# Positve film ink on screens



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

I seem to be having a little problem. The last 2 times I burn my screens. The ink from my transparency film. Transferred to my screen. I burnt 10 or so screens and they all came out fine. I was using a HP photo printer on 8.5x11 ryonet wp film. No problems at all.
I bought a epson 1400 and 1900 so I could print larger films. I burnt the first screen using the film printed with the 1900, and about %80 of the ink transferd to the screen. I burnt the next screen with film printed with the 1400, and %20 of the ink transferd to the screen. I am using epson ink in both printers. Using a 500w halogen at 18" for 20-25 min with a box fan blowing across the lamp. screens coated 3/1. the film is Micro graphic (microjet) wp from film direct. Anyone here had this problem before?
Also I am having to stack my films because 1 is not dark enough.


----------



## buehrle (Jan 14, 2008)

are your positives dry ? did you set the ink to max ? i always let mine dry overnight before i use them. i never get any transfer doing it that way and i always only use i film and have never had an issue


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

yes i let those 2 screens dry for about 20 hrs with a box fan blowing across them. I use the ultra premium glossy photo paper setting and the best photo setting. it does not give me the option of setting the ink to max. the positives are nice and dark but when you hold it up to a light you can see thou them some what. are your positives %100 opaque when you look at them threw a light?


----------



## PositiveDave (Dec 1, 2008)

I have seen this before, at one particular site. Didn't happen anywhere else and we never got to the root cause. I suspect that the moisture content is higher than it should be.
btw The inks are full of uv block and will stop uv light long before they stop visible light (translation: they work even though you can see through them). You might want to lower your ink level and do a few tests to determine the minimum amount of ink that can go down and work. Too much ink might be causing this problem.


----------



## ole Jobe (Jun 16, 2009)

Even with a fan, the emulsion will not get below the humidity level in the air. We generally have high humidity here and this occasionally happens, but not enough to keep the screens from washing out properly. Unless it is extremely cold I usually run a small window air conditioner to lower the humidity in the shop. This helps. God Bless.


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

I am able to wash the screens out, but the positives are ruined after burning the screens. I tried it again with the 1900. This time i only used 1 film instead of stacking them. The positive stuck to the screen again. Transferring the ink to the emulsion. when i pull them a part the positive is ruined.
I will try a dehumidifier and see if this helps. Do you think it could be the film? I have read here that peeps are using the stock epson ink with no problems.That leads me to believe it is not the ink.


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

I just burnt another screen for the left chest,and this time the screen stuck to the glass.a little ink transferred but not enough to ruin the positive. i think the problem is with the emulsion. I will get a dehumidifier to see if this solves the problem.


----------



## macmiller (Jul 23, 2007)

I use a laser and then toner aide. Lately, I've been having problems lately with the toner coming off just like you have with ink coming off. Today, I re-printed the positive reversed so the toner was against the glass, not the screen. problem (hopefully) solved!


----------



## Greatzky (Jan 28, 2009)

I didn't scroll through all of the comments, BUT...
Why don't you print the films on mirror mode and that way the ink side of the film won't be on your screens? You might run a very small risk of undercutting of your image becuase the ink is above your screen instead of right on it, but at least your film won't stick.


----------



## replicajeremy (Apr 16, 2010)

I can almost promise you that this issue is not caused by the epson ink or the positive film. Both printers you're using are great, but especially the 1400. The 1400 is one of the last Epson printers that still uses Dye based ink, rather than pigment, so you have a great printer there.

This list should eliminate your problem-

1- Make sure you are printing on the correct side of the positive film. (the tacky side, not the slick side).

2- The most likely problem is that you are not letting the positives dry long enough. People above were talking about the emulsion, but more likely, I think, you need to make sure to let the positives dry for a while longer. 

3- For drying the positives, and especially the emulsion, you want the humidity to be between 30-40%. You can get a dehumidifier at home depot for about $100. If the humidity is higher than this, technically your emulsion will never be properly dried, no matter how long you wait. People, including myself, get away with higher humidity, but it is not ideal.

So, as long as you print on the right side of the positive, and allow it and the screen to fully dry in proper humidity, you should not have this problem anymore. I would not worry about putting down less ink on the positives. If you are having problems with needing to stack positives then this is definitely not your problem. 

Also, yes, you will still be able to see through the ink on the positive. If you feel that it is not dark enough then you just need to get some RIP software for your printer, if you don't already use one. These allow you to print halftones and also can tell your printer how to print uni-directionally and lay down maximum ink amounts.

Easiest way to check your exposures is to get an exposure calculator. They are like $10. You'll never have to guess if you're over or under exposing again.

Sorry for the crazy long post. Hope it helps!!

-Jeremy


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

As many have written, the proof is in the damaged positive. If the ink moves, it was still wet. Grumble all you want, the ink was still wet. 

Thick capillary films or stencils that you didn't completely dry. also cause trouble as you expose with hot lamps and the capillary action of the ink jet film and the stencils fight it out.

It's spring - time for all sorts of seasonal changes.

*Homework explaining water-based ink jet ink drying *
_with instructions from Epson_

FAQ Inkjet Film for Screen Making Positives


----------



## PositiveDave (Dec 1, 2008)

Greatzky said:


> I didn't scroll through all of the comments, BUT...
> Why don't you print the films on mirror mode and that way the ink side of the film won't be on your screens? You might run a very small risk of undercutting of your image becuase the ink is above your screen instead of right on it, but at least your film won't stick.


This is a VERY bad idea.
You need good contact between film & emulsion or else you will get undercutting.
http://www.t-shirtforums.com/t-shirt-articles/t108270.html


----------



## gaichuu (Sep 30, 2009)

Our production faced this problem after switching laser film to inkjet film, we use murakami emulsion, the ink and the coated material on the film surface transfer to screen after exposure, we found that it was because of the emulsion is not fully dried. so you have to wait till emulsion is dry, orelse you gonna loss lot of film, 
other suggestion is put a flimsy OPP film on the Inkjet film to expose, it might affect the exposure result. Good luck.


----------



## Greatzky (Jan 28, 2009)

PositiveDave said:


> This is a VERY bad idea.
> You need good contact between film & emulsion or else you will get undercutting.
> http://www.t-shirtforums.com/t-shirt-articles/t108270.html



It isn't a VERY bad idea, it's just not optimal.. I'd rather have a little undercutting then keep screwing up my positives if those were my only choices.

I also mentioned in my post that it would probably cause undercutting.


----------



## buehrle (Jan 14, 2008)

i know i do not do the volume most of you guys do so my screens might sit for a few weeks before i get around to using them so i know mine are dry by then. i let my positives sit overnight before i use them so i know they are dry. i never had a problem burning screens. i think you should let things dry for a few days and try again if you can. or you can cut a vinyl sticker and use that. good luck.


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

I wanted to give a up-date to this post.
Thanks for all the replies and suggestions. I have tried them all. I have been running a dehumidifier in the room with the screens and positives. I have used baby powder on the positive. I have let the screens dry for days, and I still have a tiny bit of positive film ink sticking to the screen. not enough to ruin the positive, but enough that you have to use a opaque pen before you burn the next screen.
I am leaning towards the film being the problem. I am going to try a different manufacture and see if that solves the problem.


----------



## Greatzky (Jan 28, 2009)

do you have a fan running when you expose? I never had a problem with film ink on screens until I took the shielding off of my halogen worklight. I learned quickly that a fan running would be necessary with this set up.

Just a thought. Sorry to hear the other suggestions haven't worked out for you thus far.


----------



## tgoeltz (Aug 7, 2007)

I have the same problem...Epson 1400 and R-Film. Although I have not solved it completely, I have reduced the incidence. First, I try to get the humidity down below 45%. Not an easy task with the weather as it is in Ohio right now. Also, if making multiple screens, I need to wait a bit after wash-out to return to a lower humidity level (unfortunately my exposure unit and washout sink are in the same room).

Secondly, I try to let the positive dry overnight if possible. Even though the ink feels dry to the touch, most of the photo papers say allow 24 hours for the ink to dry, so I'm guessing that is what it really takes for the ink to dry. When printing photos, I've had some high quality photo papers that would smear several hours after printing. 

