Homebrew PCBs

Hello all,
  I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some 
trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if replacement 
aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different 
wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?

If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would 
appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin 
are out of stock)

Thanks for your help

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "tboneuk_2000" <a_reynolds@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:12 AM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question


> Hello all,
>   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some 
> trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if replacement 
> aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different 
> wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
> 
> If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would 
> appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin 
> are out of stock)

Rapid Electronics has them for 12.20 a pair.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email: aqzf13@...
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

Leon, how long does it take you to expose the PCB? 

Disco tubes (Black Light) are mentioned on the web all the time but I 
think they have the wrong wavelength for PCBs.

Mike

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Leon Heller" 
<leon_heller@h...> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "tboneuk_2000" <a_reynolds@b...>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:12 AM
> Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question
> 
> 
> > Hello all,
> >   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having 
some 
> > trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if 
replacement 
> > aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different 
> > wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
> > 
> > If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would 
> > appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, 
maplin 

> > are out of stock)
> 
> Rapid Electronics has them for 12.20 a pair.
> 
> Leon
> --
> Leon Heller, G1HSM
> Email: aqzf13@d...
> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "mikezcnc" <eemikez@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 7:01 AM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


> Leon, how long does it take you to expose the PCB?

I have mine about 20 cm away from the PCB to get a sharper image, so I use
13 mins. It depends on the distance, of course. Over-exposure doesn't matter
so much as under-exposure. Test with some artwork and expose progressively
with a cardboard mask, moving it every minute, to get the correct exposure
time.


>
> Disco tubes (Black Light) are mentioned on the web all the time but I
> think they have the wrong wavelength for PCBs.

They will work, I think, but aren't as good as the proper ones.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email: aqzf13@...
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

Hi,

I used to work with UV tubes the same kind used in insect electrocutors.
Never had a problem related with exposure with these.

Best,

Nuno T.

-----Original Message-----
From: tboneuk_2000 [mailto:a_reynolds@...]
Sent: ter\ufffda-feira, 20 de Janeiro de 2004 1:12
To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question


Hello all,
  I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some
trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if replacement
aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different
wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?

If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would
appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin
are out of stock)

Thanks for your help

---
Outgoing mail is AVG certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.562 / Virus Database: 354 - Release Date: 16-01-2004

Have a look at:  
http://www.megauk.com/cgi-bin/mega/lp.pl?page=http://www.megauk.com/sundries_and_accessories.php#SUN08

or http://tinyurl.com/3b4kz   for Order Code 170012   

DHC
Australia

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: nuno-t 
  To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 8:47 AM
  Subject: RE: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question


  Hi,

  I used to work with UV tubes the same kind used in insect electrocutors.
  Never had a problem related with exposure with these.

  Best,

  Nuno T.

  -----Original Message-----
  From: tboneuk_2000 [mailto:a_reynolds@...]
  Sent: terça-feira, 20 de Janeiro de 2004 1:12
  To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question


  Hello all,
    I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some
  trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if replacement
  aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different
  wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?

  If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would
  appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin
  are out of stock)

  Thanks for your help

  ---
  Outgoing mail is AVG certified Virus Free.
  Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
  Version: 6.0.562 / Virus Database: 354 - Release Date: 16-01-2004



  Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and files:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs 



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



  ---
  Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
  Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
  Version: 6.0.564 / Virus Database: 356 - Release Date: 1/19/2004

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

By deafult black light is the light has to be safe on eyes. Then the 
question is about the wavelentgh sensitivity of the PCB and what is 
coming out of Black Light. The opinions on the web are devided with 
60% of them against it. Is there anybody who used Balck Light lamps 
and what was he exposure time? Mike



--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Leon Heller" 
<leon_heller@h...> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "mikezcnc" <eemikez@c...>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 7:01 AM
> Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question
> 
> 
> > Leon, how long does it take you to expose the PCB?
> 
> I have mine about 20 cm away from the PCB to get a sharper image, 
so I use
> 13 mins. It depends on the distance, of course. Over-exposure 
doesn't matter
> so much as under-exposure. Test with some artwork and expose 
progressively
> with a cardboard mask, moving it every minute, to get the correct 
exposure
> time.
> 
> 
> >
> > Disco tubes (Black Light) are mentioned on the web all the time 
but I

> > think they have the wrong wavelength for PCBs.
> 
> They will work, I think, but aren't as good as the proper ones.
> 
> Leon
> --
> Leon Heller, G1HSM
> Email: aqzf13@d...
> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

Right, but this is NOT the same as so called Black Light at hte 
hardware store. What times did you require?

