TSB

screen printing => Equipment => Topic started by: Maxie on January 24, 2019, 02:04:42 PM

Title: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Maxie on January 24, 2019, 02:04:42 PM
Finally after many years of debating the pros and cons and mainly the financial side I am getting a Douthitt C30.
I booked a ticket to Detroit today and will fly over next week, go to the CTS seminar at MEG and then to Detroit to learn the ins and outs of the machine.
I don't have any service here so will have to be handy and rely on remote back up.
I am looking forward to not having to hassle with a Epson.
Get great screens, fast set up and not have to file film.
Quite exited about this purchase.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Alex M on January 24, 2019, 02:08:00 PM
Congrats! CTS is a life changer for sure!
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on January 24, 2019, 02:37:58 PM
You won't regret it.  We've been running ours for about 3 months and LOVE it.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: GKitson on January 24, 2019, 03:49:30 PM
Maxie,

Looking forward to your visit.  You will need to bring the big bottle of aspirin, we are going pack your head with details at the CTS Workflow Workshop at MEG.

See you soon,

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on January 24, 2019, 04:43:42 PM
Once you go Wax you never go back, you made a very smart decision Maxie. After reading all  the heart aches from ink jet peps you will be smiling ear to ear. I own the other wax machine which is very similar and is truly plug and play, game changer for certain.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: GaryG on January 24, 2019, 10:13:43 PM
I remember being at the Douthitt factory about 25 years ago. Neat place downtown. Try to hit a nice restaurant when in Detroit, or make them take you of course. There are some nice digs they will know of down by the water.

A company I worked for back then got one of those mammoth DMZ exposure units that you can walk into.  :o
Then it went for nothing when the company was auctioned off.  :'(

Congrats !
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 10, 2019, 11:28:13 AM
I know I am dredging this topic up, but we run the Douthitt here and on a job that we've printed for the last 3-4 years the Douthitt held way more detail.

I have to go back into the file to eliminate a faint clipping area around a part of the art.  The previous inkjet DTS didn't hold that detail at all.  We are doing work that I previously don't think I would have attempted.  We are trying to keep Dan busy with our seps.

There are some quirks with the machine vs. inkjet, but i think it was money well spent around here.  Our screens haven't looked this good since forever.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Doug S on June 10, 2019, 11:48:48 AM
I know I am dredging this topic up, but we run the Douthitt here and on a job that we've printed for the last 3-4 years the Douthitt held way more detail.

I have to go back into the file to eliminate a faint clipping area around a part of the art.  The previous inkjet DTS didn't hold that detail at all.  We are doing work that I previously don't think I would have attempted.  We are trying to keep Dan busy with our seps.

There are some quirks with the machine vs. inkjet, but i think it was money well spent around here.  Our screens haven't looked this good since forever.
If you don't mind, can you share some of the quirks?  I was thinking when I can't repair the rocket launcher any longer, I was thinking of going to wax.  1 thing I was thinking of is do you have to worry about clogs as much as you do with ink?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: ericheartsu on June 10, 2019, 12:01:56 PM
Weve been beta testing a wax unit for a month or so now, and it's frankly faster and holds a bit more detail than our i-image. The I-image is still fantastic though, especially with curves dialed in correctly.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 10, 2019, 12:59:08 PM
I know I am dredging this topic up, but we run the Douthitt here and on a job that we've printed for the last 3-4 years the Douthitt held way more detail.

I have to go back into the file to eliminate a faint clipping area around a part of the art.  The previous inkjet DTS didn't hold that detail at all.  We are doing work that I previously don't think I would have attempted.  We are trying to keep Dan busy with our seps.

There are some quirks with the machine vs. inkjet, but i think it was money well spent around here.  Our screens haven't looked this good since forever.
If you don't mind, can you share some of the quirks?  I was thinking when I can't repair the rocket launcher any longer, I was thinking of going to wax.  1 thing I was thinking of is do you have to worry about clogs as much as you do with ink?

Nozzle clogs aren't bad.  And even with a single nozzle clog, you can get away with running the screen.  I am very impatient, so waiting 90 minutes for the printer to warm up is annoying.  Even from standby mode it's about 25 minutes.  The inkjets are nice because you can print almost immediately.

I have had some ink dripping issues(a couple times) and we have a vacuum leak that we can't quite trace.  It prevents us from printing for about 30 seconds while the vacuum builds back up.  Most of the time the issues are solved with a reboot of the system. 

I also don't like the actual software that send the designs to the printer.  It isn't as smooth as the RIP from M&R on the i-image.  That may have changed though.  I do like proofing the prints in their ink colors, especially since the names of the files get cut off, so sometimes on longer file names we rename them so you can see the pms color in the filename.

I will take all of these issues though over the inkjet.  Our screens are getting a much better exposure now since the wax is so dense.  We had problems before cutting through the ink and partially exposing the emulsion behind the ink.

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 10, 2019, 01:08:34 PM

[/quote]
, so waiting 90 minutes for the printer to warm up is annoying.  Even from standby mode it's about 25 minutes.
[/quote]

Are you Doughit? I am Exile which I have programed to auto warm up at 5am so when I get in @ 6 all i do is purge and I am good to go for the day.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 10, 2019, 01:52:54 PM

, so waiting 90 minutes for the printer to warm up is annoying.  Even from standby mode it's about 25 minutes.
[/quote]

Are you Doughit? I am Exile which I have programed to auto warm up at 5am so when I get in @ 6 all i do is purge and I am good to go for the day.
[/quote]

I can do that, but we don't print everyday.  We try and group our screen runs into larger runs.  We only average 10-15 screens a day in setups.  We'll have one guy spend 1/2 a day in the screen room to run off all the screens we need for the next few days or even the week.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 10, 2019, 02:08:32 PM
IMO these machines like to run, we warm up to temp and purge everyday even if we have nothing to image.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: jsheridan on June 10, 2019, 06:04:21 PM
The biggest tip with the Douthit machines is to only add HALF a block of wax at a time.

We leave ours on and in standby from 4pm to 7am and over the weekend.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 11, 2019, 08:59:41 AM
The biggest tip with the Douthit machines is to only add HALF a block of wax at a time.

We leave ours on and in standby from 4pm to 7am and over the weekend.

Why only half a block?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on June 11, 2019, 11:50:51 AM
The biggest tip with the Douthit machines is to only add HALF a block of wax at a time.

We leave ours on and in standby from 4pm to 7am and over the weekend.

Why only half a block?

Gravity?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on June 11, 2019, 03:12:35 PM
John!! We are all wondering? Why the half?  thansk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: zanegun08 on June 11, 2019, 04:03:09 PM
Probably if you put a full one in, and run the machine it can slosh ink out of the reservoir it melts in.

We cut ours into smaller pieces as well when putting in more ink to avoid spills.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: jsheridan on June 11, 2019, 05:50:01 PM
The full block is to much for the reservoir and is a cause of the top vacuum line getting clogged.

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: BRGtshirts on June 12, 2019, 08:55:56 AM
Congrats on the Douthitt! It really is a game changer.

regarding half a block, we have always waited until we get the yellow 'add more' wax bar. We'll still run screens for a bit, and then throw in a full bar. We have run into clogged top vacuum line in the past but thought that was more a temperature issue.

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: BP on June 12, 2019, 09:08:58 AM
What is the cost per screen with a wax jet?

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 12, 2019, 09:17:58 AM
What is the cost per screen with a wax jet?

inconsequential. maybe a few cents.  if you are looking at not buying film as the money saver, you are looking at the wrong thing.  The real time saver comes from the labor savings.  The workflow for us now is as follows: Douthitt>exposure>rinse>dry>press.  We have cut out at least half of our screen handling and setup times.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: shaneds on June 12, 2019, 09:23:35 AM
The biggest tip with the Douthit machines is to only add HALF a block of wax at a time.

We leave ours on and in standby from 4pm to 7am and over the weekend.

+1 - if you add the full block it clogs the P1 hose. We go a 1/4 block at a time even.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 12, 2019, 10:36:34 AM
What is the cost per screen with a wax jet?

inconsequential. maybe a few cents.  if you are looking at not buying film as the money saver, you are looking at the wrong thing.  The real time saver comes from the labor savings.  The workflow for us now is as follows: Douthitt>exposure>rinse>dry>press.  We have cut out at least half of our screen handling and setup times.

THIS
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Maxie on June 13, 2019, 06:05:27 AM
The instructions I got from Douthitt is that using the measuring stick, the bottom mark should be 1" and top mark 2".
Not sure what this means in blocks of wax but you should be able to add a single block of wax.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: markdhl on June 13, 2019, 06:41:14 AM
 if you are looking at not buying film as the money saver, you are looking at the wrong thing.  The real time saver comes from the labor savings.  The workflow for us now is as follows: Douthitt>exposure>rinse>dry>press.  We have cut out at least half of our screen handling and setup times

The above post is the reason to switch and the added quality and density is the bonus.  Yes, wax consumable is a lot less then film or vellum but as stated not the main reason to switch.  Screen handling and PRESS set up times!

