george koller on fri 28 mar 03
Hello Ink Jetters,
I suppose strong interest in printing on decals makes sense,
because, if successful you can get started with a $200/$300
printer. Underneath it all, however, I think there are factors
like the spray control mechanisms in the cartridges which
may seem "cheap" - but are also designed with a limited
minimum life cycle by any "industrial" standards. The cost
of a short life nozzle, and there is one per color, in the cartridges
I know of should perhaps be seen to include the destroyed tiles
when one of these things starts going "flaky".
What we are doing here, on the other hand, is spraying these
same colorants through a industrial strength nozzle that has an
expected minimum life of 250,000,000 cycles, and expected
(water) life of 500,000,000 cycles. The cost is about $150 with
a ruby sapphire laser cut nozzle that will last. You do the arithmetic,
my work generally runs the nozzle at less than 100 Cycles per minute -
that is over 200 weeks of solid running 40 hours.
We are using a 8' by 4' flat bed light industrial CNC (think of it as
a plotter on steroids) for moving the nozzle and the engraving tool
around. My software reads EPS images and generates the instructions
to move this kind of machine around. Fun to watch. Note that we
spray directly on the pieces, not onto a decal. We saturate deep into
the glaze right up to the clay surface and even into it a bit. Doesn't
look like it was "printed" and it doesn't feel like it was "printed".
Of course the "resolution" is lower, but then I think we are living
within the natural limits of "real" ceramic stuff, not just putting
something on top of it.
We do not use a printer like shuttle back and forth movement in
this approach, rather the head is moved around in a pattern rather
like you would use a lawnmower to cut the irregular shapes of
gulf course greens. One of the secrets of making this "analog"
method effectively faster than the "digital" pattern of back has
been to use variable flow rates (rather like we use a brush if you
think about it). And so you techys reading this have an idea of
where this has taken us - we are now at an effective coverage
rate of about 2 square feet per hour with the engraving process
we use to encircle the objects. Note that some machines on the
market are about 5X faster than ours.
How do other people see this? Is there something I am missing
about the decal process that is a real plus? Are there, perhaps,
some folks that might be interested in learning more about what
we are doing here in Northport, Michigan. It's a humble operation
here but I'm not very humble about what I think the potential is for
this process to put more clay where wood and plastic is going
now.
Best,
george koller
Terrance Gallentine on fri 28 mar 03
I guess that I am one of those inkjetters that George is talking about. I
have been working for a couple of years on this idea of using either
transfers or direct printing as a way to apply metal salts onto ceramic
substrates with the idea of making high resolution images. There are
several problems that I have run into but I am dealing with them as they
come up. My desire to develop this system is not so I can use a cheap
printer but rather to be able to get a high detail, full gradation image. I
may be mistaken but from what I know about George's technique, it yields
something more like a paint by numbers image than a full tonal gradation.
As far as something not fully ceramic, I have been working along the lines
of using the metal salts to color standard ceramic glazes in ways so they do
not simply sit on the top of the ceramic, anymore than any glaze sits on top
of something. Once colored the glaze image will last as long as the
strength of the glaze allows. We are not talking about traditional decals
where one uses lowfire overglazes that are prone to quick deterioration but
rather a toning of the base glaze. One limitation that metal salts have is
that of a limited palette but I assume that this is a problem that one would
have even with George's approach.
>From: george koller
>Reply-To: Clayart
>To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
>Subject: Ink jet ceramic decals-Scratching my head again
>Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:49:07 -0600
>
>Hello Ink Jetters,
>
>I suppose strong interest in printing on decals makes sense,
>because, if successful you can get started with a $200/$300
>printer. Underneath it all, however, I think there are factors
>like the spray control mechanisms in the cartridges which
>may seem "cheap" - but are also designed with a limited
>minimum life cycle by any "industrial" standards. The cost
>of a short life nozzle, and there is one per color, in the cartridges
>I know of should perhaps be seen to include the destroyed tiles
>when one of these things starts going "flaky".
>
>What we are doing here, on the other hand, is spraying these
>same colorants through a industrial strength nozzle that has an
>expected minimum life of 250,000,000 cycles, and expected
>(water) life of 500,000,000 cycles. The cost is about $150 with
>a ruby sapphire laser cut nozzle that will last. You do the arithmetic,
>my work generally runs the nozzle at less than 100 Cycles per minute -
>that is over 200 weeks of solid running 40 hours.
>
>We are using a 8' by 4' flat bed light industrial CNC (think of it as
>a plotter on steroids) for moving the nozzle and the engraving tool
>around. My software reads EPS images and generates the instructions
>to move this kind of machine around. Fun to watch. Note that we
>spray directly on the pieces, not onto a decal. We saturate deep into
>the glaze right up to the clay surface and even into it a bit. Doesn't
>look like it was "printed" and it doesn't feel like it was "printed".