Mike


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "nuno-t" <nuno-t@n...> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I used to work with UV tubes the same kind used in insect 
electrocutors.
> Never had a problem related with exposure with these.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Nuno T.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tboneuk_2000 [mailto:a_reynolds@b...]
> Sent: terça-feira, 20 de Janeiro de 2004 1:12
> To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question
> 
> 
> Hello all,
>   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some
> trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if 
replacement

> aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different
> wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
> 
> If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would
> appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin
> are out of stock)
> 
> Thanks for your help
> 
> ---
> Outgoing mail is AVG certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.562 / Virus Database: 354 - Release Date: 16-01-2004

The tubes that I am using are Black Lite, when I got them at a 
lighting dist. I had asked for these with out the blue filter which 
was what M.G. Chemicals had recommended using but after I picked 
them up and got home with them found that they had sold me tubes 
with the blue filter.  I tried them and worked OK so here I am some 
10 years later and still using them.  They are a Sylvania  
Blacklight Blue  F15T8/BLB   I use (4) of these at a distance of 
about 7" for about 5 to 6 mins.  I normally do boards 12" x 8" or 
10" x 8" in size and using the M.G. Chemicals 600 series boards.

Ben

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 06:37:37 -0000, Ben H. Lanmon <bhleavi@...> 
wrote:

>  The tubes that I am using are Black Lite, when I got them at a
> lighting dist. I had asked for these with out the blue filter which
> was what M.G. Chemicals had recommended using but after I picked
> them up and got home with them found that they had sold me tubes
> with the blue filter.  I tried them and worked OK so here I am some
> 10 years later and still using them.  They are a Sylvania
> Blacklight Blue  F15T8/BLB   I use (4) of these at a distance of
> about 7" for about 5 to 6 mins.  I normally do boards 12" x 8" or
> 10" x 8" in size and using the M.G. Chemicals 600 series boards.
>
> Ben
>

i think with the proper tubes (4 at 7") you should have 30s.
i am sure about that, because i used such a unit some time ago.
i'm sorry but i can no longer look for the type of tubes and didn't then.
the board was bungard i think, but standard sensitivity (no darkroom or so
required).
I suspect it must be short-wavelength UV.
this has more energy by itself, maybe also the resist is more sensitive.
the "black light" tubes are, as said before, long wave uv (to protect the 
eyes).

ST

This is a first direct report I see that Black Light with blue filter 
works. The Black Light that is sold at Home Depot also has a blue 
filter.

Mike

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Ben H. Lanmon" <bhleavi@y...> 
wrote:

>  The tubes that I am using are Black Lite, when I got them at a 
> lighting dist. I had asked for these with out the blue filter which 
> was what M.G. Chemicals had recommended using but after I picked 
> them up and got home with them found that they had sold me tubes 
> with the blue filter.  I tried them and worked OK so here I am some 
> 10 years later and still using them.  They are a Sylvania  
> Blacklight Blue  F15T8/BLB   I use (4) of these at a distance of 
> about 7" for about 5 to 6 mins.  I normally do boards 12" x 8" or 
> 10" x 8" in size and using the M.G. Chemicals 600 series boards.
> 
> Ben

Notice Stefan that he sad  that the Black Light he's got does have 
the Blue Filter on them ie the types are blue... But it still beats 
the sun exposure. By deafult the Black Light is designed for human 
eyes viewing and therefore cannot be the damaging light, ie won't be 
too great as we know now, for PCBs.

Mike

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan 
<stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 06:37:37 -0000, Ben H. Lanmon <bhleavi@y...> 
> wrote:
> 
> >  The tubes that I am using are Black Lite, when I got them at a
> > lighting dist. I had asked for these with out the blue filter 
which
> > was what M.G. Chemicals had recommended using but after I picked
> > them up and got home with them found that they had sold me tubes
> > with the blue filter.  I tried them and worked OK so here I am 
some
> > 10 years later and still using them.  They are a Sylvania
> > Blacklight Blue  F15T8/BLB   I use (4) of these at a distance of
> > about 7" for about 5 to 6 mins.  I normally do boards 12" x 8" or
> > 10" x 8" in size and using the M.G. Chemicals 600 series boards.
> >
> > Ben
> >
> 
> i think with the proper tubes (4 at 7") you should have 30s.
> i am sure about that, because i used such a unit some time ago.
> i'm sorry but i can no longer look for the type of tubes and didn't 
then.
> the board was bungard i think, but standard sensitivity (no 
darkroom or so
> required).
> I suspect it must be short-wavelength UV.
> this has more energy by itself, maybe also the resist is more 
sensitive.
> the "black light" tubes are, as said before, long wave uv (to 
protect the 

> eyes).
> 
> ST

I think the film has the most to do with it. I have a home made 6 bulb (3
per side) box, with 18" bulbs 3" away. I use the boards from circuit
specialists, They say right on the package, 90 seconds with Real UV bulbs,
or (up to) 9 min with standard fluorescent. The black light bulbs seem to
fall somewhere in the middle. I use them - 6-7 min seems to be perfect. I'm
sure real uv bulbs would speed it up, and normal fluorescent would slow it
down (but it'd still work)
I think the difference would be more dramatic with a negative style pro
film.

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "mikezcnc" <eemikez@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:18 AM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


> Notice Stefan that he sad  that the Black Light he's got does have
> the Blue Filter on them ie the types are blue... But it still beats
> the sun exposure. By deafult the Black Light is designed for human
> eyes viewing and therefore cannot be the damaging light, ie won't be
> too great as we know now, for PCBs.
>
> Mike
>
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
> <stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 06:37:37 -0000, Ben H. Lanmon <bhleavi@y...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >  The tubes that I am using are Black Lite, when I got them at a
> > > lighting dist. I had asked for these with out the blue filter
> which
> > > was what M.G. Chemicals had recommended using but after I picked
> > > them up and got home with them found that they had sold me tubes
> > > with the blue filter.  I tried them and worked OK so here I am
> some
> > > 10 years later and still using them.  They are a Sylvania
> > > Blacklight Blue  F15T8/BLB   I use (4) of these at a distance of
> > > about 7" for about 5 to 6 mins.  I normally do boards 12" x 8" or
> > > 10" x 8" in size and using the M.G. Chemicals 600 series boards.
> > >
> > > Ben
> > >
> >
> > i think with the proper tubes (4 at 7") you should have 30s.
> > i am sure about that, because i used such a unit some time ago.
> > i'm sorry but i can no longer look for the type of tubes and didn't
> then.
> > the board was bungard i think, but standard sensitivity (no
> darkroom or so
> > required).
> > I suspect it must be short-wavelength UV.
> > this has more energy by itself, maybe also the resist is more
> sensitive.
> > the "black light" tubes are, as said before, long wave uv (to
> protect the
> > eyes).
> >
> > ST
>
>
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and files:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

About 6 to 10 min. Depending on Age of lamp and type of photo sensitive
chemical.
Whenever a new photo chemical was used, 8 min. was the starting point to
test it. If sucessfull less time was experimented. My UV box had 3 18Watt
fluorescent lamps about 8 to 10cm (aprox. 4inch) distant

Nuno T.

-----Original Message-----
From: mikezcnc [mailto:eemikez@...]
Sent: quarta-feira, 21 de Janeiro de 2004 5:16
To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


Right, but this is NOT the same as so called Black Light at hte
hardware store. What times did you require?

Mike


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "nuno-t" <nuno-t@n...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I used to work with UV tubes the same kind used in insect
electrocutors.
> Never had a problem related with exposure with these.
>
> Best,
>
> Nuno T.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tboneuk_2000 [mailto:a_reynolds@b...]
> Sent: ter\ufffda-feira, 20 de Janeiro de 2004 1:12
> To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] UV light sources question
>
>
> Hello all,
>   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some
> trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if
replacement
> aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different
> wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
>
> If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would
> appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin
> are out of stock)
>
> Thanks for your help
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is AVG certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.562 / Virus Database: 354 - Release Date: 16-01-2004


Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and files:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


---
Outgoing mail is AVG certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.562 / Virus Database: 354 - Release Date: 16-01-2004

About 6 to 10 min. Depending on Age of lamp and type of photo sensitive
chemical.
Whenever a new photo chemical was used, 8 min. was the starting point to
test it. If sucessfull less time was experimented. My UV box had 3 18Watt
fluorescent lamps about 8 to 10cm (aprox. 4inch) distant

Nuno T.

-----Original Message-----
From: mikezcnc [mailto:eemikez@...]
Sent: quarta-feira, 21 de Janeiro de 2004 5:16
To: Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


Right, but this is NOT the same as so called Black Light at hte
hardware store. What times did you require?

Mike


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "nuno-t" <nuno-t@n...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I used to work with UV tubes the same kind used in insect
electrocutors.

> Never had a problem related with exposure with these.
>
> Best,
>
> Nuno T.

> i think with the proper tubes (4 at 7") you should have 30s.
 
Well I tried the Blacklite tubes that I ended up with because as I 
remember M.G. Chemicials had said that they could be used but that 
the none filtered or non blue tubes where recommended.  

I have never exposed a board for 30 seconds.  As I said it is about 
5 - 6 seconds what I found that worked and have been for years.  I 
used a mechical timer switch to set the time.  The longest I have 
exposed is maybe 10 sec. I dropped down to the 5-6 secs just 
expermenting to see how short of time that I could do.

I took a picture of one of my boards the other evening, I will see 
about posting it in the files area. It was exposed for 5-6 sec. 
developer is the M.G. Chemicals  which is Sodium Hydroxide.  I etch 
in Ferric Chloride 5 gal. homemade bubble tank.

Ben

has one of you here tried the arc lamp method?
i have seen a page where a arc lamp was used (i think the link came from 
here).
the outer glass shell was demolished, (which is the filter/converter).
the inner shell in which the arc burns is quartz glass, good to let 
through short UV.

i really wonder what the times are with that lamp.
it is a point source so the "light undercutting" would be less too.
and this lamps are available with quite a lot of wattage.....

