Another Really Long Material Testing Post

Okay, here are two more tester responses and I'll add my notes, where applicable, too. I'm still waiting for results from one tester, but I knew that she was going to be longer in responding than everybody else, so I'll post her responses later on. 

What, if anything, did you do to prep the block before transferring your image? 

Everybody in this group sanded, including me. One sanded only one half lightly and put an "x" in the upper right corner for orientation. 

What type of transfer method did you use? 

One heat transfer, one wintergreen essential oil transfer and one pencil transfer. 

Did it take a transfer well?
Is the transfer clear and high contrast, showing detail well?
Does the transfer stay on the material without smearing or sliding?

All methods seemed to transfer well, without smearing or sliding. There was a little warping of the thin material with heat transfer, but that was likely due to the thinness of the sample and it mostly flattened back out when it cooled. The dark gray color caused a little trouble with seeing the transfers as well as some would have liked.

Many thanks to nosox for running the modified Speedball gouges through their paces, complete with itty bitty dots in the flower centers. Also, thanks for knowing I was on pins and needles waiting for responses and sending me an advance response in an email, so I didn't go completely crazy! :)

What tool(s) did you use?
Speedball modified and unmodified gouges, Staedtler miniaturized, Dockyard micro gouges and Testor's craft knife.

Using properly sharpened tools, does the cut path have clean edges?
Is the consistency of the block smooth or grainy? 

All found the cut edges clean, the material smooth and not grainy. 

Does the gouge or knife slip during shallow cuts or when ending cuts?

One found that gouges slipped occasionally on shallow cuts, one didn't have any trouble with slippage and one slipped a little with shallow knife cuts, but not gouge cuts.

Does the material release easily from the block as you finish each cut?

This set of testers had no trouble with release at the end of a cut. 

How would you rate the level of pressure it takes to move the tool through the 
material?

One said it is the same firmness as OZ, one put it between OZ and Speedy Carve, one put it between OZ and PZ - smooth and easy enough to cut, but a little drier feeling under the knife or gouge, but not grainy or crumbly.

Rate the ability to make fine, straight lines? 

All three testers rated this as good, along with the ability to clean up lines by taking thin swipes off them. One said that she ended up with a few more raised peaks between multiple parallel cuts than she was accustomed to, but found that this happened less the more she carved. Also, this tester noted that small dot shapes were easy to remove with precision.

Can you imagine this block at about .25 inches thick? If so, do you think it would be firm enough to hold fine details, or squishy such that stray background marks would show if the stamp were not mounted? 

Everybody in this group thought it would be firm enough.

Thank you to Wise Wanderer, who sanded the right side (with the "X" in the corner) and not the left, so any differences in ink coverage would be apparent. She used Staedtler and Speedball modified gouges, as well as Dockyard micro gouges.

Did you try tools with different levels of sharpness and did it make a difference if you did? 

For those who tried both, it seemed that, for the most part, sharper tools worked better, but didn't make a huge difference or didn't make a difference at all. 

What kinds of ink(s) did you try? 

A huge variety of inks were tried.

Did the carving hold the ink smoothly and evenly? 

Yes, on details. 


Do large positive spaces hold and transfer ink well. 

This depended a little on the ink, with some working better than others. For the most part, this ranked pretty well, though not perfect. One said better than OZ, and maybe about the same as Speedy Carve. Staz-on, Ranger Archival and pigment inks tended to get the best results. I tried to show a representative cross section of the inks and quality of prints, but didn't scan every single one, since there were lots of different inks tested.

Other comments:

There were not as many extra comments in this batch, though I'm sure there were other thoughts. Overall, I liked this material better than OZ, but not quite as well as PZ - I was doing a side-by-side comparison. It was a little bit firmer than PZ and didn't feel quite as well lubricated, but I was pretty pleased with the overall carving experience. I'll let the testers chime in with any other observations either here in the comments or on the AQ boards, since this post is getting very long again. One wanted the back of the material to be smooth, as well as the front. That may or may not happen, especially with the first batch, given the manufacturing limitations I will be working around. I'll hope. 

I didn't re-post pictures of my test carving, since both the half-way point block performance and ink test pictures and the finished daffodil images are already on the blog.

If you haven't already seen them, you might want to check out the first batch of intrepid tester results.

Once again, thank you to these wonderful testers.The honest feedback about things that worked well and things that didn't for a range of carving styles is a big help in narrowing down next steps.