Talk:Photoresist

message: There are definitions of positive and negative photoresist in the beginning. However, there is only detailed information about negative photoresist. So should we add more explanation and detail about positive photoresist to supplement the whole topic?
May lam (talk) 03:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: More Information about Positive Photoresist

message: Can I still buy Hoechst AZ 4562; or a similar photoresist?
The text infers that Hoechst AZ 4620, Hoechst AZ 4562 are still available to buy from Celanese but I spoke them and Celanese have only taken on some of the Hoechst products. It appears that Hoechst was split between Celanese and some other companies but I can't find out who the others were or if they still produce photoresists.
Is AZ 4562 still available please?
SpinJinny (talk) 15:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoechst AZ 4562

message: I don't know much about resists but it seems like a mention of resist for e-beam lithography is in order, and perhaps a few words about resists for soft lithography like PDMS.     Maybe a table would be a good way to summarize this kind of material?   Alison Chaiken 06:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh, I just noticed that not only is there an electron beam lithography article, there's a long one called resist that this article should be merged with.    Assuredly photoresist is a better article title.  Alison Chaiken 03:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Quite simply, the substances that react to light are not the same substances that react to electrons.  The article needs to make this clear. --Smack (talk) 22:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about e-beam? 

message: First of all, what is it? The article assumes that the reader knows. Secondly, is there a Wikipedia article that links to it? Directly linking to scission redirects to a science-fiction writer's page. TimD 01:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scission 

message: Should we include a diagram showing the process flow for positive and negative resists? It provides a succinct explanation of the difference between the two, and more importantly will be an invaluable reference. (Markscott85 (talk) 19:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photoresist Process Flow 

message: I do not see any links that are truly worth keeping. Yhis section is degraded into a vendors' directory. Any objections to a cleanup in the near furure? --DrTorstenHenning (talk) 15:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As a vendor? Or as a typical Wikipedia user? Or as someone who is looking to buy photoresist? --DrTorstenHenning (talk) 14:39, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links section 

message: Are positive photoresists generally "temporary" resists and negative photoresists generally "permanent" resists? My only exposure to this field is SU-8, which is a negative near UV photoresist. I have access to UV-6, which is a positive deep UV photoresist, so before I design a process, which necessitates a "temporary" [as in easy to remove and not desired in the final device fabrication] photoresists, around UV-6 I'd like to know that it'll work out.
My intuition says that's likely because positive photoresists are baked on and the parts that are exposed become soluble, so you can just develop the exposed parts away whereas negative photoresists have parts that are exposed and become _insoluble_. In SU-8's case, it's seemingly indestructible to the point where if I do manage to "destroy" the exposed SU-8, I will end up destroying any devices that were patterned with the help of SU-8.
SU-8 seems like it's used as a structural support element in MEMS and not really used in electronics.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.233.214.159 (talk) 20:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification about positive photoresists versus negative photoresists