TSB
General => General Discussion and ??? => Topic started by: Shanarchy on June 06, 2011, 04:56:46 PM
-
I would like to start a conversation about pre-registration systems.
First, what are the available options?
M&R tri-loc
Newman pin registration system
Vastex VRS
Am I missing any?
Now I am not talking about a system to ensure you can register your screens on press. This could be accomplished with a t-square and ruler.
What out there will, when used properly, allow you to pop your screens in and be ready to print (butt registration). I know MHM has there own thing, but it is exclusive to MHM presses (as far as I know).
Should carrier sheets be used on the exposure unit? It seems like this would leave less wiggle room then transferring them to the screen via 2 sided tape. However, is there any negatives to the carrier sheet used during exposure?
The Newman system really seems like it would be the most accurate. But also the most expensive.
How accurate are the bump stops that you line the screen up against on the tri-loc or vrs? Do they leave room to play? Is it easy to leave a slight space?
Let's here some thoughts.
-
I've got the VRS from Vastex that I got on the cheap with my used press. Truthfully I haven't really used the platen jig in a few years, but I do use the layout board and the punched mylar sheets for registering. I've got a piece of tape on my exposure unit with marks for frames, and I butt the mylar carrier against the tape edge. This is on my AmerGraph MH exposure unit. I had some stops I'd glued to the glass of my old homemade unit for registering the frames.
For what little I used the stops on the exposure unit and the platen jig, I can't say I ever got dead nuts registration. On the other hand, as I've used the press, I find I have to make fewer and fewer adjustments when setting up a job, so I might try adding the stops to my exposure unit again, use the jig, and see if I can speed up registration. Theoretically, it ought to work everytime. Possibly in the past off-contact might have played a part. If I do get off my lazy a$$ and give it another shot I'll post.
-
opposite the bump stops on the tri-loc are springs, so there is no play. You just put the screen in, then with your hand, tap the screen toward each bump stop and the screen is secure. To be honest...I love the tri-loc, but I despise carrier sheet like no other contraption I have ever encountered. I am saving hard for a cts machine just to never have to use one again unless it's on the rare occasion where I need to use 25x36 screens. Then I might even just line up on press to not have to mess with them.
-
I picked up a VRS at a yard sale for $50 early last year. I've gotten a dead on registration at press for two color jobs, but never more. Seems there is always one plate slightly off on three or more colors. That said, any adjustments I've had to make have been extremely minor, like at most a half turn of the micros. For $50, I'm more than happy with it.
-
tpitman, have you considered purchasing an extra set of the pin bars for the carrier sheets and adhering them to your exposure unit glass? What did you use for bump stops when you glued them to your old units glass?
Clark, what is it that you do not like about carrier sheets?
proyzan, was this on butt registration 2 color jobs? How far off would the 3rd color be? What do you think causes it?
-
Are there any systems that use punched film and pin registration like old offset machines?
With the low cost of films these days it seems like it might be a worthwhile idea.
-
I used to do that on my films, and exposure unit to standardize screen placement, but had no special matching jig on the press.
-
Are there any systems that use punched film and pin registration like old offset machines?
With the low cost of films these days it seems like it might be a worthwhile idea.
ya know, I thought the same thing. If your printer prints in registration, why can't we have holes placed in the film and ditch the carrier sheets -that's assuming your printer prints dead on. With a paper drill, I'm sure you can do a few boxes of film in no time. . .now that I'm using beveled blades, my reg is a ton easier -I may be able to look into a reg system. . .hmm. . .
-
ya know, I thought the same thing. If your printer prints in registration, why can't we have holes placed in the film and ditch the carrier sheets -that's assuming your printer prints dead on. With a paper drill, I'm sure you can do a few boxes of film in no time. . .now that I'm using beveled blades, my reg is a ton easier -I may be able to look into a reg system. . .hmm. . .
