Gig Posters

Posters: 154962 | Bands: 135070 | Designers: 11471                 
   
       RSS Feeds

Username:   Password: 
Register      

Social Networking Activity                 



 Bands  Designers  New Arrivals  Top Lists  Forums  Buy Posters  Submit  Merch Store  Advertise  Widgets  Help

Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    110
    Comments
    1321

    Default luck with Capillary Film?

    I've used Ulano TZ for about 55 different posters. Has good exposures and washouts 85% of the time. But I'm thinking about trying Ulanocut CDF Matrix Capillary Film (http://www.dickblick.com/zz433/29/) especially since they boast exposure flexibility and easy reclaiming.

    Anybody have experience with this good or bad, esp in comparison to emulsions like TZ or QTX?

    thanks,
    Anthony

  2. #2
    Premium Member
    Andymac's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Van Isle BC Canada
    Posts
    11,687
    Comments
    277

    Default

    better check its compatibility with waterbase inks.

    it's way more expensive per sq ft compared to direct emulsion

    we used it for years for certain applications - prints great detail, but not so resistant to cleaning during runs. We used to stick it on, then top coat the screens to make it tougher.

    Application can be tricky, and screens have to be clean and degreased properly to accept it and have it grab good.
    Andymac

    services www.squeegeeville.com
    equipment www.tmiscreenprinting.com

    Todo es empezar.

  3. #3
    Premium Member
    imagine's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    sactown ca
    Posts
    4,872
    Comments
    759

    Default

    i hate that crap. it's much easier to just use emulsion out of the bucket

  4. #4
    squeegeethree's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NYC
    Posts
    6,601
    Comments
    62

    Default

    It's a useful thing to know how to do. Invest the time to figure it out. Now that I've done it a few times I'll probably never do it again.

  5. #5
    Premium Member
    Andymac's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Van Isle BC Canada
    Posts
    11,687
    Comments
    277

    Default

    backwards rollon method always worked best, unless I had some dust or shit on the screen.

    I agree with punkfisher

    sq3 did you print any waterbased production runs. we used autotype cap18 or something like that.

    they use tons of this in electronics printing, because it gives you a pretty accurate ink lay (or at least control over the thickeness)

    ever try the precoated mesh from Sefar?
    Andymac

    services www.squeegeeville.com
    equipment www.tmiscreenprinting.com

    Todo es empezar.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    110
    Comments
    1321

    Default

    Alright, that gives me my answer. Stick with the emulsion bucket. I'm not about to do anything fancy like degrease the screen. I print in my apartment using very redimentary methods.

    The mesh I use is pretty broad, I use I think 135 gauge Sefar from V-Factory. My prints aren't precise works of technical brilliance, thass fine by me.

    But—might switch to QTX. I've been using TZ since printing on my own but am thinking about starting with QTX after I finish this gallon. QTX—more forgiving in the exposure dept? Easier or harder to reclaim? Right now I'm using a 500w halogen at 19 minute exposures.

    Thanks all, thanks Andy.

    Anthony

  7. #7
    squeegeethree's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NYC
    Posts
    6,601
    Comments
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andymac View Post
    backwards rollon method always worked best, unless I had some dust or shit on the screen.

    I agree with punkfisher

    sq3 did you print any waterbased production runs. we used autotype cap18 or something like that.

    they use tons of this in electronics printing, because it gives you a pretty accurate ink lay (or at least control over the thickeness)

    ever try the precoated mesh from Sefar?
    No, we never did use WB inks. I really liked the results. So sharp. I did a really nice 100 lpi halftone with it once.

  8. #8

    Default

    The cost must be quite steep for Cap film now. I used to use Autotype 5 star for a long time. I agree, the detail can't be beaten.

    The joys of amazing detail were often crushed when I wash the center of the letter "R" out though. Great stencil, just don't touch it for fuck sake!

  9. #9
    Premium Member
    ImJustRickG's Avatar


    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Jet City
    Posts
    2,373
    Comments
    2421

    Default

    unless I had some dust or shit on the screen.
    Andy prints with elk poop.
    Shizouka!

    Brg!

    "I don't know shit about screenprinting and can still tell all the questions you ask are retarded." -Blonde
    I can't imagine being in this position and saying to myself "Hey! I bet the people at Gigposters will be helpful!". -Phoon

  10. #10

    Default

    this is the stuff i use in my classroom. once i figured out the technique, it worked great. i dont pay for it, so cost does not matter.

    its true it doesnt hold up well after washes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •