New tissue adhesion Options

[richsul]

Craig,

Everything indicates a load from 35 to 80 is in the ballpark. The high loads don't work well. The 35 is quite transparent and some have indicated they can see the etch better. Thus the 35 is going beta till the end of the year as I posted earlier.

--Dick

All right! We are getting somewhere for sure.
Will, great studio down there, leaders in gravure!
Dick, I've got some testing under my belt now, and before my findings, Thanks! I mean, to get this good of a result, it's great.

OK, I've tested the 35 load and the 140 load simultaneous. Here we go: Yesterday;

Sensitized= First test with 35 load, 3 1/2 minutes in 5% dichromate @ 53 degrees F. / Studio @60% Rh. and 73 degrees F.
Squeegeed onto plexi then peeled and hung with indirect air flowing. tissue dry to touch in 1hour. Gave additional 45 minutes for drying.
Exposure= screen exposure 2 minutes at 600 watts, main exposure 3 minutes at 600 watts.
Laydown= 30 seconds in 68 degree distilled water, squeegeed onto plate, excellent immediate adhesion. Let sit for 15 minutes.
Developed= water bath at 115 degrees, plate sat for about 10-11 minutes, gel appeared from under backing sheet, sheet removed well. Cotton and 3 bath changes used. Great stencil, but underexposed, very thin. Plate chilled and stood on end to dry. Image 3501 shows this stencil:


140 Load= looks a lot like Autotype.
Sensitized for 3 minutes in 5% dichromate @55 degrees F. Studio at 60% Rh and 73 degrees F.
when squegeed, I noticed this tissue would not grab the plexi at all. The 35 load grabbed after a few swipes with the blade. No matter how many with the 140, it still moved about the plexi with out grabbing. I peeled it and hung to dry. It was curled badly at 1 3/4 hours and had a very bad pattern on the surface, though I did not recall it when I took it off the plexi. The 35 load sheet was hanging flat, while the 140 was curled completely. It did feel dry to the touch.
Exposure= Given the Autotype resemblance, I gave it about the same exposure I would for G25, 2 1/2 minute screen, 4 minute main @ 600watts.
Laydown= Same as above, but not quite the same grab with initial squeegee to plate. let sit for 15 minutes.
Develop= water bath at 115 degrees after 10 minutes, the paper was released on all sides, but stuck in the middle. It was evident that the tissue was not completely dry ( explaining the curl?) after removing the backing sheet, a very thick stencil with decent range was developed with cotton and 3 bath changes. The pattern that was evident on the tissue surface after drying lifted through out the entire stencil in an aquatint like pattern. Also the stencil had very bad holes and blisters that had randomly lifted. Left to dry overnight after chilling.


Today; 65% Rh at 74 degrees F.
Now I had a basis and some things to look for. Some notes. I cleaned off the stencils from the plates and noticed that the 35 load, although very thin, was very strong and needed Twinkle copper cleaner to remove it from the copper. The 140 load rinsed right off with the hose.

35 Load:
Sensitize= 5% dichromate solution for 3 1/2 minutes at 58 degrees F., Squeegeed to plexi (nice grab) and peeled to hang. Surface smooth and very little moisture is seen.
Exposure= 2 1/2 minutes screen, 6 minutes main at 600 watts. Image easier to see safe out lines to trim.
Laydown= water bath @73 degrees F., 30 seconds in, sqeegee down to plate, immediate grab, great adhesion. let sit for 15 minutes.
Develop= 115 F. water with 3 bath changes and cotton rubbing. Paper released at 10 minutes, stencil heavier overall, but having that "thin" look. And at this point, I put it in a bath of 75% Isopropyl alcohol out of habit. No problems, and the plate and stencil look great as stood to dry overnight.
Image 3501b and 3502b shows new thicker stencil