I think you would not want to rely on the inkjet placing the image on each film exactly right, from film to film. The media transport in an inkjet is just not that accurate.
You could print the films, line them up on a light table and then punch them all at once.
http://www.cartoonsupplies.com/product_info.php/cPath/29/products_id/308?osCsid=c21d89acaa28340f9d0c885c06c9fe30 (http://www.cartoonsupplies.com/product_info.php/cPath/29/products_id/308?osCsid=c21d89acaa28340f9d0c885c06c9fe30)
-
proyzan, was this on butt registration 2 color jobs? How far off would the 3rd color be? What do you think causes it?
Yeah, simple 2-color spot job, butt registered. Its not always the third color that is off, sometimes its the fourth or fifth, just seems anytime I do more than two colors, one of them is off. No idea why. I would assume its because I only use two points to fasten the carriers to the screen, so its not completely secure and some minor shifting occurs. Its never a major adjustment. In fact, its within millimeters usually. Not a big deal for me at all.
-
Punch through your reggie marks.
-
Punch through your reggie marks.
On the films or through the mesh?
:o :P
-
tpitman, have you considered purchasing an extra set of the pin bars for the carrier sheets and adhering them to your exposure unit glass? What did you use for bump stops when you glued them to your old units glass?
Clark, what is it that you do not like about carrier sheets?
proyzan, was this on butt registration 2 color jobs? How far off would the 3rd color be? What do you think causes it?
I have a set mounted onto a piece of acetate. Never got around to install them on my (not so) new exposure unit. As it is my films are all relatively in the same place on the screens so set ups are fairly fast.
On my old unit I used three 1-1/2" pvc pipe caps attached to the glass with silicone sealant, open end down, as stops along with the pin bar for registration. The main reason for not installing them on my new unit was because I was doing some yard sign jobs and I needed to keep the glass area free for the larger static frames I was using for those. It would always require that at least one of the caps be farther out in the field of glass to allow for a three-point contact arrangement to engage the frames, unless I jammed it into a corner. I'd rather keep my screens more to the center of the glass, not knowing if there is any light fall-off as you approach the corners of the glass. Getting those caps off my old unit was a bitch, too. That silicone sealant doesn't like to let go. What I really need to do is rig up some sort of a jig for the exposure unit that incorporates the 3 caps and the pin bar that can just be laid on top of the glass, and onto or into which the screen frames slide up against the caps.
As for a pin registration system and carrier sheets, I like them. Less messy than taping films to the bottom of a screen to try and keep the image in the same area from screen to screen.
-
I have a partial newman pin system here at the shop, and some of the major pieces to it are missing. I have an idea of fabricating a system using it but it's going to cost us about 500 to get the parts I need. I made our own regi system and it works rather well, but it all depends on the person taping the film to the screens. Right now, my guy doesn't believe in the system so he doesn't take the proper time and care to use it to it's potential...ignorant to say the least. I bought the Vastex VRS and it did not work very well at all. My DIY system works so much better than the Vastex.
When I was trying to make my own regi system, I was having a hard time duplicating the stops on the film positioning unit to the pallet jig, so I made them one in the same. Without the proper tools to ensure the stops on both units hit the screen in identical spots, you'll always get weird results. I need to make some changes to our system and beef up the FPU/pallet jig. I despise carrier sheets and do not use them with our system. I need to make a good video of our system, the ones I made aren't that good. Ours can be duplicated by anyone willing to do it themselves, you don't need carrier sheets and the results are good. I think it could be better, and would love to use the triloc for a brief period to see how my DIY compares.
Shurloc now has the newman pin lock adapters for the EZ frames so that is one of the reason why I'm looking to put the newman system into production and see how well it works. I have the pallet arms and the glass regi board but I'm missing the blue aluminum piece that fits onto the FPF that the frames lock into when taping film to screen. I don't understand how that piece could disappear but I've turned this shop upside down looking for it.
I'm a huge believer in the pre regi system. When used properly they make a huge difference. When I get the newman system in place I'll report on how well it works and do a comparison with our DIY.
-
The problem I always had with the M&R system was the carrier sheets. At one company we actually had a "Pinning Department" where one full time employee was responsible for pinning, creating namedrops, and cleaning/ re-using the carrier sheets. So one could crunch the #s and argue that the salary for that employee was not justified by increased setup times but those figures are a bit intangeable. Now; I doubt that simply drilling film positives will be anywhere near as accurate but who knows.
DTS is starting to look better and better.
-
I took a good look at the Pin Lock system recently and, out of them all, it looks like the best fit for us. But my final verdict was that our chameleon can't keep itself aligned well enough to reap the benefits from the system. x-y micros will walk out of reg and the off-contact adjustments like to walk around a little too. For us to get an advantage from a pre-reg system, especially one with a $4k ticket, it would need to eliminate the use of the micros on our press outright. That would absolutely be worth it- messing with those poorly designed micros takes up more setup time than anything else. If they just moved in a logical manner and stayed put when you locked them I would have those crazy short setup times that the reg systems claim just eyeballing the registration.
I'm wondering how many presses out there can? If you had a press with very tight tolerances (and you keep it calibrated) the pin lock system looks like an obvious choice.
I had a post awhile back that touched on some of this but I appears it was lost in the migration. Briefly, the way I see it, there is pre-alignment systems and pre-registration systems. If yer going for the latter you need to make a systemic commitment. The former is just something that every single shop necessarily has to do in some way or another or your films will be too far off from each other for the screen adjustments on your press to get the job into registration.
I actually like the idea of carrier sheets, but on the top of the film only, not extending down behind the film adding another layer of light scattering material, that just seems ass backwards to me. In fact, printing longer film and punching it, as mentioned would probably be preferable. What I like about the punch holes is that you can library a jobs films rather than it's screens. This is extremely appealing to a guy who doesn't have space for more screens but needs to whip out 10k worth of re-stock orders for a pre-print line every month in addition to the usual workload of a custom print shop. It'd be nice to coat fresh screens and line up the holes, tape and go. In this case you align films once and keep your parameters tight so the rest is on auto pilot. Just a fer instance. I'm sure there are other benefits. Downside is that you need to really get a post-exposure routine down if your going to use carriers and long-runs of aggressive inks would be extra tricky.
I hate, however, the notion of putting some semi-permanent fixture on my expo glass. Yay, now we need two expo units! One for the regular screens and one for the big ones... No thanks. If I could get around that somehow the tri-loc would do us fine. It looks like an otherwise nice system at a fair price.
And DTS? Absofuckinglutely. All you'd need then is a jig, anything repeatable, to align your screens on press. Whose going to make one affordable for the small to middlin shops though?
-
Why do I start drooling whenever someone mentions DTS? That technology with the identical pallet jig for the press and I think that combination could be tops in setup times. I think 95% of our issues when a job doesn't line up would be eliminated with a DTS. Could you imaging setting up every single 5 color job without having to micro the press or spend 20 minutes at the film positioning unit taping up the 5 screens precisely?
I know most of the DTS machines are triloc compatible, but since the triloc uses 3 flat metal pieces instead of round stops, it should be easier to duplicate those points on the triloc even if the DTS is made by a different company right? Reason I ask is because the problems we had with the vastex was the 3 stop points on the pallet jig didn't perfectly match the 3 point on the FPU, but 3 flat plates work differently than 3 posts that have to contact the screens in the exact same place, therefore more easily duplicated? What happens if you use something besides newman rollers and a weld knot on an aluminum screen contacts one of the posts or plates of the FPU, but doesn't contact the post or plates of the pallet jig? One screen way out of registration and several minutes of micro work and likely multiple test prints most likely.
