Hey:
I need help with the entire concept of a "transfer tool". I've currently got a
Lenk L25TT 25 Watt transfer tool. Nothing transfers. I think I'm doing it
right. I print out my design on my laser printer, which uses dry toner, put
the drawing face down on wood and, after the tool has had time to heat up, I
press it on the design.
I've tried moving the tool fast, slow, agonizingly slow and even standing it in
one place, but if any transfer occurs (and I stress the IF) it's small isolated
patches that do me no good. I even tried a desperate move and dug an old
electric clothes iron out of my closet and tried that on a variety of
settings, up to scorching the paper. I tried plywood and, just in case the
texture made a difference, I also tried a piece of pine that had been sanded.
The results were identical.
Am I doing something wrong or is the entire concept flawed?
Thanks in advance
The paper you use can make or break this technique. Some bond paper will
just not give up the toner. In particular I think paper with higher
recycled content holds the toner too tight. I like to use vellum instead.
The toner tends to lay on the surface of cotton based vellum and releases
will. If you can find erasable vellum, that is even better but I don't
bother with that.
I just use a yard sale clothes iron, set for cotton.
--
Bill Pounds
http://www.billpounds.com/woodshop
"MarcColten" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hey:
>
> I need help with the entire concept of a "transfer tool". I've currently
got a
> Lenk L25TT 25 Watt transfer tool. Nothing transfers. I think I'm doing
it
> right. I print out my design on my laser printer, which uses dry toner,
put
> the drawing face down on wood and, after the tool has had time to heat up,
I
> press it on the design.
>
> I've tried moving the tool fast, slow, agonizingly slow and even standing
it in
> one place, but if any transfer occurs (and I stress the IF) it's small
isolated
> patches that do me no good. I even tried a desperate move and dug an old
> electric clothes iron out of my closet and tried that on a variety of
> settings, up to scorching the paper. I tried plywood and, just in case
the
> texture made a difference, I also tried a piece of pine that had been
sanded.
> The results were identical.
>
> Am I doing something wrong or is the entire concept flawed?
>
> Thanks in advance
Fri, Nov 26, 2004, 2:22am (EST+5) [email protected] (MarcColten)
pleads:
Hey:
I need help with the entire concept <snip>
I've tried it, didn't like it. Now, I either fasten paper patterns
down to the wood, draw right on the wood, or cut using a wood pattern.
Less fuss, less muss, faster, easier.
JOAT
Measure twice, cut once, swear repeatedly.
On 26 Nov 2004 02:22:49 GMT, [email protected] (MarcColten) wrote:
>Hey:
>
>I need help with the entire concept of a "transfer tool". I've currently got a
>Lenk L25TT 25 Watt transfer tool. Nothing transfers. I think I'm doing it
>right. I print out my design on my laser printer, which uses dry toner, put
>the drawing face down on wood and, after the tool has had time to heat up, I
>press it on the design.
Okay. There are a few dirty little secrets about using the heat
transfer method to put a pattern on wood.
The first thing you need is a pattern with really, really dark lines.
I typically print out my designs on my laser printer and then copy
them on my copier set to the darkest setting. Theoretically I could
just use the laser print, but the extra step gives me a lot of extra
toner to play with.
Next, you need a smooth wood surface. Let me say that again. You need
a _smooth_ wood surface. Any irregularities such as grain or surface
roughness will play merry hell with the transfer process.
I usually prepare the surfaces by scraping since I don't like the
effect of sanding grit on my carving tools. YMMV, but get that wood
_smooth_.
Then you need the hottest, heaviest heat source you can find. I have a
small woodburner-type tool I use occasionally, but mostly I rely on an
old iron I got especially for the purpose (check thrift stores). I set
it as hot as I can get it and I press down hard using the point of the
iron. You have got to have heat and pressure to make the technique
work and the more of both the better.
I also attach one side (only) of the pattern to the wood with tape.
