T-Shirt Forums - View Single Post

cvreeland · July 21st, 2008

We run 2 automatics, and I'm currently printing film on an Epson 4000 unsing Ulano pigment inkjet film and PowerRip X software. The films look great to begin with, but they don't hold up well, and I find myself re-outputting film 1 out of 3 times on reorders. (I used to use a CalComp EcoPro, but sold it -- the ghost script language it used was abandoned by Adobe, and I was looking at $500.00 RIP software,anyway, in order to use CS versions of their apps.)

I'm also not too thrilled with the edges of the stencil on the Epson film -- I'm getting more undercutting on the thin lines, and along the sides of the image -- I'm guessing there's a drop in density at the edge of the art with this thing.

I've seen a couple articles about people imaging screens with Direct-to-screen machines that literally print the stencil onto the back of the emusioned screen, totally eliminating the need for film. Of course, I'm going to take any gushing trade mag article with a grain of salt, but I'm wondering if there's any real-world experience with these things here.

I saw one at a trade show about 8 years ago, but it was incredibly slow and expensive. I understand they're a lot faster now, but am also concerned with the complexity of setting up the files to image correctly, whether they can be printed to directly from Illustrator, Quark & InDesign, or if you've got to go through proprietary software as an intermediate step, and what the cost of ink is per screen in the long run.

Anybody using one of these things?
Do they break down & require constant maintenance, or are they pretty trouble-free?
How long on average to image a screen? (I'm using 23 x 31's not much "oversize" art -- pretty standard stuff)
Also, who makes them, and what are the most reputable brands?

Thanks,
Chris

July 21st, 2008	- #1 (permalink)
cvreeland T-Shirt Lover T-Shirt Fan You can call me: Chris Member Since: Jan 2008 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 37 Thanks: 0 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	Direct to Screen imaging. We run 2 automatics, and I'm currently printing film on an Epson 4000 unsing Ulano pigment inkjet film and PowerRip X software. The films look great to begin with, but they don't hold up well, and I find myself re-outputting film 1 out of 3 times on reorders. (I used to use a CalComp EcoPro, but sold it -- the ghost script language it used was abandoned by Adobe, and I was looking at $500.00 RIP software,anyway, in order to use CS versions of their apps.) I'm also not too thrilled with the edges of the stencil on the Epson film -- I'm getting more undercutting on the thin lines, and along the sides of the image -- I'm guessing there's a drop in density at the edge of the art with this thing. I've seen a couple articles about people imaging screens with Direct-to-screen machines that literally print the stencil onto the back of the emusioned screen, totally eliminating the need for film. Of course, I'm going to take any gushing trade mag article with a grain of salt, but I'm wondering if there's any real-world experience with these things here. I saw one at a trade show about 8 years ago, but it was incredibly slow and expensive. I understand they're a lot faster now, but am also concerned with the complexity of setting up the files to image correctly, whether they can be printed to directly from Illustrator, Quark & InDesign, or if you've got to go through proprietary software as an intermediate step, and what the cost of ink is per screen in the long run. Anybody using one of these things? Do they break down & require constant maintenance, or are they pretty trouble-free? How long on average to image a screen? (I'm using 23 x 31's not much "oversize" art -- pretty standard stuff) Also, who makes them, and what are the most reputable brands? Thanks, Chris __________________ when I retire, I'm going to write a book about my time in the T-shirt industry. It will be called "Blood Don't Zim."
	Reply With Quote