Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: response to inquiry

Expand Messages
  • Gerald Lange
    Dear Chris Happy to hear you have a A/V rep close by. That will help a lot. Re: the Buntings. At that size they run 667 each single/617 each at 2 to 5/578 at
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 18, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Chris

      Happy to hear you have a A/V rep close by. That will help a lot.

      Re: the Buntings. At that size they run 667 each single/617 each at 2
      to 5/578 at 6+. I always try to do the group disc thing. Only problem,
      I believe, is that the bases may all have to be ground to the same
      height, but maybe not. Bunting can be flexible, when they smell the
      dough re me (they have no problem with separate drop-ships, so might
      not have one with separate grindings). Other known distributors (to
      me) are A/V itself (at least, in So Cal), Bay Island Press, Gene
      Becker, NA Graphics. (None of whom, of course, would deign to join
      this group). Swing the best deal you can. Phone numbers etc are all in
      the Bookmarks area.

      Keep those Monotype machines oiled. Let me know how this all works
      out.

      Ger



      --- In PPLetterpress@y..., flywheel@p... wrote:
      > Gerald
      >
      > Thanks so much for the information. I've talked to the sales rep for A/V and
      > will probably go visit them in the near future. It kinda seems like a no
      > brainer to go with A/V. Everything I've heard about them is very positive,
      > and they have an office/outlet outside of Seattle. They told me to come on
      > down and they'd fire up a machine and make some plates and I could see how
      > they work. And they do traffic in used machines on a regular basis...folks
      > trading up.
      >
      > I knew the Bunting bases were expensive, but I had no idea they were that
      > much. Jeez. I'm thinking maybe I could post a note to the PP list and see if
      > I couldn't get six people together as you suggest. Would the savings be that
      > significant? And should we purchase them through you?
      >....
      > Anyways, thanks again for your help and advice. I hope that you and your's
      > are well during this trying time.
      >
      > Best wishes
      >
      > Chris
    • dpwall@hotmail.com
      I am interested in hearing some of the pros and cons of the various machines as they compare to one another. Can anyone offer opinions in this regard? Thanks,
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 21, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I am interested in hearing some of the pros and cons of the various
        machines as they compare to one another. Can anyone offer opinions in
        this regard?

        Thanks,

        David Wall
      • Frank Cabral
        Hello David, We use a Anderson Vreeland orbital washout unit. It is very simple and does not have many variables. It is basically exposing the properly dense
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 21, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello David,
          We use a Anderson Vreeland orbital washout unit. It is very simple and does
          not have many variables. It is basically exposing the properly dense
          negative, (4.0 at least, I like them digitally output of at least 1200 dpi)
          emulsion side down on the plate material for about 2.5 minutes, this is one
          of the areas where you can affect the plate. I find the MLD 145 plate
          material the best for type and where you need crisp edges I will use the
          softer plate material for printing solids. Once exposed the plate is
          attached to the magnetic orbital part of the unit and washed out with water
          for about 4 minutes. At one time I would wash it out for 2 minutes put the
          plate in the oven and dry it for 10 minutes and then wash it out for 2
          minutes then complete the drying for 20 minutes with a final exposure 4
          minutes to harden the entire plate. I have used this process with film that
          is not as dense or with very fine lines or small dots or where there is a
          lot of space between images. When I make a bad plate it is generally that
          the film was not dark enough, I exposed the wrong side of the film or the
          suction holding the kreen in place was not sufficient, all of this
          allowing to much light in to harden parts of plate that should be washed
          out. At one time a representative of AV suggested we put in vinegar in the
          washout water, at that time we had treated water, that worked fine until we
          put in a well and had the water filtered and softened which reacted with
          the vinegar and produced unstable plates, granular edges. I stopped using
          the vinegar and the problem vanished. It took a long time to figure that
          one out. I have only used this machine and have no comparison. I feel very
          confident in being able to produce excellent plates. Last summer I made
          about 230 8"x 10" plates of 16 pt text and had two bad plates, one I should
          have replaced the kreen sooner the other there was a speck between the
          negative and kreen which produced some broken letters. I will be interested
          in the experience of others with this and other machines.

