deskthority

It seems that pad printing is not as common as we believed.

Edgar Matias has (first-hand, I think) experience with Chinese factories, and his view is that China uses silkscreen printing (when not using lasers); see this topic: http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=454 ... msg1090621

Cherry and Signature Plastics definitely use pad printing.

Tai-Hao, however, have never used pad printing — their ink process is silkscreen printing (plus doube-shot and laser). The previous remarks about RoHS regulation and ink formulations actually referred to silkscreen ink. So the menu and Windows keys on the FK-2001 for example will be silkscreen, not pad printed.


Most products from China (Vortex, Gateron, Kaiche, etc) arrive out of the mists of time in a ghost ship. Nobody ever sees them arrive, nobody knows where they come from … If China wasn't so absurdly mysterious, then some of these manufacturers could list their own processes, too, and we might get a clearer picture of whether most keycaps really were pad printed or not.

Incidentally, what should we use as a generic term? "printed ink"? "surface ink"?

We can no longer use "pad printed" as a description for any keycaps of unknown origin. Do we even know for certain that Diatec use pad printing on Filco keyboards?

We need to select a generic term for the vast majority of keyboards where we don't know for certain what printing method was used. The whole wiki page on [wiki]pad printing[/wiki] is now in huge doubt, as few if any of the illustrations can be proved to be pad printed any more. I'm wondering if silkscreen and pad printing should share a page, as for most purposes I figure they're going to be the same, in terms of characteristics and limitations. The difference seems to be merely a technicality on whether the ink comes off a silicone pad or through a silk screen, although there may be differences in durability that are outside of the variance within each technology.

I like surface ink as a term. It really differentiates them from dye sublimated ink.

Chicony have confirmed that they use both, but primarily pad printing as it's quicker to set up and easier to maintain. So for vintage Far East brands we're on 50/50 so far!

I've basically been referring to silk screen printing (or what I think is silk screen printing) as rimless pad printing, which I still think is a valid term.

Pad printing uses a printing plate, that is filled with ink, and a silicone pad to transfer the ink from printing plate to keycap. Silkscreen printing uses a silk screen, of course. They're not the same thing at all, but the result is at least roughly the same (although I don't know if they have the same longevity as each other). Deliberately using the wrong name is just wrong.

Rimless is a wholly different matter entirely. Some ink is sticky enough that you could lay it on thick and that would be sufficient to withstand your desired wear period (2–3 years was Tai-Hao's intention). If the ink is thinner, or you want extra protection, you can then cover it over with a transparent sealant. To save on cost I assume, this material is constrained to roughly the same area as the legend in most cases, but Filco and Cherry cover the entire surface as it looks so much better and will be much easier to apply. This is nothing to do with whether it's pad printed or screen printed. Both methods can require additional wear protection.

"Rimless" as a term is something I find weird, as there's no "rim" — the selective image (as SP call it) clear coat goes all the way over the letters as well as around it.

The idea of a term like "surface ink printing" is that we're confirming that the ink is on the surface only (unlike dye sublimation ink that appears to sink into the plastic) but not pretending that we know exactly what method was used to get the ink on.

Chicony's term is "ink printing" — I'd prefer to use the industry standard term, but "ink printing" to me is just a little bit too close to covering dye sub too.