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

Re: [PPLetterpress] Re: troubleshooting

Expand Messages
  • Jessica Spring
    Tom & Gerald-- The plates are 94FL. I do have the steel bar at the bottom, so I can try taking that off, and for comparison I can try a steel-backed plate. The
    Message 1 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Tom & Gerald--
      The plates are 94FL. I do have the steel bar at the bottom, so I can try
      taking that off, and for comparison I can try a steel-backed plate. The last
      bit of the mystery: my vacuum has a simple on-off switch and half the time
      the button won't stay on. I've replaced the button itself, but the problem
      remains, which Jet attributes to humidity. Hmmmm. I have to let it sort of
      warm up, then it stays on. As Charles suggested, I think the vacuum is a
      stinker (AKA "wildly out of whack") and this plate happens to reveal that in
      a way I hadn't seen consistently with type.

      Jessica

      > From: "Gerald Lange" <bieler@...>
      > Reply-To: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 06:02:55 -0000
      > To: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [PPLetterpress] Re: troubleshooting
      >
      > Tom
      >
      > Interesting speculation but I doubt the vacuum is such, in any of
      > these machines, to be able to pull a polyester-backed plate into the
      > vacuum line. That would sort of be a major engineering flaw. I process
      > both steel-backed and polyester-backed plates in my machine and I
      > can't imagine this to be the case. While polyester-backed plates are
      > certainly flexible (and a bit unnerving to those accustomed to
      > steel-backs), they are not flexible enough to be drawn down into that
      > thinly etched vacuum line, unless there is something wildly out of
      > wack with Jessica's vacuum pump!
      >
      > Gerald
      >
      >
      > --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, typetom@a... wrote:
      >>
      >>
      >> In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Jessica Spring wrote:
      >>> there is now a subtle but visible "plaid" where the vacuum lines
      > produced
      >> more suction.
      >>
      >>
      >> I'm guessing you are using polyester-backed plates and the vacuum
      > is sucking
      >> hard enough to distort the contact between the plate and the
      > negative, by
      >> pulling the polyester material into the vacuum lines. I use
      > steel-backed
      >> plates. Never seen any such effect. I wonder if a thin support
      > layer beneath the
      >> plate material might solve the problem?
      >>
      >> Pure speculation! but I'd guess it's such a subtle effect that it
      > wouldn't
      >> show on normal text or image areas. You wouldn't notice the plaid if
      > the lines
      >> had other irregular variations already! A solid pattern with thin
      > rules
      >> would test the limits of the system just about every way possible!
      >>
      >>
      >> Best wishes. Let us know what you discover....
      >> Tom
      >>
      >> Tom Parson
      >> Now It's Up To You Publications
      >> 157 S. Logan, Denver CO 80209
      >> (303) 777-8951
      >> http://members.aol.com/typetom
      >>
      >>
      >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Gerald Lange
      Jessica 94FLs are a tad softer than other plates, don t know if this is the culprit or not. I d recommend a hardness rating of 65-70 Shore D minimum. You might
      Message 2 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Jessica

        94FLs are a tad softer than other plates, don't know if this is the culprit or not. I'd recommend a hardness rating of 65-70 Shore D minimum. You might also think about switching to a higher grade plate brand.

