• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Removing Yellowing from Plastics - Part 4

Yeah, sunlamps get pretty hot--they're made to do that--they have both a conventional tungsten filament as well as a mercury-vapor style capsule inside. They put out UVA, but also hot things up quite a bit. You can easily burn yourself by touching the bulb.
 
lyonadmiral said:
Well I'm thinking if you had one or two up on the ceiling and had the tub of "stuff" on the floor or on a table.
Click to expand...

I think they still direct the heat at whatever they're pointed at (like an infra red radiant heater?).
I wouldn't de-yellow my stuff with those lamps, but if you feel like experimenting, you can let us know what happens. :)
Those things use a little more electricity than normal bulbs too, don't they?
 
Here are some results from a recent Macintosh LC II and Mac SE mouse restoration I did. This was my first time ever using retr0brite. I used Merlin's recipe to the letter. Put these out in the sun for about 3-4 hours total. I found that "stirring" the gel on the surface every 30 minutes was about as effective as reapplying it. It did dry out though so I ended up having to reapply completely about once per piece. Used approximately one batch to complete these pieces. If anyone's interested I took detailed notes of my observations that I'd be happy to post.

All three pieces out in the sun

4307919927_3bbbc0c447.jpg


Before/after shots of the Mac SE mouse
Notice the slight color inconsistency on the After. Will another few hours eliminate this?

4308658866_372c16e82e.jpg
4308658910_e386e21ef2.jpg


Before/after shots of the LC II case
I also noticed some inconsistency here on the areas that started the yellowest.

4308659424_90355bfdda.jpg
4308659478_595b761a33.jpg


Detail of the Macintosh LC II text
No fading or degradation. Fantastic!

4307920285_43b59d103f.jpg


Comparison of treated LC II to untreated LC II
My favorite shot. The difference is astounding.

4307920347_233d7ddcf4.jpg


The rest of the images can be found here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sttorrence/sets/72157623239786154/

Overall I was very satisfied with the results, considering it was my first time. I'd read about it extensively on here and was very eager to try it out. With these results I'm very optimistic about continuing. I have a few ImageWriter II printers, a Mac SE, and some other miscellaneous hardware that I'm going to treat next.

Retr0brite for the win! :cool:
 
STorrence said:
Notice the slight color inconsistency on the After. Will another few hours eliminate this?

I also noticed some inconsistency here on the areas that started the yellowest.
Click to expand...

I don't think more hours will help, but I honestly don't know. I had similar results on a Mac mouse. I've got five blind Mac mice that I'm going to do some experimentation on (better on Mac parts than PC parts :)). I'ts just a hunch, but I think if we can rub the paste on/in real well, maybe that'll solve the problem. Who knows? It's still experimentaion on some things.

Yellowest: again, I think it might be how the stuff is applied. If the coverage isn't consistent on each area, the results won't be consistent. Just my hunch.

I notice you're on the second floor. You didn't wash those bits off on your deck letting the stuff spill down to the neighbors place I hope. :)
 
Lorne said:
You didn't wash those bits off on your deck letting the stuff spill down to the neighbors place I hope. :)
Click to expand...

Haha! Lord no, I washed everything in the tub.

I too suspected that initial application might have something to do with it. This could be why the submerging processes tend to produce more consistent results. However, I also noticed that on the LC II case there tended to be highlights where there was internal structure (ridges, bracing, etc.), which I couldn't really explain. I applied the gel using brushes and tried to spread it as consistently as possible.

Another thing I suspected was inconsistent mixing of the active ingredients. For the next test I might try mixing for a little longer in the blender.
 
Someone is Retr0Briting vintage gear for a fee?

From Ebay item: 220548984494
"Note that I recently has my other Lisa treated with RetroBright by Vintage Micros
for a very reasonable sum and it came out looking like completely new."

So, who is Vintage Micros ?
 
Hmmm.... I've sent him a snottygram from my e-mail account as below.

Hi,

My name is David; you may know alternatively under my web name which is Merlin, i.e. the person that wrote the Retr0bright Wiki.

I note from eBay sale No. 220548984494 that you are offering a service to treat Apple computers with Retr0bright. Whilst I am glad that people find our creation useful, you should know that Retr0bright is in the public domain as open source and was intended to be free, so that others would not profit from our work.

I am disappointed that you didn’t even think to check with us that it was OK to use Retr0bright for commercial gain, under the terms of the Wikispaces licence.

How much are you charging for this service?

Regards,
David

Well, I'm not impressed, for a start; let's see what he comes back with..... I've also asked the eBay seller what he was charged for the service.... you never know....
 