Mark Diehl
Douthitt Corporation
313 515 8635
mark@douthittcorp.com
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on June 13, 2019, 07:00:20 AM
Yeah I read somewhere that the replacement head cost is like $4k and should last like 20k screens. That’s about the same consumable cost as film.

So the savings are alllll in time, labour, and headaches.

Thinking we will add wax CTS before a 2nd auto! Just need to figure it out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: brandon on June 13, 2019, 07:36:17 AM
Yeah I read somewhere that the replacement head cost is like $4k and should last like 20k screens. That’s about the same consumable cost as film.

So the savings are alllll in time, labour, and headaches.

Thinking we will add wax CTS before a 2nd auto! Just need to figure it out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, get CTS before second auto. You do not want double the film!!! Trust me.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on June 13, 2019, 07:53:27 AM
Yes, get CTS before second auto. You do not want double the film!!! Trust me.

That’s a great way to look at it.

Main thing holding our current machine back is still setups. I dunno what I’m waiting for the payment would be like $800 a month pretty sure.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 13, 2019, 09:00:47 AM
Yes, get CTS before second auto. You do not want double the film!!! Trust me.

That’s a great way to look at it.

Main thing holding our current machine back is still setups. I dunno what I’m waiting for the payment would be like $800 a month pretty sure.

Our payment is right around $1k, I financed it for 4 years and plunked a decent down payment on it.  It's worth it.  We only run 1 auto, and I doubt we will ever add a second.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on June 18, 2019, 11:31:54 AM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: zanegun08 on June 18, 2019, 12:26:04 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 18, 2019, 12:37:27 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons

^^^^This.  Having used both wax and ink, I can say that I seriously doubt I would ever go back to ink.  There would have to be a pretty major advancement in ink to make me even think about it. 
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 18, 2019, 01:17:49 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons

WORD
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: brandon on June 18, 2019, 02:04:32 PM
Ha. Apparently we have another ink coming out called Kara for the CTS. To be fair the machines are "ink pissers" as a work friend says but yeah, in the future we will probably just go laser if not then wax. It just seems to make more sense. I don't think the ink ones are bad but it is just the nature of ink
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Orion on June 18, 2019, 02:43:23 PM
The level of ink in the reservoir is determined by temperature. As the reservoir empties the temperature rises. At a set point the operator is prompted to add wax. If that set point is too low and you add wax you will get an overflow. Speak with a tech about this to change the set point. The print head also has an internal reservoir. The set point on this is when the head calls on the ink pump to replenish the supply. Set it too low and the reservoir will overflow causing the meniscus vacuum line to clog. That in turn allows the head to weep ink. I have been running a Kiwo I-jet for 9 years now and almost all of the trouble shooting is done by looking at temperature and vacuum pressure data.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on June 18, 2019, 03:45:17 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons

No one was COMPARING the 2 units . So Really what should have been discussed it when do you add more wax and why. I happen to like the I-IMAGE but everyone is different. Its all about how efficient is it making you, Has your quality improved and is your bottom line better not arguing who has the biggest toys. There are some young screen printers out there buying things they don't need because the read things on this forum. Just sayin
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 18, 2019, 03:50:56 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons

No one was COMPARING the 2 units . So Really what should have been discussed it when do you add more wax and why. I happen to like the I-IMAGE but everyone is different. Its all about how efficient is it making you, Has your quality improved and is your bottom line better not arguing who has the biggest toys. There are some young screen printers out there buying things they don't need because the read things on this forum. Just sayin

I think what kicked it off was your verbiage.  Mainly just the word comical.  It comes off as condescending, which makes people feel attacked and then the need to defend themselves and the decisions that they've made. 
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 18, 2019, 04:36:00 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.



Rick have you had a wax machine in any shop you worked in?
On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons

No one was COMPARING the 2 units . So Really what should have been discussed it when do you add more wax and why. I happen to like the I-IMAGE but everyone is different. Its all about how efficient is it making you, Has your quality improved and is your bottom line better not arguing who has the biggest toys. There are some young screen printers out there buying things they don't need because the read things on this forum. Just sayin
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on June 18, 2019, 05:28:06 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons

No one was COMPARING the 2 units . So Really what should have been discussed it when do you add more wax and why. I happen to like the I-IMAGE but everyone is different. Its all about how efficient is it making you, Has your quality improved and is your bottom line better not arguing who has the biggest toys. There are some young screen printers out there buying things they don't need because the read things on this forum. Just sayin

I think what kicked it off was your verbiage.  Mainly just the word comical.  It comes off as condescending, which makes people feel attacked and then the need to defend themselves and the decisions that they've made.

It was condesending.because Its always the same people improving whats not broken to like be the biggest and the best. How rediculous to hear my 35k douthit screen cts doesnt work correctly untl that person ordered one, made the mods and now everyone elses should work now that person posted. then others have all of a sudden been doing the same to make there units work.  Maybe im just getting cynical and need to back off this forum for a while.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 18, 2019, 05:58:49 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons


Since we have come to comparing, I'll say this.
I have the opportunity to choose to buy a brand new top of the line WAX DTS, a new I-Image STEll, or a used 3 yr old i-Image STEll.  I'm going used. It's as good as the new. They are tanks and I can operate them with no issues with any one of the ink types.  That's just me.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on June 18, 2019, 06:34:18 PM
yea but you wont have the bragging rights to the fact that you can hold a 2 percenter. Even though you may not even print halftones.. Yep they are on here.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: zanegun08 on June 18, 2019, 06:47:39 PM
How rediculous to hear my 35k douthit screen cts doesnt work correctly untl that person ordered one, made the mods and now everyone elses should work now that person posted. then others have all of a sudden been doing the same to make there units work.  Maybe im just getting cynical and need to back off this forum for a while.

If you paid 35k for a Douthitt you got a smoking deal, I believe you are looking more in the high 50's.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 18, 2019, 07:04:49 PM
[
I have the opportunity to choose to buy a brand new top of the line WAX DTS, a new I-Image STEll, or a used 3 yr old i-Image STEll.  I'm going used. It's as good as the new. They are tanks and I can operate them with no issues with any one of the ink types.

Dan Have you worked in a shop that has a wax machine, have you personally experienced a side by side test of wax vs. ink?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 18, 2019, 08:22:20 PM
[
I have the opportunity to choose to buy a brand new top of the line WAX DTS, a new I-Image STEll, or a used 3 yr old i-Image STEll.  I'm going used. It's as good as the new. They are tanks and I can operate them with no issues with any one of the ink types.

Dan Have you worked in a shop that has a wax machine, have you personally experienced a side by side test of wax vs. ink?

Yes.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Maxie on June 19, 2019, 04:26:41 AM
Guys lets keep this friendly.
I contacted Douthitt and they say you can add a block, best not to overfill and to check using a dip stick.
(If you lift the cover there is a hole to put it in).
2" is full, 1" can add.
As for which to use, I went with the Douthitt because I heard great things about there service and since I now have one I can vouch for this,
and if you read the posts over the years there has been so much discussion about which dye to use on the I Image and problems with the different options.
I played it safe.     
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 19, 2019, 10:23:30 AM
Guys lets keep this friendly.
I contacted Douthitt and they say you can add a block, best not to overfill and to check using a dip stick.
(If you lift the cover there is a hole to put it in).
2" is full, 1" can add.
As for which to use, I went with the Douthitt because I heard great things about there service and since I now have one I can vouch for this,
and if you read the posts over the years there has been so much discussion about which dye to use on the I Image and problems with the different options.
I played it safe.     


I don't have a problem with either machine or imaging type. Wax or ink. I'd used either.  We all also know that there is nothing wrong with Douthit or M&R.  Both good. Both good service.
Both will eventually have issues. (all machines do).  If you haven't had any issues, you will know soon enough, but isn't it great that you haven't so far? But that's not to say that when you do have an issue, that it's to be considered crap now or inferior to the other brand. It's just not the case. Again, they both will have issues pop up.   One reason you don't get to read all of the issues a wax machine has had over the years (long before M&R even made them is because there just aren't that many out there comparatively. It used to be, only the big shops had them and most big shops don't post. And I know first hand, the issue shops had with wax (in the past). They are not the same as yesterdays Wax printers but they will and do still come with some issues that comes with using wax versus wet ink.  Wet ink has it's own issues.


What you all choose is your own business and you have your own specific reasons. It's not right or wrong, just yours.


For me, I'm going to choose a used I-Image.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: 3Deep on June 19, 2019, 10:37:53 AM
I'm still using film and a 3000/1430, somebody got to keep the film guys in business ;D
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: DannyGruninger on June 19, 2019, 02:28:32 PM
Dan, are you starting a new shop or did I miss some news? Last I remember you were hired to do art/seps for that shop tony went to that had all brand new equipment? Just curious

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: T Shirt Farmer on June 19, 2019, 02:44:49 PM
 ;)
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 19, 2019, 04:51:26 PM
Dan, are you starting a new shop or did I miss some news? Last I remember you were hired to do art/seps for that shop tony went to that had all brand new equipment? Just curious


Yes. Have moved on to new opportunities.  I wear many hats, so no title, but I'm in the drivers seat.  Currently in house, a 6 clr manual, an old 6 clr auto,  an new 18 clr auto,  An Epson F2000 DTG, a Kornit Storm ll, (upgrading to HD6), three dryers including our EcoTex for the DTG.