Third, although the positive and screen are now at least 24 hours old, I quickly run a hair dryer across both of them to lower any possible surface humidity. I've heard that too much heat will start to cure the emulsion so be careful.

These three steps usually work, but not always 100%. 

On another note, I use the "best photo", "matte presentation paper" settings on my 1400 printer, and then go into advanced settings and kick up the saturation to +25. This deposits a lot of ink so the above three steps are critical. I think that "matte" puts more ink down that "glossy photo", but I could be mistaken.


----------



## PositiveDave (Dec 1, 2008)

I did try several varieties of film without change.


----------



## AggressiveGuy (Feb 23, 2010)

I have had ink transfer from the film to the screen and in my humble opinion its always appears to be caused by humidity. You emulsion is most likely wet. 

I have used the film right off the printer and a film that had 24 hours to dry. Both did the exact same thing so it appeared to be a screen issue. 

I'm in Florida with severe humidity issues and the more I can control the area where I store the screens the better things seem to be.


----------



## Greatzky (Jan 28, 2009)

tgoeltz said:


> I have the same problem...Epson 1400 and R-Film. Although I have not solved it completely, I have reduced the incidence. First, I try to get the humidity down below 45%. Not an easy task with the weather as it is in Ohio right now. Also, if making multiple screens, I need to wait a bit after wash-out to return to a lower humidity level (unfortunately my exposure unit and washout sink are in the same room).
> 
> Secondly, I try to let the positive dry overnight if possible. Even though the ink feels dry to the touch, most of the photo papers say allow 24 hours for the ink to dry, so I'm guessing that is what it really takes for the ink to dry. When printing photos, I've had some high quality photo papers that would smear several hours after printing.
> 
> ...



I agree with the printer settings part. I would have assumed that PHoto Matte Paper would lay down more ink since most tutorials and such say that the matte paper is thicker and is meant to hold more ink. I haven't tried to bring up the Saturation, but I will try that with my next printout.

What type of ink do you use on your 1400? I'm running refillable cartridges with dye based ink from Continuous Ink System (CIS), Refillable Ink Cartridges, Continuous Ink System (CIS),Refillable Cartridges,Continuous ink systems,CIS,CISS,Bulk Ink,Refill Ink,ink refill,Refillable Cartridges,CIS Ink,Bulk Ink System,Ink Feed,Refill Kit,Refill Cartridg.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

*Ink on a plate, or ink in a coating evaporates the same*



Blackwater said:


> I have tried them all.
> 
> I have been running a dehumidifier in the room with the screens and positives.
> 
> ...


I disagree. How would *ANY film* effect the evaporation rate of *ANY ink*?

In a dry environment, Mother Nature will pull the water from the ink solids and the ink will be dry. The proof is in your result. If the ink moves, it's still wet. Fans in high humidity just blow moist air around. If the film is drier than the air, the film coating will absorb water from the air and re-wet the ink. The films ARE NOT WATERPROOF, they love water. Micro porous films ARE bleed resistant, not waterproof.

Lick your finger and touch the coated side. The inks are water-based and are quickly absorbed by the WATER LOVING coating on your film. ANY ink jet film.


----------



## tgoeltz (Aug 7, 2007)

Greatzky said:


> What type of ink do you use on your 1400? I'm running refillable cartridges with dye based ink from http://www.cisinks.com


Standard Epson ink. Fortunately I can buy it at wholesale pricing.


----------



## PositiveDave (Dec 1, 2008)

*Re: Ink on a plate, or ink in a coating evaporates the same*



RichardGreaves said:


> I disagree. How would *ANY film* effect the evaporation rate of *ANY ink*?


It isn't usually profitable to disagree with Richard, but... 
Different films have different hydrophilic properties, in screen shops where they have problems drying their screens properly AGFA SelectJEt has stuck to the screens and substituting another film has helped.
It is reasonable to assume that films that are more hydrophilic might dry slower than others?