Whoh!! It appears that I have stepped on someone's tail with my e-mail; I didn't think it was badly worded. here's what I got back in two replies:-

Hi,
I AM NOT offering that service anyhere. I did it as a favor for one person.
Get off my back as I am NOT advertising this to anyone anywhere! SHOW me WHERE I am advertising this service!
John Woodall

I read your note again and I will say that you are a presumptuous AH.
The next time you accuse me of hijacking your pathetic Retrobright crap you better have some legal power behind you.

What a nice guy Mr. Woodall is.... NOT.

I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.......I'm not going to dignify those messages with a reply.
 
While I haven't read up on the Wikispaces license, are you saying anything covered by that license may never be charged for? I agree if he was selling a CD-ROM with instructions how to perform the Retr0brite process, it would be a clear breach. In this case someone buys the chemicals, UV lamp and takes the time and risk to not only treat but also handle and ship other people's items.

I know several companies are in the open source industry, offering to install and support open source software. While all the contributions they do to the software will fall into the license, clearly it is not illegal to set up and commercially support this kind of software for a customer who couldn't care less about licenses as long as it works?

Or perhaps the Wikispaces license involves anyone who would like to set up this process and service other people without the means, needs to buy a commercial license from you or a representative for the Retr0brite community? You may want to clarify this pretty soon, as I expect more people might consider this approach in small scale.
 
"was intended to be free, so that others would not profit from our work.

I am disappointed that you didn’t even think to check with us that it was OK to use Retr0bright for commercial gain, under the terms of the Wikispaces licence."

Re-read the piece above again.
I think Merlin chose his words very carefully, and I don't think he is suggesting no one can make a commercial enterprise of it.

The word "intended" was a carefully chosen word, as were "check with us that it was OK to use Retr0bright for commercial gain".

Nowhere did Merlin say it couldn't be used for commercial gain.
I myself would prefer no one makes a commercial gain from it - the process wasn't developed for that purpose. In any case, no one will get rich de-yellowing old plastics.
It would be nice if someone is going to charge for de-yellowing pieces on a large scale, that maybe they check with the person who wrote the Wiki, to make sure that it is okay, and there are no royalties to be paid.

I think John Woodall probably didn't read properly or didn't understand the words in Merlin's email, and just flew off the handle with no thought. It's no big deal - it's just rude.
 
I think, and hope that he just charged for labor, and didn't sell any product, at least it seems like to me. Honestly though, I personally would of asked him what the deal was exactly first.
 
Here's my thinking on this. The Retrobrite recipe is in the public domain. I applaud that, and I applaud the way Dave has lead this project in the vintage computing community.

It's a bit of work to apply the treatment. Some people may want to get their cases de-yellowed but do not want the hassel of doing it themselves. They may be happy to pay for others to do that for them. If the charge is just for labour and materials, well, I guess that's fair enough. As Anders says, it's a bit like someone charging to setup open source software and tweak it on a person's machine. The charge is for the labour, not the software.

However, I wouldn't worry about the ideas being exploited by a big commerical enterprise. I don't think a commecial service will ever be a viable business. In order to make a profit, the cost of de-yellowing a case would need to cover

1. Labour (for washing, pasting, mixing, checking)
2. Materials (chemicals etc)
3. Shipping cases

Vintage computers don't go for much anyway and if we are talking about a local market (e.g. people drop a case in to the de-yellower) then the market is very small. How many people within driving distance are vintage computer nuts wanting their cases deyellowed AND are prepared to pay someone to do it? I would suggest very few. There is a larger market beyond the local driving zone BUT if things need to be shipped both ways, then up goes the cost...it goes WAY up.

The odd person may do some deyellowing for payment of labour and materials but I can't see it being common. Only a few will be prepared to pay what a commercial enterprise would need to charge. Not enough clients to sustain it as a business.

Tez
 
It gets better.....I got this message this morning....

Furthermore, if you post slanderous comments about me on the internet such that my name or my business are damaged, I will take legal action against you. I will not tolerate that kind of behavior.
John Woodall
VintageMicros

I really do wonder if he responds to every question he gets asked in this way..... and as for slanderous comments, I wouldn't dream of it.....

The thrust of my question was along the lines of this; I (and the guys who helped develop retr0bright) don't mind the average Joe treating his case, but when businesses start offering it as a service, that's another story to me. I have already come across one case in the UK of this and I thought that this was another one - it appears that in this case, I was wrong.

He really has over-reacted badly to my question though...... meh.
 
I'd say his own comments do more to create a negative impression than anything you (Merlin) said; not sure I'd want to do business with someone who'd react like that if I had a question or a problem, not to mention his belittling the efforts (which he benefitted from) that you and many others put into developing and refining this process with his "your pathetic Retrobright crap" remark.

Definitely uncalled for.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top