At the various trade shows throughout 2006, it was evident that something called “direct print” was a hot topic. Direct print is where a specialized printer is used to apply an ink image directly to a product. These are actually specially designed inkjet printers, not terribly different from an inkjet printer you might use in your office. These printers apply ink directly to soft products such as fabric, shirts and the like or, in some cases, to hard substrates such as metal, wood, glass and plastic. Once thought to be an interesting flash in the pan, these printers are here to stay and suddenly, it seems like everywhere you look, someone is touting a direct-to-substrate printer. Actually, direct print to fabric has been around for a while, so it isn’t anything all that new. The number of printers that can print directly to hard surfaces such as glass or metal, however, has been somewhat unexpected. Moreover, some of the printers that tout printing on hard surfaces without having to prespray the substrate have had a trying and rocky year. The most interesting thing about each of the printers, especially at last year’s ARA Las Vegas show, was the fact that almost everyone there was touting what their printer would be able to do in “two weeks.” Almost everyone had some new advancement that would hit the market in “just a couple of weeks” or “it will be in the office as soon as they get back to the office.” All of the printers shown at the various 2006 trade shows looked and worked in very similar ways. Most were four-color (CMYK) inkjet printers, some with the added “white” printing option. A few were six color (CMYK, LM, LC). Most had roughly a 13" x 19" table size and all had something in the range of a 26" x 48" footprint. The weight of the printers averages around 140 pounds. Because of those repeated claims as to what these printers would be able to do “in a couple of weeks,” EJ has held off printing this article to see how many of those promises were kept and to add that data to the informational caldron. Things can get pretty confusing with promises and expectations flying in all directions, but a review that isn’t as current as possible wouldn’t be worth much. To give you an idea what we have been up against, one of the early front runners in the digital print field over the past year was a company known as Universal Inkjet Printers, which offered several models suitable for both hand and soft substrate printing. Regrettably, just as this issue was going to press we learned that the company has withdrawn from the direct print market. For this reason we’ve removed them from this article.
MESA Distributors, Inc. Name: Kiosk (Fig. 1) Price: $10,995 Substrate: Soft (Hard available soon) Ink: 7-color Resolution: 2880-360 dpi Heat press ($600-$1,500): Required for “setting” the image in fabric (only). OK, I cheated on this one. MESA, a huge distributor of embroidery and screen printing equipment and supplies, wasn’t really at the ARA show, but they were in a trade show adjacent to the ARA show and I slipped in when no one was watching. Direct Color Systems (DCS) DCS has introduced their direct-to-hard substrate printer. This one worked a little differently than the others in that the system, as part of its protocol, applies a pre-coat (white) prior to the printing step thus eliminating the prespray step.
Sawgrass Technologies Name: DIRECT ADVANTAGE (Fig. 5) Price: $17,995 and includes PowerDriver software & extra frame Substrate: Soft Ink: CMYK x 2 (dual CMYK) Resolution: 720-360 dpi Heat press ($600-$1,500): A heat press is required for “setting” the image in fabric The Sawgrass direct print system is intended for fabric printing only. This is a truly unique system since it’s built around the Epson 4000 printer (Fig. 6). The 4000 has proven itself to be a workhorse of a printer and very forgiving in many respects. This model has been modified to print in a CMYK x 2 mode allowing for the fastest possible print speed.
U.S. Screen Print was certainly one of the leaders in direct-to-print fabric and a leader in the technology. U.S. Screen Print markets the “Fast T-Jet2” printer. They also work with several other distributors such as TR Distributors to introduce their equipment into various markets. Brother International Corporation The system is called the GT-541 and is capable of imprinting a 600 dpi image on fabric. The maximum print size is 14" x 16" and the system uses a 4-color (CMYK) water based pigment ink. Like all the fabric printers, the ink must be cured in a standard heat press or dryer after imprinting.
Sprin USA Name: Elite 1300 (Fig. 10) Price: $12,500 Resolution: 2800-720 dpi Substrate: Soft & Hard Ink: 6-color Heat press ($600-$1,500): Required for “setting” the image in fabric Name: Elite 1800 (Fig 10.) This California-based company showed two printers at the 2006 ARA show, but they actually have three. According to a company representative, they can be configured for hard or soft substrates. The printer shown for hard substrates is called the “Elite 1300.” The other two printers are the “Elite 1800” and the “Busjet Pro 603.” The 1300 and 603 printers are six-color printers while the 1800 has seven colors. The company offers water-based inks, pigment inks and solvent inks, depending on the configuration of the printer.
