Select Page
Change is hard, hard, hard.

Change is hard, hard, hard.

Yesterday there were two illuminating developments in the campaign against microplastic pollution generally and, specifically, in the context of our industry, gitter.

The first was an article in the Guardian that reported how scientists had examined 62 human fetuses and found microplastics in every one of them. The article went on the confirm that microplastics was also now being found in breast milk and blood. And, as you’d expect, this has significant adverse health implications.

The second development involved a response from yet another regular contributor to a significant industry magazine to my invitation to collaborate in persuading the textile screen printing industry to stop using glitter. I approached him after reading an article in which he mentioned glitter prints. The opening line of his email was one I’ve become accustomed to by now: “Thanks for getting in touch. While I admire your tenacity, this is not an issue that i would like to be involved in.”

There are a two popular excuses for dismissing concerns about glitter as a microplastic and “not getting involved”: (1) There are biodegradable alternatives; and (2) Glitter is a minor plastic problem compared with, say, plastic bottles. Both of these are easily answered . . . the first is simply untrue, and the second is that we aren’t going to solve the sustainability issues in our industry by pointing out that other industries have bigger problems. We have to start cleaning up our act somewhere and glitter is as good a place as any to start.

And should you have doubts about the adverse impact of glitter on the environment, then you have only to consider that such significant entities as Hallmark, H&M, and the EU have banned it.

Change is hard, hard, hard. But while ignorance, vested self-interest, and greed keep getting in the way of bringing it about on a large scale, you could help at the grassroots level by refusing to use glitter.Then differentiate your shop by promoting it as ecologically responsible.

Squeegee blade profiles

Squeegee blade profiles

Tony Palmer writes a monthly column for Images online magazine in which he responds to printers’ technical questions. In the February edition he addressed a question about “the best squeegee blade profile to use.” His opinion on this is worth considering even though he ends up the article by saying that there is no correct answer to the question but that whichever blade profile you choose should be an informed decision.

Some of the options suggested include a square profile blade which he says is currently the “king of the heap” because of its ability to create sharply-detailed prints. He advises that slightly rounded or worn blades be replaced to ensure clean prints. He doesn’t mention sharpening blades rather than replacing them, but I would suggest that that too is an option.

He goes on to discuss a ‘V’ profile blade describing it as “the new kid n the block.” It has apparently traditionally been used to print hard surfaces such as glass and ceramics but is now finding favour in hybrid textile printing—combining analogue screen printing and digital CMYK printing. This is where a white base screen is used to block out the garment colour before the CMYK digital ink is applied on top of the opaque white. The trick in this process is to put down the white in a way that does not penetrate the substrate because you want to maintain the soft hand of the DTG technique. This is apparently where the ‘V’ profile blade comes in handy.

The bottom line on choosing the “correct” squeegee profile blade? You have research and experimenting to do.

Share but don’t disclose

Share but don’t disclose

In a recent article in a prominent industry magazine, a writer offered advice that I need to take issue with. As usual, there’s nothing to be gained by naming the magazine or the writer, not so much because it might come across as unnecessarily confrontational but also because my criticism is of what was written and published, not who wrote and published it.

The article made sense to a point in that it suggested that sharing ideas, frustrations, and problems with other business owners could be helpful and might lead to creating a supportive network. The problem is that he meant other members of the industry. On the face of it, it sounds all nice and friendly in a holding-hands-and-singing-kumbaya kind of way. I would however remind you that these people you’re being urged to share everything with are competitors.These are the same competitors who undercut your pricing to lure your customers away and would gladly hire your best staff members given half a chance.

So how much do you want to share? Do you really want to risk giving away a competitive advantage by telling all? I’ve never understood businesses that discover a process or product that gives them a competitive advantage and then go public with the details. Why would you risk a competitive advantage all for a bit of publicity?

It of course makes sense to share and consult but, for goodness sake, do it with informed, trustworthy people who have no interest in competing with you: that would almost definitely not include competitors..

Apple iPhone stolen device feature

Apple iPhone stolen device feature

RGCS of Edinburgh has reported in their newsletter that Apple IPhone users are being urged to use a new feature called ‘Stolen Device Protection’ which was rolled out in a recent update to IOS.

You should take notice of this if you use an iPhone or if your employees use iPhones, whether you supply them or not. It can help prevent someone who has stolen your device and knows your passcode from gaining access and using it. It’s designed to provide additional security when your iPhone is away from familiar locations that you designate, such home and work. The feature protects by factors such as security delay and the need to authenticate by Face ID or Touch ID before certain actions can be taken on the device.

It’s an opt-in feature that can be turned on in Settings. It however requires the use of two-factor authentication for your Apple ID and setting up or enabling: a device passcode; Face ID or Touch ID; Find MY; and Significant Locations.

If everyone’s working, who’s managing to prevent crises?

If everyone’s working, who’s managing to prevent crises?

I believe that it was Zig Ziglar (1926 – 2012) who talked about working on your business rather than working in your business. He was making the point in the context of growing a business. More recently, I re-read an article I’d kept on file in which the same on-your-business-not-in-your-business point was raised in the context of a textile screen printing shop.

The article started out being about a shop with a printing probelm.They were dealing with a deadline order to print in white on burgundy nylon running shorts that they discovered were actually polyester shorts when the dye bled into the print. This led to to a closer examination of why this was allowed to happen and how the shop was being run. A list of management problems were unearthed in the process:

  • A production manager running the press, leaving nobody to manage the production or run the shop.
  • A poor screen-coating technique.
  • A high temperature in the shop at around 49 Celsius.
  • Accepting the job with too tight a deadline with no time allowed for dealing with problems.
  • No standard operating procedure for minimizing problems.
  • Poorly trained production staff.

Unfortunately, this is quite common in the industry. How does your shop stack up against this list of management problems? is someone managing to prevent crises?