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

I still think it is the film. I print my positives then I put them in a room with 70 pint per day dehumidifier. I have a fan circulating the air in the room, and I leave them for about 12 hrs. Some times longer. The films that i printed useing the 1400 usually do OK,but the films that I print using the R1900 area one a shot deal. They are trash after exposing them. And yes I have a fan blowing over the glass and the bulb while the lamp is on. The films that I print with the 1400 are reusable. Some may have a few spots that have to be tuched up with a block out pen.
I went to office depot and picked up some 3M 8.5x11 ink-jet transparency film to use for my front chest images, and smaller prints. I have no problems with positives that I print on this film. I am still working my way threw the box of 13x18 films that I got from Film Direct.com. I am still trying to figure out what manufacture to try next.


----------



## tgoeltz (Aug 7, 2007)

Bryan: Keep us posted if you try a different brand. It's interesting that the 3M transparency sheets work well. I noticed that Staples has 8.5 by 11 Apollo "quick dry" transparency sheets for $24.99 for a pack of 50. I may give those a try.


----------



## buttton (Jul 27, 2009)

I would mirror the image before printing the neg so that the ink side is on the glass, unless their is really fine detail.


----------



## spit947 (Jan 26, 2010)

i'm a noob so take my advise with a grain of salt but why not just do a 1:1 coating on your screen and burn your image for ten minutes. i use the same 500w light and the ryonet wp film and haven't had a problem with it yet. maybe the 3:1 coating cant dry enough and the longer burn time generates to much heat even with a fan. if all else fails maybe its just another thing to try.


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

buttton said:


> I would mirror the image before printing the neg so that the ink side is on the glass, unless their is really fine detail.


That is the one thing that I have not tried. I have been afraid that I would undercut the image. It is really aggravating when you go the process of reclaiming a screen, getting it ready for the new stencil. then after you wash it out. you find out that you just wasted all that time for nothing. It makes me hot, and I want to throw the screen a cross the room.


----------



## Blackwater (Feb 9, 2010)

spit947 said:


> i'm a noob so take my advise with a grain of salt but why not just do a 1:1 coating on your screen and burn your image for ten minutes. i use the same 500w light and the ryonet wp film and haven't had a problem with it yet. maybe the 3:1 coating cant dry enough and the longer burn time generates to much heat even with a fan. if all else fails maybe its just another thing to try.


the problem is the same if it is a 1:1, 2:1, or 3:1 coating. i have tried them all. I did not have this problem when I used the 8.5x11 Ryonet WP film. I ran into this problem when I bought a new wide format printer, and new film*.

*I use a Stouffer scale on each of my screens to see how solid my stencils are. using a 500w halogen at 18" it takes 24min to reach a #7 on the scale.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

*Re: Ink on a plate, or ink in a coating evaporates the same*



PositiveDave said:


> Different films have different hydrophilic properties, in screen shops where they have problems drying their screens properly AGFA SelectJEt has stuck to the screens and substituting another film has helped.
> 
> 
> It is reasonable to assume that films that are more hydrophilic might dry slower than others?


I'm sure we all agree that ink jet film sticking to stencil IS NOT ink moving or transferring to the stencil in the vacuum frame. A simple test is to put an unprinted film next to your positive during the exposure process. If the plain film sticks, I suggest the moisture could be from the stencil or the film could still be holding moisture.

If the film coating OR stencil are sticky/tacky ?How can that happen? Only moisture can make the water LOVING (hydrophilic - water bonding) coating sticky. Touch your film with any wet object - or any dry object. See the white halo from your fingerprint? Moisture makes the coating sticky.

YES, every coating will have unique properties, and if you find a film that doesn't stick under the same environment - you should think of buying it.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

Blackwater said:


> I still think it is the film.
> 
> I print my positives then I put them in a room with 70 pint per day dehumidifier.
> 
> ...


With all respect to your dehumidifier, what is the relative humidity in your positive & stencil area?








We could put a 70 pint dehumidifier in my mother's greenhouse or some screen makers bath rooms and the relative humidity would never go below 65%.

How are you measuring?