What We Don’t Know About Direct Print 1. We don’t really know about the UV stability on hard substrates. Although some manufacturers and distributors are making promises that its UV stability surpasses sublimation and even say it will hold up for 5-10 years outdoors, that’s unlikely. To my knowledge, no one has done any lab tests for UV stability with these inks yet (there isn’t any need so long as the inks keep changing as fast as they are now) and except for a few people who have stuck products on window sills, no real world testing has been done either (Fig. 12). This must become a priority if the process is to satisfy many mainstream applications. Lab tests over the years on sublimated products have proven to be very unreliable making real world testing a priority. Unfortunately, the problem with real world testing is that the only way to know if something is going to hold up for three years is to wait three years. Still, the early test results are promising. As for UV stability on fabric, there’s little or no concern since the only way a shirt would be exposed to UV long enough to see much change would be in window displays. 2. Are these printers really cost effective over sublimation or screen printing? If the question is, “Can you print a shirt cheaper with a direct printer than to sublimate it?” the answer is, “Yes, without a doubt.” In a best-case scenario, a sublimated shirt costs between $5 and $8 depending on the size of the transfer. One made by direct print can cost less than $2. Of course, the shirts are different. The sublimated shirt is a top of the line Hanes Soft L’ink (50% polyester/50% cotton) or a Vapor or Dye-Trans shirt while the direct print might be one of Hanes’ 100% cotton Beefy T’s. Interestingly, to the average customer, a shirt is a shirt and many couldn’t care less. In fact, many customers prefer the less expensive cotton shirt over the more expensive sublimatable shirt. This is, in part, due to a lack of consumer education, but even when a dealer tries to educate the customer about the advantages of a polyester or polyblend garment, it’s often an uphill battle. Compared to screen printing, the tables turn the other way. Screen printing is a very inexpensive way to print shirts provided there is a large enough quantity. That’s where direct printers fit in for the screen printer. They aren’t intended to replace screen printing, but they fill a gap that, up to now, could only be filled with sublimation—the customer who wants only 12 shirts, but also wants 12 colors. With direct print, no one cares how many colors or even if it has a photograph. As for cost, that’s hard to compare, but anyone who can’t make money doing short run, highly personalized shirts when the net cost is $2 each, just isn’t trying.
There’s another side to the question: Sure, the shirts are cheaper and the quality is nearly equal, but what about the investment. At $10,000-$20,000 for a printer, it takes a lot of shirts to justify the cost. When amortized over the life of the printer, is there any way it can pay for itself? That’s the real question, and the answer will be as individual as the people who buy the printers. Being able to print both fabric and hard surfaces with the same printer and ink would certainly soften the hit, but even then, the answer will come down to marketing and perhaps a little luck. If a shop only does about 10,000 shirts a year and only 10% of those are direct printed, it would take a long time to justify the investment. Even at 10,000 shirts done on the direct print system, it could be difficult to justify if they were all black fabric when comparing it to screen printing. If, however, the system is used to make only short run, highly personalized shirts that can fetch $10 or $15 each, it could be a goldmine. 3. How these hold up compared to sublimation over the long-term on hard substrates. Sublimation is typically a more durable product than direct print, especially on hard surfaces such as tile, metal, glass and the like. Yet, sublimation has its Achilles’ heel, too. It may be subsurface which makes it more durable, but it can tend to migrate (the dyes actually move around under the surface) making it blur and greatly restricting the size of text and images. Even though sublimation is more durable initially, will its benefits outweigh its disadvantages? Only time will tell. 4. How these hold up compared to sublimation or screen printing over the long term when applied to fabric. Sublimation actually dyes the fabric itself so it’s very durable and resistant to washings. Direct print when applied to light colored fabric (no white ink) seems to hold up just about as well to repeated washings. White ink, when applied correctly to dark fabric, will break down over time, but seems to be about equal to screen printing when washed repeatedly. Both direct print and screen printing eventually tend to crack over time due to the heavy layer of white required to keep the dark or black fabric from fading through the ink. Although there are ways to sublimate on dark fabrics, the process is expensive and/or labor intensive. Sublimation, in one form or another, requires a layer of white polyester fabric or film to be adhered between the ink and the fabric making the direct print process both more efficient and more cost effective than sublimation when applied to dark fabrics. 