T-Shirt Forums banner

101 - 120 of 134 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
Sounds like you need to put another printer next to that operator. Get a 541 next to the 782 so he/she can run both. Even if they are only running the 541 at 50% efficiency that's still and additional 50%.
For 14 x 16, we do run our 541 in parallel with the 782. Lately we have been doing a lot of 16 x 18 prints which only the 782 can do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,526 Posts
German,dont you have anything better to do,like print shirts and stop worrying about the Brother.Those who are buying Epson based printers will buy them,those who want the Brother will buy that.You are not going to convince anybody with your posts .Im glad I dont have all the time you have to worry about this because Im printing shirts and busy making money.Give it a break.This thread was not about the Epson based printer.Again,start your own thread.
I love how this thread involved heavy discussion of "Brother ink cost / viscosity vs. Epson ink cost / viscosity" FROM THE FIRST PAGE, but as soon as Jeff rally's some facts / videos / dollars and cents comparisons for the EPSON printers, you Brother owners start getting personal and making it about the PERSON and not the PRINTERS. This whole "you have a hidden agenda if you are promoting machine X" has been used a hundred thousand times before, and it is no more a valid argument than "you don't own one so you don't know anything about it".

Look at the FIRST PAGE of this thread, and let me know what you think this discussion was about, then explain why you guys keep choosing to attack Jeff instead of sticking to debating the issues at hand (ie, Brother ink costs / viscosity vs. other machines, and the merits / downfalls of each). By the SECOND POST in this thread, someone was already comparing the Brother setup to the Epson setup.... By the end of the first page, a Kornit owner had chimed in to compare the setup to his, another Epson DISTRIBUTOR, and several end users, all showed up and began discussing these very points......... But as soon as Jeff pops up with real good information that contradicts what the Brother owners hold dear, everyone starts crying foul. Lame; go enjoy your printer, and let the fortunes you are obviously making roll in, unless of course you want to actually discuss the merits of one printer vs. another, without taking jabs at people?

Im glad I dont have all the time you have to worry about this because Im printing shirts and busy making money.
Riiiight.... But you have plenty of time to come in here and insult people who are actually sharing valuable information, not just talking ****? We have gone these rounds before, I know..... I still can't stand it when the best rebuttal someone has is "go away and start your own thread; nobody is listening to you, here" or "Gee, I'M way too busy and important to participate in a conversation like this, so I'm going to imply by my statements that YOU suck because you have free time to share information with people on the forum". God I hated Jr. High.....


Jeff - THANK YOU for sharing all the information you have shared, FOR FREE, EVERY DAY on this forum.... You don't come here and act like you have all the answers, and you certainly don't belittle anybody else (at least, not in one single post I have read of yours); your professional opinions are enlightening, and I for one have learned quite a bit from you since you started coming around here (and hey, I haven't had to buy a damn thing from you!!!! Although you must be making a fortune on all those products you are supposedly selling........ :rolleyes:).

Marc - As always, thanks for continuing to share your experience with your Brother printer.... As you know, we went totally opposite directions with our most recent machine purchases, respectively, so it is great to see thorough discussions like these taking place! Gives me insight, in conjunction with trade show evaluations and sample prints and discussions like these, to allow me to make informed decisions in the future. You've always been down to debate the pros / cons of each system, and time has proven that you have never had specific loyalty to one specific brand or system!

You people in the peanut gallery (you know the ones; those who are NOT posting information for the benefit of others, but who would rather insult others on the forum who ARE, simply because you happen to have a differing opinion) aren't really proving anything with your "nobody is listening to you so just go away" attitude. The fact is, LOTS of people read these discussions and gain insight into the industry that helps determine future buying decisions. Those who DON'T own Brother printers can learn about them through the feedback of the end users, and those who DON'T own Epson printers can learn about them through the feedback of the end users... I don't really see what the downside to discussions like this, are, except that people get upset when you tell them you don't agree with them. :confused:

Anyways, I don't think I contributed anything provokative to this discussion, so that's all I've got for now...... Play nice? :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
But as soon as Jeff pops up with real good information that contradicts what the Brother owners hold dear, everyone starts crying foul.:rolleyes:
That is because it is grossly incorrect. I have shown that the 782 prints faster at a similar quality. Then Jeff wants to post another video with less quality showing his is faster. Guess what...I can do the same. I have several steps in quality to go down, that would produce faster and cheaper prints. I have also proven that it is cheaper to print the same shirt on a Brother than an Epson. I did this using Jeff's own numbers. He then makes a post that the ink price and spe is one reason he prefers the Epson?!? WTF?

He then chooses to say that my print is out of registartion. It is not. It is 100% dead on. The white at the bottom is actually a grey drop shadow on the original artwork from Dane that does not show up on the artwork Jeff has. And look at the pictures he posted, his artwork has artifacts all over from a poorly removed background.Which makes me wonder why he needed to remove the background. Does he not own the original artwork?

I attack Jeff post's (not Jeff himself) because he posts statements that are not grounded in fact. Of all people I would think you, Justin, could appreciate that.

He also seems to be the ONLY person in the universe that can get a great looking sellable print using 720x720 single pass white. I have posted here, as well as PM'ing several 1800/1900 users, and nobody else can do it. I for one am very glad he can. If the manufacturer's, Rip coders, and distributors could have done it for me when I was looking to upgrade, I might have made a different decision. I just cannot locate anyone else who can. How about you Justin? Can you do it on the Dream, or the Neo? If you can, I will fly out Monday and get a demo.

I sincerely hope someone creates a sub $2000.00 (or $20,000 for that matter) printer that prints faster than the Brother, and uses less ink. I will be first in line. I am not bashing any Epson, that is how I made the money to afford what I have now. I have always been a supporter, and still advise people to look at the Mod1, and the Neoflex, as you yourself received that very information from me, before making your latest purchase.

I also do not claim the 782 is perfect. It has lots of issues, from wasted ink, to issues printing solid vectors, etc....

All I want is a fair unbiased factual discussion. I have posted indisputable visual evidence that the 782 prints faster and cheaper than an Epson at 720x720, not to mention 1440x720, or 1440 squared. I still do not understand why Jeff is the only one who can do a 720x720 and get a great print. I would love for some more end users to step up and prove that they do all of their printing in 720x720. I think until that is proven, the rest of this is moot, because at any higher resolution, it is not even a contest!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
Let me also add that my comments are based on speed and price per print. IF we start taking into consideration the initial entry price, then the Epsons certainly gain ground and come to the forefront. If we take into account quality of print regardless of speed or cost, then clearly the Epson's are once again at the front of the discussion. However this is not what the discussion has centered around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
I also want to make it clear that I believe Jeff has created a cool printer, and I think he has optimized the settings in the rip to get what he feels is a good print. The issue is, can it be repeated by anyone else, and would those of us that actual sell shirts, agree that it is high enough quality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,136 Posts
Marc,

with all due respect you reposted your surfshark vid... you had one already posted and i set my printer/rip up to print what you had represented in that video...

once i posted my vid then you made another taking out your highlight and trimming it down!!! WTF so whats the problem you couldnt except that comparison? thats why i would like to post an equal.. i can trim it back the same as you did and get equal image results !!! im not sure about faster but i know alot of time will be saved by doing so... you posted the second vid reprint not me..

i thought we were doing are best quaility image!!! the truth i believe is you just cant except it, first saying it cant be done by an epson in 720 which is just false any anajet sprint using the ek software can do this with an experienced user..... ANAJET WITH EK RIP!!

you dont beleive the anajet vids that clearly showed this and you are questioning mine that was recorded on a camera.. i posted up the ink cost right from the rip!!! 2.97 for that print... you quoted in your FIRST video 2.75 for the print buying in bulk?

I have represented my findings 100% accurate, maybe you could post up a print calc also on that first print?

just want to show things apples to apples here as far as print quaility and time!!!

