dhlocker:
My comments and observations were for Office Max High Gloss photo
paper.
Next time I go into my local Office Depot store, I pick up a package of
SKU 652-001 and give it a try.
If the paper does not work well for PCB applications, I can always use it
for some mundane, boring task........like printing photos!
Thanks for the correction
Roland F. Harriston
dhlocker wrote:
>
> Oops. It was Office Depot paper I used. (I should have known; my
> wife bought it :)
>
> Anyway, it was SKU 652-001, Office Depot High Gloss Photo Paper, UPC
> 7-35854-98034- 4, 69# (260 gm/m2) It has a distinctly plastic surface
> that is very shiny and a distinctly not-plastic surface that is
> slightly matte. I printed on the matte side on an HP LaserJet 5000 at
> RET Max and Toner Density 5. Ironed for 4 minutes at halfway between
> Cotton and Linen, then cooled it, peeled the plastic surface away,
> soaked for 5 minutes and peeled the paper away.
>
> Donald.
>
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@ yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:Homebrew_PCBs%40yahoogroups.com>, "Roland F. Harriston"
> <rolohar@... > wrote:
> >
> > dhlocker:
> >
> > Thanks for the comments.
> >
> > I have noticed that the back side of the Office Max paper is just
> slightly
> > less glossy than the front side, so, as you have experienced,
> either side
> > will probably work. Next time I use the Office Max paper, I'll try
> > the backside.
> >
> > I think the active agent here is a polished clay coat, and the
> Office Max
> > paper might just be polished more on one side than the other, but
> both sides
> > are clay coated.
> >
> > The paper experts among us can correct me if I'm wrong in this
> assumption.
> >
> > I'm still stuck on the idea that the toner plays an important part
> in this
> > scheme, and that various toner compounds react differently with respect
> > to how well they bond to the paper. A really strong bond might present
> > problems when removing the paper. Whereas a less strong bond will
> > allow easy paper removal. It seems that I did read somewhere about the
> > various compositions of laser toner compounds.
> >
> > Like yourself, I have always used the litho negative/photoresis t
> > technology, and am pleased as Punch not to have to go through
> > that rain dance anymore! Not to mention getting rid of that
> > messy ferric chloride slime.
> >
> > Most of my stuff is strictly hobby or prototyping, and the
> > laser jet toner technique is just fine for my applications.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Roland F. Harriston
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]