ST

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 03:47:41 -0000, Ben H. Lanmon <bhleavi@...> 
wrote:

>  > i think with the proper tubes (4 at 7") you should have 30s.
>
> Well I tried the Blacklite tubes that I ended up with because as I
> remember M.G. Chemicials had said that they could be used but that
> the none filtered or non blue tubes where recommended.
>
> I have never exposed a board for 30 seconds.  As I said it is about
> 5 - 6 seconds what I found that worked and have been for years.  I
> used a mechical timer switch to set the time.  The longest I have
> exposed is maybe 10 sec. I dropped down to the 5-6 secs just
> expermenting to see how short of time that I could do.
>
> I took a picture of one of my boards the other evening, I will see
> about posting it in the files area. It was exposed for 5-6 sec.
> developer is the M.G. Chemicals  which is Sodium Hydroxide.  I etch
> in Ferric Chloride 5 gal. homemade bubble tank.
>
> Ben
>

maybe the MG resist is just different from the one i used with 30 
seconds...
most likely...

Everybody has to try it out, with his boards and light source.
Anything else seems to lead not very far..

ST

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Stefan Trethan" <stefan_trethan@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


> has one of you here tried the arc lamp method?
> i have seen a page where a arc lamp was used (i think the link came from
> here).
> the outer glass shell was demolished, (which is the filter/converter).
> the inner shell in which the arc burns is quartz glass, good to let
> through short UV.
>
> i really wonder what the times are with that lamp.
> it is a point source so the "light undercutting" would be less too.
> and this lamps are available with quite a lot of wattage.....

I have heard of someone doing this. It worked very well. Cannot remember
where I saw it, though.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email: aqzf13@...
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

***********************
 El mail fue rastreado por la oficina de Sistemas de Artes Graficas Rioplatense a traves del Interscan Messaging Security Suite y se encuentra libre de virus.
***********-***********


Yes ,

I am using an Mercury mixer lamp 400 watts power 

simply i broke the glass envelope and use the inner quartz tube.

be aware do not touch the quartz tube or will be broken with naturals oils
from the skin and watch out with the light emmited is very harmful 

for the naked eye and skin.

fhe

> ----------
> De: 	Leon Heller[SMTP:leon_heller@...]
> Responder a: 	Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> Enviado el: 	Jueves 22 de Enero de 2004 01:34
> Para: 	Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com
> Asunto: 	Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question
> 
> ***********************
>  El mail fue rastreado por la oficina de Sistemas de Artes Graficas
> Rioplatense a traves del Interscan Messaging Security Suite y se encuentra
> libre de virus.
> ***********-***********
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Stefan Trethan" <stefan_trethan@...>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 4:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question
> 
> 
> > has one of you here tried the arc lamp method?
> > i have seen a page where a arc lamp was used (i think the link came from
> > here).
> > the outer glass shell was demolished, (which is the filter/converter).
> > the inner shell in which the arc burns is quartz glass, good to let
> > through short UV.
> >
> > i really wonder what the times are with that lamp.
> > it is a point source so the "light undercutting" would be less too.
> > and this lamps are available with quite a lot of wattage.....
> 
> I have heard of someone doing this. It worked very well. Cannot remember
> where I saw it, though.
> 
> Leon
> --
> Leon Heller, G1HSM
> Email: aqzf13@...
> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html
> 
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and files:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
>

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Etchenique Fabian" <fetchenique@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 4:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


> ***********************
>  El mail fue rastreado por la oficina de Sistemas de Artes Graficas
Rioplatense a traves del Interscan Messaging Security Suite y se encuentra
libre de virus.
> ***********-***********
>
>
> Yes ,
>
> I am using an Mercury mixer lamp 400 watts power
>
> simply i broke the glass envelope and use the inner quartz tube.
>
> be aware do not touch the quartz tube or will be broken with naturals oils

The quartz may be cleaned with IPA or similar if it is touched accidentally.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email: aqzf13@...
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

you're right in your assumption. I keep trying to nail the moving 
rabit with negatives... Mike

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Jeremy Taylor" <jt@j...> wrote:
> I think the film has the most to do with it. I have a home made 6 
bulb (3
> per side) box, with 18" bulbs 3" away. I use the boards from circuit
> specialists, They say right on the package, 90 seconds with Real UV 
bulbs,
> or (up to) 9 min with standard fluorescent. The black light bulbs 
seem to
> fall somewhere in the middle. I use them - 6-7 min seems to be 
perfect. I'm
> sure real uv bulbs would speed it up, and normal fluorescent would 
slow it
> down (but it'd still work)
> I think the difference would be more dramatic with a negative style 
pro
> film.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "mikezcnc" <eemikez@c...>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:18 AM
> Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question
> 
> 
> > Notice Stefan that he sad  that the Black Light he's got does have
> > the Blue Filter on them ie the types are blue... But it still 
beats
> > the sun exposure. By deafult the Black Light is designed for human
> > eyes viewing and therefore cannot be the damaging light, ie won't 
be
> > too great as we know now, for PCBs.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Trethan
> > <stefan_trethan@g...> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 06:37:37 -0000, Ben H. Lanmon <bhleavi@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >  The tubes that I am using are Black Lite, when I got them at 
a
> > > > lighting dist. I had asked for these with out the blue filter
> > which
> > > > was what M.G. Chemicals had recommended using but after I 
picked
> > > > them up and got home with them found that they had sold me 
tubes
> > > > with the blue filter.  I tried them and worked OK so here I am
> > some
> > > > 10 years later and still using them.  They are a Sylvania
> > > > Blacklight Blue  F15T8/BLB   I use (4) of these at a distance 
of
> > > > about 7" for about 5 to 6 mins.  I normally do boards 12" x 
8" or
> > > > 10" x 8" in size and using the M.G. Chemicals 600 series 
boards.
> > > >
> > > > Ben
> > > >
> > >
> > > i think with the proper tubes (4 at 7") you should have 30s.
> > > i am sure about that, because i used such a unit some time ago.
> > > i'm sorry but i can no longer look for the type of tubes and 
didn't
> > then.
> > > the board was bungard i think, but standard sensitivity (no
> > darkroom or so
> > > required).
> > > I suspect it must be short-wavelength UV.
> > > this has more energy by itself, maybe also the resist is more
> > sensitive.
> > > the "black light" tubes are, as said before, long wave uv (to
> > protect the
> > > eyes).
> > >
> > > ST
> >
> >
> > Be sure to visit the group home and check for new Bookmarks and 
files:

> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >  Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> >  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >

tboneuk_2000 wrote:

> Hello all,
>   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some 
> trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if replacement 
> aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different 
> wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
> 
> If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would 
> appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin 
> are out of stock)
> 
> Thanks for your help
> 


For fluro tubes type lamps then you need standard BL (blacklight) lamps 
used for attracting insects to "insect zappers". Phillips make them and are 
very common. The filtered blacklights used for special effects will equally 
produce the 365nm emission from mercury , but much more expensive.

You can get 175W HID (High Intensity Discharge) mercury vapor lamps pretty 
cheap. Due to the HID lamps high intensity point like source they will 
eliminate most photomask light undercutting problems. The mercury vapor 
lamp are almost always made with a white phosphorous outer shell, but I 
found that doesn't seem to attenuate too much of the long wave UV (330nm to 
400nm) which is the wavelengths standard photoresists are most sensitive 
too. A home made exposure box using a single HID lamp is better than an 
array of fluorescent tubes in terms of cost, performance and construction 
simplicity.

I use 400W HID mercury lamp, with white phosphor shell, and exposure time 
is about 150 seconds at 40 cm distance, using Epson inkjet transparency, 3 
mm window glass and negative dry film photoresists from Macdermid.

The other common HID lamp is the metal halide. These lamps are manufactured 
with a clear outer shell since the arc tube is designed to produces mostly 
visible light. I'm not sure how much long wave UV is produced from metal 
halide HID lamps compared to phosphorized mercury vapor HID lamps. Has 
anyone tried a metal halide HID lamp for photoresist exposure ?

Motto: There is no need to waste your money on specialty lamps.

Adam

There are/were one or two companies around making EPROM erasers using a
Xenon flash tube - these emit quite a lot of UV. This technique might be
worth investigating for PCB exposure. Multiple flashes could be used if one
wasn't sufficient. I don't think an ordinary photographic electronic flash
unit would be suitable as it stands as they probably have a UV filter,
although I'm not sure about this.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email: aqzf13@...
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

Went to the M.G. Chemicals website

They list the wavelength at 375nm

Their exposure kit indicates that it is using Daylight fluorescent 
tube.  Guess have to go to a light manufacturer to see what the 
specs. are for the different lamps.

Ben

> Went to the M.G. Chemicals website
> 
> They list the wavelength at 375nm

Sylvania website listed the Blacklite as having a peak output at 
356nm

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Ben H. Lanmon" <bhleavi@y...> 
wrote:
> 
> > Went to the M.G. Chemicals website
> > 
> > They list the wavelength at 375nm
> 
> Sylvania website listed the Blacklite as having a peak output at 
>  356nm


TL-40/05-from PHILIPS i use workz great older series 
Actinic Lamp
color/05
nm:300-460 uvb type is used in many major brands like welisch rapid

now these days dey run under the type/name "cleo"

bit more info
http://www.eur.lighting.philips.com/int_en/oem/ca/special/segments/bod
ycare/natural.html
 
 gr Roel

roel_cnc wrote:
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Ben H. Lanmon" <bhleavi@y...> 
> wrote:
> 
>>>Went to the M.G. Chemicals website
>>>
>>>They list the wavelength at 375nm
>>
>>Sylvania website listed the Blacklite as having a peak output at 
>> 356nm
> 
> 
> 
> TL-40/05-from PHILIPS i use workz great older series 
> Actinic Lamp
> color/05
> nm:300-460 uvb type is used in many major brands like welisch rapid
> 
> now these days dey run under the type/name "cleo"
> 
> bit more info
> http://www.eur.lighting.philips.com/int_en/oem/ca/special/segments/bod
> ycare/natural.html
>  
>  gr Roel
> 

Yes, a sun tanning lamp may be great source for photoresist exposure.
Not sure if anyone seen this page on spectral sensitivity of typical 
photoresists.

http://www.circuitree.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/features/BNP__Features__Item/0,2133,3647,00.html

To summarize, the photoresists have a usable spectral sensitivity in the 
range 340nm to 400nm, where peak is around 360 nm.

One thing no one has talked about is what people use for a safe lighting. I 
colored a couple of fluorescent tubes with some yellow water based acrylic 
paint.

