![]() ![]() It can be exposed with a standard incandescent bulb, and that is what I am using. However, this film does not require UV lighting for exposure. Yes, it is a positive acting photosensitive film. Or, you could bypass of this and go to a focused dot UV direct writeĪnd get single board exposures in about 5 minutes off a re-purposed flatbed plotter. So use the thicker 7mil films for phototools and keep the process boards ![]() Your next problem will be dimensional stability during the process use, Kick around the photo sites on books about inkjet films and inks for making exposure negativesįor making platinum and palladium prints and you will find certain inks that work best at filtering for UV. That are FILTERS rather than the full spectrum blockage with toner. That speaks to Leon's point of making inkjet transparency exposures Transparent, and mostly act as FILTERS at the exposure wavelength. That brings up another interesting feature, that the Diazo masks are pretty Most shops then shoot the master phototools (contact print) to Diazoįor the final tools (sacrificial after multiple uses) on production boards. ![]() On density (except for the pinholes that always creep in). It's about a buck a print for the RA films, and it will eliminate all your problems ![]() Most of this stuff is still available as Rapid Access (RA) process, by various makers. Then shoot the negs/pos from LPF films for the final exposure masks. That is what I use as a first step to make the first art phototools by camera and laserjetĪt a 1.5 to 2X reduction of the laser prints to master films. To fuse (very slight swelling) better (chemically) for a improved contrast ratio on paperīut I expect that it would eat the transparency films. There was a product called 'Laser Buddy', mostly Methylene Chloride etc that caused toner (reduced exposure time required with cover sheet on) This will require about double the current exposure time, since the PCB film cover sheets constructivelyĪdd at the exposure wavelength. If so, then removing the cover sheet before exposure will generate finer lines with direct contact. I'm assuming this is some type of photosensitive film PCB overlay, correct ? Phil is right on the reversed image, with direct contact to the pcb film. What do you guys think? Is this possible? During normal printer operations, the interface is simply bypassed by the selection of a switch position, but by altering the switch position, the interface would allow fine tuning of the toner transfer, capable of surpassing the maximum factory level, for the purpose of creating purely opaque photo masks. So I propose an interface that can be inserted between two connectors to control the density of the toner output. I am certain there is a connection somewhere within the printer that can be seperated which controls the density of the toner. The LaserJet 6L has a maximum density setting of Level 5, but somehow I want to surpass this density level with an electronic interface. I want to create a photomask interface for my printer. I am sure there are several printers available that will print a nice transparency, as well as other solutions, but I want to attempt something new to try and resolve this problem. After a lot of experimenting, I have come to the conclusion that I need a much better positive film to obtain better results, so I have spent an extensive amount of time researching the different methods that are available.Ĭreating inadequate positives for PCB photo-imaging is a common problem amongst electronics enthuiasts. During some of these experiments, I have been using a LaserJet 6L and transparent overhead film to make my positive masks. As I am sure that many of you already know, I am performing some experiments with my new exposure box design and trying to obtain some very nice exposures. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |