> > The goat slaughterer wrote:
> >
> > But seriously - what I was trying to
> > indicate that there is a lot less art (or
> > black magic) in photo-developing than
> > there is in toner transfer.
> Stefen T wrote:
> Let's just disagree, shall we?
Deal - but arguing endlessly could be a
way of filling up my boring days at work :D
> I had the exact opposite experience.
You had process variation problems with
photo ? What part could you not get
repeatable ?
> It depends which process you get more
> proficient at, they are very similar
> in the number of involved steps.
I think after 5 or 6 years I did get
pretty proficient at toner transfer. And
I am sure I get a single board in the
etchant faster with photo than the
amount of time it took me to scrub the
copper with Jiff.
Yes you pay for that convenience with
the fact that Kinsten pre-sensitized boards
being more expensive. But I am willing
to pay a machine in a factory to do the
manual labour of scrubbing boards for me.
> That's why we are looking at inkjet
> printing. With some luck it would beat
> both.
Here Here - well said.
I agree whole heartedly that inkjet may
beat both hands down in manual labour and
cost. (just not quality - my precious
beloved photo process will always win
there :P)