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "tboneuk_2000" 
<a_reynolds@b...> wrote:
> Hello all,
>   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some 
> trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if 
replacement 
> aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different 
> wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
> 
> If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would 
> appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin 
> are out of stock)
> 
> Thanks for your help

Hello All, sorry for not posting sooner but I have been away on 
buisness for a while.
A big thankyou for all your surgestions and comments, this has helped 
a lot.
Although this maybe not the best solution I managed to pick up a 
couple of blacklight tubes for £5 the pair from a local market
stall 
(the guy had a stockpile of them and it wasn't finacialy viable to 
stock the 1FT fittings so he was more than pleased to sell at a 
reduced price). Also at a local car boot sale (same sort of thing as 
a garage sale for our american cousins) I picked up a couple of 1FT 
fittings including Balasts, starter etc fot £2. I have made a base 
out of plywood with all the part on and put the whole lot into an 
aluminium case. I'm using Glass for the top, although perspex may be 
preferable (due to UV absorsion on glass) and a timer based on a pic 
circuit.
The timer isn't finished yet but I hope to complete in the next 
couple of weeks (time permiting).
So all being well I should be exposing my first board this weekend, 
(probebly the pcb for the timer circuit to find exposure times etc)I 
have made many boards with profesional equipment so I look forward to 
finding out if my homemade box works.
If the the Blacklight tubes do not work very well I will replace them 
with the correct ones from Megauk or Rs (thankyou for the info on 
tube availability), they did not cost much so there is no great loss 
if they do require replacement.

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "tboneuk_2000" <a_reynolds@...>
To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 12:46 AM
Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "tboneuk_2000"
<a_reynolds@b...> wrote:
> Hello all,
>   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having some
> trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if
replacement
> aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different
> wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
>
> If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would
> appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin
> are out of stock)
>
> Thanks for your help

Hello All, sorry for not posting sooner but I have been away on
buisness for a while.
A big thankyou for all your surgestions and comments, this has helped
a lot.
Although this maybe not the best solution I managed to pick up a
couple of blacklight tubes for \ufffd5 the pair from a local market
stall
(the guy had a stockpile of them and it wasn't finacialy viable to
stock the 1FT fittings so he was more than pleased to sell at a
reduced price). Also at a local car boot sale (same sort of thing as
a garage sale for our american cousins) I picked up a couple of 1FT
fittings including Balasts, starter etc fot \ufffd2. I have made a base
out of plywood with all the part on and put the whole lot into an
aluminium case. I'm using Glass for the top, although perspex may be
preferable (due to UV absorsion on glass) and a timer based on a pic
circuit.

Glass doesn't absorb much of the long-wave UV used for exposing PCBs.

Leon
--
Leon Heller, G1HSM
Email: aqzf13@...
My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

A project within a project wihin a project...

Walmart has a simple timer GoodCook that is pleasant to use, simple 
to operate and I use it all the time for everything else. Can't beat 
$5. The nicest thing is that it stays always on (14microA), has 
larged digits. People will have enough problems building a UV box be 
gentle on yourself and get that stoopwatch/countdown timer. Looks 
great in yellow light too.Mike 


--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "Leon Heller" 
<leon_heller@h...> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "tboneuk_2000" <a_reynolds@b...>
> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 12:46 AM
> Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: UV light sources question
> 
> 
> --- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, "tboneuk_2000"
> <a_reynolds@b...> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >   I would like to make my own uv exposure box, but I am having 
some
> > trouble locating a suitable tube. Could anyone tell me if
> replacement
> > aquariam uv tubes would work (do they opperate at a different
> > wavlength), also can you use disco uv tubes?
> >
> > If anyone knows of a supplier in the uk other than maplin I would
> > appreciate it (RS do sell them but they are very expensive, maplin
> > are out of stock)
> >
> > Thanks for your help
> 
> Hello All, sorry for not posting sooner but I have been away on
> buisness for a while.
> A big thankyou for all your surgestions and comments, this has 
helped
> a lot.
> Although this maybe not the best solution I managed to pick up a
> couple of blacklight tubes for £5 the pair from a local market
> stall
> (the guy had a stockpile of them and it wasn't finacialy viable to
> stock the 1FT fittings so he was more than pleased to sell at a
> reduced price). Also at a local car boot sale (same sort of thing as
> a garage sale for our american cousins) I picked up a couple of 1FT
> fittings including Balasts, starter etc fot £2. I have made a base
> out of plywood with all the part on and put the whole lot into an
> aluminium case. I'm using Glass for the top, although perspex may be
> preferable (due to UV absorsion on glass) and a timer based on a pic
> circuit.
> 
> Glass doesn't absorb much of the long-wave UV used for exposing 
PCBs.

> 
> Leon
> --
> Leon Heller, G1HSM
> Email: aqzf13@d...
> My low-cost Philips LPC210x ARM development system:
> http://www.geocities.com/leon_heller/lpc2104.html

> One thing no one has talked about is what people use for a safe 
lighting. I 
> colored a couple of fluorescent tubes with some yellow water based 
acrylic 
> paint.

I use a yellow bug light in a reflector aimed up into the ceiling.

M.G. Chemicals says 40 watt or less incandescent lamp, the yellow 
bug light.

Ben

On 28/1/04 14:03, mikezcnc at eemikez@... wrote:

> A project within a project wihin a project...
> 
> Walmart has a simple timer GoodCook that is pleasant to use, simple

Any chance of bottom-posting your replies and trimming away all the stuff
you weren't replying to?

I had to re-read the entire message you quoted to discover what you were
talking about!

-- 
Cheers,

Derryck

> Any chance of bottom-posting your replies and trimming away all the stuff
> you weren't replying to?
>
> I had to re-read the entire message you quoted to discover what you were
> talking about!
>

trimming is a good idea, but bottom posting?

im my mail software i see the top of the mail first, and have to scroll 
down
so often to see the reply.

I would vote for top posting, i was told in the past to bottom post and so 
i did.
Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see how the others think.

ST

Stefan Trethan wrote:
>>Any chance of bottom-posting your replies and trimming away all the stuff
>>you weren't replying to?
>>
>>I had to re-read the entire message you quoted to discover what you were
>>talking about!
>>
> trimming is a good idea, but bottom posting?
> 
> im my mail software i see the top of the mail first, and have to scroll 
> down so often to see the reply.
> 
> I would vote for top posting, i was told in the past to bottom post and so 
> i did.
> Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see how the others think.

You still need to cut the 100+ trailing lines off anyway, so it's no
extra work to do that, then bottom-post, which should all be visible
on the screen.

Stefan Trethan wrote:

>>Any chance of bottom-posting your replies and trimming away all the stuff
>>you weren't replying to?
>>
>>I had to re-read the entire message you quoted to discover what you were
>>talking about!
>>
> 
> Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see how the others think.
> 


   Ack, ignore it.  No one was holding a gun up to their head to read the 
message in the first place.  My usual reply is a multiple choice:  A. Take 15 
seconds to set up and filter everything by my email into trash.  B. If you chose 
not to do this and read my messages then be quiet.

   Usually anyone who writes this "I had to re-read the entire message" has 
obsessive compulsive disease, shown from both the need to reread something that 
they will likely never use anyway, and that they feel required to send you a 
message to 'help clean up the internet' instead of having the good sense to skip 
it and move on.  And that's not counting the attention deficit disorder they 
have if they just read that original and then had to reread it to understand 
your post only a few hours later.  Really they're likely slack and wanting you 
to trim to just the line or two you're replying to so they don't have to read 
the message in the first place, and saying they had to reread it was pure 
fabrication.  Plus they could stand to join the mid-90's and get a mouse with a 
wheel, and learn to scan a message properly, that original simply wasn't long 
enough to be complaining about.  Same as with the 'you must edit all your 
messages exactly for me to read in digest' people, the fault is on their side 
not yours.  Your only real job is as a text and ideas contributor, not as their 
personal message editor.

   Anyone worrying about such minor junk after the general discussion just 
doesn't have enough real stuff to worry about, and likely could stand a tree to 
fall on their car or house to knock them back to a better perspective.

Alan

On 30 Jan 2004, at 15:14, Stefan Trethan wrote:

> trimming is a good idea, but bottom posting?
Yep. Please post reply immediately following 
the thought that engendered the reply.
 
> im my mail software i see the top of the mail first, and have to
> scroll down so often to see the reply.
But, some of us cannot always know what the reply is about 
without reading the original. Thus, it is necessary to page down
anyway to read the original thought and then page back up 
to read the reply in context.

I prefer keeping things in logical order (for English); 
reading left to right & top to bottom........
 
> I would vote for top posting, 
One vote to the opposite. 
Wonder what a poll would show??

>i was told in the past to bottom post
> and so i did. Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see how
> the others think.
What is convenient varies by person, I guess. YMMV.

cheers,
johnd

"Life isn't like a box of chocolates ... it's more like a jar of
jalapenos. What you do today might burn your butt tomorrow. "

>> I would vote for top posting, i was told in the past to bottom post and 
>> so
>> i did.
>> Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see how the others think.
>
> You still need to cut the 100+ trailing lines off anyway, so it's no
> extra work to do that, then bottom-post, which should all be visible
> on the screen.
>

The top posting in not for the convenience of the poster, it is for the 
convenience of the reader.
If the mail is short enough, ok, you can see all on the screen.
But if it is more than one page (or one half depending on mail software) 
you need to scroll
any mail you want to read down.
I read more posts than i write, as does anyone, so i would rather have 
convenience in reading many mails
a day, rather than just not reading at all posts with a topic not so 
interesting.
The only advantage of bottom post so far is "logical order" which is 
doubtful, as normal (non-list)
emails are normally answered on top too?

I will do as the majority (or the owner) says, but i also will voice my 
different opinion.

ST

I Top Post when the response does not require the reader to re-read 
one's post to understand the reply.

I randome post throughtout the response if the origional poster did 
not have one thought, but rather offered randome questions.