I have no issue with you at all, have read a ton of your posts i think your a good guy, sometimes you have to look outside the box!!!.. Im just saying the ek rip will do this and if you dont beleive it your cordially invited to chicago to see it in person if you cant find it anywhere else!!:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
I agree stick to the topic. But I can't help but notice is that Jeff's post doesn't neccesarally discredit Brother. It does more harm to DTG, Neoflex , MOD1 and all other epson based printers as they are identical in almost comparison/Foundation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
What do you mean by trim down? The second video is an equivalent post to an epson 720x720 white layer. The original video is equivalent to a 1440 squared print from an Epson. How could you possibly set your printer up to represent that post? You have not printed on a 782 enough to make that judgement call. I printed a top quality print off of my machine in my first video. You didn't. This is the ludicrous accusations that I refer to. You come back with at best a middle of the road print for your machine based on resolution. It is several steps below the maximum 2880 the printer is capable of. I do the same and you accuse me of trimming it back. What do you mean by trimming it back?

You can't have it both ways. Either print your best resolution against mine, or print your medium against mine, or your lowest against mine. You can't print your medium against my best and call that a far comparison. Come on, I would expect more from an engineer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
Marc,


i thought we were doing are best quaility image!!! the truth i believe is you just cant except it, first saying it cant be done by an epson in 720 which is just false any anajet sprint using the ek software can do this with an experienced user..... ANAJET WITH EK RIP!!

you dont beleive the anajet vids that clearly showed this and you are questioning mine that was recorded on a camera.. i posted up the ink cost right from the rip!!! 2.97 for that print... you quoted in your FIRST video 2.75 for the print buying in bulk?

I have represented my findings 100% accurate, maybe you could post up a print calc also on that first print?

just want to show things apples to apples here as far as print quaility and time!!!

I have no issue with you at all, have read a ton of your posts i think your a good guy, sometimes you have to look outside the box!!!.. Im just saying the ek rip will do this and if you dont beleive it your cordially invited to chicago to see it in person if you cant find it anywhere else!!:)
Best quality image? You are saying the best quality image on your machine is 720x720? Really? You are correct, I don't believe it.

I am not at all questioning your video. I believe the times and the ink costs, both of which are slower and more expensive than the Brother. What I do not believe is that the industry (not just you and your wife) would agree that the 720x720 prints are good enough to sell. Nobody has come onto this or any other thread to backup this statement. Several users have come on here and said they cannot do it. What do you expect me to believe?

I would love to be proved wrong, but I will not be holding my breath.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,136 Posts
What do you mean by trim down? The second video is an equivalent post to an epson 720x720 white layer. The original video is equivalent to a 1440 squared print from an Epson. How could you possibly set your printer up to represent that post? You have not printed on a 782 enough to make that judgement call. I printed a top quality print off of my machine in my first video. You didn't. This is the ludicrous accusations that I refer to. You come back with at best a middle of the road print for your machine based on resolution. It is several steps below the maximum 2880 the printer is capable of. I do the same and you accuse me of trimming it back. What do you mean by trimming it back?

You can't have it both ways. Either print your best resolution against mine, or print your medium against mine, or your lowest against mine. You can't print your medium against my best and call that a far comparison. Come on, I would expect more from an engineer.

like i said im no expert at printing... i just added some highlight etc in my first vid that i can leave out!!!

I will print the surfshark again at my best speed time in 720 res and we will call it done!!! it will be what it is? sound fair

is the 2:47 print time on your 720x720 your best with that image!! i have no idea how much if any faster i can get the epson to print but i will give it a shot and see what it does..:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts
That really accomplishes nothing. What needs to happen, is a print at a resolution that creates an industry accepted finished print, anything less than that is a wate because nobody will ever print at anything below acceptable industry standards I propose you print a black T at your fastest possible speed that results in a garment that you believe is sellable. Send that garment to an impartial judge like Justin Walker. If Justin posts that it would pass in his shop as a sellable print, I will accept that, as Justin has a firm grasp on what the market will accept. Post time to print and ink used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Let me also add that my comments are based on speed and price per print. IF we start taking into consideration the initial entry price,
$35,000 Additional over a Mod1...

then the Epsons certainly gain ground and come to the forefront. If we take into account quality of print regardless of speed or cost, then clearly the Epson's are once again at the front of the discussion..
Huh??? Maybe as a "framable" Art Print fresh off the printer, but Isn't the Brother better QUALITY After 20- 28 washes?