          Frank
          cabral@...
          Nevada City

          dpwall@... wrote:

          >
          > I am interested in hearing some of the pros and cons of the various
          > machines as they compare to one another. Can anyone offer opinions in
          > this regard?
          >
          > Thanks,
          >
          > David Wall
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          ADVERTISEMENT
          [Image]

          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Gerald Lange
          ... Dear Frank My A&V rep told me the same thing, and I always put vinegar in the wash (he said a cupful). He said it would keep mineral deposits from
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 30, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            > Frank Cabral wrote....At one time a representative of AV suggested we put in
            > vinegar in the washout water, at that time we had treated water, that worked
            > fine until we put in a well and had the water filtered and softened which
            > reacted with the vinegar and produced unstable plates, granular edges. I
            > stopped using the vinegar and the problem vanished. It took a long time to
            > figure that one out....


            Dear Frank

            My A&V rep told me the same thing, and I always put vinegar in the
            wash (he said a cupful). He said it would keep mineral deposits from
            accumulating (it also apparently helps suspend the waste material—
            techanically termed inspissation!!!).

            When a BASF sales rep came in to try and sell me the new water-washout
            plates they are making for flexography he said the only requirements
            for conversion were extremely high temperatures and a soft water
            hookup. I didn't bother to didn't ask about vinegar.

            It just might well be that a certain acid/akaline balance is somewhat
            important.

            Gerald
          • Frank Cabral
            Hello Gerald, I think you are correct about that balance. Yet another variable. The A&V rep also suggested to have the water temperature at 110 F. for
            Message 5 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello Gerald,

              I think you are correct about that balance.
              Yet another variable. The A&V rep also suggested to have the water
              temperature at 110 F. for processing the MLD 145. I have found better
              results keeping the water about 85 degrees (as with the KM 152 plate
              material). With the higher temp. it was to easy to wash away fragile
              isolated dots or the edges of fine type.

              Frank
            • Gerald Lange
              Dear Frank Since we are using the same machine I have some questions I hope you will address. I also keep the temperature down a bit. 90 to 100 max for KM 95s
              Message 6 of 14 , Oct 1, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Frank

                Since we are using the same machine I have some questions I hope you
                will address. I also keep the temperature down a bit. 90 to 100 max
                for KM 95s (.038).

                But I would like to know your exposure times for KM 152 (.060). You
                wash these out for four minutes right? What are your exposure settings
                here for say reverses,/solids, then type, then fine lines/halftones?

                And a curious question, why MLD 145s for text? These aren't even on my
                spec sheet for letterpress!!!! Aren't the MLDs for molds, hot
                stamping, flexography, rubber stamps, etc.? How did you get to this
                choice?

                Gerald


                --- In PPLetterpress@y..., Frank Cabral <cabral@j...> wrote:
                >
                > Hello Gerald,
                >
                > I think you are correct about that balance.
                > Yet another variable. The A&V rep also suggested to have the water
                > temperature at 110 F. for processing the MLD 145. I have found better
                > results keeping the water about 85 degrees (as with the KM 152 plate
                > material). With the higher temp. it was to easy to wash away fragile
                > isolated dots or the edges of fine type.
                >
                > Frank
              • Frank Cabral
                Dear Gerald The exposure for the KM 152, depending on image, the more solid the shorter, is for about 2.5 minutes and wash out about 3 minutes. I have found
                Message 7 of 14 , Oct 2, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear Gerald

                  The exposure for the KM 152, depending on image, the more solid the
                  shorter, is for about 2.5 minutes and wash out about 3 minutes. I have
                  found that this material is easier to wash away. After about two and half
                  minutes I will check with a loupe every 15 to 30 seconds until the bevel on
                  the edge is correct and that the periods, dots over 'i' and end of lines
                  are not undercut. The arrangement of positive and negative space on the
                  negative will affect this.

                  I will use the KM 152 for solids, when the general image is large
                  (backgrounds, large block type etc.) While this material is capable of
                  holding fine lines I find when printing that it is a softer, more generous
                  and will spread more than the MLD. The 152 is great for printing on plastic
                  and responds best to soft packing.

                  MLD after the final exposure is quite hard, but brittle, and holds up to
                  the letterpress look (deep impression) that is so popular today. I have
                  found it holds fine lines and dots with a longer washout than the 152. The
                  longer washout is important, it reveals the edges of the typeface, washes
                  away the shoulder and makes the printing more accurate as to its design.
                  Especially on the different surfaces and thickness of paper. Printing is
                  primarily on 10x15 Heildelbergs' and 21x28 Heidelberg cylinder presses.

