Anything you can spray on a "normal" cd to allow inkjet printing?

Haven't you seen the Mythbusters episode in which they
spin CDs on a high-speed drill? You have to reach thousands of
RPMs before a
normal (uncracked) disk breaks

the speeds are as follows IIRC
1x = 500rpm
52x = 27,500rpm

DVD = 1658rpm
16X DVD = 26,528 rpm

On the issue of "normal" disc, you would be correct. Normal silkscreen
and graphics while they would throw the disc off balance to a degree
isn't enough to really do much in the way of harm given the fact that
the disc is held in place by a shaft and a magnetic clamp in most
cases. Also, CD-audio is 1x...DVD standard speeds are in the low
thousands range. It's the ROM speeds that are the big issue... but
even DVD speeds i've had the press on labels be rejected.... and flew
out the front at a speed of +150mph, a relativly low speed in terms of
-ROM. Application of paint I'll agree... while it would have an affect
on the balance at normal media playing speeds it won't have much of an
affect... but do keep in mind that 16x DVD and 52x CD are in the speed
range that mythbusters were talking about where one needs to think
about.

But I certainly saw the mythbuster episode... but I actually undersood
it and the relative speeds respecive devices play them at. Their tests
were crude but effective. I for example can't mount a CD on my angle
grnder which is rated at 15,000 RPM without the disc shattering but
this is due to the fact that it's hard for me to mount those things
without being off axis on such a device. CD/DVD have the benifit of
being tapered and machined properly to an exact specification that a
hell of alot closer than I can achive with a 3/8 inch spanner.

Oh also, the reccomendation for spinning a disc to achieve a more even
coat is reasonably sound, but keep in mind that a parabolic shape is
inevitable, not enviable. Thin coats would help prevent outward
sagging.

Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"
Printable discs seem to be priced relatively close to conventional ones,
plus the effort and expense of coating the conventional ones would drive
me up the wall. Note" there may have been other posts asking this
question, but I have Psycho King and a few others in my killfile.
Allen

Allen wrote:
Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"

Because some people would just rather modify what they have than buy
what they need. It's a disease.

"Allen" wrote in message
...
Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"

A combination of curiosity and utility. I already have a big stack of
$14/100 DVD's. As it so happens, I just scored a great deal on the demo
model of an inkjet printer that has CD/DVD printing capability at Circuit
City.

So, I wonder if there's a way to utilize the DVD's I already have without
having to reinvest in the much more expensive printables. Maybe someday
they'll be having $14/100 deals on them, but I haven't seen it yet.
Introducing a $1.50 can of spray paint into the equation so far seems to
provide a viable solution.

Here's another angle. I find that even the printables have the problem that
if moisture contacts the water-soluble inkjet print, it smears. So, after
printing on the disc, hitting it with another couple of mist coats of clear
spray paint seems to make it far more waterproof. Looking at the graphics
applied to some commercial DVD's, I doubt the amount of material I'm
applying is any more.

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com...

Allen wrote:
Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"

Because some people would just rather modify what they have than buy
what they need. It's a disease.

And a happy holidays to you.

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:57:30 -0800, William Sommerwerck
wrote in
:

Since posting this I tried matte-white spray paint shot in several mist
coats from about 1 foot above the disc. The column of paint by the time it
hits the disc is a bit larger than the disc and thereby seems to give even
coverage. My guess is it won't affect the balance.

The mass of the paint is so small...

Haven't you seen the Mythbusters episode in which they spin CDs on a
high-speed drill? You have to reach thousands of RPMs before a normal
(uncracked) disk breaks.

I understand that disks can reach a speed of 27 500 rpm in a 52x drive.

--
Regards,
Nicolaas.


.... Ever stop to think ... and forget to start again?

Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"
Printable discs seem to be priced relatively close to conventional ones,
plus the effort and expense of coating the conventional ones would drive
me up the wall.

Well.. I just went shopping for printable CDs... $20ish for a 50 pack
of Verbatium silvers and $10 for a 30 pack of the compusa brand... so
while non-printable would be a better deal without a doubt, and more
options... this is reasonable. It's shopping for printable DVD+/-Rs
that the price hike is terribly high localy at least for me... we are
talking on average 90+cents/disc vs mailorder of 25 to 50 cents/disc.
Ridata 16x or fuji 8x 40cents/per. So while I'll agree the mail order
price is similar... the local price is not.

But to answer your question... it wasn't so much about the price per
disc but rather, at least for me... it was the simple fact that I
bought a huge load when they were on sale at 10cents/per... brandnames
too... before I had a cd printer. While with the Epson I could "get
away" with printing on non-printables the Canon I could not. My
resolution was to do a batch in triplicate and give away discs to
friends done in a sharpy... problem solved. So your point is valid...
and I personaly agreee with you though I'm most empathic to those who
also have a bucket load of non-printables and would prefer to find a
means of using them vs a sharpy.

Allen wrote:
Looking back at the posts so far in this thread, it looks like nobody
has asked the obvious question: "Why would you want to do that?"
Printable discs seem to be priced relatively close to conventional ones,
plus the effort and expense of coating the conventional ones would drive
me up the wall. Note" there may have been other posts asking this
question, but I have Psycho King and a few others in my killfile.
Allen


Regardless of the reason for asking, it's worth answering.
Unfortunately, my news server drops many posts; even more unfortunately,
not the ones I would like to lose. As a result, I'm replying to a reply.

As has been pointed out, the danger is that the material or its solvent
will penetrate the acrylic lacquer if that's all that protects the
metallic layer. If there is a printed surface or if you're certain that
there is an overcoating, then the odds are that the spray will be safe.
Otherwise, whatever the matte spray puts on can be expected to use a
solvent which is likely to destroy the disc over time.

Note that penetration can take months or years judging from similar
failures with solvent-based inks and some pigments.

Mike
--

http://www.mrichter.com/

"Mike Richter" wrote in message
...
Allen wrote:

As has been pointed out, the danger is that the material or its solvent
will penetrate the acrylic lacquer if that's all that protects the
metallic layer. If there is a printed surface or if you're certain that
there is an overcoating, then the odds are that the spray will be safe.
Otherwise, whatever the matte spray puts on can be expected to use a
solvent which is likely to destroy the disc over time.

Note that penetration can take months or years judging from similar
failures with solvent-based inks and some pigments.

I was under the imression that with spray paint, the solvents are merely a
carrier for the solids and evaporate, leaving the solids behind.

I was under the imression that with spray paint, the solvents are merely a
carrier for the solids and evaporate, leaving the solids behind.

On the most basic level... that's true. Keep in mind too that the
solids are in a liquid state designed to adhear to materials... metal
plastics wood whatever. And the solids them selves may be a form of an
epoxy that uses oxygen as a catalist not to speak of acryloyl
chloride... which if we are talking aluminium there is much in the way
of bother and effort giving it that uniform look etching away the old
oxide layer to permit the growth of a new uniform oxide layer. Not to
speak of self etching primers which contain N-acryloyl aspartic acid or
phosphoric acid... which as you might know is not the sort of stuff you
would dare use on aluminium..... that calls for hydrocholoric and even
then i'm not sure you'd be wanting to strip off the O2 layer from the
label side. Keep in mind this really isn't my field but even I can see
there are some issues one has to watch out for. Even if we were just
talking lacquer or shallac even then we are dealing with solvents along
the lines of naphtha, xylene, toluene, and ketones, and acetone.
Shallac also various alcohols can be used which are not likely to
affect the CD... but I couldn't tell you on acetone, naphtha or xylene.
Next time I pick some up i'll be sure to see if they melt a CD.