IMHO It all comes down to washability and "that $35,000"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,136 Posts
That really accomplishes nothing. What needs to happen, is a print at a resolution that creates an industry accepted finished print, anything less than that is a wate because nobody will ever print at anything below acceptable industry standards I propose you print a black T at your fastest possible speed that results in a garment that you believe is sellable. Send that garment to an impartial judge like Justin Walker. If Justin posts that it would pass in his shop as a sellable print, I will accept that, as Justin has a firm grasp on what the market will accept. Post time to print and ink used.
yeah .. we will work something out after the holiday!!!;) i just started getting some crazy stuff going on with my ink lights!!! different lights come on and off... i reset them and same deal.. i have reset my waste ink counter aswell and still get the lights.. so i have a problem to fix first:rolleyes: never ran into this one before!! may have some bad carts from switching them out so much!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,136 Posts
Still would like you to explain what you meant by trim down.

I set my rip up for level 3 for the white.. or three passes per line im guessing.. I have some adjustment room just not sure how much before losing a good base in 720.. the color layer is fast no probs there, just have to see what the capabilitys are for the white in 720.. i also added highlight to the color print.. im new at all this so im learning yet.. but i imagine if i reduce my settings i can get more speed... just a guess;) gotta crash..tired................. i dont like this white ink business working on getting rid of this pretreat crap at least this type... working on retroing a eco-solvent for the printer..its proving to be a pain to work out..to little time... to much work:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
$35,000 Additional over a Mod1...



Huh??? Maybe as a "framable" Art Print fresh off the printer, but Isn't the Brother better QUALITY After 20- 28 washes?

IMHO It all comes down to washability and "that $35,000"
Brother 782 run rate; 35 prints an hour ( I'm ignoring pretreat time as they would be equal) 280 per 8 hr shift. x 250 production days per year = 70,000 prints per year. If you can't achieve that you're better off not buying the 782 anyway.

At only a $.25 difference in ink cost it would take 2 years to break even between the two in cost, and that is assuming equal run rates. Depending on how much faster the 782 is it could force that break even sooner.

So even a seemingly small difference of $.25 per print in reoccurring cost can mean large difference over time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
:0/ Why do you have to have this count in order for it to be worth it? Oh here we goooooo!
All of this assumes the actual existence of a $.25 difference in favor of the Brother 782 compared to the Mod1

Digital printers are usually looked at the same as office electronics. 5 year life cycle. So 20,000/5 = $4000 a year so $16 a day for the mod1 compared to the $44 a day the 782 would cost.

Now if the prints are $.25 more expensive on the Mod1 then you eat into that daily difference per print. After 112 prints per day you break even. So I would actually set the bar there. Say 115 prints a day or more and you are better served by the Brother, under 110 and you are better off with the Mod1.

I know the equipment should last more than 5 years but no one really knows the actual number yet.

If we do that same exercise with a 7 year life cycle it looks like: $12 a day for the Mod1 and $32 a day for the Brother. Use that same $.25 per print difference and you get 80 prints a day difference.

What I'm getting at is that the longer you plan on owning the equipment the better off you are paying less per print, even with more than twice the machine price. This is more of a parabolic curve though. The kornit's price requires substantial daily throughput to make the machine price difference viable, but that's a different conversation.

Now if you are only planning on doing 50 prints a day on average then the Mod1 is definitely for you.
 
101 - 120 of 134 Posts
Top