                  I don't remember how I got to this choice but it has worked so well I
                  haven't found a reason to look further. Most problems are operator error
                  either in how I made the plates, my make ready or some mystery that is
                  plainly obvious to everyone but me.

                  I think the spec sheet I have for MLD recommends it for all the
                  processes you mention but I thought it also included letterpress. I will be
                  at the shop tomorrow if it is any different I will send you a note.

                  What material do you use?

                  With regards
                  Frank


                  Gerald Lange wrote:

                  > Dear Frank
                  >
                  > Since we are using the same machine I have some questions I hope you
                  > will address. I also keep the temperature down a bit. 90 to 100 max
                  > for KM 95s (.038).
                  >
                  > But I would like to know your exposure times for KM 152 (.060). You
                  > wash these out for four minutes right? What are your exposure settings
                  > here for say reverses,/solids, then type, then fine lines/halftones?
                  >
                  > And a curious question, why MLD 145s for text? These aren't even on my
                  > spec sheet for letterpress!!!! Aren't the MLDs for molds, hot
                  > stamping, flexography, rubber stamps, etc.? How did you get to this
                  > choice?
                  >
                  > Gerald
                  >


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • typetom@aol.com
                  Hello Gerald & others, With such variations apparent in different plates, it would help my perspective if you might label the brand or source of the various
                  Message 8 of 14 , Oct 2, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello Gerald & others,
                    With such variations apparent in different plates, it would help my
                    perspective if you might label the brand or source of the various plate
                    materials you are describing. I am using Gene Becker's Miraclon MS152 plates
                    in a home-made, handwashed system, getting good results (within a long
                    process of adjustments and fine tuning and experimenting). But I am
                    continually amazed at how divergent everyone's answers are: I hardly ever
                    hear the same instructions, exposure times, washout times, proceedures, etc,
                    despite how certain and enthusiastic we all are about our results. I have
                    projected the same certainty at times, only to realize later that I had
                    misinterpreted some factor or another. Correctly diagnosing problems in this
                    technology remains a humbling mystery, despite my being able to use it
                    successfully for numerous commercial and artistic projects.

                    Another request: I wonder if someone might describe the machine washout. Does
                    the machine fill up with water and soak before brushing? Or maybe pause
                    brushing and soak occasionally? For how long? Or is it all continuous action?
                    And is there any method used for observing/evaluating the progress, or is it
                    just a timed setting? In hand-washout, I am continually checking, and choose
                    to halt early or continue washing down to clean metal backing according to
                    the specific details of the plate. I have wondered how this could be possible
                    in the machine.

                    Any rate, thanks for carrying on so -- I'm listening with interest.
                    Best wishes, Tom

                    Tom Parson
                    Now It's Up To You Publications
                    157 S. Logan, Denver CO 80209
                    (303) 777-8951
                    http://members.aol.com/typetom
                  • Gerald Lange
                    Dear Tom Don t really know how to address the first issue. Economics is a big factor here. If you are not doing industry standard (and to do so requires
                    Message 9 of 14 , Oct 3, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear Tom

                      Don't really know how to address the first issue. Economics is a big
                      factor here. If you are not doing "industry standard" (and to do so
                      requires owning variously expensive equipment; processing machine,
                      bases, etc., all of which have their own uniquely varied
                      requirements) you are doing "alt," and in alternative processing the
                      techniques and materials employed are so varied, subjective, and
                      discontinuous one to another that to speculate on their relative
                      merits or demerits is foolhardy.

                      I'd like to think this must be somewhat akin to the problems that
                      Monotype must have faced. Now that they've potentially put a possible
                      foundry into every printshop, how do they regulate it? Their answer
                      seems to have been, to not regulate. Give the caster the ability to
                      alter character positioning, metallurgy, type height, etc. Hmm, maybe
                      not the best analogy after all.