140 Load:
Sens= 59 degrees, 5% at 3 1/2 minutes. Big difference in squeegeeing. Tissue would not grab plexi, not after 5 minutes of letting it sit and repeated squeegee action. Hung to dry. Not much on the surface, a little wetter and patterned then the 35 load, not much visually. Patterns in surface seemed to develop as it hung to dry, consistently getting worse and more pattern like as the tissue dried. Today I let both tissues dry for 4 hours. At the end, the 35 load was flat (as it was in one hour) and the 140 had about a 50% curl and the tell tale pattern in surface.
Expo= 2 1/2 minutes screen, 5 minutes main, nothing out of ordinary in laydown.
Develop= Lot's and lots of releases in stencil in the same pattern that formed on the surface as the 140 tissue dried. It really resembles a flooded aquatint, the same "squiggles" Will is showing. After the experience with the 35 load and the 75% alcohol, I tried it with the 140 also. No problem, good water extraction. Set to dry upright.
Pattern on surface of tissue shown during exposure in vacuum frame image 1406pattern

image 1405 shows areas coinciding with pattern that have released during development

image showing entire 140 stencil after development complete


OK, so something is going on in the heavy load tissue...any ideas?
Hopefully tomorrow I'll etch and see where to go.
Best, C

[Will Lytch]

Craig, thanks for posting your results. Looks like you're having a bit more luck with the 35 gram load tissue. I notice the three points our work flows differ is in the % of dichromate (I'm using 3.5%), your screen exposure is a lesser percentage of the film exposure, and the fact that you are waiting a little longer to expose and laydown after you find the tissue to be dry. I've not been waiting the additional 45 minutes "to be sure." Our studio temperature & humidity are the same. I'll try modifying my routine and see how that affects things. Will

[Craig Zammiello]

Craig, thanks for posting your results. Looks like you're having a bit more luck with the 35 gram load tissue. I notice the three points our work flows differ is in the % of dichromate (I'm using 3.5%), your screen exposure is a lesser percentage of the film exposure, and the fact that you are waiting a little longer to expose and laydown after you find the tissue to be dry. I've not been waiting the additional 45 minutes "to be sure." Our studio temperature & humidity are the same. I'll try modifying my routine and see how that affects things. Will

Hey Will,
Yeah, I'm partial to the 5% dichromate, but switch back and forth as warranted.
As for the screen, the last time I used one was teaching in Europe 1990. Do all gravures with rosin, but did not want to introduce another condition at the moment. So just putting in a percentage exposure.
Looks like a good solid grain, we'll see.
And it does seem that time is a little more on your side with the tissue as it stands.
The big mover on these was the 75% alcohol extraction bath. So, we kind of eliminated that being a problem like we thought it may have been with your first.
Hopefully I'll get an etch on this today and see how that goes.
Best, C

[Craig Zammiello]

Craig,

Everything indicates a load from 35 to 80 is in the ballpark. The high loads don't work well. The 35 is quite transparent and some have indicated they can see the etch better. Thus the 35 is going beta till the end of the year as I posted earlier.

--Dick

Yup, I'm with you on that. I'm thinking that something in the realm of 45-65 pigment load, but who knows yet.
This stencil shows great detail, really, really nice. Can't tell about how it will react until I etch, hopefully in a little while.
I'm happy about the alcohol extraction bath, that helps things along big time.
My paper contact seems to think he has narrowed down the backing sheets of the Autotype and Hanfstaengl tissues to an available Bristol type roll paper that gets coated for high end ink jet. Not the same stuff but very close.
I think if we can, we ought to think about trying the best pigment load on some paper. The Yuppo is interesting, and it sure works, but for big stuff it's not practical. Just saying...
Anyway, talk later, best,
C

[richsul]

Not to sound like a stuck record*, (again my age shows,) I want re-emphasize my strategy on building a good gravure tissue.

I could have chased the ghost of Autotype and tried to duplicate it. There is a controversy as to whether it is as good as or worse than McGraw, etc. Never mind. They clearly were not going to reveal their methods and formulas, but... After some research I found out from a picture that their machine coated paper in what appeared to be in 10 ft wide or larger strips and the machine looks like it is a normal one that runs the paper at a about 50 MPH. That's all well and good but there is likely nothing there that I can use. Machines like that are in the million plus price range. I would need a fork lift just to move the paper around so another gotcha.

I am using machines that are essentially Victorian in nature, except they are motor driven instead of hand cranked. Paper is loaded in a continuous loop which is a touch over 20 feet in length and 36 wide.

