Since we are on this subject, I would like to offer a little
explanation on screening of Stooge panels. There will always be some
room for error in this process. In fact, I am finding variations in
my actual MOTM panels in these terms (2/100s of an inch seems to be
the max). During screen set up, any error in positioning of the
screen will be translated into some offset. This is less visible on
MOTM panels because the screen is made to match the holes already in
the panel. However, since we do custom work and not 100 of each
panel, we print our panels without holes. So, the holes must be put
in AFTER the screen is applied. This will no doubt result in error
that may not be detectable by the printer. The bottom line is that
some small variations are inherent to the process. We strive and
continue to stress to our printer careful alignment. But, we will
never be able to match the precision of an etched panel like
Schaeffer. Our mission is to closely match MOTM (tough paint BTW).
Therefore, we are stuck with the screening process and the slight
inherent inaccuracies.
Larry
--- Richard Brewster <
pugix@...> wrote:
> It isn't true! It was a mistake to imply that ∗all∗ Stooge panels
> have this vertical alignment variation from MOTM. In fact my
> remarks apply only to the Oakley OMS-410 and OMS-902 (Multimix)
> Stooge panels, where I first noticed it. I hold in my hand a shiny
> new MOTM-320R Stooge panel, which is perfectly aligned on the same
> grid as the MOTM-320. Likewise for the MOTM-120R panel. And today
> I built an Oakley Equinox, and its Stooge panel is nicely aligned,
> too. I apologize for over-generalizing.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com