# Most common or most used mesh size



## winkle (Feb 1, 2009)

I know the difference in the different mesh counts in regards to amount of detail, type of ink, etc. I was just wanting to see what mesh do most people usually use? Is there one they use more often than another? I currently have 110 and 156... mostly 110 because that was initially what most people said was most common. But I'm starting to find that may not be the case. Hope to hear from several of you!


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

110 is definitely the most common in screenprinting guide books, recommendations at art shops, etc. etc. It's _probably_ the most commonly used mesh overall.

I'd speculate that the most common mesh used by the printers on TSF is 156 though.


----------



## PositiveDave (Dec 1, 2008)

To be honest it depends what you're printing, starts at 100tpi and goes up to 300 & above. Finer meshes can hold finer detail.


----------



## thutch15 (Sep 8, 2008)

I use 156 and up to about 230.


----------



## Uncle John (Mar 11, 2007)

We use 156 about 90% of the time. It gives good detail on the spot color printing that we do.


----------



## studog79 (Jul 13, 2006)

We hardly ever use anything less than 156 unless its for a glitter ink.


----------



## InkedApparel (Mar 18, 2009)

I use 110 for white underbase plates,,,but most everything else i use 230..... hope this helps..
Inked


----------



## Celtic (Feb 19, 2008)

My mainstay is the 230 mesh


----------



## thutch15 (Sep 8, 2008)

Celtic said:


> My mainstay is the 230 mesh


Do you print/flash/print a lot or are you using 230 (colors and heather tees)?


----------



## Celtic (Feb 19, 2008)

thutch15 said:


> Do you print/flash/print a lot or are you using 230 (colors and heather tees)?


 
No, not usually. Of course, it depends on what you're printing. Sometimes.
I get good coverage overall.
Of course, a lot also depends on your film and how well you burn your screen.


----------



## n.signia (Nov 21, 2007)

We also use 156 90% of the time.


----------



## pukingdeserthobo (Jun 3, 2008)

156 and up


----------



## Tj Ryonet Tech (Jul 28, 2008)

We have found that anywhere from 110-230 are the most popular screen meshes for printers. This also can change if you are using an automatic or manual press.


----------



## InterStreme (Feb 9, 2008)

We stick between 156 and 230...230 probably being most often used by us.


----------



## winkle (Feb 1, 2009)

so I can see i probably won't be using my 110 mesh much anymore. I am using a manual press, is 230 too high? I'm thinking I won't go over 156 when printing with white... if I do use a 230 will I have to thin out my ink (i'm thinking black now). THanks for all your help!!!


----------



## Adam Becker (Mar 22, 2009)

winkle said:


> if I do use a 230 will I have to thin out my ink (i'm thinking black now). THanks for all your help!!!


Do you mean thin it to keep the ink from drying in the screen?

I use 156 for light colors on dark fabric and 230 for dark on light usually, if there's a lot of detail.


----------



## InterStreme (Feb 9, 2008)

Nah, 230 isn't too high. We often use 305's on our manuals.


----------



## NaturalUnnatural (Feb 16, 2009)

I am just starting my business and would like some mesh count advice please? 
- I have a manual press and am not very strong.
- I just found out that some people measure mesh count by lines per cm, and some by lines per inch - so now i'm really confused. 
-I will be printing onto paper and onto tshirts, bags etc.
Some of the designs will be detailed, but line work rather than halftones just now.

This is where i will probably buy my screens:
Standard Aluminium Ready Stretched Screens

-I was going to buy a couple of 110-120 for fabrics and
140 - 150 for paper. 
(But now i don't know if that is lines per inch or per cm- would explain why the mesh count only goes upto 165 threads per cm- but how does that translate into threads per inch?)
- Is there a thread count converter!?

Any advice please would be so helpful, i am so bad when it comes to numbers and it would be such a pain to order the wrong count screens.


----------



## cjoler (Aug 22, 2007)

There's 2.54 cm per inch, so multiply threads/cm x 2.54 --> 165 t/cm x 2.54 = 419 t/in. I don't print on paper, but for shirts I think you could get buy with a few screens in the 160 t/in range - you can get decent detail and print most colors out of the can.