From my research at CCP in Tucson, I saw that McGraw did a more traditional thing and hung the paper in a tall large room in loops like ribbon candy to dry. (You can only hang from rods on the dry side.) From reports from moles at MacDermid, they dried theirs coming off the machine. This lead me to two suppositions: one MacDermnid made a thin tissue, and yes, a spec sheet claimed it was 1.6 mils. I am guessing, due to the way McGraw was drying, that theirs was thicker. My experience tells me that you could dry coming off, only if the coating is under 2 mils. Reheating set gelatin only melts it into a runny mess again. MacDermid may have had some tricks here possibly even freezing it before it went through the oven.

Because of the thinness, MacDermid needed to add quite a pigment load to trap light before it bounces off the backing. I can get by with a much smaller load due to the thickness which around 1.5 to 2 x thicker. This as Will has said will allow you to see the etch better.

Noting all of this, my strategy was to build on what I already knew about tissue making. There is quite a bit to know. What I have discussed here is only the tip. Major variables in making tissue are: run speed, gel Bloom, gel percentage, gel temperature, room temp, pot age, pigment type, pigment load, and more. Any one of these can cause disasters. We had 4 disaster runs early on (pics posted earlier) due to a surfactant in the pigment. For 4.5 liters of glop, there was only about a tablespoonful (35 gm) of pigment dispersion in it. There was likely not more than a half a drop of the surfactant in the dispersion but enough to cause wide streaking of the coating.

I think we are there. We need to keep posting and sharing your experience in etching plates etc. If someone would like to gift me a new Takash floor model press, I'll go pick it up in ABQ<grin> and then I can work out the details on my own. I could possibly work in the print room at the local college where I teach, but they are a bit gun shy about the dichromate. The point is, we are going to have to learn some new techniques for making plates and we need to share those experiences so everyone can learn. So far, everyone here has been willing to share!

Cheers.

--Dick Sullivan

*Trivia time. Victor made the table top Talking Machines and later introduced the floor model console called the Victrola. Like Gillette and the blade, Victor wanted to sell records not machines. Ever notices the domed pyramidal top on them? That was intentionally designed that way to keep people from putting stuff on top, like books or lamps. If the top was loaded, no one would remove the stuff to play a record and thus would not buy records.

Motorola? They took the hint from Victor and so gave the first car (motor) radio that name.

A Caruso cylinder costs about 3 dollars in 1900 and was good for less than 100 plays. It was quite an investment.

Hey Will,
Yeah, I'm partial to the 5% dichromate, but switch back and forth as warranted.
As for the screen, the last time I used one was teaching in Europe 1990. Do all gravures with rosin, but did not want to introduce another condition at the moment. So just putting in a percentage exposure.
Looks like a good solid grain, we'll see.
And it does seem that time is a little more on your side with the tissue as it stands.
The big mover on these was the 75% alcohol extraction bath. So, we kind of eliminated that being a problem like we thought it may have been with your first.
Hopefully I'll get an etch on this today and see how that goes.
Best, C

[Craig Zammiello]

Dick,
OK, no sweat I agree, it's nut's to try and copy something that was done on a scale of any of these companies.
But, you got some Victorian machines? Hey, they did not have Yuppo back then, right?

Anyhoo, this stuff rocks! It etched textbook! Very happy with the 35 load...i think if you started to fine tune like you said, starting to bring it up, it would be superb!
I agree with Will, it's a pleasure to be able to see at such depth into the gelatin etching.

I'll print and post later.

Great work, very great spot we are in.
C

[richsul]

They are not vintage Victorian, just Victorian in design. And, ok, a few secret mods along the way.

When everything is up and running, I can make 400 sq feet a day. I think we can handle the load with that. If not, I am making a good profit and I could expand to a new building.

We are having the first meeting of the Four Color Team tomorrow evening. There is a growing demand for a archival color process out there that is not ink jet. There is a huge resistance in the high end art market for inkjet prints. With prices moving into the six figures for some color contemporary work, spending a thousand to have a 4 color carbon made is only a small percentage of the cost and could boost the price of the print significantly, well over the cost of having it made.

Dick,
OK, no sweat I agree, it's nut's to try and copy something that was done on a scale of any of these companies.
But, you got some Victorian machines? Hey, they did not have Yuppo back then, right?