>Of course the "resolution" is lower, but then I think we are living
>within the natural limits of "real" ceramic stuff, not just putting
>something on top of it.
>
>We do not use a printer like shuttle back and forth movement in
>this approach, rather the head is moved around in a pattern rather
>like you would use a lawnmower to cut the irregular shapes of
>gulf course greens. One of the secrets of making this "analog"
>method effectively faster than the "digital" pattern of back has
>been to use variable flow rates (rather like we use a brush if you
>think about it). And so you techys reading this have an idea of
>where this has taken us - we are now at an effective coverage
>rate of about 2 square feet per hour with the engraving process
>we use to encircle the objects. Note that some machines on the
>market are about 5X faster than ours.
>
>How do other people see this? Is there something I am missing
>about the decal process that is a real plus? Are there, perhaps,
>some folks that might be interested in learning more about what
>we are doing here in Northport, Michigan. It's a humble operation
>here but I'm not very humble about what I think the potential is for
>this process to put more clay where wood and plastic is going
>now.
>
>
>Best,
>
>
>george koller
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
>melpots@pclink.com.
_________________________________________________________________
J. B. Clauson on sat 29 mar 03
Lighten up, George. The Ink Jet Decal set is not likely to impinge on your
bottom line. You have to consider a few things when dealing with our
beloved pottery community.
1. Most potters are dirt poor if they depend on their pottery for a living.
In the words of my ex-father-in-law, they can't afford a pot to pee in or a
window to throw it out of. So, any process they can do in-house helps
(usually).
2. Our perfectionist brethren and sistern need to assure themselves that
they get the color, line weight, shading, etc. they desire. Often, when
ordering product from a third party, you get an "interpretation" of what
they want. This is also true of computer programmers. "Interpretation" can
leave a lot out. Just look at most of the small business bookkeeping
software!
3. Lastly, there is the need to have done it "all myself". The striving for
individuality and originality that runs throughout all the threads here in
Clayart. We are continually striving to find better ways while preserving
the tradition of integrity to the process
In addition to all that, you must consider the design and functionality of
the ink-jet printer. As you have pointed out, the materials used in
producing the ink jets will not hold up well running the kind of chemicals
we use to color our pottery. As it stands now, I see that the use of the
Ink Jet Printer is probably cost prohibitive. So, unless the results of
these experiments are really spectacular, I see no future for it. Even if
the results are magnificent, but the wear and tear on the print heads is as
bad as I think it will be, I can't see any of the printer manufacturers
stepping up to the plate and producing Ink Jet printer heads for pottery
applications.
So, George, take a deep breath, get yourself a cup of coffee (or tea or
whatever you drink), and have a nice day.
Jan Clauson
george koller on sat 29 mar 03
.....from what I know about George's technique, it yields
something more like a paint by numbers image than a full
tonal gradation.
Hello Terrance, InkJetters...
You are correct that the process we are evolving can be used
to produce "paint by numbers" style work, but if you think about
it - this is vector style graphics and the only limitations on size
are the evolving limits of the tools and equipment. With engraving
the minimum size of any fill or color object is about 1/4 square
inch. We do not need to engrave, indeed, our process on porcelain
does not even use require a glaze.
Using the metal sulfates gives us a decent, but not really
"complete" palette of colors. Some of these sulfates, like
copper are only a dollar per gallon. What are your colorant
costs like? I know some "additive" colorant systems get very
(!) expensive. Right now we only use one nozzle but I think we
could dynamically control the mix of the colorants going into
it. (In my software I have allowed for "three point color"
influence at the mural level...this allows us to modify each
"pixel" of color by the distance to a point of that color.
But this is not implemented in the dispensing electronics.))
Are you working for "photo-realism" on clay? That is not our
direction. I think there are some smart and well financed
folks out there doing that. Dominic Crinson of London, U.K. for
one has been doing something like that for years (but his is
not truly ceramic).
Photorealism is most certainly not our goal. To put an image
on clay in our process we work from a vectorized image (EPS
format). An image can be built of 100,000's of images or just
one, but there seems to always be some simplification necessary,
it is not a question of if, but of how much. We have maybe
12 pretty dependable colors now, that fact drives simplification,
but that would also be true if we had 256 or any other number.
Sometimes just Black&White is better than color, sometimes 3
colors are better than an infinite number... I guess at this
point I even like working backwards and find/fitting images
to look better with fewer colors. I like the way those random
specks of Manganese Dioxide "explode", and the iron specks come
out in reduction firing to replace the natural variability of
the original.
I would say that our goal is to: Enable a machine to assist
us in building artful images on clay. It has taken me 7 years
total, and some 4 years since Mel first introduced me to the
work of Kurt Wild and his decorating process to get this far.
