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

Re: [PPLetterpress] Re: troubleshooting

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
      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 2 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
        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 3 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
          > 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 4 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
            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 5 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
              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 6 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
                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 7 of 28 , Jun 3, 2005
                  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 8 of 28 , Jun 4, 2005
                    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.