Anyhoo, this stuff rocks! It etched textbook! Very happy with the 35 load...i think if you started to fine tune like you said, starting to bring it up, it would be superb!
I agree with Will, it's a pleasure to be able to see at such depth into the gelatin etching.

I'll print and post later.

Great work, very great spot we are in.
C

[richsul]

Also, ignore the heavy load tissue. The 35 is the target now!


--Dick

They are not vintage Victorian, just Victorian in design. And, ok, a few secret mods along the way.

When everything is up and running, I can make 400 sq feet a day. I think we can handle the load with that. If not, I am making a good profit and I could expand to a new building.

We are having the first meeting of the Four Color Team tomorrow evening. There is a growing demand for a archival color process out there that is not ink jet. There is a huge resistance in the high end art market for inkjet prints. With prices moving into the six figures for some color contemporary work, spending a thousand to have a 4 color carbon made is only a small percentage of the cost and could boost the price of the print significantly, well over the cost of having it made.

[Craig Zammiello]

Also, ignore the heavy load tissue. The 35 is the target now!


--Dick

OK, Here are the proofs. The 35 load was a pleasure to etch (45, 43, 41, 40, 39 all at 72F. total of 25 minutes), it is very nice to see "into" the stencil. Great for sneaking up on the highlights.
I etched the 140 load exactly the same time as the 35 load in each bath.

So, the 35 was done visually as I would normally, and the 140 went by the numbers (from the 35), regardless of results,
which were interesting. I see a big boost in contrast with the heavier pigment. Does pigment load have to do with this??
And that wacky pattern is very legible in a printed detail of the 140, it actually acted as hardened, insoluble parts of the stencil, like a coarse screen.
Anyway, as you say, that load is moot, except for the contrast thing...I do feel a bit more pigment might be good...

OK Talk later. Great job Dick, very cool!
C
The 35 load printed:

35 load detail:

The 140 load printed:

140 load detail:

[richsul]

Yes, the heavier load does increase contrast.

We can forget the heavier load. It does weird for us!

I have some 35 to send out for the cost of shipping as I previously posted.

Question: Stay with the 35? Go to 50 or 60?

Minds are inquiring?

--D

OK, Here are the proofs. The 35 load was a pleasure to etch (45, 43, 41, 40, 39 all at 72F. total of 25 minutes), it is very nice to see "into" the stencil. Great for sneaking up on the highlights.
I etched the 140 load exactly the same time as the 35 load in each bath.

So, the 35 was done visually as I would normally, and the 140 went by the numbers (from the 35), regardless of results,
which were interesting. I see a big boost in contrast with the heavier pigment. Does pigment load have to do with this??
And that wacky pattern is very legible in a printed detail of the 140, it actually acted as hardened, insoluble parts of the stencil, like a coarse screen.
Anyway, as you say, that load is moot, except for the contrast thing...I do feel a bit more pigment might be good...

OK Talk later. Great job Dick, very cool!
C
The 35 load printed:

35 load detail:

The 140 load printed:

140 load detail:

[Lothar Osterburg]

Sorry it took me so long to do my testing- life got a bit out of hand for a while here.... but finally I am back- But no Photos yet....

I etched and printed both the 140 and 35.

I agree with Craig, the 140 is way too contrasty. I never finished etching - it still had not broken through the thickest gelatin after 2 hours in the bath.
Glad you did this though as we now know the upper limit.

The 35 etched quite well, but not as good as the 60 load from the first run. It was a bit too soft contrasty for me. I also had some trouble releasing it. The image stayed on undamaged, but I lost some thicker gelatin between the safe edge and image. (I had those problems with the 40 load as well... Not completely at the lower limit but close.
If we can vote, I would vote for the 60 - maybe 50!!!?!

I did everything the same as before: no alcohol in the mating bath, no curing time, but went straight to the developing bath. STill they take time to peel off the copper.
My main concern this time around was to avoid the appearance of those mottling marks from my first round of tests - similar to those Craig got in the 140 load.

