Mike Young's mantra for the new age screen printer
In an exclusive online interview, Mike Young, a SGIA Fellow and member of the Academy of Screen & Digital Technology, USA, shares his views with Shripad Bhatt about advanced screen printing process and related issues.
19 Aug 2015 | By Shripad Bhat
During my educational tour of India (the “Knowledge Tour”), I collected many business cards then and noticed something very strange about them—a large amount of screen printing companies were ISO Certified—an obvious contrast to their European/North American counterparts. At the same time, however, I could tell they did not have the necessary experience, knowledge, skills or techniques, for whatever reason, that would help to take their companies up to the next level in performance—hence my close relationship with the education factor—something I referred to as advance process training. The 'Knowledge Tour' was held in six major Indian cities was just but one great start and believe this could be a future event during non-Screen Print India show years.
Back in December 2010, I had the opportunity to revisit DMI. A number of changes were obvious; least of all the classroom was larger and somehow, represented a professional ambiance rather than a scholarly one. Students had full used of the well-equipped printing area, from darkroom to screen making, printing to various drying systems and screen cleaning/reclaiming to numerous processing/testing instrumentation. If that was not enough, there was a fully stocked library of tech books on various aspects of the process as well as several commercial trade magazines stretching back to the '60s. In some respects, this was made more remarkable especially when one consider it is a private institution, first and foremost, yet it will accept students who cannot pay and then takes the trouble to find them jobs upon graduation!
Going back to ISO certification for a moment, I wrote some twenty years ago an article about meeting the “ISO Man.” It was a little tongue-in-cheek essay because ISO auditing companies were trying to twist things around, at least in my view, that being certified will improve product quality and business prospects. So far, so good, but screen printing is very much “art,” the beauty, as it were, is in the eye of the beholder. My position was you can implement great management systems but it says nothing about actual print quality. A printer may specialize in the low-end cheap decal marketplace but still be ISO certified. What I contended in the article, to get my point across, is that if your company was always late in deliveries, fine, but make sure it is always late for consistency and have it well documented as to why! I was trying to express certification was for the welfare of how business are managed and functions, while print results was something entirely different. As it is, I highly recommend all industrial printers to become ISO certified, as well as any commercial printer who deals with major domestic/international corporations, and other customers who are equally ISO certified—but only if the business warrants it.
These are all good healthy signs that clearly demonstrates commitment to improve upon the status quo in the eyes of the customer.
Purchasing capital equipment for entry level companies is one thing but buying for existing printing operations that seeks growth in both quality and market positioning means price is no longer first, nor second and perhaps not even third in the decision-making process. This is not to say price is not important but other fundamental criteria play a bigger part of the purchasing equation. Experience has shown that very rarely does equipment brought simply on lowest or low price return a healthy profit. “Price” is what one pays today for suitable equipment that meets current and future needs while “cost” is the true price one continuously pays for failing to look beyond tomorrow! Challenges are always lurking around the corner and things will change for sure, so consider the buying process like shopping for new shoes for your children. It is more prudent to prepare by growing into a piece of equipment rather than one that fits today’s needs but outgrown tomorrow.
To give some credence to how well this function must perform, one printing operation have their screen printing press mounted on an earthquake-proof base, so that any minor shocks or tremors will not cause problems during production.
This is why 50 large prints can be screened and all look the same, both colour and uniform, but the same cannot be guaranteed with digital. When reviewing digital entries at SGIA or FESPA print competition, every entry is slightly different from one another, some excessively, yet all participants used the exact same downloaded file. Therefore, while screen is not perfect by any means, at least printers do have full control over deposition and colour/deposit uniformity, due to the nature of the process. With digital, however, software management is difficult to finesse while controlling and varying ink nozzles’ output is all but out of the question.
1. Image-to-frame ratio: The net result from a wide-angle camera lens distorts the outer peripheral view (in fact the whole picture) because it is trying to pack in more into it than what the human eye naturally sees. This is similar to printers upping their image size on a screen frame and becomes dissatisfied because expected quality does not materialise was it does with a smaller image or a larger frame. As a useful guideline, I gave three different ratio examples of what they should ideally be kept to, according to the degree of difficulties typically encountered.
Screen makers routinely use the same exposure distance and/or time for small screens to midsize, or midsize to large. You cannot do this and expect superb image resolution every time with fine detail and well-defined dot shapes. Emulsions and stencil films have radically advanced over the years and very sensitive to every process needs—despite many having a good latitude to work with. But that latitude has nothing to do with self-correcting wrong exposure distances even if it gives some leeway with exposure timings.
Additionally, many screen makers do not use an exposure calculator and even if they have one in-house, they do not know how to use it. In my estimation, this is more of a problem with suppliers, because instructions are normally written in a European language that may not be locally understood. Furthermore, suppliers ought to physically explain and demonstrate how these calculators work as part of customer service.
Mike is a SGIA Fellow, a member and immediate past chair of the Academy of Screen Printing Technology and recipient of the prestigious Swormstedt Award for technical writing. Mike Young has been a specialist in high-definition graphic and high-performance industrial screen printing for over 40 years.