                      Maybe I can do better on machine washout. Well, the machine should
                      fill up with water to some point just above the brushes. My rep says a
                      quarter of an inch, and I believe every word he says. The machine has
                      a cyclical pattern that seems to brush, halter, and brush again. It
                      could be reversing the pattern, I do not know. The machine is closed
                      during the process. The halting is only for a second or two. The
                      machines are timed-set. It is initially a matter of trial and error to
                      find the correct timing though there is certainly enough info out
                      there to get you on the right track quite quickly. This of course
                      various with different configurations of plates. Nothing but variables
                      in photopolymer I'm afraid. Trick, I quess, is to find your own here.

                      Regarding the checking. I never do this. I don't know what I could
                      tell by what I was seeing anyway. This may probably be a good idea,
                      whether you are doing this by machine (as Frank does) or by hand (as
                      you are), but I assume you need the eye for it. If I've had problems
                      (other than the purely mechanical) they have generally been in exposure
                      because I have knowingly taken shortcuts, specifically, ganging plates
                      or running different weights of text or formats together or, the worst,
                      saying yes to the client who prefers to furnish their own plates. I do
                      a certain amount of hand washing out for a specific kind of plate and
                      I try to mimic what I believe are the actions of the machine. I have a
                      little contraption built for this that I use in the machine, against the
                      brushes; I think I may have mentioned this in a very early post. Personally,
                      hand-washing scares the crap out of me. I do a lot of bookwork mainly so
                      consistency is quite crucial to me. I'm under the opinion that seconds
                      count here and I don't trust variables in regard to processing.

                      Doubt if this answers or resolves anything. But it was a good question
                      and, since no one else jumped at it, I thought it worth a shot.

                      All best

                      Gerald

                      > Hello Gerald & others,
                      > With such variations apparent in different plates, it would help my
                      > perspective if you might label the brand or source of the various plate
                      > materials you are describing. I am using Gene Becker's Miraclon MS152 pla=tes
                      > in a home-made, handwashed system, getting good results (within a long
                      > process of adjustments and fine tuning and experimenting). But I am
                      > continually amazed at how divergent everyone's answers are: I hardly ever=
                      > hear the same instructions, exposure times, washout times, proceedures, e=tc,
                      > despite how certain and enthusiastic we all are about our results. I have=
                      > projected the same certainty at times, only to realize later that I had
                      > misinterpreted some factor or another. Correctly diagnosing problems in t=his
                      > technology remains a humbling mystery, despite my being able to use it
                      > successfully for numerous commercial and artistic projects.
                      >
                      > Another request: I wonder if someone might describe the machine washout. =Does
                      > the machine fill up with water and soak before brushing? Or maybe pause
                      > brushing and soak occasionally? For how long? Or is it all continuous act=ion?
                      > And is there any method used for observing/evaluating the progress, or is= it
                      > just a timed setting? In hand-washout, I am continually checking, and cho=ose
                      > to halt early or continue washing down to clean metal backing according t=o
                      > the specific details of the plate. I have wondered how this could be poss=ible
                      > in the machine.
                      >
                      > Any rate, thanks for carrying on so -- I'm listening with interest.
                      > Best wishes, Tom
                      >
                      > Tom Parson
                      > Now It's Up To You Publications
                      > 157 S. Logan, Denver CO 80209
                      > (303) 777-8951
                      > http://members.aol.com/typetom
                    • Harold Kyle
                      Tom, I had thought, much like you do, that hand-washing would be accurate than machine washing--until I recently switched over to a machine washout. I
                      Message 10 of 14 , Oct 4, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Tom,

                        I had thought, much like you do, that hand-washing would be accurate
                        than machine washing--until I recently switched over to a machine
                        washout. I purchased the machine for better exposure and for
                        convenience, but didn't anticipate better washout.

                        In fact, the machine washout produces noticeably better plates. The
                        main advantage to the machine is its evenness of pressure. You don't
                        need to check the plate periodically for unwashed areas because the
                        whole plate washes out at the same rate. Corners took notoriously
                        long to wash out by hand; now, I don't have to worry about overdoing
                        the washout in the center. This isn't such a problem on type, but a
                        10% or 5% screen in the middle of your plate will suffer from
                        excessive washout. Because its pressure is constant, it doesn't tend
                        to wash away isolated dots as easily.