A favorite line of thought for me is that using hand-made tiles
with machine assistance for decorating allows us to now produce
a whole new line of products at about the same cost. I like
wacking and rolling clay about more than I like transferring
image details. I like being able to use a graphics package
to "what if" with the image. But mostly I just like how it all
comes together as a whole piece, in my software I am finding
more and more ways to assist that.
Best,
george koller
Terrance Gallentine on sun 30 mar 03
George,
First I must apologize if I may have been a little bit aggressive in my
response to your first letter, but I had just come back from an "Iraq" forum
and I was feeling kind of combatant. I appreciate where you are coming from
in regard to your technique but I do feel that there is a future for other
techniques too.
Photorealism on clay is only one part of what a technique (like the one that
I am pursuing) could yield. A technique that could transfer high resolution
and fully gradated images would be capable of producing any sort of image.
Charcoal drawings, watercolor washes, computer generated images or indeed
photographic images could be transferred (with little loss of detail) to
ceramic substrates. I also am familiar with the work started in England and
know it to be only a sublimation dye technique that produces an image on a
polyurethane coating not a truly ceramic image. I am pursuing images that
will last as long as the glaze itself. I think that we are talking about
similar metal salt and glaze reactions so you know how durable such a
surface can be.
I admit that my background is more in the realm of fine art printmaking. My
desires to be able to do work that would last for centuries without
deterioration has led me into the ceramic world. This work started some
twenty five years ago and involved screen printing fired enamels on glass.
The screenprinting process is highly laborious if one wants to create a one
of a kind image. That is what has led me in the direction of inkjet. I
hope to be able to use it to create large ceramic images. My personal
desire is to create high tech petroglyphs. Images of our civilization that
will be visual time capsules.
I know that Clayart is designed predominantly for those who mold and
manipulate clay into art but it seems that there has been some interest in
this sort of imaging in the list discussions. I apologize to Mel for the
length of this posting.
I hope that we can keep up a forum on this technique and that we can find
common ground in the creation of art.
Sincerely,
Terry
>From: george koller
>Reply-To: Clayart
>To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
>Subject: Re: Ink jet ceramic decals-Scratching my head again
>Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 14:34:35 -0600
>
>.....from what I know about George's technique, it yields
>something more like a paint by numbers image than a full
>tonal gradation.
>
>
>Hello Terrance, InkJetters...
>
>You are correct that the process we are evolving can be used
>to produce "paint by numbers" style work, but if you think about
>it - this is vector style graphics and the only limitations on size
>are the evolving limits of the tools and equipment. With engraving
>the minimum size of any fill or color object is about 1/4 square
>inch. We do not need to engrave, indeed, our process on porcelain
>does not even use require a glaze.
>
>Using the metal sulfates gives us a decent, but not really
>"complete" palette of colors. Some of these sulfates, like
>copper are only a dollar per gallon. What are your colorant
>costs like? I know some "additive" colorant systems get very
>(!) expensive. Right now we only use one nozzle but I think we
>could dynamically control the mix of the colorants going into
>it. (In my software I have allowed for "three point color"
>influence at the mural level...this allows us to modify each
>"pixel" of color by the distance to a point of that color.
>But this is not implemented in the dispensing electronics.))
>
>Are you working for "photo-realism" on clay? That is not our
>direction. I think there are some smart and well financed
>folks out there doing that. Dominic Crinson of London, U.K. for
>one has been doing something like that for years (but his is
>not truly ceramic).
>
>Photorealism is most certainly not our goal. To put an image
>on clay in our process we work from a vectorized image (EPS
>format). An image can be built of 100,000's of images or just
>one, but there seems to always be some simplification necessary,
>it is not a question of if, but of how much. We have maybe
>12 pretty dependable colors now, that fact drives simplification,
>but that would also be true if we had 256 or any other number.
>Sometimes just Black&White is better than color, sometimes 3
>colors are better than an infinite number... I guess at this
>point I even like working backwards and find/fitting images
>to look better with fewer colors. I like the way those random
>specks of Manganese Dioxide "explode", and the iron specks come
>out in reduction firing to replace the natural variability of
>the original.
>
>I would say that our goal is to: Enable a machine to assist
>us in building artful images on clay. It has taken me 7 years
>total, and some 4 years since Mel first introduced me to the
>work of Kurt Wild and his decorating process to get this far.
>
>A favorite line of thought for me is that using hand-made tiles
>with machine assistance for decorating allows us to now produce
>a whole new line of products at about the same cost. I like
>wacking and rolling clay about more than I like transferring
>image details. I like being able to use a graphics package
>to "what if" with the image. But mostly I just like how it all
>comes together as a whole piece, in my software I am finding
>more and more ways to assist that.
>
>
>
>
>Best,
>
>
>george koller
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
>melpots@pclink.com.
_________________________________________________________________
| |
|