        Gerald

        --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Jessica Spring <springtide@i...>
        wrote:
        > Tom & Gerald--
        > The plates are 94FL. I do have the steel bar at the bottom, so I can try
        > taking that off, and for comparison I can try a steel-backed plate.
        The last
        > bit of the mystery: my vacuum has a simple on-off switch and half
        the time
        > the button won't stay on. I've replaced the button itself, but the
        problem
        > remains, which Jet attributes to humidity. Hmmmm. I have to let it
        sort of
        > warm up, then it stays on. As Charles suggested, I think the vacuum is a
        > stinker (AKA "wildly out of whack") and this plate happens to reveal
        that in
        > a way I hadn't seen consistently with type.
        >
        > Jessica
        >
        > > From: "Gerald Lange" <bieler@w...>
        > > Reply-To: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
        > > Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 06:02:55 -0000
        > > To: PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: [PPLetterpress] Re: troubleshooting
        > >
        > > Tom
        > >
        > > Interesting speculation but I doubt the vacuum is such, in any of
        > > these machines, to be able to pull a polyester-backed plate into the
        > > vacuum line. That would sort of be a major engineering flaw. I process
        > > both steel-backed and polyester-backed plates in my machine and I
        > > can't imagine this to be the case. While polyester-backed plates are
        > > certainly flexible (and a bit unnerving to those accustomed to
        > > steel-backs), they are not flexible enough to be drawn down into that
        > > thinly etched vacuum line, unless there is something wildly out of
        > > wack with Jessica's vacuum pump!
        > >
        > > Gerald
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, typetom@a... wrote:
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Jessica Spring wrote:
        > >>> there is now a subtle but visible "plaid" where the vacuum lines
        > > produced
        > >> more suction.
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> I'm guessing you are using polyester-backed plates and the vacuum
        > > is sucking
        > >> hard enough to distort the contact between the plate and the
        > > negative, by
        > >> pulling the polyester material into the vacuum lines. I use
        > > steel-backed
        > >> plates. Never seen any such effect. I wonder if a thin support
        > > layer beneath the
        > >> plate material might solve the problem?
        > >>
        > >> Pure speculation! but I'd guess it's such a subtle effect that it
        > > wouldn't
        > >> show on normal text or image areas. You wouldn't notice the plaid if
        > > the lines
        > >> had other irregular variations already! A solid pattern with thin
        > > rules
        > >> would test the limits of the system just about every way possible!
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> Best wishes. Let us know what you discover....
        > >> Tom
        > >>
        > >> Tom Parson
        > >> Now It's Up To You Publications
        > >> 157 S. Logan, Denver CO 80209
        > >> (303) 777-8951
        > >> http://members.aol.com/typetom
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
      • Harold Kyle
        ... Well you finally stirred me to write with this comment! Re: softness . The hardness of the 94FL is 62 shore D so I think you d have a hard time seeing the
        Message 3 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          On 6/3/05 1:22 PM, "Gerald Lange" <bieler@...> wrote:
          > 94FLs are a tad softer than other plates, don't know if this is the culprit or
          > not. I'd recommend a hardness rating of 65-70 Shore D minimum. You might also
          > think about switching to a higher grade plate brand.

          Well you finally stirred me to write with this comment!

          Re: "softness". The hardness of the 94FL is 62 shore D so I think you'd have
          a hard time seeing the difference between it and your recommended range of
          65-70. The difference is insubstantial. Also, should you want a harder
          plate, Jet makes a 94HFL that has 80 shore D. We at Boxcar Press have a job
          shop running the popular "deep impression" printing exclusively from the
          94FL. The plate's printing shows no evidence of "softness".

          Re: "Higher grade plate", Gerald, your opinion of Jet 94FL plates are of
          less quality will not be borne out in a side to side test of the material. A
          rep selling Toyobo Printight visited Boxcar Press' shop earlier this week
          and we proofed a test plate of Printight KF95 next to the Jet 94FL material.
          The Jet plate showed more detail and, at the same time, exhibited less gain;
          this is with a rep selling Printight monitoring the processing. After
          extensive testing, I've come to conclude that the only plate that gives the
          94FL a run for the money is the BASF WH95. The cost difference between these
          plates makes the 94FL much more desirable option. I would be happy, by the
          way, to scan a proof of the side-by-side comparison of Printight and Jet
          plates when I get a chance.

          Re: Jessica's platemaking "plaid" problem. I'm problem solving this with the
          manufacturer of the machine, who apparently can furnish a vacuum table
          adaptor to make the grooves less noticeable. I want to get more information
          before I promise you that this is possible. Apparently, the adaptor is a
          "diamond-plate" material that sits in the vacuum table. I'll post to the
          list to let you know when I have more information. The problems you're
          experiencing, though, appear to be from the platemaker and not the plate.

          Re: Jessica's platemaking button problem. I'm sorry I didn't touch base with
          you about this sooner. I remember calling you several months ago to let you
          know that I may have found the possible problem, but I guess we never
          touched base. Apparently, the powder-coating of the steel might have made
          the opening for the vacuum switch too small. The extra pressure on the
          switch causes problems in it working properly. You can file the opening to
          be a little wider see if the switch works better.