On order we have (2) 14 clrs, an Auto coater, An Eco-Rince, an I-Image STEll   It's coming together.


to add to that, rather than make another post, I'll mention tho, there was nothing wrong with my last job. It will be great for the right person. It was a good job, reliable and safe but I didn't see myself retiring from there. This move was intended to be closer to family. It just so happens that this fell in my lap at the right time in the town where most of my family already resides. It also comes with more responsibility and opportunities. I do art/seps, sales, process improvement, quality control, and new business development. We have three buildings but combining/planning is in the process.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Rockers on June 19, 2019, 08:10:50 PM
I think its comical how people think they have to change a standard set up like the amount of wax put in a machine. Don't you guys think if it was a REAL problem that the Doutthit Corp. would have made the modification to half of the amount of wax?  Just sayin

It has to do with adding wax before you really need to be.  It's like adding a full tank of gas to a car when it's on half a tank.

On the flip side, it's comical how many ink types ink jets have had to have developed to work properly, and how you may have to change emulsions for it to work properly.

Wax sticks to everything out there, is more opaque, and works great and we are using the same wax that has worked forever.  Having to cut a block of wax in half is a small trade off, everything has it's pros and cons
Did EXILE contact you already and offer you to change to their new wax?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: brandon on June 19, 2019, 09:56:29 PM
Dan! Congratulations that's awesome. Super happy for you man!
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: BP on June 20, 2019, 07:06:15 AM
There is a lot of good info on the thread. I am jumping in with both feet. I am liking wax but not sure about service? So with wax or ink who has had a bad time with parts or service????

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 20, 2019, 08:25:25 AM
I hear great things about Douthit and their sales contact Mark Diel (Spelling) who post here now and then.  Wet ink, (M&R) is also known for great service.  You can get some stories of not such a great experience here and there from both. Out of that, they are both tops in their field of service.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on June 20, 2019, 08:29:22 AM
I hear great things about Douthit and their sales contact Mark Diel (Spelling) who post here now and then.  Wet ink, (M&R) is also known for great service.  You can get some stories of not such a great experience here and there from both. Out of that, they are both tops in their field of service.

I would agree with that statement 100%.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: BP on June 20, 2019, 11:42:32 AM
Dan, I heard that Douthitt service is good. And We are a blue shop and have worked with them for the past 30 years. I have a number for Mark at Douthitt.

Thanks!
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 20, 2019, 01:54:04 PM
Dan! Congratulations that's awesome. Super happy for you man!


Thanks!  I'm still learning as I go. I didn't intend on making a public announcement about it, but it's no secret either. LOL.  I informed my move to my partners here before I made the move just to keep them in the loop.
Then of course Tony P knew and one other on the board here.

Never really took a shop from where it's at to new levels (in various areas on my own. I've mostly just built up the art/seps part.  We have another guy here that helps with everything on a management level, but he's new to the industry and more of the main sales person. I do sales also, but more to specific areas if business and whatever local stuff I come across.

We do some contract printing and some custom. I am more focusing on building the contract printing and the retail end for supplying retail locations with our designs.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Maxie on June 20, 2019, 01:59:50 PM
I checked with Mark Diehl at Douthitt, he said that the best way to measure the wax level is with a dip stick.
Low level is 1" and full 2".
As you see in the attached picture that's pretty accurate, the ink low warning started flashing I checked, it was 1".
I put a full block of wax into the unit and checked again 2".
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 20, 2019, 04:08:06 PM
Is that stick part of the items that come with the printer or can you use any type of stick?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Maxie on June 20, 2019, 10:16:49 PM
I took a electric wire and stripped the plastic off, it’s about 5 “ long.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on June 28, 2019, 05:25:05 PM
There are some young screen printers out there buying things they don't need because the read things on this forum. Just sayin

I’m pullin’ the trigger on wax!
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on June 28, 2019, 05:59:54 PM
There are some young screen printers out there buying things they don't need because the read things on this forum. Just sayin

I’m pullin’ the trigger on wax!

see. I knew it. lol 
Title: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on June 29, 2019, 11:23:51 AM
The forums is one of the only resources a lot of printers have. I learned recently our biggest competitor here doesn’t even know that a replacement for film exists.

What I’d appreciate is actual insight. I’m choosing wax based on what I’ve read from people who use it. I’ve read about the benefits from shops, not sales reps.

If you think ink is better then tell us why instead of acting like young people are making blind decisions.

Here’s what I understand and how I am making my choice:

- higher up front cost for wax. Thinking this off offset by some factors below like maintenance.

- there are no used units easily available to me. So a used CTS is not on the table and I’m not an experienced M&R tech ready to mess with an ink one anyway.

- less routine maintenance for wax, like head cleanings and whatnot. Inkjet is generally not fun in our climate, we have like two months of humidity and the rest dry.
Wax has been around a decent chunk of time. How many ink formula changes have we seen for wet ink in that time? I feel like some shops have changed ink systems 3 times. That’s a lot of maintenance for something that was supposed to work with the first version of ink. And second version.

- better image quality from the wax being more dense. I have seen comparison images of ink vs wax dots and the difference is distinct. If this isn’t true and ink dots are just as clean then let’s see a comparison to debunk it.

- wax works on more emulsions. That’s a lot more simple in the long run. One less variable to worry about.

- the footprint. The flat style ink units look huge compared to the vertical ones. So the CT30 is looking good based on size.


But most importantly, shops I respect are swearing by them. Shops that have had both. But the difference is that it comes with logic and reasons why, and comparison photos of the dots.

Anyone I’ve seen harping on about them being a waste or something we don’t ‘need’ can’t seem to explain why. I don’t sign up for the whole ‘what works in one shop might not in another’ mindset.

It’s gotta make screens consistently with minimal human effort. If we want to have a discussion about it we need to remove the big variables like Dan being an M&R tech.

Dan, I’d appreciate your opinion more if you stepped out of your own bubble of experience. Would you still pick a used ink CTS if you weren’t a digital tech for the machines?

Which system produces better imaging quality? Not quality up to a standard, I’m talking better dots side by side.

Which system is more consistent?

Which system has less maintenance?

Because all signs point to wax for those things.

I guess what I’m saying is we should split the conversation into two questions. Which system is better?

And if you didn’t choose that system, what factors did you think weren’t a dealbreaker? For example Dan may not care about wax being more reliable since he is an experienced tech and serviced many ink machines.
And someone else may not give a crap about dots because they don’t do any halftone work.

All I’m saying is I’m reasonable. I’m reading the opinions and the facts. Lots of people saying wax isn’t worth it but not able to articulate why. If you don’t think the hype is real then please help me save tens of thousands of dollars but it needs to come with some substance. Even anecdotal.
Title: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on June 29, 2019, 11:36:07 AM
One reason you don't get to read all of the issues a wax machine has had over the years (long before M&R even made them is because there just aren't that many out there comparatively. It used to be, only the big shops had them and most big shops don't post. And I know first hand, the issue shops had with wax (in the past). They are not the same as yesterdays Wax printers but they will and do still come with some issues that comes with using wax versus wet ink.  Wet ink has it's own issues.

What are those issues with wax then? We have heard the issues with wet many times over. I appreciate your explanation that big shops don’t post. But you post. And you seem to know what issues to watch for with wax. What are they then?



What you all choose is your own business and you have your own specific reasons. It's not right or wrong, just yours.


For me, I'm going to choose a used I-Image.

And this is where I am confused. We all understand this! So take your bias out and your specific reasons. Compare the machines and make your choice. But there’s still a better machine.

We can agree that less maintenance is good. Which has less maintenance in general?

Too many people defending their decisions instead of explaining them.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: markdhl on June 29, 2019, 11:49:32 AM
Well state for so many reasons!!!

I am happy to discuss with anyone and PROVE the difference using their files and their screens however for many they do not do the homework. 

Also, initial cost is about the same. 

Mark Diehl
313 515 8635
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 29, 2019, 11:50:20 AM
Here is my biggest gripe with posti g “why”.   I e posted the why over and over in bits and peace’s (as it has pertains Ed to the topic at ha d. Still, most don’t get it.  So in a bit she’ll, most don’t care about the details and are really only looking at the surface sales key words.

I received an email from Mark with Douthitt. Very professional and simply said “I wished you had gotte. With
E to do side by side comparisons and  pull Richard Grienves in to work with us and we can see.
So I replied to him with my mai. Reason , and the. Started into deta. Many thins I’ve already told people here.   I didn’t get a reply, but I mentioned that there is more and would get back to him later. I’m in the process of moving today. So no time.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: markdhl on June 29, 2019, 11:56:37 AM
Dan,

In my opinion your response had too many wrong assumptions to reply so I was awiting your complete reply. As I stated it is easy for me to show you the differences on your screens and your coating and your files.

