printing without ink - new technique

http://nos.nl/artikel/2141047-oud-st...nder-inkt.html



--


|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os

Linea Recta wrote:

http://nos.nl/artikel/2141047-oud-st...nder-inkt.html

No English version (didn't see a language icon to change it). So I had
to use:

https://translate.google.com/transla...-text=&act=url

I'm never sure about the accuracy of such algorithmic translations.

I'd have to wonder about the durability of carbon (by burning the paper)
since it is not bonded to the paper. I thought printable CD/DVDs were
great where the laser is used to burn the label side but you have to buy
special discs for that - and they fade, like after 3 years to become
illegible. In that very terse and non-technical article, there is no
mention of durability or use of special paper (or specific types of
paper).

Ever kept a sales receipt printed on thermalchromic paper? Years later
when you want to read it (to, say, check on what you paid or when you
bought it), you can't. It's all faded. While much of documentation is
now only electronically stored, there is still a need for long term
hardcopy. Carbonizing the paper doesn't seem durable. Are they going
to spray the print with bonding compound or a sealer? If so, it is
still an [black] inkless printer but not without a cartridge or well to
store the "shellac".

The article is pretty useless as it never even touches on the method
used for the carbonized printing. "developed a whole new printer that
uses heat." Oh yeah, like that says anything. Could be a laser, could
be electric coil(s), could be heating up the balls of an old IBM
selectric impact printer or the impact hammers of an old manual
typewriter (that slammed a ribbon against the paper). The example
doesn't show scale so readers have no idea how well their method works
for small print (for darkness) or huge print (for evenness).

Then imagine the lack of durability of printing in greyscale. And how
is the carbon going to mix with the colored inks to create dark colors?
Painters don't just use black paint to paint only black, just like they
don't just use white paint to paint only white. CYMK means cyan,
yellow, magenta, and "key". Key is a key black plate (various shades of
black). That's substractive color mixing. Then there is additive color
mixing (RGB) that adds white but the only white to add is the paper
itself but you've carbonized to print so its substractive.

Then there's the smell. A single consumer-grade printer that gets used
occasionally and for small volume of output wouldn't be bad but you
might get some looks as others wonder if you burnt toast. A large-scale
printer would have to deal with sucking away and probably treating the
smell. You are, after all, burning the paper.

The wet ink colors would soggy up the carbonized paper but not mix with
it. Dry ink colors would just sit atop the carbonized paper. This new
(but actually old) method is only useful for black-only printing, and
you'll still need a black ink cartridge to mix with the other inks
unless you completely forego color printing. Well, black-only
(monochrome) laser/LED printers have been around for a long time and are
still sold today.

This isn't new technology. There are factories that use a CO2 laser to
burn expiration dates on the sides of boxes as they passed by on a
converyor belt. Very pricey, though (e.g.,
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detai...9556.html?s=p).
The cartons are designed to last for the duration of shipping and a
reasonable storage time, nothing like the duration expected of printed
paper-based documents. The ash is not permanent, it doesn't mix with
other inks, and it destroys the fiber of the paper which results in
weakening the material. After many years, a document might look like
moths were chewing on it - and physical degradation would be far worse
if the document were handled often, like with library books.

Destroying the paper to "print" on it doesn't sound a good scheme unless
you want monochrome-only output and don't care about endurance.

Wolf K wrote:
On 2016-11-02 13:16, Linea Recta wrote:
http://nos.nl/artikel/2141047-oud-st...nder-inkt.html

Not entirely new, using heat to print POS receipts on heat-sensitive paper has been done
for quite a while. But Chandrasekar an van de Veen have found a way to use heat on
ordinary paper, it seems. Good!

Never, ever touch POS receipts due to the BPA.

On 2016-11-02 19:15, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

Wolf K wrote:
On 2016-11-02 13:16, Linea Recta wrote:
http://nos.nl/artikel/2141047-oud-st...nder-inkt.html


Not entirely new, using heat to print POS receipts on heat-sensitive
paper has been done
for quite a while. But Chandrasekar an van de Veen have found a way to
use heat on
ordinary paper, it seems. Good!

Never, ever touch POS receipts due to the BPA.