-
I had the Vastex VRS system and Mark Vastex worked with Doug Greiger to make the pallet registration system specific for my platens (Antec Legend 14" x 14" square with no neck). I loved it. Something I found was that if I had a job that was more than 2 colors and just kept stacking the carrier sheets and positives on the board, there were registration issues after the 2nd color. What I did was to place one carrier sheet and the positive on the board and leave it there until I had done all the other carrier sheets/positives ONE AT A TIME. In other words, I made the 2nd carrier and removed it from the board, then I placed the 3rd carrier/positive and aligned it to the reg. marks of the 1st carrier and removed the 3rd carrier and then made the 4th, etc., etc. When I tried to align too many reg. marks (read: more than one set), the registration began to suffer because I was looking thru too many sheets and seeing too many reg. marks.
-
If I had a DTS I would totally forgo a pallet jig and use an identical head jig for placement. That would save immense time over lining screens individually and it would be done as soon as the screen was placed into the holder...like the MHM.
The best part is if the jig was off on each head, it could be adjusted out with the micros and each head would then be tuned to each other. Then no switching platens or tabling up for alignment.
-
The best part is if the jig was off on each head, it could be adjusted out with the micros and each head would then be tuned to each other. Then no switching platens or tabling up for alignment.
That would be most excellent.
Does anyone make an "entry level" DTG that does 25" wide screens?
-
Punch through your reggie marks.
On the films or through the mesh?
:o :P
Think outside the frame.
-
If I had a DTS I would totally forgo a pallet jig and use an identical head jig for placement. That would save immense time over lining screens individually and it would be done as soon as the screen was placed into the holder...like the MHM.
The best part is if the jig was off on each head, it could be adjusted out with the micros and each head would then be tuned to each other. Then no switching platens or tabling up for alignment.
For MHM users, how difficult is it to "zero" out your micros? I understand the mhm system but when I think about it I only can envision it as if it were installed on our press and then things start to get muddy on the whole printhead zeroing the micros. I know most autos have the grid and a marker to show you how and where you've moved the micros, but truly zeroing them out seems like it might be difficult due to several factors. I know they can manufacturer each printhead to be fairly identical but it seems like during the initial installation of the press, the zero for each printhead would have to be figured out and marked. I can zero out our printhead micros to be close to the same but our press is different and I don't know how accurate it would be if we had a printhead jig of sorts. I do think the MHM system is probably the best, but I see potential issues with it but only comparing it to if something similar would be installed on our press.
This discussion has really motivated me to move forward with the newman pin lock system so that first, I can compare it's ability to the DIY I made, then work on getting my guys to buy into using it if it works better than our current one. There was someone on the M&R board that said he had fabricated a regi system and was working on the patent but that was months ago and haven't heard anything about it since. I'd be real interested to see how and if someone was able to reinvent the wheel so to speak and was real suspicious of whether it was really something new. I'm certainly not someone who can invent anything, I'm the kind of guy that can use and analyze something and figure out how to make it better, like most of us can do. I am envious of those who can create something out of the blue and invent something new. I've spent many hours trying to figure out a better regi system but it almost seems like everything that can be done has been done as far as that topic goes. But I'm also not as smart as the people who came up with the popular systems so that could be the main reason why I haven't come up with anything.
-
I've read their sheets on the MHM auto-reg presses and it sounds like it overcomes the zeroing out issue handily. These are equipped with something like precision motors that can reset themselves. I think you place a positive on a platen, adjust that head's micros to align and then the other heads move exactly that far in each direction.
-
Something I found was that if I had a job that was more than 2 colors and just kept stacking the carrier sheets and positives on the board, there were registration issues after the 2nd color. What I did was to place one carrier sheet and the positive on the board and leave it there until I had done all the other carrier sheets/positives ONE AT A TIME.
Color me dumb, I never considered that. And it describes the problem I have perfectly. I'll have to give it a try.