Competition is a good thing and i would prefer to talk to people direct and do not want to turn the forum to wax vs ink. 



Mark


 
Title: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on June 29, 2019, 11:58:26 AM
That’s ridiculous Dan. I and many care about the details. You’re just making more generalizations.

I have gone through the forums looking for these bits and pieces. I’ve had my eye on this subject for years.

I have never believed this:

If you don’t have anything nice to say then don’t say anything at all.

But have always believed this:

Don’t write a cheque you can’t cash.

And many on this forums are writing cheques. Why is ink better??? In what ways?

Or are scared to cash that cheque? Today you’re too busy to cash it which is fair.

But, why is is not better, and why did that not matter for YOU?

If you can’t answer that then what is the point of posting? Without actual info you’re going to lead young guys to buy wet ink. I respect your opinion but that’s typically because i see it coming from fact, evidence, experience.

Because right now I don’t understand why you’d take crappier dots!!!

You’re a tech so I understand why you don’t care about constant maintenance and ink flush/changing. You said budget wasn’t a factor so do the dot tones not matter to you or your new shop?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on June 29, 2019, 02:49:21 PM
What I am saying  is,  Wax is great!  Wet ink is great!

Either one you get is a great choice.

The things people say as their reason, (the key selling points) As reasons for one or the other can be argued and needled.  Buts the differences will be splitting hairs. In some cases, literally.

There really are some or (is only one) obvious benefit of wax over wet ink. That is the fact that it’s wax and not affected by environmental changes as is wet ink. But that alone is not (as drastic) of a benefit over wet ink. It “sounds impactful) when you hear of the few that do experience environmental issues, but like I’ve been saying, it’s not everything case. In fact it’s a small portion of the customers of wet ink that experience these issues.

Wax has had its run of changes as well. I know this, because I’ve ran a wax machine and they have had to change it’s chemical makeup many times to improve on its print capabilities. For example, the wax used to not solidify as fast as it does today. Then there were improvements of how well it maintained its solidity once hitting the screen. Back in the day, with wax, you could only run a full 35 LPI on them. 45 was pushing it as you could not hold shadow tone with it. The wax had to be placed so far apart so as not to puddle and run together. It’s s the same case today, but not as bad as it was back then. (They went through a bought of fine tuning their wax).  Sound familiar? And today, as you also do with wet ink, you just over compensate to maintain keeping the dot gain open. This is not new. It’s something everyone should have been doing with film. Like with wax, wet ink or film, many would be surprised at just how many in the industry are just not aware that they can and should be adjusting for dot gain on their output device.

So, It’s a sales persons duty to capitalize on anything they can find to compare their product and/or equipment.  Am I wrong?  So I’m not complaining about how one sells a product. I take issue with and prove my position on everything I say.  The wax ink people will say they can prove theirs also. When we do, you will see that we can both be correct in what we say. You just have to make a choice as to what one (you think) is the best choice for you.  You see, Mark can prove his position and I will prove mine and (for me) when I make the call to put in the order, im going to put my order in based on what’s best for me and my shop at the time of purchase and need. I’m going with wet ink, not because I had worked as a Tech I’m not a “Tech”, I’m more of an artist, printer, shop guy and separator then I had ever been as a tech. I was a Tech for almost 3 yrs. I’m one of the most scrutinizing guys in the apparel business when it comes to the end product. How does it look once on the shirt. So I ask myself, (tech life aside) what machine do I need to get that will do the job that meets my expectations and run every day, and have less consumables?

Some points can be argued, like “consumables and how much you get out of that. I’ve seen people say (well, you gotta buy their ink and it’s 90.00 a late (or whatever it is) and that’s expensive. No, it’s not. I’ve literally ran the wet ink machines myself and averaged .07 cents a print with the average jobs being of 4 colors and 13”wide x 15” tall. Compare that to wax...and the usage may be similar. I don’t know for a fact, but I’ve been told by one wax user that the wax usage and cost is a little higher. Like it consumes a little  more to do the same job (it’s thicker) makes sense. But that comparison is not a deal breaker for me. .07 or .10 don’t matter all that much.

one major factor for comparison (that I haven’t beat down on in the past) is the head life. Yes, wax sales guys will tell you “they’ve improved on that”. I’m sure they have, they had to. It was horrible at how long or “quick” the heads would go bad. The wax heads would go bad so fast  (due to the heat) that some shops were replacing the heads every 4-6 months. They would do this back then, (I sat back then) referring to my previous wax customers running a certain machine that was one of the earliest to be provided. This customer has been thru 3-4 wax machines, upgrading each time.
because the alternative was going back to film. That’s how great the DTS is. People would have rather paid a couple thousand every 6 months than to go back to film.

Was has been a hot topic on here and there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s the key points (wet ink bad) idea that is misinformation.  That’s sales Gimmicks is IMO.  And those that had bought one over the other “stand by their decisions”. If not, they are admitting they made the wrong choice or not the best choice (in their mind) and we can’t have that can we?  I don’t think it’s a bad choice for either.  One is not “drastically “ better than the other. It’s just not, and (for you people), I will now have to prove it. I don’t really care what you buy. It’s your business, your decision. But, I do take issue with the incorrect or exaggerated statements. I don’t work for M&R, and I don’t work for Douthit.

The fact that I have been a tech installing these machines only makes it easier for me to decide to go with wet ink because I’m so familiar with them inside and out. 

I’m going to write a big Cheque soon (prove it) and I happen to be one of the few that can actually cash it.  It’s just a matter of getting the time and paying added expenses I don’t need to, for you all, to prove my side. Why, I donno. You’ll end up making your own choice anyways. Kinda of a waste of time.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: blue moon on June 30, 2019, 05:39:12 PM
We’ve been back to film for a while now and keep trying to figure out why we should fix our CTS. The replacement parts have been here for 6 months and the only reason to fix it has been so we have redundant systems. Our 4800 seems to be producing better screens and it’s easier in the workflow...
Pierre
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: markdhl on July 01, 2019, 05:20:44 AM
Dan's post has nothing to do with Douthitt's wax machines but some other wax machines designs did cause them to go through print heads.  However, Too many areas that are unrelated to Douthitt. TRUE all wax machines are NOT created equal but a bad apple does …… .  Again, for the FACTS on the Douthitt units from the beginning to now, it is best to email me direct at mdhlexp@aol.com or call me 313 515 8635.  Too many "facts" are distorted at least if any are directed at the Douthitt wax unit past or present. 

Pierre is correct that a good film output device and good film can give better quality over an ink jet (he has an old style ink jet) CTS but ink jet film cannot match the quality of the Douthitt wax jet units.  We give much better quality than ink jet film.

Mark Diehl
Douthitt Corporation
313 515 8635
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 09:11:28 AM
I take issue with and prove my position on everything I say.  The wax ink people will say they can prove theirs also. When we do, you will see that we can both be correct in what we say.

One is not “drastically “ better than the other. It’s just not, and (for you people), I will now have to prove it. I don’t really care what you buy. It’s your business, your decision. But, I do take issue with the incorrect or exaggerated statements. I don’t work for M&R, and I don’t work for Douthit.

I’m going to write a big Cheque soon (prove it) and I happen to be one of the few that can actually cash it.  It’s just a matter of getting the time and paying added expenses I don’t need to, for you all, to prove my side. Why, I donno. You’ll end up making your own choice anyways. Kinda of a waste of time.

Any claim being made should be able to be backed up. How can you both be correct about what you say? Are you suggesting you’re both spinning something?

That’s what makes this difficult. You and others make claims but don’t want to prove it. Sounds like Douthitt has offered to cover costs for some testing, why don’t you take them up on that?

That last part though. That’s the weirdest attitude ever. Of course I will make my own decision, but I’ll weigh your opinion. No one can take your opinion seriously though the way it’s been presented here. I’d have to blindly trust comments online, which (I agree with Rick) would be foolish for person of any age to do.

If you think it’s a waste of time to share knowledge then what is the point of these boards? The only reason anyone has any respect for anyone on these boards is the knowledge they share, isn’t it?

I just want info to help me make a decision but am trying to be more confident in the opinions and advice I come across.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 09:12:21 AM
We’ve been back to film for a while now and keep trying to figure out why we should fix our CTS. The replacement parts have been here for 6 months and the only reason to fix it has been so we have redundant systems. Our 4800 seems to be producing better screens and it’s easier in the workflow...
Pierre

Curious about this. Easier in the workflow? A big selling point for CTS is the registration. Were you not seeing the CTS give those registration gains in production?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 01, 2019, 09:56:21 AM
I don’t see anywhere that Mark gd offered to cover any cost at any point on here or in email.
I would be happy to receive a plane ticket to his place for a Saturday. I would want to have all of the testing video recorded and posted. I’m sure any wax printer manufacturer would be confident enough to do so, but (what if) I was able to actually prove on tape, that the comparison of wax really isn’t as great as has been told. Would that company still permit that video to be shown?