My advice for a beginner would be to buy some curable reducer plastisol base to mix with your plastisol inks. If you do this and mix it with your thick colors (like white) then you'll probably not need anything less than 160 t/in unless you want to use specialty inks (like glitter) or a one-shot light-on-dark print (which hardly ever works for me anyway).

I used to use almost exclusively 110, 125, 137 (not sure why), and 160 meshes. Once I found curable reducer and got over the whole I-shouldn't-see-light-through-the-shirt issue I got rid of the 110 and most of the 125. Now I buy mostly 178 for most jobs. I don't do process color so I find it works well for me for most apps. For lights on dark, I still usually print-flash-print and use something like 137 or 158 depending on the design detail and solid areas.


----------



## NaturalUnnatural (Feb 16, 2009)

cjoler said:


> There's 2.54 cm per inch, so multiply threads/cm x 2.54 --> 165 t/cm x 2.54 = 419 t/in. I don't print on paper, but for shirts I think you could get buy with a few screens in the 160 t/in range - you can get decent detail and print most colors out of the can.


Wow i'm glad i didn't just go ahead and buy the screens - theres no way i could squeeze ink through a 419 screen!!

Thanks for the tips, i think i will have to get a mathematical friend to help me out though!

As my business has an eco-friendly ethos - plastisol inks are no good. I will be using permaset for fabrics, and speedball for paper (until i find a better water based ink)
- will this dramatically affect my mesh choices do you think?

Thanks.


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

NaturalUnnatural said:


> - I just found out that some people measure mesh count by lines per cm, and some by lines per inch - so now i'm really confused.


It's usually quite easy once you have the printing basics down, you just have to read for context. If someone recommends a 77T mesh for anything requiring detail, it's obvious they're talking metric. Likewise if someone recommends 305, they're clearly using imperial.

When the counts are correctly notated (which they aren't always - but usually they are) then metric counts are followed by a capital T and imperial counts are not. So 43T = metric (threads per centimetre), 110 = imperial (threads per inch).



NaturalUnnatural said:


> -I was going to buy a couple of 110-120 for fabrics and 140 - 150 for paper.
> (But now i don't know if that is lines per inch or per cm- would explain why the mesh count only goes upto 165 threads per cm- but how does that translate into threads per inch?)


Okay, this is one of those rare instances where I actually _can't_ tell from context which system of units you're using 

110 (43T) is common for fabric, though some of the printers on TSF find it too low.

But 140 (55T) is *way, way* too low for paper.

On the other hand, 110T (280) is very high for fabric, and 140T (355) is just very high in general.

I think in this case it isn't unit conversion that's the problem, it's just that you have bad information.

You want something on the order of 43T-77T (110-195) for fabric, and 90T-120T (230-305) for paper.


----------



## NaturalUnnatural (Feb 16, 2009)

Solmu said:


> You want something on the order of 43T-77T (110-195) for fabric, and 90T-120T (230-305) for paper.


Great - That is exactly what i needed to know!

I'm glad that i now understand the conversion too ( I am in the UK - supplier sells threads per cm)

I can only afford 6 screens right now so these are what i will go for:

9 - 43T For glitters etc
49 - 62T, 71-77T Fabrics
90 - 100T (x2), 110-120T Paper

Does that sound about right to you?

Thanks so much.

Megan


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

There's a substantial difference between 9T and 43T. Do you plan on actually doing glitter, etc. initially? Because if you do 43T is a bit fine for that, and if you _don't_ then you don't want anything with a lower mesh count than that.

Other than that, it's _about_ right. If it was me I'd probably cluster them a little more (like 2x 43T, 2x 77T, 2x 120T for example) just to simplify things. But I don't like having odds and ends around to keep track of.

It also depends what you're planning on printing - if you want to do a _very _wide range of product types, then what you have above would be better.


----------



## NaturalUnnatural (Feb 16, 2009)

Thanks that's helpful, gives me a few things to consider and now i have much more of an idea what i'm doing!
I have a mix of art and design styles in my products and its useful to know about all the possibilities of the equipment, tools and materials. . I like experimenting but don't like making expensive mistakes, so advice like this is great.

Thanks!

Megan


----------

