> > Hello all,
> > Like many of you, I've had great success with the Direct
toner
> > method. Unless I'm mistaken I was the FIRST to suggest the use of
> > sheets from magazines as a souce of the paper ( I did EXTENSIVE
> > research on the net for a couple of months looking for
>
>
> But, again, remember that you guys had a reason that made you
believe
> you needed to GET a laminator. You were clearly not getting the
results
>
Thats right, I needed to get consistancy to get anywhere near the
resolution I'm getting now with the laminator. I tried a few years
ago to make several different papers work with a clothes iron
(dynart, transparencies, sticker backer board, gelatin coated papers,
elmers glue coated paper, inkjet photo paper, and yes even magazine
paper --all at suggestions from other people on other usegroups at
the time) with limited success. I could do small boards with fairly
coarse resolutions, but I finally went back to the tried and true
photoresist method. I like many people wasen't willing to stick with
it for just something that I could only successfully build smt adaper
and carrier boards. Obviously other people where getting better
results but I couldn't reproduce them.
The laminator got me to revisit the method when I didn't have coated
boards handy and to my pleasant suprise it worked great. The
laminator limited the amount of technique required to get the toner
transfer to work (for me). I was able to produce very complex boards
with it. If you get it right, you don't need to do ∗any∗ touchup.
The laminator may be a crutch, but it can simplify your life
greatly. YMMV, but the laminator worked better for me. You can get
them new from $29 on up (the Royal Sovereign I use is ~$70; so to me
its a no brainer. Others will disagree.
That said, I think the clothes iron video would be a great idea.
Many people don't have access or the funds to use a paper laminator.
It's always handy to see what works for other people.