To do the comparison, side by side, we could only do one at one location and another vid at another location because no many in the US have both newer machines at the same locations.

There is one. He may or may not chime in. His location would be perfect. And Mark can bring in Richard Grieves and myself if he wishes.

I made my last statement of being a waste of time... (as a waste of “my time” and my money to “prove” anything to anyone that doesn’t want to be proved to. Some of you are so head strong over things that you don’t really see and becomes futile. They’ve proved it time and time again.  So I’ve posted about things and you blew it off. I’ve shown a few pictures and you’ve blown it off. So for me to take much more effort, I get to a point of “you get what you get, and I’ll get what I get”. I don’t need to work hard or fight over any of this to convince anyone. I’m not trying to convince you to buy wax or ink. I really don’t care what you buy. I’m just pointing out what really is, and what is exaggerated. I’ll take any offer tho, to travel to someone’s location for a comparison.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 10:29:27 AM
I made my last statement of being a waste of time... (as a waste of “my time” and my money to “prove” anything to anyone that doesn’t want to be proved to. Some of you are so head strong over things that you don’t really see and becomes futile. They’ve proved it time and time again.  So I’ve posted about things and you blew it off. I’ve shown a few pictures and you’ve blown it off..

Blown what off, Dan? I’ve asked you to link it. I don’t recall the few pictures. Can I see them?

Who’s proved what? All I’ve really seen is a dot comparison where CTS looked like crap, plus the many support threads for wet ink.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 10:47:30 AM
Oops double post.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 01, 2019, 10:50:12 AM
Well I can say day in day out we produce high end graphics 12-14 colors with heavy halftone screens. We produce upwards of 300 screens per day for a lot of retail clients and do it on a I-Image with no issues or downtime. That accounts for something.We do use the original ink.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 10:59:32 AM
Well I can say day in day out we produce high end graphics 12-14 colors with heavy halftone screens. We produce upwards of 300 screens per day for a lot of retail clients and do it on a I-Image with no issues or downtime. That accounts for something.We do use the original ink.

Yes, it does account for something. It’s a strong endorsement for wet ink but says nothing about it compared to wax. Shops can say the same thing about wax.

What I’m interested in is shops that have actually compared and tested both and are willing to share the results. I respect your opinion but taking your last post at face value would be the same as blindly buying wax because another shop said it’s better.

Sure you may not think we ‘need’ it but if equipment is going to sit here for years then I’d like to make sure we’re considering all options for quality, and longevity.

If another machine at a similar cost produced a cleaner dot with less headaches then it’s pretty likely you’d have chosen it at the time. And that’s what I see here, that wax produces better screens with less headaches.

Some are claiming otherwise but examples have only been shown that makes wax look better. Or well, apparently Dan has posted the contrary but I’ve never seen or it been able to find it. Would appreciate a link!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 01, 2019, 11:21:15 AM
I can't compare wax to CTS since we only have had an I image in our shop. We are about 4 months in and as of yet its been absolutely perfect running with no down time ever. What I can say is the improvement in our half tone printing is remarkable, we are able to hold dots we never could before with just a basic inkjet imaging system. I don't bat an eye at the thought of shooting a 65lpi screen when before I would go above 55lpi. The only issue we had to over come from the transition was the room environment. When installed it was still cold and dry so we went through 3 different humidifiers trying to find one that could maintain a decent humidity level, the best we could do was about 35% on full blast but it would drink water to a blown dam. We gave up on that and came up with a simpler solution. We lightly spray a rag with a water bottle and just swipe it across the screen and then print, works perfect every time. Now that its humidity season we do not have even do that anymore.

We did demo a wax many two years ago and it was a fantastic machine, I loved the foot print which was tiny compared to the I image and it was very fast, and what i recall the image quality was fantastic. Regardless the prcing was out reach at that time and with the more affordable I Image S we demoed it, loved it and pulled the trigger.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 01, 2019, 11:42:40 AM
I’ve never claimed wet ink dots look “better”.  What I can prove is that your “pretty dots” mean nothing over a wet ink ugly dot.  That I can prove, but not just yet. I’ve posted picture, but you need to see the proof on the shirt at the end of the video. It’s a “when I get to it”.  If you don’t like that, sorry.

it really comes down to “if you can win awards off of both wet ink and wax ink, is your pretty dot under the loop, an important deciding factor?

It's far more common to have no issues with either machine, than what you have seen with wet ink.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 01, 2019, 12:48:53 PM
Well I can say day in day out we produce high end graphics 12-14 colors with heavy halftone screens. We produce upwards of 300 screens per day for a lot of retail clients and do it on a I-Image with no issues or downtime. That accounts for something.We do use the original ink.

Yes, it does account for something. It’s a strong endorsement for wet ink but says nothing about it compared to wax. Shops can say the same thing about wax.

What I’m interested in is shops that have actually compared and tested both and are willing to share the results. I respect your opinion but taking your last post at face value would be the same as blindly buying wax because another shop said it’s better.

Sure you may not think we ‘need’ it but if equipment is going to sit here for years then I’d like to make sure we’re considering all options for quality, and longevity.

If another machine at a similar cost produced a cleaner dot with less headaches then it’s pretty likely you’d have chosen it at the time. And that’s what I see here, that wax produces better screens with less headaches.

Some are claiming otherwise but examples have only been shown that makes wax look better. Or well, apparently Dan has posted the contrary but I’ve never seen or it been able to find it. Would appreciate a link!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for your input
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 01, 2019, 12:57:55 PM
I really cannot believe their is enough difference between the two machines dot quality to be important. It is already well known from both sides they produce great enough dots to easily cover the most demanding shops. I don't think I ever heard anyone say an Epson film printer is better than a wax or ink DTS. Besides look at the product from someone like Serj, he does that with just a film printer, so if he can do that with film surely that can be done with any reputable CTS machine out there.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 01:02:46 PM
I’ve never claimed wet ink dots look “better”.  What I can prove is that your “pretty dots” mean nothing over a wet ink ugly dot.  That I can prove, but not just yet. I’ve posted picture, but you need to see the proof on the shirt at the end of the video. It’s a “when I get to it”.  If you don’t like that, sorry.

it really comes down to “if you can win awards off of both wet ink and wax ink, is your pretty dot under the loop, an important deciding factor?

I’m far more coming to have no issues with either, than to have one.


I don’t know what you’ve claimed since I’ve never seen it. I don’t have any dots since I haven’t chosen a machine.

Don’t make this about what I like and don’t like. I’m very interested to hear why the dot doesn’t make a difference. It’s literally what I asked earlier. Why would someone take the crappier dot? Because it doesn’t make a difference on a shirt?

Well then if the dots are the same then maybe it comes down to the other factors. Like which achieves those same results with less headaches for a general non-tech operator.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 01, 2019, 01:05:16 PM
I really cannot believe their is enough difference between the two machines dot quality to be important. It is already well known from both sides they produce great enough dots to easily cover the most demanding shops. I don't think I ever heard anyone say an Epson film printer is better than a wax or ink DTS. Besides look at the product from someone like Serj, he does that with just a film printer, so if he can do that with film surely that can be done with any reputable CTS machine out there.

Exactly! So if the dots are the same on a shirt then you’re paying for other factors. Other shops have claimed better quality with the wax though. I just don’t understand why the finally print quality and dot quality gets mentioned if it’s the same on the shirt though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 01, 2019, 01:26:25 PM
I think its all the other variables. You can have perfect dots even the 2 percents but what about squeegie pressure, mesh, deflection, off contact. I think thats the point . We are printing a tshirt is the difference really enough to make the difference either way even in the highest end shops? just sayin...not arguing..
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: BP on July 01, 2019, 01:32:01 PM
Well this is starting to become 2 guys trying to sell some equipment. I have looked at both and have used a I Image in the past. We are a blue shop. but with that said I will go with the wax.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 01, 2019, 01:38:36 PM
I really cannot believe their is enough difference between the two machines dot quality to be important. It is already well known from both sides they produce great enough dots to easily cover the most demanding shops. I don't think I ever heard anyone say an Epson film printer is better than a wax or ink DTS. Besides look at the product from someone like Serj, he does that with just a film printer, so if he can do that with film surely that can be done with any reputable CTS machine out there.

