Need to Register?

txshirts · January 10th, 2009

Howdy,
I'm looking for feedback and advice on ChromaBlast.

We've been doing photo-transfers forever and a day (8 years). Our most reliable printer was a HP2800. It ran for a very long time until this last week. Now we have the "marching dots error."

I don't feel like the ROI is there for DTG. For the $$ on DTG I can add a couple heads of embroidery.

We currently run an R1800 for film output. Film output seems to be really rough on epson printers. They last about 18 to 24 months for us and then die from one thing or another.

I recently ran across ChromaBlast and it almost seems to good to be true. From what I understand it bridges the space between DTG and Transfer by using a bit of each technology.

I understand functionally, how it works. I'm interested in some real world references.

1. Can you sell it as a "digital imprint"? i.e. can the end user tell the difference between this and a DTG garment?

2. Is the washability and colorfastness good? i..e better then transfers?

3. Sawgrass says that the cost per garment is around $2 including ink. Do you find this to be accurate?

4. I know it will work fine on whites. How is it with lights?

5. Are there any hidden gotchas that they don't talk about? i.e. does the bulk system work? I bought a bulk system from another company one time and ended up ripping it out and just going with refillable cartridges.

thanks,
Brian

charles95405 · January 10th, 2009

do a search here on chromablast...I don't want to comment tooooo much as I really really REALLY do not like it...costly ink...costly paper..subject to clogging more than sublimation and totally not suited for anything but whites...you would be much better off using JPSS and Epson pigment ink..all for less $$ search here for JPSS

txshirts · January 10th, 2009

Okay, I'll note that as one vote against. lol. I already have a brand of transfer paper that works fine. I just don't see it as a viable competitor to DTG. I sell it as a novelty option. It is good for very short run full color.

Transfer Paper is not an alternative to 4 color process because of hand issues. That said, I prefer not to direct print 4 color process. It never quite turns out the way it should and there are other things we can do with our press and time that make as much money.

A job isn't profitable if you spend 3 days messing with it and remaking screens.

It isn't good if the first shirt and last shirt don't look the same... and direct screenprint process never comes out that well for me. Even with software from certain companies that have a heavy presence at most ISS shows.

txshirts · January 10th, 2009

I should have added that I am not too concerned about the cost per unit. I see it as being slightly more than a photo transfer.

I'm trying to figure out if I can use chromablast as a substitute for a DTG printer.

DAGuide · January 10th, 2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by txshirts


	I'm trying to figure out if I can use chromablast as a substitute for a DTG printer.

Brian,

I doubt companies would have sold 1,000s of dtg printers over the past couple of years if there was a comparable product at 10% or less of the cost. What you are asking is an opinion and my opinion is that dtg printing is better overall on all light colors compared to ChromaBlast. Others may agree or differ. There are some posts on this forum that have pictures of what ChromaBlast looks like on light colored shirts. You should check them out. The only way to know for sure is to do the comparison for yourself. Try to make it to a trade show and get some samples.

Mark

txshirts · January 12th, 2009

I've looked extensively at DTG. I just don't see the ROI when you look at the capital expense involved, actual production rates (as opposed to sales production rates), sales of this particular niche for us, and value per garment/volume ratio.

One of the metrics I look at when evaluating equipment is it's profit potential. DTG units are very expensive per unit of finished goods. Spending $12K ( a nice conservative figure) for something that produces 4 to 5 finished items per hour that sell for $18/ea is challenging.

Each time I've analyzed DTG it falls very short for my business. There are businesses that it excels in, such as hot-market, walk-in retail, and mass customization. Those are not markets I do much with.

I've been using photo transfers as a stop-gap to fill the void below what plastisol printing does well(mass production).

They work well, are very cost effective and look good enough for the customer that typically wants color on short runs.

Our transfer printer bit the dust. I don't find repairing printers to be a cost-effective strategy. Maybe I should... but I don't right now.

As part of the printer replacement process I stumbled onto Chroma Blast. ChromaBlast looks like a upgrade/replacement for our current transfer product. Minor increase in cost, with the ability to sell it for more.

Photo Transfers (or Silicon Carrier Imaging as I nickname it) are not an analog to DTG. ChromaBlast might be.

Yes, a trade show can be a useful place to gather information. However, I find that you get alot of sales talk there. I like to hear from people who actually own them. I have no plans to go to ISS LB and I'm not going to wait until ISS FW (or go to another ISS show) to make this decision. If it were closer I might go to a show.

As for the logic that thousands of unit sales can't be wrong. I really think that is false reasoning. First, there are companies who's products are CRAP. Because I speak and write within the industry it's best for me not to name names. There are companies who make manual and automatic equipment that you couldn't give me. I'd scrap it. The same holds for Embroidery. There are 4 majors, 2 minors, and a flotilla of junk vendors who's machines produce bad embroidery. Despite producing bad equipment, bad software, and having horrible support, these companies manage to survive.

I always recommend that a purchaser be able to clearly see ROI on a piece of equipment or process before purchasing. DTG makes sense for some businesses, not mine at this time. That doesn't mean DTG is bad..... just overpriced IMHO.

There are people out there making a bundle using it. It will not replace plastisol printing. Not based on what I know.

I do appreciate your opinion, even if we don't agree on some things. A good discussion raises points that will benefit others who may be making a similar comparison.