-
Alan, I have a Newman pin system. All but the pallet. How are the arms mounted to the pallet? Could one possibly buy the arms and mount them themselves? I have been hesitant to invest in this until I know it will work spot on. Having to but pinlocks for every frame will add up. A worthy investment if it will make your micros obsolete, but not if it only gets you "very close".
I also have a VRS. However, mine is made to be used with the matching exposure unit. Otherwise I would need to swap out my FPU for one with the bump stops. I think transferring the film via 2 sided tape leaves too much margin for the film to move slightly. I have considered ashering the pins and bump stops to the glass of my msp3140. Again, not worth making it tougher to expose larger frames if you can not achieve dead on registration.
I think the films should all be registered no more than 2 at a time. As mentioned you put your first film down. Register the second. Move it to the screen. Then repeat for all other films.
I am also thinking if using carrier sheets and an exposure unit with pins on the glass, small cut pieces of the carrier sheet would work better. So the carrier sheets would only be maybe 4" long. The film taped on the top to it. Would this leave room for the film to easily shift if not mounted/taped in all four corners? I am thinking no. Thoughts?
Bump stops, would round or flat edge be more preferred?
I think if the screens can all be burned in dead on register, the biggest problem is overcome.
What if a square could be fabricated that would lay/not adhere to the glass (so you can remove it for bigger screens) which had the carrier sheet pins at the top. and frame mounts at the bottom. Then said frame could mount to a master pallet....
I also believe that the MHM will zero itself. I am sure Pierre can confirm that.
-
Something I found was that if I had a job that was more than 2 colors and just kept stacking the carrier sheets and positives on the board, there were registration issues after the 2nd color. What I did was to place one carrier sheet and the positive on the board and leave it there until I had done all the other carrier sheets/positives ONE AT A TIME.
Same thing with the Tri-Loc. I put the "keyline" film down on the first carrier sheet on the light table, then do one color at a time on it. I use a loupe to register the reg marks dot-for-dot. Works perfectly.
That said, it helps to slow down just a bit at this step. 10-15 extra seconds on each film makes a world of difference. Line up, put the first piece of tape down, double check all the reg marks, then more tape, etc.
-
Alan, I have a Newman pin system. All but the pallet. How are the arms mounted to the pallet? Could one possibly buy the arms and mount them themselves? I have been hesitant to invest in this until I know it will work spot on. Having to but pinlocks for every frame will add up. A worthy investment if it will make your micros obsolete, but not if it only gets you "very close".
I was going to mount the arms to pallet number one myself, using contact cement, but I don't know if that will hold up over time. I'm not worried about getting the arms in the correct location, that seems fairly easy to do but will the contact cement be enough to hold those arms in place and rigid enough to not every flex or move at all. I'm not really sure how Newman attaches the arms to the pallets and how they assure everything is correctly place in relation to the press pallets, but I'll try to do it myself before I contact them to do it for me. I did put the arms on one of our old centurian pallets a few years ago but took them off when I abandoned the idea of using the pin lock system. I know that Newman recommends that you send a pallet in and they attach the arms there but there is no telling how much that costs, as nothing of theirs is cheap.
As far as round bump stops or square, I have no idea which is better. I've only used the round stops and haven't really sat down and tried to figure out which method would work best. Something tells me the square or flat stop might work better but that's just because I haven't used it and always think the grass is greener on the other side.
-
As far as I know you can send a pallet into Stretch Devices and they will correctly mount the pin-reg arms for you.
-
I know that Newman recommends that you send a pallet in and they attach the arms there but there is no telling how much that costs, as nothing of theirs is cheap.
[/quote]
Memory tells me it was $1000 (possibly a hair more, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't less).
As far as centering the arms I think it would be as easy as putting a vertical line on the center of the screen to lay over a center line drawn on the pallet the pin locks on the screen would put the outstretched pin arms where they belong. As long as you have it 98% straight and centered I don't see it making a difference in the final product (shirt print). All the screens will be registered on the same pallet so they would all be in register to each other. Of course, I am thinking this with out seeing the actual pallet arms.