          Sorry not to be able to write sooner. I should be loading my trailer right
          now for a press move...

          Harold

          Boxcar Press
          Fine Printing / Digital Letterpress Supplies
          Delavan Center / 501 W. Fayette St. / Studio 222 / Syracuse, NY 13204
          315-473-0930 phone / 315-473-0967 fax / www.boxcarpress.com
        • Gerald Lange
          Harold My comment about higher grade plate brand had nothing to do with Toyobo. Neither Jet or Toyobo are what I would consider top grade plates. But they are
          Message 4 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Harold

            My comment about higher grade plate brand had nothing to do with Toyobo.
            Neither Jet or Toyobo are what I would consider top grade plates. But
            they are both adequate for most letterpress applications. I've run my
            own comparison tests of these particular brands as well and my suspicion
            is that these differing plates need differing exposure and washout times
            to provide optimum detail and subsurface strength, so it is essentially
            misleading to compare them or any other plate brand in the manner that
            you suggest.

            But the hardness rating of a plate has less to do with how deep your
            impression can be than it does with ink acceptance and transfer. Any
            photopolymer plate, no matter brand or hardness or thickness or relief
            depth, is going to splay under increased printing pressure (that is self
            evident to any seasoned printer). And "gain" is a normal consequence of
            increased impression with the letterpress process. If folks need deep
            impression without splay they would be better off going with a copper
            photomechanical engraving mounted on a metal base. There is a technical
            reason for the limitation of thickness and relief (and hardness) in
            regard to letterpress formulated plates.

            Just out of curiosity, would you have switched brands if Toyobo had
            surpassed the Jet in your comparison test?

            Gerald
            Good luck with the press move.



            Harold Kyle wrote:

            >On 6/3/05 1:22 PM, "Gerald Lange" <bieler@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >>94FLs are a tad softer than other plates, don't know if this is the culprit or
            >>not. I'd recommend a hardness rating of 65-70 Shore D minimum. You might also
            >>think about switching to a higher grade plate brand.
            >>
            >>
            >
            >Well you finally stirred me to write with this comment!
            >
            >Re: "softness". The hardness of the 94FL is 62 shore D so I think you'd have
            >a hard time seeing the difference between it and your recommended range of
            >65-70. The difference is insubstantial. Also, should you want a harder
            >plate, Jet makes a 94HFL that has 80 shore D. We at Boxcar Press have a job
            >shop running the popular "deep impression" printing exclusively from the
            >94FL. The plate's printing shows no evidence of "softness".
            >
            >Re: "Higher grade plate", Gerald, your opinion of Jet 94FL plates are of
            >less quality will not be borne out in a side to side test of the material. A
            >rep selling Toyobo Printight visited Boxcar Press' shop earlier this week
            >and we proofed a test plate of Printight KF95 next to the Jet 94FL material.
            >The Jet plate showed more detail and, at the same time, exhibited less gain;
            >this is with a rep selling Printight monitoring the processing. After
            >extensive testing, I've come to conclude that the only plate that gives the
            >94FL a run for the money is the BASF WH95. The cost difference between these
            >plates makes the 94FL much more desirable option. I would be happy, by the
            >way, to scan a proof of the side-by-side comparison of Printight and Jet
            >plates when I get a chance.
            >
            >Re: Jessica's platemaking "plaid" problem. I'm problem solving this with the
            >manufacturer of the machine, who apparently can furnish a vacuum table
            >adaptor to make the grooves less noticeable. I want to get more information
            >before I promise you that this is possible. Apparently, the adaptor is a
            >"diamond-plate" material that sits in the vacuum table. I'll post to the
            >list to let you know when I have more information. The problems you're
            >experiencing, though, appear to be from the platemaker and not the plate.
            >
            >Re: Jessica's platemaking button problem. I'm sorry I didn't touch base with
            >you about this sooner. I remember calling you several months ago to let you
            >know that I may have found the possible problem, but I guess we never
            >touched base. Apparently, the powder-coating of the steel might have made
            >the opening for the vacuum switch too small. The extra pressure on the
            >switch causes problems in it working properly. You can file the opening to
            >be a little wider see if the switch works better.
            >
            >Sorry not to be able to write sooner. I should be loading my trailer right
            >now for a press move...
            >
            >Harold
            >
            >Boxcar Press
            >Fine Printing / Digital Letterpress Supplies
            >Delavan Center / 501 W. Fayette St. / Studio 222 / Syracuse, NY 13204
            >315-473-0930 phone / 315-473-0967 fax / www.boxcarpress.com
          • David Wall
            ... Oh come on . . . I haven t been following this thread up until now, so maybe I ve missed something---but this sounds like a bunch of baloney. I consider
            Message 5 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              > But the hardness rating of a plate has less to do with how deep your
              > impression can be than it does with ink acceptance and transfer. Any
              > photopolymer plate, no matter brand or hardness or thickness or relief
              > depth, is going to splay under increased printing pressure (that is
              > self
              > evident to any seasoned printer). And "gain" is a normal consequence
              > of
              > increased impression with the letterpress process.  If folks need deep
              > impression without splay they would be better off going with a copper
              > photomechanical engraving mounted on a metal base. There is a
              > technical
              > reason for the limitation of thickness and relief (and hardness) in
              > regard to letterpress formulated plates.

