T-Shirt Forums banner
21 - 40 of 694 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
UPDATE:

I have washed a Cotton Heritage CH1044, American Apparel 2001 and a LAT 6901 around 30 times now. They are all starting to fail to some degree which is to be expected. The LAT and AA look the best still showing very little cracking and wear, but oddly the CH shirt stuck together on wash 25...it was stuck together straight out of the washer. I believe this was due to not enough curing time for the ink as I really loaded up the ink to put this new PT to the test. With the other PT brand the sticking shirt issue would have presented itself on the first wash or two. I think it is a testament to the bonding strength of the new PT which kept the print from sticking previously and it has kept the other shirts in the test looking very impressive. IMHO this new PT is a HUGE leap forward in the DTG industry!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Eric- this is great news........... as a newbie to dtg the pretreatment has been the biggest issue to get correct-way too many variables. If you think about it 30 washes is over half a year if you wore/washed a shirt once a week not bad IMHO.

In reading this post there are comments made that the application amount is not as critical as with other pretreatments. On your testing what settings were you using before like on the ch 1044 and what settings are you using with this new pretreatment to get the best results?

Thanks
Larry
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
Eric- this is great news........... as a newbie to dtg the pretreatment has been the biggest issue to get correct-way too many variables. If you think about it 30 washes is over half a year if you wore/washed a shirt once a week not bad IMHO.

In reading this post there are comments made that the application amount is not as critical as with other pretreatments. On your testing what settings were you using before like on the ch 1044 and what settings are you using with this new pretreatment to get the best results?

Thanks
Larry
Larry,

I was using around 8-10 grams of DuPont on the CH1044 which is where I started with this new PT. However I was told to try a little bit more so I incrementally stepped up to around 15 grams and had dozens of great wash tests before a failure. (The CH1044 is the shirt that showed deterioration first, AA2001 and LAT6901 are still holding strong) I am now using around 17-18 grams as it seems that using more does indeed help with washability. This goes against everything we knew using DuPont PT so it was hard to go against the grain but I must say more is better! I am still doing testing and I haven't dialed in my exact settings for every shirt yet but the formula for getting good prints and good wash-ability has become much much easier to figure out!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
I don't think you will see an increase in print quality on a crappy shirt. It's more about the longevity of the print not the quality. A bad image on a bad shirt is going to still look bad regardless. The image quality is dependent on the quality of the shirt, art and the machine its printed on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
Spidey brother, I plan on doing the G2000 later this week. To see just that. I tend to agree with Eric though. Hard to turn a sows ear into a silk purse! Also I have been using 18-25 grams with good results, I have never been able to get reliable results with dupont below 15, and that's on a great quality shirt. So far this pretreat is great, I might use a little more but I have far less problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 23spiderman

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
Have you all tried this on any shirts with polyester in them? Such as a tri blend? Just wondering if it helps with shirts that have poly in them.
Interesting how you mentioned this as I am going to do a test on poly this week. I'm confident it will work fine on a blend...I want to see how it handles 100% poly. I will post my findings as soon as I have data to provide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Eric & Randy- do you'll have any results on trying image armor on the gildan and polyester tees yet? I am especially curious to see what it does for the gildans. We have went to CH & Keya for all our dtg and gildan as a fill-in as a last resort.