Would JB Weld work? How were the affixed to the pallet of your centurian?
-
I took a good look at the Pin Lock system recently and, out of them all, it looks like the best fit for us. But my final verdict was that our chameleon can't keep itself aligned well enough to reap the benefits from the system. x-y micros will walk out of reg and the off-contact adjustments like to walk around a little too.
Wow, this sounds like your press needs a serious tune & lube. Mine holds registration rock solid. Seriously, I've ran into a screen with a tall screen cart and it didn't knock the reg out.
The Tri-Loc works perfectly with it.
A few things are critical for the Chameleon to work right with pre-registration (or for any job setup really):
Off contact - the level pad buckeye (the bolt/pad on the station arm) needs to be perfectly the same height from station to station. This is somewhat of an involved adjustment time wise, but it's a "one time" deal. Once they are all set right (or if they are already set right) you shouldn't touch them. The procedure is simple - find head #1 and tape the off contact adjustment knob in place. Lock a screen in the head. Don't touch any more adjustments on the head. Measure the distance from the bottom of the screen frame in the back to the top of the pallet arm. (or from a fixed point on the bottom of the head) A caliper is good for this. Now spin the next station to this head and measure. Adjust (if needed) the buckye bolt so this head is the same height from the top of each pallet arm. Lock em all down firmly and measure them all twice. All the same? Good, un-tape the off contact on that head and your all set. Threaten all staff with public torture if they touch the buckeyes with a wrench. This should be a once every five years adjustment, if ever again.
Micro locks - these need to be pulled apart every once in awhile, the lock studs need to be snugged up from underneath the head, (two acorn nuts are under there, snug em up) and the whole shebang put back together with some lithium grease. Then the top anti-droop locknut should be adjusted to *just* let the micro move. Then the top plate goes back on and the locking handles (grease all mated surfaces and threads). If the studs come loose from the bottom or the top locknut is out of adjustment, then the micros will not work smoothly and may not lock down all the way.
Check every 6 months or whenever micros feel weird or don't lock.
Pallets need to be dead parallel. Check monthly or every time some ass rests something heavy on one.
Tilt adjusters shouldn't be really easy to move. Tighten them so there is no play in the tilt, but you should still be able to turn the knob with *some* resistance. Check yearly.
-
The Vastex system, both the jig and the system that comes with a Vastex exposure unit, use round bump stops, the reason being (I think) is that the frame edges can tangentially only contact a very small part of the stop, which should eliminate any variation between 2 longer edges trying to mate (the frame and a flat-edged stop). As for carrier sheets, I only tape my film at two places along the top edge so there's no chance of it bunching up against an opposite taped edge. And as others mentioned, only register two films to one another, usually using the one with the most information as the "key" and register the others to it, minding not just the marks but the fit of any trap, choke or butt. Any offset shops I worked at always did it that way.
-
man, this post exploded in no time!
Only the highest model of the MHM has auto registration (4000). On the regular one I have, micros are not motorized.
So I still have to turn the knobs just like everybody else.
What is different?
the screens lock in place by the pins so they go into the same position every time. If you take the screen out and put it back in, no registration is needed. 'probably goes back to within few thousands of an inch.
Another advantage is that the micros are not locked in and the adjustments can be done on the fly. If you start with the print pretty close to where it needs to be, you can take the next few shirts to tweak the registration. Yes, you end up with few showing the underbase or being misaligned, but usually not enough to matter.
Micros do not drift (unless there is something wrong with them. You can print thousands of prints and never have to worry about something moving. Also, they are very precise. On the high end prints we register to2-3/1000 of an inch. I thought it was more, but I had to go out an measure it few weeks ago and it really is that little. Same prints use registration marks that are only about 6/1000 of an inch wide.
so the reality is, with a DTS there might not be any need for the micros on the MHM. That is if the DTS really did what it was supposed to do. My understanding is that there are issues with warped frames and crashing heads. I wonder if the MHM's precision is higher than the DTS's (in the long run)?