I did not get any marks in the 140 or 35 papers!!!! I tried all of the following:
- Squeegee face down on plexi, blot the back and surrounding plexi dry with paper towels, peel off immediately and place flat in my drying cabinet (build to drylight sensitive material lying down flat)
- squeegee surface and blot excess off with a clean sheet of newsprint
- hang dry (my least favorite method - took longer to dry - the stuff kept dripping for a while (into the sink - but leaving contamination behind) - just messy)
- squeegee surface with gelatin placed on a blotter, and finish blotting excess with newsprint
- squeegee surface with gelatin placed on a blotter, and finish wiping off excess with lint free paper towels. (amazingly it worked!)

They all seemed to work pretty well more or less, I have not had the chance to etch them all - as the slightest marks will not show until the etch, and then they seem to print only in the subtlest highlight areas.

As Dick is telling us- the tissue is not going to be a replacement for Autotype but it's own thing. I had to be flexible in in my approach how to work with it, do things I never would have done with Autotype, and keep an open mind. And it was not even that difficult - round 2 was a lot better than round 1! Of course I stayed small for now, and the next challenge is to go bigger without re-introducing drying marks.
I am interested in continuing as beta tester (even for the 35)!!!!
I still have a little of the first round left, and will do a test using the new drying methods in direct comparisons between the 35, 60 and 80 under the same conditions.

Lothar Osterburg

[Craig Zammiello]

Sorry it took me so long to do my testing- life got a bit out of hand for a while here.... but finally I am back- But no Photos yet....

I etched and printed both the 140 and 35.

I agree with Craig, the 140 is way too contrasty. I never finished etching - it still had not broken through the thickest gelatin after 2 hours in the bath.
Glad you did this though as we now know the upper limit.

The 35 etched quite well, but not as good as the 60 load from the first run. It was a bit too soft contrasty for me. I also had some trouble releasing it. The image stayed on undamaged, but I lost some thicker gelatin between the safe edge and image. (I had those problems with the 40 load as well... Not completely at the lower limit but close.
If we can vote, I would vote for the 60 - maybe 50!!!?!

I did everything the same as before: no alcohol in the mating bath, no curing time, but went straight to the developing bath. STill they take time to peel off the copper.
My main concern this time around was to avoid the appearance of those mottling marks from my first round of tests - similar to those Craig got in the 140 load.

I did not get any marks in the 140 or 35 papers!!!! I tried all of the following:
- Squeegee face down on plexi, blot the back and surrounding plexi dry with paper towels, peel off immediately and place flat in my drying cabinet (build to drylight sensitive material lying down flat)
- squeegee surface and blot excess off with a clean sheet of newsprint
- hang dry (my least favorite method - took longer to dry - the stuff kept dripping for a while (into the sink - but leaving contamination behind) - just messy)
- squeegee surface with gelatin placed on a blotter, and finish blotting excess with newsprint
- squeegee surface with gelatin placed on a blotter, and finish wiping off excess with lint free paper towels. (amazingly it worked!)

They all seemed to work pretty well more or less, I have not had the chance to etch them all - as the slightest marks will not show until the etch, and then they seem to print only in the subtlest highlight areas.

As Dick is telling us- the tissue is not going to be a replacement for Autotype but it's own thing. I had to be flexible in in my approach how to work with it, do things I never would have done with Autotype, and keep an open mind. And it was not even that difficult - round 2 was a lot better than round 1! Of course I stayed small for now, and the next challenge is to go bigger without re-introducing drying marks.
I am interested in continuing as beta tester (even for the 35)!!!!
I still have a little of the first round left, and will do a test using the new drying methods in direct comparisons between the 35, 60 and 80 under the same conditions.

Lothar Osterburg

Dick,
I'd vote for the 60 also. I think that would be just the right contrast range for general consumption.
C

[richsul]

OK, I have some 35 made and will make 100 sq feet of 60 today. And 100 sqs over the weekend. I will make more if needed.


If anyone orders either for beta -- they pay shipping, they will get 12 sq foots of each.

The new target is 60.

So far no one has bought me a new Takash press!!!!! I can pick it up myself and save on shipping.

Does anyone know the name of the gravure studio in Mexico City. It is in the basement of a museum which used to be a power station for streetcars. The museum is gorgeous with some of the old dynamos still in the room. They have Takash's in the print shop but they are all on leg platforms to raise them up about 10 inches. They considered them to be too low. I am afraid they do not know of what we are doing here and of the Autotype issue and would like to contact them. I think I could get in touch through my friend Julio Galindo in Mexico City.