Best Regards,
Brian

BRC · January 12th, 2009

If you are asking if it holds up even close to DTG the answer is simply NO. At least not the sample I received 2 years ago. It faded as fast or faster than the simple ink jet transfers. If you are satisfied with ink jet but are having trouble with the 1800's why not go to the 4880 which is a commercial grade printer? After all you wouldn't buy a Kia to haul a 40' trailer would you?

DAGuide · January 12th, 2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by txshirts


	There are businesses that it excels in, such as hot-market, walk-in retail, and mass customization. Those are not markets I do much with.

Brian,

A great quote and an even better overall post. I would put this single post in the Top 10 posts on this forum that I have read.

The reason why I mentioned seeing ChromaBlast at a trade show is that it is still an inkjet transfer. The only difference between ChromaBlast and other traditional transfers is that ChromaBlast has some binders in the ink itself that allow them to use a transfer paper with a lower amount of polymer (i.e. glue / silicone / sticky material / ...) that adheres the ink to the garment. Due to the lower amount of polymer, it becomes harder to see the window (i.e. the area on the transfer paper that does not contain ink but does show up on the shirt) on a white garment. However, you can still see the polymer window on light colored garments. Here are some pics (not the best as I am not photographer) that show what it looks like on a light yellow shirt - DAGuide/ChromaBlast - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting.

Here are some of the negatives that I have (besides price as it affects companies differently depending on their markets). The ChromaBlast paper is not weedable or can't be print-cut without have to purchase a carrier sheet (i.e. additional cost and time). In order to use the binders in the ink, the ink is thicker and tends to clog faster than traditional heat transfer ink or OEM ink. Most of these can be found by reading through some of these post linked here - chromablast related topics at T-Shirt Forums. I will restate though that I think ChromaBlast is a good product for white garments for a company that is going to print them 4-5 days a week.

By the way, not sure if your business can wait till the end of April... but the Ft. Worth NBM Show will be in town then - Welcome to NBM Shows!.

Hope this information helps. Best wishes in your decision.

Mark

bigtyme805 · January 12th, 2009

Lots of Info but first hand I can tell you because I own the chromablast system.

First it is sitting in my drawer, so that should tell you a lot...

Cost is much more than chromablast told you because I was continually cleaning the heads sucking lots of ink.

It wasn't a very good system. I use bulk systems with Pigment and Dye Inks and much more happier.

If you want to buy my Chromablast Ink System contact me. I will give you a good deal.....

txshirts · January 13th, 2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRC


	If you are satisfied with ink jet but are having trouble with the 1800's why not go to the 4880 which is a commercial grade printer? After all you wouldn't buy a Kia to haul a 40' trailer would you?

If I had a choice I wouldn't own an Epson printer. Every single one of them I have owned is a piece of junk. That is one of the biggest reasons I hesitate to buy a DTG machine. Most of them use Epson heads. I've had everything from a Epson 3000 to the latest being a Epson 1800. All of them were billed as "commercial" grade printers. I finally realized that Epson designs their printers to fail after a certain amount of prints. Sometimes you can recover from this with various software and most of the time they just die and you have to buy another. It's very annoying.

Our HP2800 on the other hand, has worked for 3 years with no trouble. That is the printer we use to print photo transfers. It's reliable, feeds well, and holds up to repeated washings with no issues.

A transfer is not however, comparable to DTG or direct screenprint.

txshirts · January 13th, 2009

DAG- Thanks for the pics. Yours are the *best* kind.... real photos not done by the marketing genies and sales soothsayers. lol. Yes, I clearly see the window.

I insisted that they send me several samples including:
a) an applied item
b) An unapplied transfer that I could apply myself.

I've been beating them for ROI data and all I'm getting is "it's about $3 a shirt". I told signwarehouse (who Sawgrass sent to me) that I WILL not purchase any system without detailed costing data. I recommend that anyone reading this insist on the same thing. It's absolutely impossible to price your product without good costing data.

They are pushing it as sublimation for cotton. Sawgrass went as far as saying the window washes out in the first wash. Heck the paper we use now (Image Jet II) is nearly impossible to see. We pressed 6 high-end polos with it today. Yes, it amazes me what people want a transfer on. lol. Ah I love this business! Best part is they paid a rush charge to get it done quickly.

Anyhow, I found a replacement HP2800 which takes the fire and urgency out of this.

It sounds like when we get right down to it:
A) Cost is not what is being promised (surprise surprise).... DTG costing data isn't very nice either.
B) It isn't as "invisible" as they promise. We'll see.

It amazes me that they don't know costing.
I guarantee you that someone at Sawgrass knows the cost/ml of ink and the ink/square inch of media and the average square inches per imprint (about 25). I also guarantee that they know the usage in ml per cleaning/purge cycle and thus the cost per cleaning. It's basic math to figure this out.

Yes, NBM would be a good time to see them.... I still need to call Graphic Solutions (who doesn't sell Sawgrass) and see what they have to say about it. I'm sure they will have a list of evils about it and know all of it's shortcomings. Sometimes talking to the competition can help you find all the "gotchas" you need to evaluate. Every process has gotchas. The trick is to identify the gotchas and accept them, accomodate them, or figure them in to your cost of goods sold.

Need to Register?

Resources

T-Shirt Sites

Advice on ChromBlast