And I mostly bottom post as that is where I read from as I trim the 
rest of the post.

May not be the best system, but it seems to work for me.

Dave

Until reading this thread, I never noticed post
location varied.  Now that you mention it though I do
find myself through each message for the post.  I
kinda wish you hadn't brought it up.

Brgds,
Ron

--- Stefan Trethan <stefan_trethan@...> wrote:
> 
> > Any chance of bottom-posting your replies and
> trimming away all the stuff
> > you weren't replying to?
> >
> > I had to re-read the entire message you quoted to
> discover what you were
> > talking about!
> >
> 
> trimming is a good idea, but bottom posting?
> 
> im my mail software i see the top of the mail first,
> and have to scroll 
> down
> so often to see the reply.
> 
> I would vote for top posting, i was told in the past
> to bottom post and so 
> i did.
> Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see
> how the others think.
> 
> ST
> 
> 
> 
> Be sure to visit the group home and check for new
> Bookmarks and files:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Homebrew_PCBs/
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  Homebrew_PCBs-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

In the past I've seen long flame wars erupt over this. So you can 
imagine how pleased I am at how everyone is handling this. ;')

I'm not nit picky about this. I have my opinions but as long as it 
hasn't come up on it's own, I'm not going to go all control freak.

Here are my opinions:

Post so it's understandable to someone following the thread. Don't try 
and contain the entire thread in your reply, they can go to the List 
Archives if they don't remember what it was about.

But leave enough of the original so your reply is in context. Trim. If 
it's short, top posting is fine, if it is a couple of paragraphs you 
feel you need to quote, bottom post. If it is many points in one email 
you want to respond to, then post below each quoted portion you are 
responding to so it makes sense.

But please, please, put a blank line between. Here's what I mean:

> Important point that someone made about a thousand monkeys making
> printed circuit boards with typewriters.
See how hard it is to pick that out without a blank line? Get 5 or 6 
paragraphs like that and it is very difficult to scan quickly.

Making it worse is differences in quoting. The standard has always 
been an angle bracket and one space at the beginning of each quoted 
line. Unfortunately some mail programs seem to be set to only put the 
angle bracket and space at the beginning of each paragraph.

> So a quote looks like this, add on a few sentences of stuff and it 
gets hard to tell when I add on my reply whether there's a blank line 
or not.
Here's my reply, without a blank line it looks like part of the quote, 
or maybe 3 lines of the quote look like my reply.

Even worse is HTML email. The list strips it, so the neato colors you 
see don't show up. So the rest of us see 5 lines of text without 
anything to differentiate between the quoted portion and the reply.

Steve, the moderatin' moderator

PS if anyone has noticed a "thank you" they've sent on list has gone 
missing, it's because I delete them from the archives after a few days 
if the "thanks" is followed by 3 pages of 5 messages worth of 
discussion. The list has had good ideas and info from day one and I'd 
like to delay the eventual dissappearance of that, at least until we 
all have our printable solderable conductive ink printers. ;')

--- In Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com, Alan King <alan@n...> wrote:
...
>    Anyone worrying about such minor junk after the general 
discussion just 
> doesn't have enough real stuff to worry about, and likely could 
stand a tree to 
> fall on their car or house to knock them back to a better 
perspective.
> 

I prefer a more moderate view, being the moderator and all, but points 
well taken. All things in moderation. Or was that "take with water"?

Steve

Stefan Trethan wrote:
>>>I would vote for top posting, i was told in the past to bottom post and 
>>>so i did. Still i find it inconvenient and would like to see how the others think.
>>
>>You still need to cut the 100+ trailing lines off anyway, so it's no
>>extra work to do that, then bottom-post, which should all be visible
>>on the screen.
>>
> The top posting in not for the convenience of the poster, it is for the 
> convenience of the reader.
> If the mail is short enough, ok, you can see all on the screen.
> But if it is more than one page (or one half depending on mail software) 
> you need to scroll any mail you want to read down.
> I read more posts than i write, as does anyone, so i would rather have 
> convenience in reading many mails
> a day, rather than just not reading at all posts with a topic not so interesting.
> The only advantage of bottom post so far is "logical order" which is 
> doubtful, as normal (non-list) emails are normally answered on top too?
> 
> I will do as the majority (or the owner) says, but i also will voice my 
> different opinion.

The problem is mail clients that don't have a setting to autoscroll to
the bottom of messages.

My vote would be for trimming to just enough information to make 
your post mean something and/or deleting orginal post message in 
replies depending on what makes your reply clear to someone reading 
it.  They can go back and read the post before if they need to.  Not 
quoting the whole post will save storage space for the information 
that we are all here for in the first place.

Yes please do delete post that offer no usable information to the 
topic of the group list, such as all the post on trimming/bottom 
posting.

Also I like the idea of not being a control freak and dicating in 
detail how a message is to be posted.

Yes this post may be delete as needed. 

Ben

On 30/1/04 16:29, Alan King at alan@... wrote:

Thanks for your kind words.

You're obviously one of the lazy ones who simply cannot take any time or
trouble.

-- 
Cheers,

Derryck