Exactly! So if the dots are the same on a shirt then you’re paying for other factors. Other shops have claimed better quality with the wax though. I just don’t understand why the finally print quality and dot quality gets mentioned if it’s the same on the shirt though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely the dot quality was not part of the equation when we pulled the trigger. It came down more to cost. We found the cost of the I image s coupled with a very reputable and trustworthy company made the decision for us. Would I have liked the wax instead? Probably, the foot print being a major reason and some other small things. Regardless I do not feel like I am missing out on anything by have an I Image S versus the wax machine.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: 3Deep on July 01, 2019, 02:33:46 PM
You guys kill me, every year something new comes out or something that's been out for years is debated on, and in most cases the tried and true method wins out.  I can see were wax would save money in the long run and inkjet printers over using film, and yes both might even do a better screen with more detail than film, but how does that relate to the customer?  better looking prints bring more profit? can you tell a big difference in prints or is it just a step that helps speed up production.  Either way this is a good thread for people looking into wax vs inkjet machines.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 01, 2019, 03:26:27 PM
You guys kill me, every year something new comes out or something that's been out for years is debated on, and in most cases the tried and true method wins out.  I can see were wax would save money in the long run and inkjet printers over using film, and yes both might even do a better screen with more detail than film, but how does that relate to the customer?  better looking prints bring more profit? can you tell a big difference in prints or is it just a step that helps speed up production.  Either way this is a good thread for people looking into wax vs inkjet machines.

It is mostly for increased speed, trashing the need for films, and even better registration than just the tri loc. But the increase in halftone quality does have me taking more chances on screens than I used to and that has already proved an improvement enough in ability to land a good customer. The customer seen some work we did  and was blown away at the halftone quality and was struggling with his current printer, he started sending his work to us.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: markdhl on July 01, 2019, 03:36:21 PM
I can see why some I respected the most have left this forum.  I will state that ink jet cts is not as good as a good ink jet film device.  That is not true with our wax jet …. quality goes way up.  Registration advantages on press should be applicable to both.  Again, anyone that wants to compare we do that anytime on their screens and their artwork. YES, we video and yes that can be shared.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Frog on July 01, 2019, 04:26:50 PM
I can see why some I respected the most have left this forum.  I will state that ink jet cts is not as good as a good ink jet film device.  That is not true with our wax jet …. quality goes way up.  Registration advantages on press should be applicable to both.  Again, anyone that wants to compare we do that anytime on their screens and their artwork. YES, we video and yes that can be shared.

In the past, I have seen folks leave forums when they thought that the management discriminated against a specific manufacturer.
I've seen others leave when their feelings were hurt. I suggest that only those with somewhat thicker skin get into the "Ford vs Chevy vs MoPar type discussions.
I know of at least one who left here because I discougaged posts that got argumentative, or nasty. He liked it spicy!
I don't think that this thread has reached that level yet, but who knows? Maybe he'll return!  ???
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: 3Deep on July 01, 2019, 04:30:13 PM
You guys kill me, every year something new comes out or something that's been out for years is debated on, and in most cases the tried and true method wins out.  I can see were wax would save money in the long run and inkjet printers over using film, and yes both might even do a better screen with more detail than film, but how does that relate to the customer?  better looking prints bring more profit? can you tell a big difference in prints or is it just a step that helps speed up production.  Either way this is a good thread for people looking into wax vs inkjet machines.

It is mostly for increased speed, trashing the need for films, and even better registration than just the tri loc. But the increase in halftone quality does have me taking more chances on screens than I used to and that has already proved an improvement enough in ability to land a good customer. The customer seen some work we did  and was blown away at the halftone quality and was struggling with his current printer, he started sending his work to us.

Your answer is what most people are looking for, real world and it makes a difference when you spend a good piece of change on equipment.  Like I said before good thread and info for whomever is looking into buying either machine.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 01, 2019, 07:59:02 PM
I can see why some I respected the most have left this forum.  I will state that ink jet cts is not as good as a good ink jet film device.  That is not true with our wax jet …. quality goes way up.  Registration advantages on press should be applicable to both.  Again, anyone that wants to compare we do that anytime on their screens and their artwork. YES, we video and yes that can be shared.



Some people leave for many different reasons. One big one is getting but hurt when they don't like what they read. But hey, It wasn't you. I was asked by a potential wax customer to provide some proof of my comments. My comments were not bad mouthing wax or your product. Kinda odd that you take offence. It was more to say, why I stand by my choice.  If given the opportunity, I'd run a wax machine any day. If I ahve to buy one, I'd have to really consider what the end results is going to be and how that impacts my sales or by budget for the year.

The post came out. Someone questioned my comments and suggested I prove what I say. Well, no biggie. You feel you're 100% correct, and so do I.


RE: inkjet DTS not being as good as film, Well, that's your opinion. It is mechanically as good.  There is a difference of course. Film printers are physically printing much closer to the substrate, while DTS machines ahve to accommodate for screen and emulsion thickness. Thus, a little further way fro substrate. This then, changes up the direct accuracy of the imaging. (same as wax DTS).  Your wax output is done quite differently and is clumpier for the lack of a better word. Thicker, more solid in content. So obviously, it would make sense that it is "more opaque" than wet ink. Wet ink is covered in "passes".  1 pass for example, is (lets call it paper thin). Then another layer is thicker, more opauqe, but not usable. So we have 6, 12, 14, 16, 18, and up to 24 passes with wet ink. 

How much more opaque...and how much that makes a difference is the question?  So, we all know there is a certain Dmax we need for burning good screens that is 3.0.  It's said that, 6.0 is a solid black or as black as you can get.  Wet ink, at default printing (12 pass, high speed, bi directional, puts out 4.3 - 4.8 Dmax.  Lets even say that my memopry is off and it's 3.4-3.8. This, is still of no concern. This, I know, since I've personally tested using a densitomitor with one of the industry's leading film and color separation providers in the US.  So, if 6.0 is solid black, and wet ink produces 4.3 - 4.8, then the opacity of wet ink is obviously good to go. Well above 3.0   So, it's been said that WAX is more opaque than Wet ink. It must be then, that the wax is above a even a 3.8.  That, I don't doubt it. This is where Mark is correct is saying "It's more opaque".  Ok. It's the sales statement that "wax being more opaque than wet ink, (as an important factor) to mention that gets me.  "It's in the details". Like how opaque is opaque?  It can be more opaque, but how much more higher than 3.4-or 4.3 wet ink is really needed?  It's in a list to point out as one output method over another to use as a tool for comparing...but actually means little to nothing in production (between the two).  Follow?


So again, you feel you are 100% correct, and you are.  but so am I.   If this kind of information makes you want to leave the forum, then I donno how best to provide the information that would make it more comfortable.




http://www.screenweb.com/content/densitometry-your-guide-print-quality-0#.XRqbrOhKguU (http://www.screenweb.com/content/densitometry-your-guide-print-quality-0#.XRqbrOhKguU)
" The Dmax value represents image density. It is equal to the maximum density that a particular film positive material will provide, whether the positive is produced photographically or from a digital device such as a laser printer or thermal imagesetter. When selecting a densitometer, the higher the Dmax value the gauge is capable of measuring, the better. A value of 6.0 is ideal.
[/size][/color]For screen printing, the film's Dmax should be 3.0 or higher. As the Dmax drops below 3.0, light will be transmitted through the image areas, progressively hardening the emulsion in areas of the stencil that should remain clear, which will make it difficult to process the image accurately. After you wash out the "fogged" image area, you may end up with poorly developed fine lines or jagged stencil edges. In relation to half-tone dots, low Dmax could also contribute to moiré".[/font]
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: DannyGruninger on July 02, 2019, 12:58:45 AM
I feel after running 6 different "cts" machines consisting of wax, laser,  and ink systems, I've had enough real world production to see all the nuances with each. For the last several years the shop has made between 60-200 screens a day depending on what we were doing that given shift. Starting with a single head lawson cts, then upgrading to a multi head in jet model, followed by an m&r I Image multi head ste, then by a machine similar to the newest kiwo xts Xerox wax machine, and lastly what we are currently using the douthitt. We also tested the saati laser unit a couple different times for months at a time, and have recently been approached by some other manf. to test future cts machines coming out. I'll start by saying from personal experience using all of those given machines above I would have no problem endorsing any of them as from my personal experience overall with each of those machines we had greatly positive experiences. Awards and really great prints were done with all of those machines, they all had positive ROI's for us and if I had to use any of them tomorrow I could make it work for us. Now do some machines provide in my eyes provide upside to others?(depending on your shop) Absolutely and overall for the shop we currently are I couldn't see us moving away from the wax systems we've run and are running now for  a couple reasons.

1. IMO the ink jet based systems are what I consider more of a printer where the wax machine is more of a cnc style machine built for hard production. Don't get me wrong, our I image had hundreds of thousands of prints with virtually zero issues or downtime but it takes more detailed skilled trained operators to really extend the life of the ink jet machines. The same I image we had I knew of several others with issues and each time I showed up at the shop it was clear because the operators would treat the machine pretty terrible. The wax machines sitting next to the I images were running and beat to hell but still running and it was clear they were more robust and could withstand more abuse. Not to mention when we did have to work on the ink jet cts machines we had it was always intimidating dealing with the replacement of heads, boards, filters, clogged air lines, etc.