35% is better than 42%.
20% is better than 35%.
10% is better than 20%


----------



## inksolman (Jan 19, 2009)

Two things... First problem is the pigment ink will want to stick, so use dye ink instead. second, if you are using a photopolymer emulsion, it contains enough plastisizer that will make the ink on the positive stick. solution, switch to a dual cure emulsion.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

Beware. You don't want anything to do with transparencies.

You want positives that are opaque to invisible UV energy. Of course, if it works, use it.

Transparency film *has less coating *than screen printing ink jet film. It's designed for colored *transparent inks* used for overhead projectors for pretty colors shined on a reflective wall screen.


----------



## sweetts (Apr 4, 2010)

Print in mirror with the printed side up touching the class not the screen so If it does come off you can just clean the glass


Sent from my iPhone using TShirtForums


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

inksolman said:


> Two things... First problem is the pigment ink will want to stick, so use dye ink instead. second, if you are using a photopolymer emulsion, it contains enough plastisizer that will make the ink on the positive stick. solution, switch to a dual cure emulsion.


What will make the pigment ink move more than dye ink?

How will the plasticizer in a photopolymer stencil separate and make the ink on the positive stick?


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

*Mirror print so wet ink touches the glass*



sweetts said:


> Print in mirror with the printed side up touching the class not the screen so If it does come off you can just clean the glass


The polyester film will allow the image to be choked - which is usually bad.

If the ink is still wet and stains the glass - the positive is ruined so you can't use it again anyway. You might as well prevent undercutting/choking by placing the positive with the ink side in intimate contact with the stencil. If the ink transfers to the stencil, it will just dissolve with the un-exposed stencil & the positive is still ruined.

Dry your storage area.


----------



## SqueezePlay808 (Mar 13, 2010)

I've recently switched over to Ulano's new orange emulsion from QX-1... I love it. Exposes quicker & the stencils appear to be stronger, but I notice some ink from my film to be sticking to the emulsion. I've dried both my screen & positive overnight, but I live in Hawaii, so it's pretty humid. Would slightly over-exposing my screen possibly be the cause?


----------



## gscotth21 (Nov 7, 2012)

Does anyone know what the humidity level should be to prevent the film from sticking? I have been having an issue with this for awhile now and getting tired of wasting so much film.


----------



## ole Jobe (Jun 16, 2009)

I read somewhere that anything below 60 percent is acceptable. Maybe 4 or 5 days per year ours gets that low. I generally work at 75-80 percent and seldom have a problem. I do try to give the film about 30 minutes drying time before burning screen.


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

*Over exposing*



SqueezePlay808 said:


> I've dried both my screen & positive overnight, but I live in Hawaii, so it's pretty humid.
> 
> Would slightly over-exposing my screen possibly be the cause?


*Exposure*
Ink jet ink moving to your stencil has nothing to do with your exposure, it's because your ink or stencil isn't dry.

The best exposure is to completely cross-link all of the sensitizer in your stencil. Once the sensitizer can't react anymore, further exposure is useless for stencil resistance. Exposure is like filling a bucket - after the bucket is full (drop by drop or with a fire hose), further filling only wastes time & water.

As the air cools at night, it holds LESS moisture. Hawaii or Arizona, if you're getting unwanted ink movement, you must create drier storage.

Posts 6 & 7 ask if you are measuring your relative humidity so you can judge the actual conditions and make changes accordingly.

ole Jobe is telling you what works in Mississippi, but that doesn't solve your problem.

gscotth21 wants to know "_what the humidity level should be_".
35% is better than 42%.
20% is better than 35%.
10% is better than 20%.

As Wallis Simpson might have said "_A screen maker can never be too rich, or too thin, or have too dry a storage room_".

If you have a failure, your correction is a drier room, and ir all starts with a relative humidity gauge/hygrometer.









*Dehumidifier*
A dehumidifier dries the air so your air can pull the moisture from film & stencil. Mother Nature does the job with your help.

On my last equipment setup in the Bahamas, I told them to buy a dehumidifier way before I got there. We coated screens the first morning at 9am to get a head start. 

9pm, then 9am the next day, the screens were still damp. They scrambled & paid too much to get one before I left. Screens dried in 60 minutes once they had a small room at 35% Rh vs. the 85% Rh they were used to.


----------

