Comments on: Universal III toggle base (usefulness for photopolymer) http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/2006/11/19/universal-iii-toggle-base-usefulness-for-photopolymer/ »A forum for flatbed cylinder proof presses Sat, 22 Nov 2008 09:00:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Gerald Lange http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/2006/11/19/universal-iii-toggle-base-usefulness-for-photopolymer/#comment-167 Gerald Lange Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:47:48 +0000 http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/?p=95#comment-167 There was a fellow in Australia who had manufactured a magnetic interbase that worked with steel-backed photopolymer plates and the Sterling honeycomb base/toggles. Robert Beson at TDI Magneticx P/L . Seemed like it did not catch on though. I thought it a good idea, particularly in regard to the registration problem inherent with photopolymer plates. I think your existing Boxcar Base would be better for polyster-backed plates (more exacting) than trying to rig up up those old Vandercook bases. Even the slightest disturbance in a base is going to be revealed in the printing. That's what photopolymer does best. Gerald There was a fellow in Australia who had manufactured a magnetic interbase that worked with steel-backed photopolymer plates and the Sterling honeycomb base/toggles. Robert Beson at TDI Magneticx P/L . Seemed like it did not catch on though. I thought it a good idea, particularly in regard to the registration problem inherent with photopolymer plates.

I think your existing Boxcar Base would be better for polyster-backed plates (more exacting) than trying to rig up up those old Vandercook bases. Even the slightest disturbance in a base is going to be revealed in the printing. That’s what photopolymer does best.

Gerald

]]> By: Eric Holub http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/2006/11/19/universal-iii-toggle-base-usefulness-for-photopolymer/#comment-159 Eric Holub Mon, 20 Nov 2006 19:40:01 +0000 http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/?p=95#comment-159 What you have are for Vandercook's own diagonal groove plate base (which is same vintage as the 219OS): Hooks, filler strips, plate remover hook. The vacuum base is more of the Universal era. Maybe with the filler strips you will be able to tape Boxcar plates on the grooved side, or flip it as you already said. This isn't like the other patent bases meant for production work; it was meant for proofing of photoengravings, so Vandercook might have made it compatible with 16-gage originals. A backing plate about .085 was once sold for adapting original plates for use with .759 base, so a few piece of suitable sheetmetal in different sizes would let you use boxcar plate and adhesive (and some interlay) with this base. What you have are for Vandercook’s own diagonal groove plate base (which is same vintage as the 219OS): Hooks, filler strips, plate remover hook. The vacuum base is more of the Universal era.
Maybe with the filler strips you will be able to tape Boxcar plates on the grooved side, or flip it as you already said.
This isn’t like the other patent bases meant for production work; it was meant for proofing of photoengravings, so Vandercook might have made it compatible with 16-gage originals. A backing plate about .085 was once sold for adapting original plates for use with .759 base, so a few piece of suitable sheetmetal in different sizes would let you use boxcar plate and adhesive (and some interlay) with this base.

]]> By: The Arm NYC http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/2006/11/19/universal-iii-toggle-base-usefulness-for-photopolymer/#comment-157 The Arm NYC Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:23:18 +0000 http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/?p=95#comment-157 Eric, Thanks for all the information. The bases I am referring to are the hook and vacuum type you mention. I am not really keen on running the vacuum though; I think its just going to be too loud for my sanity. It appears that since thus base doesn't have the diagonal grooves the plates would have to be run at standardised dimensions, is that correct? Since I am paying for platemaking by the square inch that just wouldn't be economical. Here is a picture of all the hooks, I haven't taken one of the base yet. http://static.flickr.com/122/301683766_d29ae18e41.jpg Daniel Eric,
Thanks for all the information. The bases I am referring to are the hook and vacuum type you mention. I am not really keen on running the vacuum though; I think its just going to be too loud for my sanity. It appears that since thus base doesn’t have the diagonal grooves the plates would have to be run at standardised dimensions, is that correct? Since I am paying for platemaking by the square inch that just wouldn’t be economical.
Here is a picture of all the hooks, I haven’t taken one of the base yet.
http://static.flickr.com/122/301683766_d29ae18e41.jpg

Daniel

]]> By: Eric Holub http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/2006/11/19/universal-iii-toggle-base-usefulness-for-photopolymer/#comment-156 Eric Holub Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:22:56 +0000 http://vandercookpress.info/vanderblog/?p=95#comment-156 Which kind of base are you talking about? Patent plate bases (and there were many different brands: Sterling, Blatchford using hooks in toggle-holes, Warnock, Wesel, Notting using hooks in diagonal grooves, and Vandercook offered several bases including hook- and vacuum-types) were in general meant for 11-pt duplicate plates like stereotypes and electrotypes. Original plates were typically 16-gage and the body is not thick enough to work with the jaw of a standard hook without the hook printing. Sterling PMC did sell special low-profile hooks for proofing 16-gage plates, but they were not intended for running, not strong enough. Some engravers can make 11-pt photoengravings, or an original photoengraving or photopolymer plate can be adhered to a backing plate for use with base. The thickest (and most expensive) aluminum-backed photopolymer plates might be made to work with hooks, but normal steel-backed plates will not. I think any use of toggle-hooks will likely require more expensive plates than the Boxcar you are now using. Which kind of base are you talking about? Patent plate bases (and there were many different brands: Sterling, Blatchford using hooks in toggle-holes, Warnock, Wesel, Notting using hooks in diagonal grooves, and Vandercook offered several bases including hook- and vacuum-types) were in general meant for 11-pt duplicate plates like stereotypes and electrotypes. Original plates were typically 16-gage and the body is not thick enough to work with the jaw of a standard hook without the hook printing. Sterling PMC did sell special low-profile hooks for proofing 16-gage plates, but they were not intended for running, not strong enough. Some engravers can make 11-pt photoengravings, or an original photoengraving or photopolymer plate can be adhered to a backing plate for use with base. The thickest (and most expensive) aluminum-backed photopolymer plates might be made to work with hooks, but normal steel-backed plates will not. I think any use of toggle-hooks will likely require more expensive plates than the Boxcar you are now using.

]]>