2. Climate - the wax machine doesn't give two shits what the climate really is in your shop where with the ink jet cts machines you better have your environment exactly where the manf wants it or else that will always be the first excuse if there's a potential issue. We had to replace what I would consider some regular items on the ink jet machines that before needing replaced would start to show small issues in certain prints or processing jobs and anytime we would ask for trouble shooting thats the first goto which I find a bit of a downside of ink machines. Our wax machines do not care if its 5% or 99% humidity in our shop, it images the screens the same each time which during certain days we did see differences in our ink made screens. I've seen firsthand the environment, weather, emulsion, surface tension, etc play a large role in how inkjet cts images a screen where I've never seen it make a difference for our wax machines.

I've had to replace parts including heads, mother boards, and tons of other stuff on all styles of these machines and the current wax machines are built so much more friendly to work on in the field its imo a big difference. You can replace a head assembly, calibrate and be up and running within 20 minutes on a wax machine where unless your doing it all the time with a ink jet your down for hours replacing, priming, calibrating, etc so for shops that don't have backups but have parts its a great piece of mind. Whenever our inkjet needed us to work on it I felt like we were on the phone with the techs or having to have a tech fly in where with wax machines we've never experienced that so overall I'm a big fan of cts in general but for myself and what I've experienced wax has the upper edge in my shop. Maybe not your shop but here wax is the winner winner chicken dinner. I always had great support from m&r with our machine but I've had even better support from douthitt which I felt would be hard for them to do. I could be here all night on these cts topics so I'll before it gets too late and chime back if anyone cares to ask anything specific.


Danny

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 09:33:06 AM
Danny,


That's a good detailed post. Thanks! Doesn't mean much to CBCB because you have to "prove it" and not just say it.  Ribb'n CBCB. ;)


I agree with and support everything you said about the I-Image. Still, knowing all of that, (as I stated), for me and my needs and knowing what I know, I will buy the used I-image 3 hd STEll over a new I-Image or a Wax machine.  I've never said anyone should buy this or that unlike some may start to think. I've always just said I have to make that decision myself here soon, and I will be getting a used I-Image. You'd of thought I said something wrong or "bad".


I don't know about needing "skilled" operators. Great and probably better to have skilled peopl eon there, but it's that the case with anything. I know many that have brought someone in just to run the I-Image with no screen print or print production experience at all. As long as you follow direction, you're golden. The maintenance, as you know is child's play, but you just need to do it on schedule.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 09:35:11 AM
P.S.

This thread may get split into two post, so as to keep the original intent on topic. I helped derail this one.  No harm, just a little too far off from the original post I think.  I'll have to go back farther and confer with Frog.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 02, 2019, 10:41:22 AM
this was sent to me last night by a wax machine user.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: mk162 on July 02, 2019, 11:43:19 AM
Rick, any idea of the lpi on that?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 12:15:58 PM
this was sent to me last night by a wax machine user.


Looks like wet ink.  You sure it's wax, edges are rough.  We';ve been reading that wax has smooth rounder edges.  I've seen some other wax dots blown up, but those where smoother edges yet meteorite shaped or irregular as apposed to round. Yet still smooth edged.


This seems to be in the area of 35lpi at 70% halftone based on the threads (unless that's like a 355 mesh lol. Looks more like wet ink with "Speckled edges on the dots".  Guessing, but if the sender says it's wax, I have no place to question that.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 02, 2019, 12:19:42 PM
Danny,


That's a good detailed post. Thanks! Doesn't mean much to CBCB because you have to "prove it" and not just say it.  Ribb'n CBCB. ;)

I can take a ribbing better than most, but I really don't appreciate this. You're missing my point entirely. I really don't need you to prove it. In fact, I asked you to explain it. To articulate your idea because you said:

"And I know first hand, the issue shops had with wax (in the past). They are not the same as yesterdays Wax printers but they will and do still come with some issues that comes with using wax versus wet ink."

I asked you to explain that and some pretty easy follow up questions about which produces a better dot, which you think is easier to get that dot, but you dodged them all by saying I won't get it and it's a waste of your time to explain.

Only then did you and Mark go back/forth. You're the only one who thinks there needs to be a friggen' POV gonzo video to prove it. Not me.

I just want to know more details. I have plainly seen that wax produces a cleaner dot on the screen, but I respect your opinion that it doesn't make a difference on the tee. But is that because it's 'good enough' or because you have actually compared? And I mean compared, not just got an award using the machine. That's all I'm trying to get at, why do you think it doesn't make a difference?

I don't charge by the LPI and I've never tried to win an award. Just trying to get consistent results with less downtime.

At the end of the day it sounds like the quality difference is minor in a lot of people's eyes, and I weigh that opinion heavily. Lots of awards won with wet ink, that is widely known.

Not sure what else to say to you Dan except I still respect your work and history, just seems like some ego stuff going on here or something. I don't know. But this was weird as hell. Share your knowledge. You don't need to prove it, just share it.

If the dots are the same then there are lots of other reasons for the price gap I'm sure. I just want to discuss what those are so that a decision can be made. I'm not trying to crown a champion here, because it varies for every shop.

Maybe I'd pay an extra couple grand just for the smaller foot print. Doesn't mean you can't share the damn dimensions or that anyone made the wrong choice.



Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: ABuffington on July 02, 2019, 12:27:25 PM
As an art professor once told me, "It's not what tools you use, it's what you create that matters".  Having used all of the CTS out there; I want true film with 28,000 dpi and halftones so crisp you can't see a bump in the edge anywhere!  However consumables would be quite expensive in the long run. No matter which CTS you use it sure beats the hell out of cutting rubylith, using contact sheets to create halftones, 3 tray development, expensive film and chems and hours upon hours in the dark room to create a 1 good sim process job that can be sepped and Ripped almost automatically today in minutes.  Kind of like your grandpa telling you he walked up hill in the snow going to school in both directions.  CTS is a dream come true in a workflow whether it is wax or ink.  The art you put into the RIP may be more important for a final product than how you image the screen.  Take a lousy sep job and it is still a muddy fuzzy print with either. Take great art and a great sep job and both create screens that print well.  It amazes me that as printers we can see minute details and crisp edges that the buyer and end user may never see or understand all the effort we put in to making it as perfect as we can.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 12:39:42 PM

As an art professor once told me, "It's not what tools you use, it's what you create that matters".  Having used all of the CTS out there; I want true film with 28,000 dpi and halftones so crisp you can't see a bump in the edge anywhere!  However consumables would be quite expensive in the long run. No matter which CTS you use it sure beats the hell out of cutting rubylith, using contact sheets to create halftones, 3 tray development, expensive film and chems and hours upon hours in the dark room to create a 1 good sim process job that can be sepped and Ripped almost automatically today in minutes.  Kind of like your grandpa telling you he walked up hill in the snow going to school in both directions.  CTS is a dream come true in a workflow whether it is wax or ink.  The art you put into the RIP may be more important for a final product than how you image the screen.  Take a lousy sep job and it is still a muddy fuzzy print with either. Take great art and a great sep job and both create screens that print well.  It amazes me that as printers we can see minute details and crisp edges that the buyer and end user may never see or understand all the effort we put in to making it as perfect as we can.


Indeed on several points. "I want true film with 28,000 dpi and halftones so crisp you can't see a bump in the edge anywhere!"

and this is why I would be going with a used wet ink machine.
"It amazes me that as printers we can see minute details and crisp edges that the buyer and end user may never see or understand all the effort we put in to making it as perfect as we can."
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 02, 2019, 12:45:16 PM
You all are like machinists. They would make a metal door stop out of metal and argue that its not parallell within .00005" each side.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 02, 2019, 12:54:40 PM
this was sent to me last night by a wax machine user.


Looks like wet ink.  You sure it's wax, edges are rough.  We';ve been reading that wax has smooth rounder edges.  I've seen some other wax dots blown up, but those where smoother edges yet meteorite shaped or irregular as apposed to round. Yet still smooth edged.



This seems to be in the area of 35lpi at 70% halftone based on the threads (unless that's like a 355 mesh lol. Looks more like wet ink with "Speckled edges on the dots".  Guessing, but if the sender says it's wax, I have no place to question that.

Dan, Comments like that are why the sender of that left this forum and others. Why did you pick that apart? NO ONE is trying to fool you or anyone else. The sender is one of the most respected industry vets. THIS IS REDICULOUS
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 02, 2019, 01:12:27 PM
Agreed Al! But there’s some science to this art and unfortunately I don’t want to only be able to hire scientists. An easy dot is the best dot in my eyes.
Just curious why some people wouldn’t take what looks like a better dot. Especially since many others say the quality is higher. But for me I’d pay for a better workflow all day long and less downtime and fussin’ will probably be my biggest weighing point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: 3Deep on July 02, 2019, 01:27:21 PM
Just curious why some people wouldn’t take what looks like a better dot. Especially since many others say the quality is higher

@CBCB, I'm willing to bet most people would, but cost sometimes makes it very impossible and we do the best with what can afford in our shops.  Then you have some of us that don't do very much high end work or have the work flow that some other shops have, but it's good to know that this tech is out there just incase ;)
Title: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: CBCB on July 02, 2019, 01:31:04 PM
Just curious why some people wouldn’t take what looks like a better dot. Especially since many others say the quality is higher

@CBCB, I'm willing to bet most people would, but cost sometimes makes it very impossible and we do the best with what can afford in our shops.  Then you have some of us that don't do very much high end work or have the work flow that some other shops have, but it's good to know that this tech is out there just incase ;)

Totally fair enough! Lots of great work even on film. I don’t do much high end work, but I do want the workflow. Not trying to throw shade on anyone with a particular machine since I’m sure your choices are justified. Budget is a big factor for sure.


