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

Re: UV light

Expand Messages
  • typetom@aol.com
    In a message dated 9/5/2003 bieler@worldnet.att.net writes:
    Message 1 of 4 , Sep 5, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 9/5/2003 bieler@... writes:
      << the vacuum uses a sheet of glass...
      My understanding is that you do need a translucent medium not a transparent
      medium for photopolymer exposure. I had asked my platemaker sales rep about
      this a long while back and he confirmed it.
      I believe Harold Kyle (Boxcarpress.com) sells some kind of kit for replacing
      glass with (K)reene though. >>

      Hi Gerald,
      I have been using transparent glass (an old Nuarc vacuum frame) for exposing
      photopolymer plates -- no problem except the vacuum actually was bending the
      glass slightly and allowing occasionally irregular contact between the negative
      and the plate material. I solved that by adding pieces of mat board around
      the plate material to support the glass and keep it from bending so much.

      The use of glass (and the transparency) does not seem to me to be a problem,
      once I figured out the bending. I work with an home-made exposure set-up and
      hand washout, and I have been getting excellent and consistent results, all
      kinds of fine-lined images and fonts.

      My exposure box is 4 UV flourescent bulbs, which cost me a total of $48. A
      friend gave me the vacuum frame, so that was my total start up cost except the
      price of a brush I got from Gene Becker.

      The only advantage I can see for the expensive exposure/washout machines is
      for doing quite large plates, which may take too long to wash out by hand with
      a manageable size brush. I've done 7 x 9 and a few larger, though, on
      occasion, mostly around 4 x 6 no problems.
      Best wishes to all, Tom


      Tom Parson
      Now It's Up To You Publications
      157 S. Logan, Denver CO 80209
      (303) 777-8951
      http://members.aol.com/typetom
    • E Roustom
      ... The enthusiasm and ingenuity is aplauded, but the understatement calls for a correction: The advatantage of the expensive exposure/washout machines is
      Message 2 of 4 , Sep 6, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        > The only advantage I can see for the expensive exposure/washout machines is
        > for doing quite large plates, which may take too long to wash out by hand with
        > a manageable size brush. I've done 7 x 9 and a few larger, though, on
        > occasion, mostly around 4 x 6 no problems.
        > Best wishes to all, Tom

        The enthusiasm and ingenuity is aplauded, but the understatement calls for a
        correction: The advatantage of "the expensive exposure/washout machines" is
        being able to make plate after plate in a predictable and reliable manner
        with the least amount of effort in the least amount of time, wasting less
        material in the process. If you print for profit (ha ha) there's no
        substitute.

        If you print occasionally though, the big machines are overkill.

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