              Oh come on . . . I haven't been following this thread up until now, so
              maybe I've missed something---but this sounds like a bunch of baloney.
              I consider myself an appropriately seasoned printer and I've never
              found "splay" to be of any more consequence with photopolymer than it
              is with metal type---which is to say, no consequence at all. If we were
              using plates similar in durometer to hard rubber stamps I can see where
              it would be a factor, but I highly doubt that any splay in the plates
              that any of us use would be noticeable unless you were either
              deliberately abusing the plate---by which I don't mean simply "deep
              impression"---or you were somehow measuring in microns---in which case
              ink squeeze and the amount of ink on the rollers would obliterate any
              reliable evidence of splay. Perhaps this phenomenon is a factor in
              flexo printing of screened images in cases where precise color matching
              of prepress proofs and original artwork is important, but it certainly
              doesn't play any significant role in letterpress printing from polymer
              plates.

              Dave

              ________________
              David P. Wall
              The Applecart Press, LLC
              14 Maine Street, Box 43
              Brunswick, ME 04011
              Tel. 207-373-1690
              Fax 207-373-1691
              www.applecartpress.com
            • Gerald Lange
              David This kind of surprises me. I guess I ll have to respectively disagree. There are techical reports I could dig up concerning quantitative compression and
              Message 6 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                David

                This kind of surprises me. I guess I'll have to respectively disagree.

                There are techical reports I could dig up concerning quantitative
                compression and pressure measures of photopolymer plates which I would
                assume have more weight than "our" experiential wisdom or ad hoc
                tests, but clearly, what a waste of effort that would be.

