Yahoo Groups archive

Homebrew PCBs

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:05 UTC

Thread

Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

2012-04-03 by thb201

Hello group:

I just joined the group and this is my first post so I hope I'm not treading over old territory.  I've made PCB's in the past using the black layout tape and photo negative method used years ago.  

Now I need to jump back into making my own PCB's again using these somewhat newer methods.  I was going to use the Pulsar materials as they're the only ones I can get here in Canada.  I asked the Pulsar people about which printer is suitable.  All they said was to stay away from Brother and also the HP LaserJet 1102.  The Brother I understand as there is a problem with their toner, but they didn't give an explanation as to why they nixed the HP printer.  At that point in order to avoid too many emails back and forth I just asked them if they had a list of recommended printer(s) but they stopped answering any more of my questions, so I'm sort of left hanging.

I've been hunting down reasonably priced (cheap!) printers in my area and came across the Samsung ML-1670 and Samsung ML-1675.  Both are monochrome and appear to be at least 1200 x 1200 dpi.  Beyond that I'm not sure what the difference is between the two models or if they are even suitable for this purpose.  I don't intend on using them for anything else other than making PCB's so financial outlay is a consideration, as is size (they are small and simple).

I'm open to using either the toner transfer method, or the positive transparency on sensitized board method.  Either is fine with me.  None of the boards I need to make are overly complicated or have any ultra fine traces.

If anyone has any comments on Samsung printers in general, or these two in particular, I would be very appreciative.  Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
John
VE3CXB

Re: Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

2012-04-03 by AlienRelics

Check the Database of the group, there are a few Samsung Laser printers in there. Looks like decent results.

<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/database?method=reportRows&tbl=4&sortBy=1&sortDir=down&start_at=20>

Note that people were trying different papers with their Laser printers, so take note of that.

Steve Greenfield AE7HD

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "thb201" <hudakjm@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Hello group:
> 
> I just joined the group and this is my first post so I hope I'm not treading over old territory.  I've made PCB's in the past using the black layout tape and photo negative method used years ago.  
> 
> Now I need to jump back into making my own PCB's again using these somewhat newer methods.  I was going to use the Pulsar materials as they're the only ones I can get here in Canada.  I asked the Pulsar people about which printer is suitable.  All they said was to stay away from Brother and also the HP LaserJet 1102.  The Brother I understand as there is a problem with their toner, but they didn't give an explanation as to why they nixed the HP printer.  At that point in order to avoid too many emails back and forth I just asked them if they had a list of recommended printer(s) but they stopped answering any more of my questions, so I'm sort of left hanging.
> 
> I've been hunting down reasonably priced (cheap!) printers in my area and came across the Samsung ML-1670 and Samsung ML-1675.  Both are monochrome and appear to be at least 1200 x 1200 dpi.  Beyond that I'm not sure what the difference is between the two models or if they are even suitable for this purpose.  I don't intend on using them for anything else other than making PCB's so financial outlay is a consideration, as is size (they are small and simple).
> 
> I'm open to using either the toner transfer method, or the positive transparency on sensitized board method.  Either is fine with me.  None of the boards I need to make are overly complicated or have any ultra fine traces.
> 
> If anyone has any comments on Samsung printers in general, or these two in particular, I would be very appreciative.  Thanks in advance.
> 
> Cheers,
> John
> VE3CXB
>

Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

2012-04-03 by Leon Heller

On 03/04/2012 21:15, thb201 wrote:

>
> I'm open to using either the toner transfer method, or the positive
> transparency on sensitized board method. Either is fine with me. None of
> the boards I need to make are overly complicated or have any ultra fine
> traces.

An inkjet printer is best if you use photo-etch, I get very good results 
with an HP 5940 which I bought a few years ago. I think that the current 
model is the 6940 costing about $100.

Leon
-- 
Leon Heller
G1HSM

Re: Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

2012-04-04 by leeleduc

I use a Samsung ML-2525. You can see my results in the photos section under the folder "Dissolvo Paper Experiment". The paper was just an experiment, I usually use the Pulsar transfer paper with good results.   