                        Since the machine brushes are larger, they also get the plate out of
                        the water sooner. Some plates, especially the large (say, 11x17)
                        ones, had to remain underwater for 10+ minutes to wash out with a 4x8
                        brush. Leaving them underwater so long can cause delamination of the
                        plate. Oh, and the machine brushes don't have hard plastic corners
                        that can scratch the surface of your plate.

                        Handwashing works. Telling the difference between a machine washed
                        plate and a hand washed plate (by someone who has excellent
                        technique) would be impossible on most small plates. But for large
                        plates or ones with isolated dots, light screens, or very small text,
                        machine washing works much better.

                        Harold Kyle
                        www.boxcarpress.com
                      • typetom@aol.com
                        Thanks Gerald, Your description of the washout machine action is about as I imagined, having only seen one not in operation. My washout time is presently quite
                        Message 11 of 14 , Oct 4, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thanks Gerald,
                          Your description of the washout machine action is about as I imagined, having
                          only seen one not in operation. My washout time is presently quite a bit
                          longer than others have mentioned, perhaps because I use a very soft brush
                          and only very gently agitate. Obviously still some room for experimentation
                          here, but my results now are quite consistent and it seems possible to
                          control it by hand washing.

                          My first question was probably simpler than your answer: just that the plate
                          references (such as MK or MLD) don't tell me much unless I am using the same
                          source for plates, I think. Would the MK152 be the same as the MS152 I get
                          from Gene Becker? Maybe I just need to go back to the various notes Gene gave
                          me to see if the answer is there. Similarly, I have had some difficulty
                          making comparison with materials supplied by NA Graphics, because the names
                          differ. So I thought it might help if I say Gene Becker's Miraclon MS152
                          rather than 152 or MS152....

                          Regarding toxicity, it sounds like it's a question of skin sensitivity rather
                          than poison or carcinogin. I have hand-washed maybe 40 sheets (A3 size,
                          297x420 mm = 11x15? cut to innumerable smaller plates) over six years or so.
                          No gloves. No noticable skin reaction, no other problems at all (except an
                          occasional cut from the sharp edge of the metal backing, of course). I do
                          keep the water running slightly (to keep the temperature constant) so maybe
                          the concentration is low. Or maybe I'm just not sensitive. So far, it seems
                          to me remarkably benign. The very slight odor from unexposed material also
                          seems inconsequential to me. UV light, of course, is bad for the eyes (and
                          skin as well, I think).

                          Best regards, Tom

                          Tom Parson
                          Now It's Up To You Publications
                          157 S. Logan, Denver CO 80209
                          (303) 777-8951
                          http://members.aol.com/typetom
                        • Frank Cabral
                          Hello Tom, The orbital washout unit has been the only way I have been able to produce consistently good plates efficiently. The time factor is very important.
                          Message 12 of 14 , Oct 4, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hello Tom,
                            The orbital washout unit has been the only way I have been able to produce
                            consistently good plates efficiently. The time factor is very important.
                            About twenty years ago, when the photo polymer was just entering the
                            market, I was told by salesmen that the plate could be exposed in the sun
                            and washed out in a sink with any brush. I spent what seemed and endless
                            amount of time discovering only that there are many variables. I built
                            things, converted things, nothing I did seemed to have the same results
                            twice, or that the plates were just not good enough. I like process, but I
                            was always off task trying to find a solution.
                            While not quite a glorious epiphany, the machine allowed me to make
                            accurate plates, in a short time with not so much guess work. I only had to
                            pay attention to the orientation and density of the negative, the suction
                            of the vacuum table, cleanliness of the kreene, monitor the wash out, water
                            temperature, drying and final exposure to harden the material. The process
                            is simple and consistent (generally).
                            I like to examine the plate during washout to check that as much
                            material has washed away as possible but not so much as to weaken its
                            structural integrity , (small bits of the design, or letters that break off
                            during printing that you don't notice until you are finished).
                            Gerald has a good explanation of the washout process.
                            I think Monotype had much more exacting details built into their
                            production, and while success at times seems atmospheric the documentation
                            they provided would allow you some success. There are just so many pieces
                            to pull together and each one requires complete attention to detail.

                            If you contact me off list I can send you some plate processing
                            instructions for Miraclon/Rigilon, this is the MLD made by Toyoba. They
                            also recommend it for crash printing, hot stamping and for pantograph
                            masters. I have only used it for letterpress printing.

                            Regards
                            Frank
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.