                Gerald


                --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, David Wall <applecartpress@y...>
                wrote:
                > > But the hardness rating of a plate has less to do with how deep your
                > > impression can be than it does with ink acceptance and transfer. Any
                > > photopolymer plate, no matter brand or hardness or thickness or
                relief
                > > depth, is going to splay under increased printing pressure (that is
                > > self
                > > evident to any seasoned printer). And "gain" is a normal consequence
                > > of
                > > increased impression with the letterpress process. If folks need
                deep
                > > impression without splay they would be better off going with a copper
                > > photomechanical engraving mounted on a metal base. There is a
                > > technical
                > > reason for the limitation of thickness and relief (and hardness) in
                > > regard to letterpress formulated plates.
                >
                > Oh come on . . . I haven't been following this thread up until now, so
                > maybe I've missed something---but this sounds like a bunch of baloney.
                > I consider myself an appropriately seasoned printer and I've never
                > found "splay" to be of any more consequence with photopolymer than it
                > is with metal type---which is to say, no consequence at all. If we were
                > using plates similar in durometer to hard rubber stamps I can see where
                > it would be a factor, but I highly doubt that any splay in the plates
                > that any of us use would be noticeable unless you were either
                > deliberately abusing the plate---by which I don't mean simply "deep
                > impression"---or you were somehow measuring in microns---in which case
                > ink squeeze and the amount of ink on the rollers would obliterate any
                > reliable evidence of splay. Perhaps this phenomenon is a factor in
                > flexo printing of screened images in cases where precise color matching
                > of prepress proofs and original artwork is important, but it certainly
                > doesn't play any significant role in letterpress printing from polymer
                > plates.
                >
                > Dave
                >
                > ________________
                > David P. Wall
                > The Applecart Press, LLC
                > 14 Maine Street, Box 43
                > Brunswick, ME 04011
                > Tel. 207-373-1690
                > Fax 207-373-1691
                > www.applecartpress.com
              • Harold Kyle
                ... I m sorry--I thought that was the plate that you preferred. Would a higher grade be BASF? Are there any other plates that you consider top of the line? ...
                Message 7 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 6/3/05 5:45 PM, "Gerald Lange" <bieler@...> wrote:
                  > My comment about higher grade plate brand had nothing to do with Toyobo.
                  I'm sorry--I thought that was the plate that you preferred. Would a higher
                  grade be BASF? Are there any other plates that you consider top of the line?

                  > so it is essentially
                  > misleading to compare them or any other plate brand in the manner that
                  > you suggest.
                  The test I did showed that the Printight plate gained more with less detail.
                  To get more detail I would have had to increase exposure, causing more gain.
                  I relied on the rep selling Printight to dial in the right numbers. But I
                  agree that this is a slippery issue, and best left up to the printer's
                  judgement. I'm stating my personal preference and standing up for it based
                  on tests I've done. The differences between brands are minimal but when I
                  print I have the attitude: "I need all the help I can get." I really wish I
                  could afford BASF plates, and I might consider using them more if they
                  didn't smell so much!

                  > Just out of curiosity, would you have switched brands if Toyobo had
                  > surpassed the Jet in your comparison test?
                  We sell Printight plates alongside Jet and BASF plates, so we're very
                  familiar with the Printight brand in relation to the competition. We prefer
                  them for intaglio processing. The pricing is comparable with Jet plates, so
                  yes I would be tempted to switch brands if I felt the plates were equally
                  sharp on the letterpress. The Printight salesman hasn't given up--we may be
                  troubleshooting the gain issues soon. For now, I'm sticking with the plates
                  that I know are going to give the best results.

                  I'll be back on Monday! The trailer's loaded up and ready to go.

                  Harold


                  Boxcar Press
                  Fine Printing / Digital Letterpress Supplies
                  Delavan Center / 501 W. Fayette St. / Studio 222 / Syracuse, NY 13204
                  315-473-0930 phone / 315-473-0967 fax / www.boxcarpress.com
                • LA. Book Arts
                  All, the problem she has is with the machine, the machine doesn t seem to have a gage for vacuum pressure, so basically she has no way of knowing if she has
                  Message 8 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    All,

                    the problem she has is with the machine, the machine doesn't seem to
                    have a gage for vacuum pressure, so basically she has no way of knowing
                    if she has enough or what.
                    The exposing of a plate with Film is a very critical stage of
                    platemaking, a good vacuum, a good piece of Film and it's smooth
                    sailing. I just made 65 9.5 x13 inch plates (WH 94) for a book project
                    the other day.
                    If you have no way of measuring your action it is very difficult to
                    repeat it over and over.

                    charles


                    www.custombindery.com
                  • Gerald Lange
                    Harold I actually prefer the BASF, especially for halftones or very fine detail though I am not sure I have quite figured out the correct washout for them as
                    Message 9 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Harold

                      I actually prefer the BASF, especially for halftones or very fine
                      detail though I am not sure I have quite figured out the correct
                      washout for them as they never seem finished to me. The surface
                      texture is ideal, but yes, they do stink and crud up the bath. I like
                      plates that indicate by color, surface and subsurface, which both the
                      BASF and the Toyobo do. For some reason I think it helps clarify
                      things for me.

                      There are probably a lot better plates out there, BASF is getting to
                      be rather old technology I'd think (maybe that's not bad though).
                      Would appreciate any info you discover in this regard.