5. The debate over white ink. Everyone wants the ability to offer white ink so these machines can print on black or dark fabrics. A couple of companies do offer this capability. There are lots of questions as to how well this really works and how economically feasible it is since it requires multiple passes over the shirt and, according to one source, takes up to eight minutes per shirt to print. My own tests with a black shirt showed one looked excellent when first printed. After about 10 washings, I found almost no change in color or vividness. I was told that the print on a black shirt must be so heavy it will crack and chip off even with just a fingernail. I didn’t find that true with my sample. However, I would want to do a little more research before plunking down a wad of money. Doug Schauf of TR Distributors, who sells the Fast T-Jet2 said the white ink worked fine and a shirt could be printed in about five minutes. He did emphasize that there was a “learning curve” with the white ink. He went on to remind me that anytime white ink is used, the shirt must be presprayed with a special chemical to help the white ink bond to the fabric. This only takes a few seconds, but it does take a little practice to learn how to do it well. He reminded me that not only do many customers want black shirts with custom imprinting, but white ink also becomes very important when printing corporate logos and things like baseballs or soccer balls on shirts. There just isn’t a substitute for white in these cases, and customers are willing to pay a little extra to have it. Like most things, it’s important to understand the tradeoffs involved when considering the purchase of a printer that is white-equipped. They cost more; they come with a learning curve and the durability of the imprint is probably not going to be as good as a shirt that doesn’t require white ink. It also means a longer print time and additional steps for each product printed. On the up side, it broadens the potential customer base and the amount of creativity one can bring to the marketplace.
6. Many of the direct print machines are made overseas. Now I know about the global economy and all that, and how it’s getting increasingly difficult to buy a growing list of products that are still made in the U.S.A. But it’s one thing to buy a package of socks from Wal-Mart that’s made by a company I’ve never heard of in one of the “emerging” countries. I find comfort in the fact that if the socks turn out to be junk, you can always take them back to Wal-Mart and get a replacement or your money back. On the other hand, when I’m being asked to pay upwards of $10,000 for a piece of equipment that I need to perform for many years, one that will require tech support and replacement parts, I’m not as enthusiastic about buying a machine from an unknown manufacturer with no support network in North America, other than a newly-appointed dealer/distributor. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not opposed to buying equipment made in other countries—there are now plenty of international companies selling innovative, state-of-the-art products. However I find it to be comforting when the company has a familiar name, a track record, an office and support facility in the U.S., and a knowledgeable, English-speaking staff that can help customers when we need help.
When I started writing this review months ago, I had some pretty strong feelings as to who the winners were going to be, but as time passed, I have to admit, I’ve changed my mind at least a hundred times. The reason this article has taken so long to write isn’t because of my procrastination, it’s been because every time I contact a distributor, they have a new batch of machines. Although this might seem like a good thing, I’m not sure it is. In fact, it makes me very nervous. It means whatever I buy today might be obsolete before I get it out of the box! When talking about $10,000 or more, I want the manufacturer to really think things through before they put their machine on the market. I’m not sure that is what has taken place with the emerging technology. So, is it time to run out and buy one of those super hot new direct-to-something printers? For most of us, probably not. They’re still pricey and it will be difficult for most of us to justify or recoup the investment. For some, however, those who have a well-established shirt business especially, the question might be more of, “How do I maintain my edge over the competition?” than it is about recouping the investment. For those, and for the business that caters to people who need a wide variety of highly personalized products on a wide variety of soft and hard substrates, it may be worth being on the cutting edge. Certainly, the technology has come a long way in a very short time. Is direct print the way of the future? Without a doubt! In time, I foresee direct printing taking over all of the short-run applications for both hard and soft substrates. How long that will take, is anyone’s guess. It certainly won’t be done in a year, but in three to five years? Who knows. In any case, it’s certainly worth watching, especially if you plan to invest in any kind of color application technology in the near future.
|