--Dick

Dick,
I'd vote for the 60 also. I think that would be just the right contrast range for general consumption.
C

[Craig Zammiello]

OK, I have some 35 made and will make 100 sq feet of 60 today. And 100 sqs over the weekend. I will make more if needed.


If anyone orders either for beta -- they pay shipping, they will get 12 sq foots of each.

The new target is 60.

So far no one has bought me a new Takash press!!!!! I can pick it up myself and save on shipping.

Does anyone know the name of the gravure studio in Mexico City. It is in the basement of a museum which used to be a power station for streetcars. The museum is gorgeous with some of the old dynamos still in the room. They have Takash's in the print shop but they are all on leg platforms to raise them up about 10 inches. They considered them to be too low. I am afraid they do not know of what we are doing here and of the Autotype issue and would like to contact them. I think I could get in touch through my friend Julio Galindo in Mexico City.

--Dick

Dick,
I remember reading about it on Mark Katzman's site...You could email him for contact specifics:
mkatzman@photogravure.com
Best, C

[richsul]

David will be taking down 100 sqs of 50 in a short while. It looks real good.

--Dick

Dick,
I remember reading about it on Mark Katzman's site...You could email him for contact specifics:
mkatzman@photogravure.com
Best, C

[Craig Zammiello]

David will be taking down 100 sqs of 50 in a short while. It looks real good.

--Dick

50.
Sounds good.
C

[Will Lytch]

I called today and gave info for shipping the next beta batch. I'll look forward to giving the 50 gram a try. Thanks, Will

[psmyers]

Pieter Myers here - Hello Dick et al.
I realize you are sending out an new batch of tissue, but here are the results of my testing, for what it is worth. I tested your 35 (run#1) and the 140. I had no problems handling the material once a couple of adjustments were made, namely in drying the sensitized tissue and finding the right exposure. The pictures below show (A) the control image with G-35, ( B&S 35, © B&S 140.
Here are the procedures that worked for me:
SENSITIZING:
Sensitized the tissue in 3.5% dichromate at 55 deg.F for three mins, then drained and hung tissue directly in my film drying cabinet (no squeegee or ferrotyping) - thank you Erika. Dry for 45 mins at low heat (85 deg. F) with good air circulation. Remove and let equalize to room humidity for one half hour.
PLATE PREP:
Cleaned and polished copper then rinsed with a 3% mixture of Sodium Hydroxide to degrease (forget about tarnishing forever).
EXPOSURE:
Exposed with screen and then positive using Amergraph mercury printer. B&S 35 needed double the exposure of the control G-35. The 140 needed 50% more exposure than G-35 to get approximately the same density.
ADHERING:
Soaked in a 60 deg.F water bath for 30 secs then adhered and squeegeed and paper towel dried and let sit for 15 mins.
DEVELOPMENT:
Develop in 105 deg.F water. B&S 35 - removed backing at 4 mins then sloshed in tray for another 5 mins while flooding hose with 100 deg. F water directly on plate. B&S 140 - backing lifted by itself after 2 mins, then developed normally. Development seems to go faster than with G-35.
ETCHING: Normal, within 30 - 35 mins using 45, 43, 41, 39 be.
CONCLUSIONS: I could work with either of these tissues, but each has its drawbacks. B&S 35 needs a lot of exposure to get enough density on the plate. The 140 is not forgiving of overexposure. A little too much and you will have lift-off in development. I liked the 140 best and didn't find it too contrasty. But something in between will be easier to work with, which you already know. I would vote for something up around 90-95. Would like to have a couple of sheets of the 50 or whatever you are sending next. Then we will really have it dialed in. Congratulations on coming up with this fine product! Cheers, Pieter

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[richsul]

So we have votes for 50-60 and 90-95.

I am thinking that perhaps we should go with both a 50 and a 90??? Sort of like the two that Autotype offered... or is this just going to add confusion to the market? I can see folks asking our advice -- "Which one should I buy???" I still haven't seen anyone offering to buy me that new Takach press <grin>, so how am I to know?

I still want to try making some with the Burnt Sienna and we could end up with two of those and that really would confuse the market.

Comments? Opinions?


--Dick