-
To answer Alan's question on the MHM jig dealie-do...
Think about it your "zero" like this. Say you insert a screen into head 8 and
you're off by a bit one way. You micro it over and you're good to go. The next time
you insert a screen into that head, it should now be at it's "zero" provided
you did all the pre-reg right.
The screen pins really are like having a tri-loc on all of your heads, all of the time.
I almost puked in disgust when I realized that they were necessary for MHM machines,
but now I can't live without them.
-
This is not quite to the level of registration that you are lookig for but it works pretty well for us to insure we are always within tarveling range on our manual.
Simple locator sheet that registers to the exposure glass via a couple of dress makers snaps silicone attached to the glass. Registration holes in the register or lacator sheet fit over the male half of the dress snaps. Grid lines, pallet and newman screen indicators complete the sysyem. Pics should give you some insight.
mooseman
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/MRS4DSCF3151.jpg (http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/MRS4DSCF3151.jpg)
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/MRS3DSCF3155.jpg (http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/MRS3DSCF3155.jpg)
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/mrs2DSCF3164.jpg (http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/mrs2DSCF3164.jpg)
http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/MRS1DSCF3170.jpg (http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x296/copdaddy/MRS1DSCF3170.jpg)
-
On the E-type at any rate the micros have adjustable markers so you can set zero to your liking, we did that by putting a center line and horizontal line on all the pallets, set the markers on the micros and checked each pallet against the first using a screen with an identical pattern burned on. Sounds confusing but it's easy and you reap major benefits from doing this.
-
So I was just thinking.
Usually, this is a dangerous thing.
I think I just figured out how to use the Tri-Loc without carrier sheets, and without taping the films to the screens.
As I am crazy busy, I will have to put this together in a few weeks after I get back from a road trip with my band.
If it works, I will be SO stoked.
-
DUDE -evo! you can't hand out that bit of info and leave us hanging for a few weeks. . it's like a stripper showing half a nipple. . .wtf man. . .
-
DUDE -evo! you can't hand out that bit of info and leave us hanging for a few weeks. . it's like a stripper showing half a nipple. . .wtf man. . .
When/if it works I will post the full monty.
:o
-
We've used both the Tri Loc and the newman system. The key is your press. If it isn't level, and hold register no system will ever work. You need flat pallets, screens the same tension. You need good films, nothing from a laser printer.
Lots of pieces to this puzzle. YMMV.
-
And that is what I am working on. Our press is older, but it's a decent press, getting everything set back to factory or set properly has been a chore. The hardest thing are the off contacts. I can't ever seem to get them perfect and consistent. And yes, my platens are level, i have a nifty trick I learned from a tech on that one.
-
I know that Newman recommends that you send a pallet in and they attach the arms there but there is no telling how much that costs, as nothing of theirs is cheap.
Memory tells me it was $1000 (possibly a hair more, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't less).
As far as centering the arms I think it would be as easy as putting a vertical line on the center of the screen to lay over a center line drawn on the pallet the pin locks on the screen would put the outstretched pin arms where they belong. As long as you have it 98% straight and centered I don't see it making a difference in the final product (shirt print). All the screens will be registered on the same pallet so they would all be in register to each other. Of course, I am thinking this with out seeing the actual pallet arms.
Would JB Weld work? How were the affixed to the pallet of your centurian?
I used contact cement, but I've used JB weld for other things around the shop including our pallet jig that we use now and it would probably work as well or better than the contact cement.
-
Well we love our Tri-Loc. Its easily worth the money in my opinion. We are often dead nuts or need to micro maybe 1 head a little. Its cut our set up time down a lot and we came from a VRS Vastex system.
-
Well we love our Tri-Loc. Its easily worth the money in my opinion. We are often dead nuts or need to micro maybe 1 head a little. Its cut our set up time down a lot and we came from a VRS Vastex system.