That way I can peel it back to check the progress and put it back in
exactly the same place to handle the spots that haven't transferred
yet.
>
>I've tried moving the tool fast, slow, agonizingly slow and even standing it in
>one place, but if any transfer occurs (and I stress the IF) it's small isolated
>patches that do me no good. I even tried a desperate move and dug an old
>electric clothes iron out of my closet and tried that on a variety of
>settings, up to scorching the paper. I tried plywood and, just in case the
>texture made a difference, I also tried a piece of pine that had been sanded.
>The results were identical.
>Am I doing something wrong or is the entire concept flawed?
The concept is emphatically not flawed. However it is not automatic
either. It sounds to me like you're not putting enough pressure on the
tool to make the transfer. Scorching-the-paper hot is about right.
>Thanks in advance
--RC
Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:02:35 -0500, [email protected] (J T)
wrote:
>Fri, Nov 26, 2004, 2:22am (EST+5) [email protected] (MarcColten)
>pleads:
>Hey:
>I need help with the entire concept <snip>
>
> I've tried it, didn't like it. Now, I either fasten paper patterns
>down to the wood, draw right on the wood, or cut using a wood pattern.
>Less fuss, less muss, faster, easier.
>
>
>
>JOAT
>Measure twice, cut once, swear repeatedly.
That works for some things and not for others. If you have to reapply
the pattern repeatedly it is a huge pain. For that matter it's a large
pain if the pattern is particularly inticrate. Heat transfers are a
lot faster.
--RC
Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?
Sat, Nov 27, 2004, 2:37pm (EST+5) [email protected] claims:
That works for some things and not for others. If you have to reapply
the pattern repeatedly it is a huge pain. For that matter it's a large
pain if the pattern is particularly inticrate. Heat transfers are a lot
faster.
Works for all I've tried so far. Make multiple copies. No prob.
Intricate patterns, no prob, some of mine have quite fine detail, come
out quite clear.
The heat transfer patterns I've tried only worked half-way
decently, one time each. So, you'd need multiple. Plus, they never
showed up that great, especially on darker wood.
The paper patterns work as fast, or faster, for me; but, even if
they didn't, I'm not doing this for a living, so am not terribly
concerned.
JOAT
Measure twice, cut once, swear repeatedly.
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:11:33 -0500, [email protected] (J T)
wrote:
>Sat, Nov 27, 2004, 2:37pm (EST+5) [email protected] claims:
>That works for some things and not for others. If you have to reapply
>the pattern repeatedly it is a huge pain. For that matter it's a large
>pain if the pattern is particularly inticrate. Heat transfers are a lot
>faster.
>
> Works for all I've tried so far. Make multiple copies. No prob.
It is if you have to keep re-tracing from those multiple copies.
Especially if you're only tracing part of the pattern on succeeding
copies.
>Intricate patterns, no prob, some of mine have quite fine detail, come
>out quite clear.
When I say 'intricate' I mean things like pictures of wildlife
posterized from photographs. That's an awful lot of drawing.
> The heat transfer patterns I've tried only worked half-way
>decently, one time each.
As I say, there's a skill to making making heat transfer patterns and
it's learned by experience.
> So, you'd need multiple.
Yep, and you run multiple copies when you make your copies. Easy
enough. And, again, faster and more accurate than trying to transfer
with carbon paper or something.
> Plus, they never
>showed up that great,
Show up fine for me. As I say, you have to get the surface flat for
heat transfers to work. I don't think that's at all a bad thing to
begin with so I don't see that as extra work.
> especially on darker wood.
I suppose you could use a color laser printer and print the pattern in
white or yellow toner, but I'll give you that one. I use dressmakers'
carbon paper in white or yellow and then go back and touch up with
something like a whiteout pen. Something of a PITA, but it works.
Only have to do it on woods like walnut. Even brown oak has enough
contrast.
> The paper patterns work as fast, or faster, for me; but, even if
>they didn't, I'm not doing this for a living, so am not terribly
>concerned.
