On 22/12/2010 22:06, Nathan House wrote:
> I would like to try the photoresist method sometime, too. Isn't it
> more expensive than the toner transfer method, though? (As far as the
> cost per-board, and also having to build the UV lightbox..).
>
> For now I'm getting pretty good results with the toner transfer method:
>
> http://www.roboticsguy.com/tutorials-/electronics-/pcb-/making-pcbs-toner=
-transfer-/images/l297-l298-printed-circuit-board-pcb-diy.jpg
> http://www.roboticsguy.com/tutorials-/electronics-/pcb-/making-pcbs-toner=
-transfer-/images/pcb-traces-close.jpg

It's not really much more expensive, and the UV box is a one time=20
expense (you can buy a UV box on eBay for <=A350, or even an old sun lamp=20
will do - I used a =A35 lamp to do a few boards ages ago, and it worked fin=
e)
The PCB laminates cost a little more than plain board, not much though.
In any case, the expense is not really the reason for me, it's the=20
ability to make a quick test board when I need it rather than wait a=20
week for one from a PCB house. Most of the time I can wait though as I=20
have plenty to do in the meantime.
Even for hobby purposes I'm not sure whether it's worth it from a=20
savings point of view, given the very cheap prices you can get double=20
sided prototypes done for nowadays. Spirit Circuits (UK) even do a free=20
service for double sided with no resist/silk.

Everything else aside though, if you want to get the best possible=20
results, photoresist is definitely the way to go. However, if you are=20
intending to stick with through hole or larger pitch SMD, I would carry=20
on as you are as your results look pretty good.



--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.