According to Wikipedia: BPA is employed to make certain plastics and
epoxy resins. BPA-based plastic is clear and tough, and is made into a
variety of common consumer goods, such as water bottles, sports
equipment, CDs, and DVDs. Epoxy resins containing BPA are used to line
water pipes, as coatings on the inside of many food and beverage cans
and in making thermal paper such as that used in sales receipts.[2] In
2011, an estimated 10 billion pounds of BPA chemical were produced for
manufacturing polycarbonate plastic, making it one of the highest volume
of chemicals produced worldwide.[3]

It might be more easily absorbed from POS receipts than from plastic
water bottles, but if you're trying to avoid it you will have to stop
touching and using a lot of stuff...

Best Regards,

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain /
! (o o) Memberavid-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society
oO-( )-Oo A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand.

"VanguardLH" schreef in bericht
...
Linea Recta wrote:

http://nos.nl/artikel/2141047-oud-st...nder-inkt.html

No English version (didn't see a language icon to change it). So I had
to use:

https://translate.google.com/transla...-text=&act=url

I'm never sure about the accuracy of such algorithmic translations.

I'd have to wonder about the durability of carbon (by burning the paper)
since it is not bonded to the paper. I thought printable CD/DVDs were
great where the laser is used to burn the label side but you have to buy
special discs for that - and they fade, like after 3 years to become
illegible. In that very terse and non-technical article, there is no
mention of durability or use of special paper (or specific types of
paper).

Ever kept a sales receipt printed on thermalchromic paper? Years later
when you want to read it (to, say, check on what you paid or when you
bought it), you can't. It's all faded. While much of documentation is
now only electronically stored, there is still a need for long term
hardcopy. Carbonizing the paper doesn't seem durable. Are they going
to spray the print with bonding compound or a sealer? If so, it is
still an [black] inkless printer but not without a cartridge or well to
store the "shellac".

The article is pretty useless as it never even touches on the method
used for the carbonized printing. "developed a whole new printer that
uses heat." Oh yeah, like that says anything. Could be a laser, could
be electric coil(s), could be heating up the balls of an old IBM
selectric impact printer or the impact hammers of an old manual
typewriter (that slammed a ribbon against the paper). The example
doesn't show scale so readers have no idea how well their method works
for small print (for darkness) or huge print (for evenness).

Then imagine the lack of durability of printing in greyscale. And how
is the carbon going to mix with the colored inks to create dark colors?
Painters don't just use black paint to paint only black, just like they
don't just use white paint to paint only white. CYMK means cyan,
yellow, magenta, and "key". Key is a key black plate (various shades of
black). That's substractive color mixing. Then there is additive color
mixing (RGB) that adds white but the only white to add is the paper
itself but you've carbonized to print so its substractive.

Then there's the smell. A single consumer-grade printer that gets used
occasionally and for small volume of output wouldn't be bad but you
might get some looks as others wonder if you burnt toast. A large-scale
printer would have to deal with sucking away and probably treating the
smell. You are, after all, burning the paper.

The wet ink colors would soggy up the carbonized paper but not mix with
it. Dry ink colors would just sit atop the carbonized paper. This new
(but actually old) method is only useful for black-only printing, and
you'll still need a black ink cartridge to mix with the other inks
unless you completely forego color printing. Well, black-only
(monochrome) laser/LED printers have been around for a long time and are
still sold today.

This isn't new technology. There are factories that use a CO2 laser to
burn expiration dates on the sides of boxes as they passed by on a
converyor belt. Very pricey, though (e.g.,
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detai...9556.html?s=p).
The cartons are designed to last for the duration of shipping and a
reasonable storage time, nothing like the duration expected of printed
paper-based documents. The ash is not permanent, it doesn't mix with
other inks, and it destroys the fiber of the paper which results in
weakening the material. After many years, a document might look like
moths were chewing on it - and physical degradation would be far worse
if the document were handled often, like with library books.

Destroying the paper to "print" on it doesn't sound a good scheme unless
you want monochrome-only output and don't care about endurance.




Glad you found your way to Google translate :-)
You're right, there are still lots of problems to solve. But the message
sounded so nice on telly, imagine: never having to buy ink again, that I
rapturously posted the link.




--


|\ /|
| \/ |@rk
\../
\/os

On 02/11/16 19:24, VanguardLH wrote:

This isn't new technology. There are factories that use a CO2 laser to
burn expiration dates on the sides of boxes as they passed by on a
converyor belt. Very pricey, though (e.g.,
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detai...9556.html?s=p).

And not very efficient. According to the product details, it's a 10W
laser that uses a 1000W power supply.

--

Jeff