>
Yep. YMMV and that's what makes horse races.
Not everyone is going to like doing heat transfers, but for them that
do, there are things you need to do to get a good pattern.
--RC (who's getting ready to transfer some patterns for relief carved
signs right now.)
>
>
>JOAT
>Measure twice, cut once, swear repeatedly.
Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:15:59 -0500, [email protected] (J T)
wrote:
>Sun, Nov 28, 2004, 12:59am (EST+5) [email protected] mumbles:
>It is if you have to keep re-tracing from those multiple copies.
>Especially if you're only tracing part of the pattern on succeeding
>copies.
>
> I don't re-trace anything. Photo copies. Works just as good on
>part of the pattern.
Okay, now you've got me confused. Do you mean you don't transfer the
pattern at all but rather glue down the photocopy on the wood?
For a lot of the stuff I do that doesn't work worth a damn. Try
carving through a pattern like that and you'll see what I mean.
But if that's not what you're doing, could you explain your technique
to me?
--RC
Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?
Tue, Nov 30, 2004, 11:44am (EST+5) [email protected] says:
Okay, now you've got me confused.
Ah, my job is done. LOL
Do you mean you don't transfer the pattern at all but rather glue down
the photocopy on the wood?
Well, you can use rubber cement, if you want to take the pattern up
again; but, yeah, I glue the pattern down. Usually. Sometimes I just
draw on the wood.
For a lot of the stuff I do that doesn't work worth a damn. Try carving
through a pattern like that and you'll see what I mean.
I have, it worked; but, for carving, I find sketching on the wood
works.
But if that's not what you're doing, could you explain your technique to
me?
For starters, I don't use rubber cement. Tried that once, and
considered it a real PITA to get off once I pulled the used pattern up.
Now I use Titebond II thinned half & half with water. Dry overnight and
itls like a top layer of wood. Took a bit to perfect the technique, but
it works great for me.
For me, your way would be a PITA. Workable, yes, but still a PITA.
My way might be workable for you, but a PITA for you. Different
strokes, etc.
JOAT
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind dont
matter, and those who matter dont mind.
- Dr Seuss
Sun, Nov 28, 2004, 12:59am (EST+5) [email protected] mumbles:
It is if you have to keep re-tracing from those multiple copies.
Especially if you're only tracing part of the pattern on succeeding
copies.
I don't re-trace anything. Photo copies. Works just as good on
part of the pattern.
When I say 'intricate' I mean things like pictures of wildlife
posterized from photographs. That's an awful lot of drawing.
Again, photocopying.
As I say, there's a skill to making making heat transfer patterns and
it's learned by experience.
Skill wasn't the problem. Wasn't getting results I liked.
Yep, and you run multiple copies when you make your copies. Easy enough.
And, again, faster and more accurate than trying to transfer with carbon
paper or something.
I only use carbon paper on one-shot projects, and seldom even then.
Show up fine for me. As I say, you have to get the surface flat for heat
transfers to work. I don't think that's at all a bad thing to begin with
so I don't see that as extra work.
I suppose you could use a color laser printer and print the pattern in
white or yellow toner, but I'll give you that one. I use dressmakers'
carbon paper in white or yellow and then go back and touch up with
something like a whiteout pen. Something of a PITA, but it works. Only
have to do it on woods like walnut. Even brown oak has enough contrast.
Waaay too much bother for me.
Yep. YMMV and that's what makes horse races. Not everyone is going to
like doing heat transfers, but for them that do, there are things you
need to do to get a good pattern.
--RC (who's getting ready to transfer some patterns for relief carved
signs right now.)
Like I said, way too much bother for me, the photo copies work
great for all that. Or, for a one-time shot, I just use the original
drawing, or just draw it out on the wood. Could use a pantograph too,
but don't.
JOAT
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind dont
matter, and those who matter dont mind.
- Dr Seuss