Laying down 210 Lam

[CentralSigns]

We only use a cast for cast and a calendered for calandered. Calendered is the short term stuff and cast is the long term stuff. You got a too complicated shop. Big squeegee for everything. A day in the sun and it all looks the same.

 

[john1]

You can use cast OVERLAMINATE on calendered vinyl but not other way around. This will help it shrink less.

 

[Salmoneye]

It's the backing paper on the 210. We laminated forever on our 3/4" thick glass table. I can do 4x8's by myself but it is much easier with 2 people. The results get better the more practice you get. I have a laminator but still BS anything narrower than 54" unless it is over 8-10 feet. I also use it when I need a piece of matte and have gloss loaded...

 

[Colin]

Well that was interesting. I just finished laminating two 4’ x 4’ prints with the 210. Visualizing it beforehand I could tell that my helper would only be able to grab the centre point of the liner, and given that it’s so thin, the far end would be drooping down and all hell would break loose. So I placed a clean 54” cardboard tube squarely in front of the front edge of the rolled-up laminate (sitting in the cradle of the BS), then rolled that tube forward about 8” out of the way, taking care to not let it go out of square.

I started the BS forward about 4” (which of course required my helper to lift & pull the liner as it won't even go forward at all by itself), stopped, and taped the liner to the tube with five 3” pieces of tape. As I then pushed the BS forward, I had my helper roll the tube forward using their (alternating) hands pushing forward & gently down on the tube to prevent it from going askew.

This worked well, but a PIA compared to how easy a heavier liner would make it.


I don’t know the breakdown on the numbers of people using the BS vs a laminating machine, but how do you think Oracal would respond to a request for a heavier liner?

 

[GAC05]

I might be the odd man out but there is an advantage for me with the tissue thin liners of the 210G and 290G -shipping weight
I have to use Priority mail if I need something sooner that 4 to 6 weeks by ocean freight.
I save $20 to $30 per roll over the 3M paper backed rolls of the same size.
The backer seems to release easier from the lam vs the 85 series 3M product.
I have an inexpensive hand cranked 64 inch laminator that takes care of most of the work. It doesn't have a feed or take up reel so it is very quick for what I do. No loading/unloading webbing etc. I just cut the lam to fit and go.
I've run single panels up to about 45' with it.

wayne k
guam usa

 

[Colin]

I just attempted to lay down a wee little 9" wide (x 54" long) piece of 210 lam (using basically the B/S method) and even that narrow piece would not release from the liner! It screeched to a halt like the brakes of a Porsche.

So I don't think that it's just the issue of the liner being thin, although that might be part of it, I think that it's got more to do with the huge amount of stiction that happens with that particular liner and the vinyl. Maybe it would occur to a lesser degree if pushing it forward onto Matte vinyl - I dunno.

 

[Colin]

Update:

I've had nothing but grief with the Oracal 210 and the Big Squeegee lately, so I got a 5 yd sample (54") of the Arlon 4560GTX and 3420G from a local supplier.

I tried putting down a 38" x 78" lam on a print last night. The backing paper wasn't as thick what I was hoping, but it's thicker than the Oracal 210. There certainly was some stiction with the lam liner on the print, but the 38" wide piece did go down without having to lift the liner. A 48" wide piece might be a challenge.

I noted too that in terms of bubbles and silvering, the result was better than any other brand I've tried.

So while the Oracal may indeed be a good quality vinyl & lam, I won't be using it again. Arlon it is, for now.

 

[Colin]

Another update:

I feel that this should have occurred to me at the outset, but I have discovered that the 210 lam goes down just fine (with the BS method described at the start) when applied to matte vinyl, but is impossible when applied onto gloss vinyl. It is obviously the shiny side of the backing paper coming into contact with the glossy surface of the media that causes it to come to an immediate screeching halt.

However, I still prefer the thicker paper backing of the Arlon lam, but have heard some bad stories of the Arlon print media, so I've decided to use the Arlon lam on the matte Oracal.

 

[eforer]

Another update:

I feel that this should have occurred to me at the outset, but I have discovered that the 210 lam goes down just fine (with the BS method described at the start) when applied to matte vinyl, but is impossible when applied onto gloss vinyl. It is obviously the shiny side of the backing paper coming into contact with the glossy surface of the media that causes it to come to an immediate screeching halt.

However, I still prefer the thicker paper backing of the Arlon lam, but have heard some bad stories of the Arlon print media, so I've decided to use the Arlon lam on the matte Oracal.

We mix laminate/substrate brands all the time, just don't mix calendered vs cast. Use what you like. I believe Mactac makes some airegress clear films that might work as a laminate in a pinch and would be very easy to apply. If you find yourself doing this a lot a laminator will pay for itself quickly if it is a good quality unit. We started many years ago with a cheapie and it was more trouble than it was worth. I bought a GBC Orca many years ago and it was worth every penny. We still have a bunch of big squeegees though too!

 

[Colin]

...just don't mix calendered vs cast.

Thanks. Yup, I'm aware of that one.

If you find yourself doing this a lot a laminator will pay for itself quickly if it is a good quality unit. We started many years ago with a cheapie and it was more trouble than it was worth. I bought a GBC Orca many years ago and it was worth every penny. We still have a bunch of big squeegees though too!

There's three factors which have prevented me from buying a laminator:

1) All of the horror stories I've read, as you outlined above.

2) I'm not a high-production shop (one man show).

3) I don't comfortably have the space for a laminator.

 

[eforer]

Thanks. Yup, I'm aware of that one.




There's three factors which have prevented me from buying a laminator:

1) All of the horror stories I've read, as you outlined above.

2) I'm not a high-production shop (one man show).

3) I don't comfortably have the space for a laminator.

I understand, I started as a one man show and while a good laminator is easy to run, it's expensive and it does take up a lot of space. I was lucky enough to score my GBC used at a bargain price and I have it to this day and it gets used daily.

When I find equipment or resources that would make life easier, I try to find a job that will justify the investment and then enjoy the convenience afterward.

 

[Jackpine]

Colin, H&H, a member here sells MacTac laminate, calender or cast that works great with a big squeegee.

 

[Wrapdup]

Lot of people don't like arlon, but I think many have not tried it for that same reason. Year and a half agoewe switched to 4560mtx/3420g for all our calandered needs. For the price it's hard to beat. We use multiple brands depending on the app for our cast stuff, but pretty much only arlon on flat/temp stuff.

 

[Colin]

It was reports like this that made me nervous:

http://www.signs101.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67088&highlight=Arlon

But, perhaps that is old news and they solved issues.

Flame?