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "thb201" <hudakjm@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> Hello group:
> 
> I just joined the group and this is my first post so I hope I'm not treading over old territory.  I've made PCB's in the past using the black layout tape and photo negative method used years ago.  
> 
> Now I need to jump back into making my own PCB's again using these somewhat newer methods.  I was going to use the Pulsar materials as they're the only ones I can get here in Canada.  I asked the Pulsar people about which printer is suitable.  All they said was to stay away from Brother and also the HP LaserJet 1102.  The Brother I understand as there is a problem with their toner, but they didn't give an explanation as to why they nixed the HP printer.  At that point in order to avoid too many emails back and forth I just asked them if they had a list of recommended printer(s) but they stopped answering any more of my questions, so I'm sort of left hanging.
> 
> I've been hunting down reasonably priced (cheap!) printers in my area and came across the Samsung ML-1670 and Samsung ML-1675.  Both are monochrome and appear to be at least 1200 x 1200 dpi.  Beyond that I'm not sure what the difference is between the two models or if they are even suitable for this purpose.  I don't intend on using them for anything else other than making PCB's so financial outlay is a consideration, as is size (they are small and simple).
> 
> I'm open to using either the toner transfer method, or the positive transparency on sensitized board method.  Either is fine with me.  None of the boards I need to make are overly complicated or have any ultra fine traces.
> 
> If anyone has any comments on Samsung printers in general, or these two in particular, I would be very appreciative.  Thanks in advance.
> 
> Cheers,
> John
> VE3CXB
>

Re: Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

2012-04-04 by sailingto

The problem with the HP 1102 model it does not allow mirror when printing.  Toner transfer works ok, but if you're using ExpressPCB you don't have the ability to mirror top layer.  If using Eagle, then you can mirror during the print phase with the Eagle software, so it's not an issue with Eagle.

Ken H>

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "leeleduc" <leeleduc@...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I use a Samsung ML-2525. You can see my results in the photos section under the folder "Dissolvo Paper Experiment". The paper was just an experiment, I usually use the Pulsar transfer paper with good results.   
> 
> 
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "thb201" <hudakjm@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello group:
> > 
> > I just joined the group and this is my first post so I hope I'm not treading over old territory.  I've made PCB's in the past using the black layout tape and photo negative method used years ago.  
> > 
> > Now I need to jump back into making my own PCB's again using these somewhat newer methods.  I was going to use the Pulsar materials as they're the only ones I can get here in Canada.  I asked the Pulsar people about which printer is suitable.  All they said was to stay away from Brother and also the HP LaserJet 1102.  The Brother I understand as there is a problem with their toner, but they didn't give an explanation as to why they nixed the HP printer.  At that point in order to avoid too many emails back and forth I just asked them if they had a list of recommended printer(s) but they stopped answering any more of my questions, so I'm sort of left hanging.
> > 
> > I've been hunting down reasonably priced (cheap!) printers in my area and came across the Samsung ML-1670 and Samsung ML-1675.  Both are monochrome and appear to be at least 1200 x 1200 dpi.  Beyond that I'm not sure what the difference is between the two models or if they are even suitable for this purpose.  I don't intend on using them for anything else other than making PCB's so financial outlay is a consideration, as is size (they are small and simple).
> > 
> > I'm open to using either the toner transfer method, or the positive transparency on sensitized board method.  Either is fine with me.  None of the boards I need to make are overly complicated or have any ultra fine traces.
> > 
> > If anyone has any comments on Samsung printers in general, or these two in particular, I would be very appreciative.  Thanks in advance.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > John
> > VE3CXB
> >
>

Re: Samsung laser printers - any good for PCB's?

2012-04-08 by x100

I use a Samsung 1665 printer.  I've been using magazine paper.  I do mostly double sided surface mount with 0603 parts and 15 mil traces.  The results are very good except for the paper fiber that gets stuck between fine gaps which needs to be manually removed.

I recently tried HP presentation paper.  Although I didn't etch yet, the transfer looks perfect.  The paper floats off by itself after about 2 min of soaking, leaving an etch ready board.  The paper is low cost, $15 for 250 sheets.  It's highly recommended.

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.