Thanks
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
I am doing wash tests on a poly blend now...so far so good. I plan to test a 100% poly shirt too, in regards to Gildan...no I haven't tested any. So far the LAT 6901 and AA 2001 look the best after close to 40 washes. The more I use the various LAT styles the more I like the brand. LAT has actually become my first choice in garments. I have no interest in selling/printing on cheap carded cotton garments like the Gildan 2000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
No did not get to the Gildan on Friday, had some orders to get out. My reason to check the Gildan was to see how it worked on a poor quality shirt, some people still print on them, just trying to get the entire spectrum. But I agree with Eric on their quality.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
I've used the new PT on a Tultex shirt which is still ring spun but not a high end brand. The price point is the draw like that of Gildan, however the print quality was night and day compared to the better garments we have discussed in this thread. The new PT hasn't helped make a cheap garment print any better than with DuPont from what I can tell. I'm not sure why people are so hung up on sticking with Gildan. DTG printing is a premium service that should be used on a premium shirt. To upgrade from a G2000 to a LAT 6901 or similar is around $0.75 more. The difference in the print quality FAR out weighs the cost. Of course this is only my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
You are correct. I don't use them either, just testing the whole spectrum looking for the edge of the envelope! Besides I have a pile of them I use for print cut heat press. What is your sweet spot so far on say a tight ring spun, 18-20 grams?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,443 Posts
Yeah the high teens low twenties seem to have the best results. It's crazy how wet the shirt looks before drying it. With the DuPont it was usually barely damp because I only used around 10 grams. Have you also found this to be true?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·
No, could not get away with less than 15. I think u have the magic touch! With IA it seems, when in doubt use more. I have one at 32 grams that has not failed after 8 washes, if I put that much of dupont on it would have peeled off by 3-5. I am happy to trade a little more pretreat for a much better print that last. When you get an order back because of failure it quickly pays for itself! Not to mention the customers who do not return they shirt, the just don't return!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
Eric, I just messaged you on Facebook about this stuff. It's funny because they friended on FB me a few weeks ago and I never bothered to see what it was. I might fill the Neo up with some white again soon (currently loaded dual CMYK) to test this stuff out just for the heck of it. I guess all the questions I had about this new PT are answered here in this thread.
Like Spidey said, I also found the best combination of image and wash results on a Keya shirt. The thinner shirts like cotton heritage, next level, etc. seem to break down sooner. Great to hear Viper has come up with something that works 2x better than Dupont.
I think the main problem with pretreatment in general is the inconsistent nature that a given brand of shirt will take to it. By this I mean that whether it be Keya, cotton heritage, hanes nano, next level, etc. I have found some differences in the way the shirts absorb/take to the pretreat which certainly has an effect on washability. There is only so much wash testing you can do as a printer. When you find a great result and stick with it on your choice brand, only to find a random batch of mediums that are pretreating looking much "wetter" than usual during a print run, it is daunting. Examples: On Keyas, I have noticed that the 2XL-4XL sizes sometimes tend to need more pretreat than the S-XL's. I have also printed a recent order of Cotton Heritage shirts that the mediums seemed to "repel" the pretreat more than the L and XL, requiring less pretreat... applying the same amount as the L and XL would cause them to peel. Hearing that applying more pretreat will not negatively effect the washability is pretty awesome. I think for me and plenty of other DTG printers, shirts appearing not to pretreat consistently is a worrisome issue. This could be a big step forward for dark shirt DTG. Next step would be to eliminate pretreat.. which seems far off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #38 ·
Jeff, the thing about Image Armor is so far it not only washes better, but is very forgiving. Only time will tell for sure but so far. BTW the shirt I bought from you still looks great after about 20 washes. I never wash, even in testing, anything in cold water it gets normal cycle with the jeans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
Thanks for the feedback Randy. Looking forward to trying image armor at some point. I am sure I will miss the dark shirts soon enough and will load that white back in. Right now dual CMYK is awesome for me I am cranking out light shirts and haven't really got many dark shirt requests recently. I did test like a maniac throughout the last year and got great results... But the inconsistencies with the brands of shirts is what makes it annoying. Great to hear Brian and igroup have developed this pretreat... It seems the "forgiving" aspect might help when you come across some shirts that suddenly don't need as much pretreat as the last 50 you sprayed even though they are the same brand, same country of origin, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,768 Posts
Discussion Starter · #40 ·
Viper, same guys that make the pretreat machines. Google Image Armor pretreatment!
 
21 - 40 of 694 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top