And, they do stabilize at some point. Dealing with the time in between "out of the box" tension and stabilized tension is the part that sucks. It extra sucks having it happen on press. I have a hunch that if you could pre-work harden S mesh and properly affix it to a good, true, static frame you'd have a contender to the other systems.
This is something nobody's brought up in the "funny math" of panels v. bolt mesh v. rollers v. statics v. hybrids- compared to statics, all of the rest require extra labor steps in your print shop. If 24n is as high as you can go with the mesh you have on any of those systems well then....do retensionables have any benefits in a low tension mesh system?
-
If 24n is as high as you can go with the mesh you have on any of those systems well then....do retensionables have any benefits in a low tension mesh system?
I don’t want anyone to think that I am advocating “low tension” but high and low tension are an area of some marketing v. working facts.
Generally recognized as the “minimum tension” is the 20 Ncm level, and 20 Ncm will prevent the one major problem with loose mesh “mesh rolling” where the squeegee pressure will actually move the image out of position in a way that is progressive to the end of the stroke.
What is “high tension” in the land I live and work with wood 110 white mesh screens that are lucky if 5 Ncm is on the fabric and everything is warped - well that is the type of shop I work with most of the time.
Should we not be talking about “proper working tension” and the results of the same?
Where “sales people” from some “supply dealer” told them they only needed 110 mesh, SBQ, no-name ink, and an oven element made into a flash - well I can tell you I know tears and frustration on a regular basis, my job is to try and fix that.
-
Let's face it, I hate to type. With that said, from what I read the problems addressed are two fold.
1. Squeegee pressure.
2. Ink deposit.
As to #1...
Excessive squeegee pressure is in my opinion the number one cause of frustration. I have seen squeegees bent in half on autos for years. When asked why they did this they all said the same thing, need more ink. Before you say it I have witnessed this problem on both types of screens.
The retens were at 40n+ and the press being used was not able to hold the parameters. The static was what it was. Both examples were printing the way they had always printed without taking into account the improvements made in the inks and chemistry they now used.
As to #2...
It takes less ink to cover if the ink is not pushed into the shirt. I will say that a reten used properly will allow for easier lay down of ink on the shirt. My issue is that most who use retens do not use them properly. I mean they do not have the tools to set their presses for maximum benefit, they stretch them too tight, and do not use the proper microns on their mesh.
Basically anything over 30n is not helpful. As to 305 mesh the "Perfect" tension is exactly 25.5n. At that tension the openings are perfectly square. This info is obtained from "Control Without Confusion" by Joe Clarke.
However the true use of the screen is simply a carrier for the ink. The true culprit here is the squeegee and misuse thereof. For instance a 18" wide print on a 23x31 frame.
All I am saying is that there is more to it than the screen. For either to be the cats meow the other would not exist. Retens are nice when used properly. The learning curve is much greater than with a static. With the proper squeegee to give you the lightest pressure a static can and will hold tension for a long period of time.
Do not let a salesman sell you anything you do not need or understand, myself included.
Thanks for the dialog.
-
back to some more facts . . .
So, as stated, wider opening seems to trump (or so some of us believe) the tension. "S" mesh at lower tension is said to provide a better print.
But there is more than one factor at play here. The "S" thread is thinner and thus has a lower theoretical volume of ink deposited. Also, having a lower tension, it will flex more and stretch more and who knows what else that I can't think of right now. How do these factors influence the quality of the printed image from the opacity and sharpness perspective?
What about the ability to cover the hills and valleys of teh weave?
Are we laying down more ink at the expense of sharpness?
At what point is the thinner screen too soft and loses the advantage to a thicker tighter mesh?
OH, and I just came back from the dark room and one of the EZ panel frames popped while drying. I checked the tension on the remaining screens and it is at 24N, so they are not too tight. This is really starting to PISS me off! If I was to switch to the EZ frames with 225's and 330's right now, I would be breaking one screen per day. That is just not an option!
Damn Pierre, that is really weird having that many panels busting. We've remeshed about 10 frames, 6 ez's and 4 newmans with s thread mesh and we've only busted one in about 8-10 months. We have however been on a screen busting spree of late where almost one per week is getting nicked or busted, but luckily, they're not the s threads. I sat the guys down last week and said if this keeps happening I'm gonna be watching them all day/every day until I find out who is the one handling them incorrectly, and there hasn't been one busted in 2 weeks. We've gone a year without busting a screen before, and now we've busted 20 this year alone. I go above and beyond with protecting the outside of the screens with polyken tape so I know our screen busting issues are coming from mishandling. A hole in the middle of the screen doesn't happen for no reason. I understand your frustration over busted panels. It's very, very nerve racking, it makes me want to start busting heads and firing people.
Douglas, I consider the ez's a hybrid type screen. In my little opinion, they are great and have handled everything we've thrown at them. If this was a perfect world I would have nothing but newman rollers and they'd all be at perfect tension but I've certainly reaped many benefits from using the ez's. I don't think they're better than newman rollers, but they settle in at a very reasonable tension level for us, low to mid 30's for just about every mesh count, except the s thread. It takes about 10 minutes for us to get one into production, and most of that is putting the polyken tape on for protection.
There was a brief time where I was maxing out our tension levels with our newmans, 110's were at 50-55 newtons, so were the 156's and I didn't notice any benefits but spent a ton of time maintaining the roller frames at such a high level. Now I've come back to earth slightly and we keep our newmans at 35-40 newtons, depending on mesh count of course, with some mesh counts being lower due to their specs. The ez's are 30-35 newtons right now and are performing almost as well as the newmans. We can print faster through the newmans, get a little better ink shear/deposit but the ez's have their place in our shop for sure.
I've had the ez's in production for a year and a half right now without retensioning any of them, and that's not long term enough for some but I would bet that some of them have been through the cycle 50-75 times by now and all is good.
-
A hole in the middle of the screen doesn't happen for no reason. I understand your frustration over busted panels. It's very, very nerve racking, it makes me want to start busting heads and firing people.
I keep this in my head all day:
"This is not a screen, it's a thin sheet of glass."
or
"This Newman roller is filled with explosives."
It helps.
-
A hole in the middle of the screen doesn't happen for no reason. I understand your frustration over busted panels. It's very, very nerve racking, it makes me want to start busting heads and firing people.
I keep this in my head all day:
"This is not a screen, it's a thin sheet of glass."
or
"This Newman roller is filled with explosives."
It helps.
Oddly, the sound you always hear right after one pops is "aw, sh_t!" Must have something to do with the sudden release of the tension on the rollers or insertion strips.
-
Just talked to Jim at Shurloc. . . It turns out that I am not crazy even though the rate of failure is higher than normal. I bought my panels a while back and they have since reduced the tension due to similar issues. We talked about some of my screen practices and found a few places where some adjustments can be made. In lieu of everything I've decided to start using regular 305 murakami mesh for my day to day and have a few 330's for the occasional high end work. I went ahead and ordered about 20 panels, and will start slowly phasing out the high mesh statics. I look forward to trying those out. They should be a considerable improvement over my regular screens . . .
-
Good move Pierre....we went shur-loc and neumans years ago and wow what a difference in set up times, reclaiming and just better prints...it has all been said here....I just believe in using the right tools for the job vs. struggling with each job because of substandard equipment or items....
Sam