What do you think makes the tri-loc more accurate?
-
Well we love our Tri-Loc. Its easily worth the money in my opinion. We are often dead nuts or need to micro maybe 1 head a little. Its cut our set up time down a lot and we came from a VRS Vastex system.
What do you think makes the tri-loc more accurate?
The stops. The master frame and the pallet are perfectly matched. Also, you are registering on a light table with a loupe. I line up the reg marks dead perfect, then I look throughout the image to make sure the butt registration is matched dot-for-dot. Only way to get it closer would be a microscope, and I am actually looking into that. I'm looking at setting up a USB microscope so I can register everything through a monitor so I don't have to bend over the light table any more.
Also, I think using a pre-reg system with front/back or side clamps with air locks will beat out a back clamped manually locked down screen. You pop the screen in, line it up and flick a switch. It's held on two sides instead of one, much more stability and accuracy.
-
Well we love our Tri-Loc. Its easily worth the money in my opinion. We are often dead nuts or need to micro maybe 1 head a little. Its cut our set up time down a lot and we came from a VRS Vastex system.
What do you think makes the tri-loc more accurate?
The stops. The master frame and the pallet are perfectly matched.
Would the stops actually play a roll if they were slightly off from press to exposure unit? The bumps on the exposure unit get all the screens burned in register. The bumps on the press get all the screens locked on press in register. So wouldn't the only difference be very slight in square and center? But the screens would all still register to each other.
Thoughts?
-
Well we love our Tri-Loc. Its easily worth the money in my opinion. We are often dead nuts or need to micro maybe 1 head a little. Its cut our set up time down a lot and we came from a VRS Vastex system.
What do you think makes the tri-loc more accurate?
Rubber Bumpers are just not going to be as accurate IMO as a block of allum. Just my opinion. We rarely had jobs dead nuts on the VRS, it was still good though. With the Tri-Loc is the other way around now, we often have them be dead nuts with rarely needing adjustment.
-
Would the stops actually play a roll if they were slightly off from press to exposure unit? The bumps on the exposure unit get all the screens burned in register. The bumps on the press get all the screens locked on press in register. So wouldn't the only difference be very slight in square and center? But the screens would all still register to each other.
Thoughts?
I think it's that the Tri-Loc has fixed, machined flat surfaces where the VRS has bumper style posts. Also, the Tri-Loc rear stop is farther back than the VRS, that may have something to do with it. Also, the Tri-Loc master frame has the 3 spring pins that push the frame into an exact position every time, where as the VRS is a screen on a tilted table relying on gravity.
The biggest thing though might be that double sided tape is used to register the films with the VRS. Tri-Loc relies on register pins and the films are not fixed to the screens.
-
The VRS Comes with a steel table printed with a layout grid and platen outlines, and brass registration pins mounted at the top. You mount the carrier sheets to the table, tape your film to the carrier sheets, then mount the carrier sheet with film to the pins on the exposure unit. Look at Mooseman's photo for the location of the brass pins mounted on the far end of his exposure unit.
-
The VRS Comes with a steel table printed with a layout grid and platen outlines, and brass registration pins mounted at the top. You mount the carrier sheets to the table, tape your film to the carrier sheets, then mount the carrier sheet with film to the pins on the exposure unit. Look at Mooseman's photo for the location of the brass pins mounted on the far end of his exposure unit.
Ahh...well that's not how I understood how the system worked. As far as I knew it's lining up the films on a grid then pressing the screen down onto double-stick tape. I thought no reg pins were involved.
-
The original VRS system is how tpitman described. It utilized the Vastex exposure system with pre-mounted pin locks and bump stops. The newer system is made to be used with any exposure unit, has the bump stops on the FPU and requires 2 sided tape.
I feel the 2 sided tape method leaves to much room for error and like the idea of the carrier sheets better.