                      You might like this: When I first started buying photopolymer plates I
                      went to visit my processor and discovered a completely different plate
                      on his press (a BASF). I asked him why he didn't sell those to his
                      clients. He didn't miss a beat, "Because my customers are too f***ing
                      cheap."

                      At any rate, I keep profiles on clients as to their needs and
                      expectations and often process plates based on various formulas I have
                      used. I think the Toyobos require much less exposure and much more
                      washout (than the reps tell you) to get to finer detail and better
                      substructure. I've run Jets at the same formula and they are not quite
                      there. So I assume they have their own configuration. But I don't use
                      them or sell them so don't know what that would be.

                      Once again, good luck with the move.

                      Gerald

                      --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, Harold Kyle <harold@b...> wrote:
                      > On 6/3/05 5:45 PM, "Gerald Lange" <bieler@w...> wrote:
                      > > My comment about higher grade plate brand had nothing to do with
                      Toyobo.
                      > I'm sorry--I thought that was the plate that you preferred. Would a
                      higher
                      > grade be BASF? Are there any other plates that you consider top of
                      the line?
                      >
                      > > so it is essentially
                      > > misleading to compare them or any other plate brand in the manner that
                      > > you suggest.
                      > The test I did showed that the Printight plate gained more with less
                      detail.
                      > To get more detail I would have had to increase exposure, causing
                      more gain.
                      > I relied on the rep selling Printight to dial in the right numbers.
                      But I
                      > agree that this is a slippery issue, and best left up to the printer's
                      > judgement. I'm stating my personal preference and standing up for it
                      based
                      > on tests I've done. The differences between brands are minimal but
                      when I
                      > print I have the attitude: "I need all the help I can get." I really
                      wish I
                      > could afford BASF plates, and I might consider using them more if they
                      > didn't smell so much!
                      >
                      > > Just out of curiosity, would you have switched brands if Toyobo had
                      > > surpassed the Jet in your comparison test?
                      > We sell Printight plates alongside Jet and BASF plates, so we're very
                      > familiar with the Printight brand in relation to the competition. We
                      prefer
                      > them for intaglio processing. The pricing is comparable with Jet
                      plates, so
                      > yes I would be tempted to switch brands if I felt the plates were
                      equally
                      > sharp on the letterpress. The Printight salesman hasn't given up--we
                      may be
                      > troubleshooting the gain issues soon. For now, I'm sticking with the
                      plates
                      > that I know are going to give the best results.
                      >
                      > I'll be back on Monday! The trailer's loaded up and ready to go.
                      >
                      > Harold
                      >
                      >
                      > Boxcar Press
                      > Fine Printing / Digital Letterpress Supplies
                      > Delavan Center / 501 W. Fayette St. / Studio 222 / Syracuse, NY 13204
                      > 315-473-0930 phone / 315-473-0967 fax / www.boxcarpress.com
                    • Gerald Lange
                      Hi Charles No vacuum gauge? How did you find that out? Geez, this was all sort of a big waste of time then wasn t it? If it does nothing else, a gauge will
                      Message 10 of 28 , Jun 4, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Charles

                        No vacuum gauge? How did you find that out?

                        Geez, this was all sort of a big waste of time then wasn't it? If it
                        does nothing else, a gauge will tell you when vacuum is iffy, and, if
                        it reveals release during exposure, your plate/s just went south. Kind
                        of an important feature.

                        Gerald


                        --- In PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com, LA. Book Arts <livres@a...> wrote:
                        > All,
                        >
                        > the problem she has is with the machine, the machine doesn't seem to
                        > have a gage for vacuum pressure, so basically she has no way of knowing
                        > if she has enough or what.
                        > The exposing of a plate with Film is a very critical stage of
                        > platemaking, a good vacuum, a good piece of Film and it's smooth
                        > sailing. I just made 65 9.5 x13 inch plates (WH 94) for a book project
                        > the other day.
                        > If you have no way of measuring your action it is very difficult to
                        > repeat it over and over.
                        >
                        > charles
                        >
                        >
                        > www.custombindery.com
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.