Edit, and dang I should clarify by ‘some people’ I meant Dan when I originally asked for clarification. Like I said I don’t charge by LPI I just am curious why opinions I respect seem to say ‘it makes a quality difference’ vs. ‘no quality difference’.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: DannyGruninger on July 02, 2019, 02:17:01 PM
For myself its not so much about the shape of the dot but the consistency of the dot....... We had our i image printing really really good dots after working on the head voltage, firing pulses, etc but the difference is when we had a climate change in our screen room you could under a loupe easily see the differences. How humid the screens were, how long they sat in the screen room prior to imaging, etc all played factors in the consistency of the dots..... We had jobs that we printed in july that had slight differences compared to jobs printed in the winter and from what I saw under a loupe this was due to the ink jet cts........ Our wax machines we have not noticed any impact based on the environment so for myself its not so much about the shape of the dot but the integrity of the dot from day to day or week to week. I remember a long time contributor here had an i image and outdated wax machine side by side and any of his 4cp work went to the wax because everytime it was the same, with the ink jet results would vary......... To me that said a lot considering I trust the source very much so. Wax has always provided us consistent results where ink has failed us on a few occasions.

Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 02:39:46 PM
this was sent to me last night by a wax machine user.


Looks like wet ink.  You sure it's wax, edges are rough.  We';ve been reading that wax has smooth rounder edges.  I've seen some other wax dots blown up, but those where smoother edges yet meteorite shaped or irregular as apposed to round. Yet still smooth edged.



This seems to be in the area of 35lpi at 70% halftone based on the threads (unless that's like a 355 mesh lol. Looks more like wet ink with "Speckled edges on the dots".  Guessing, but if the sender says it's wax, I have no place to question that.

Dan, Comments like that are why the sender of that left this forum and others. Why did you pick that apart? NO ONE is trying to fool you or anyone else. The sender is one of the most respected industry vets. THIS IS REDICULOUS




Reading to much into it.  I know the sender also and my type of comment is not why he left. :)
Great guy, and I stand by that. My statement is correct none the less.

 "The edges in that photo look rougher than what had been described as (wax dots being perfect dots) or even "better than".... wet ink....and that image, could easily be a pic of wet ink by mistake (not that it is), but they are not that far apart.  Truth is, I have seen for myself, that the wax dots look "better than" or somewhat smoother than wet ink formulated dots. They ar not "dramatically better than, but for those who like to take somthing and run with it, sure, lets call them "better than". That don't make them smooth, just better rounded, (less irregularities) or less picoliter sprays popping off the sides like than wet ink. Still rough and irregular. It's not wet photo film image setter quality as we know.  That is the all encompassing bench mark for dot quality.


Was actually has mass also, as in "height". If not using a direct light surce, it's more possible for light scatter to fatten a % tone such as making a 6% dot more of a 5%due to .  (Not that this is horrible).   But that's the stuff that people use for comparison.  "Oh, gonna get light scatter with those high wax dots, don't buy wax".  (and just to clarify....that was a joke back there about "oh the light scatter".
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 02, 2019, 02:49:33 PM
To be fair the slight roughness of those dots on the screen image look like a lot of it is caused by the edge of the dot where it sits on the knuckles of the mesh. So is it a printed dot thing or simply physics when washing the screen out? Its a cool pic with great looking dots, whether that mesh is 300 or 350 TPI those are definitely some pretty small dots.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 02:51:01 PM
For myself its not so much about the shape of the dot but the consistency of the dot....... We had our i image printing really really good dots after working on the head voltage, firing pulses, etc but the difference is when we had a climate change in our screen room you could under a loupe easily see the differences. How humid the screens were, how long they sat in the screen room prior to imaging, etc all played factors in the consistency of the dots..... We had jobs that we printed in july that had slight differences compared to jobs printed in the winter and from what I saw under a loupe this was due to the ink jet cts........ Our wax machines we have not noticed any impact based on the environment so for myself its not so much about the shape of the dot but the integrity of the dot from day to day or week to week. I remember a long time contributor here had an i image and outdated wax machine side by side and any of his 4cp work went to the wax because every time it was the same, with the ink jet results would vary......... To me that said a lot considering I trust the source very much so. Wax has always provided us consistent results where ink has failed us on a few occasions.




Fair enough. Good clarity and one I had not considered.  Repeat-ability means a lot in retail.  Still, even when doing the retail (for me and me only guys), it's not enough impact for me to go overboard and pay another 15k or something.  Just me tho.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 02:53:50 PM
To be fair the slight roughness of those dots on the screen image look like a lot of it is caused by the edge of the dot where it sits on the knuckles of the mesh. So is it a printed dot thing or simply physics when washing the screen out? Its a cool pic with great looking dots, whether that mesh is 300 or 350 TPI those are definitely some pretty small dots.
  I agree with that. I donno about the dots being small tho. Seriously, they look huge to me..  Like 40lpi in the shadow tone on a 305 or something. Maybe Rick and get the sender to provide the details not that he needs to prove it.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 02:58:44 PM
Just curious why some people wouldn’t take what looks like a better dot. Especially since many others say the quality is higher

@CBCB, I'm willing to bet most people would, but cost sometimes makes it very impossible and we do the best with what can afford in our shops.  Then you have some of us that don't do very much high end work or have the work flow that some other shops have, but it's good to know that this tech is out there just incase ;)

Totally fair enough! Lots of great work even on film. I don’t do much high end work, but I do want the workflow. Not trying to throw shade on anyone with a particular machine since I’m sure your choices are justified. Budget is a big factor for sure.


Edit, and dang I should clarify by ‘some people’ I meant Dan when I originally asked for clarification. Like I said I don’t charge by LPI I just am curious why opinions I respect seem to say ‘it makes a quality difference’ vs. ‘no quality difference’.




To be fair, I never said "there is no quality difference".  I said, for me, there is not enough, not a drastic improvement enough to make (me) want/need to go wax over a used I-Image.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 03:09:25 PM
CBCB,


YOU'RE RIGHT.  My apologies. It wasn't you who brought up proving it.  I must read your first big post, then saw the proving it thing and then combined the two in my head.


Well state for so many reasons!!!I am happy to discuss with anyone and PROVE the difference using their files and their screens however for many they do not do the homework.  Also, initial cost is about the same.  Mark Diehl313 515 8635


and then I jumped in about proving what I say.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 02, 2019, 03:34:11 PM
To be fair the slight roughness of those dots on the screen image look like a lot of it is caused by the edge of the dot where it sits on the knuckles of the mesh. So is it a printed dot thing or simply physics when washing the screen out? Its a cool pic with great looking dots, whether that mesh is 300 or 350 TPI those are definitely some pretty small dots.
  I agree with that. I donno about the dots being small tho. Seriously, they look huge to me..  Like 40lpi in the shadow tone on a 305 or something. Maybe Rick and get the sender to provide the details not that he needs to prove it.

My guess is 305 mesh, 49lpi and I agree 40%.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 03:55:48 PM
To be fair the slight roughness of those dots on the screen image look like a lot of it is caused by the edge of the dot where it sits on the knuckles of the mesh. So is it a printed dot thing or simply physics when washing the screen out? Its a cool pic with great looking dots, whether that mesh is 300 or 350 TPI those are definitely some pretty small dots.
  I agree with that. I donno about the dots being small tho. Seriously, they look huge to me..  Like 40lpi in the shadow tone on a 305 or something. Maybe Rick and get the sender to provide the details not that he needs to prove it.

My guess is 305 mesh, 49lpi and I agree 40%.




HAHA!  40%.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 02, 2019, 06:09:48 PM
Mr Filip said this " pretty sure its 305 mesh. 65 lpi angled for 4c process and I was adjusting the machine at the time "
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 06:42:01 PM
I don't doubt him. Strange tho, that there is such a large dot area with the mesh. That's a lot of coverage.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: RICK STEFANICK on July 02, 2019, 07:29:16 PM
I don't doubt him. Strange tho, that there is such a large dot area with the mesh. That's a lot of coverage.

Please call him and get it all clarified. He was just trying to help
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: bimmridder on July 02, 2019, 09:01:29 PM
Please DON'T call him. He was just trying to show a half tone made with a wax machine. It was a freaking test screen! If you look close, there is a line through the image. The machine was being fine tuned. Who give a rat's ass if it was a 95%  20 LPI dot on a 40 monofilament mesh. He was showing the dot. Guess what, he runs both kinds of machines and has reasons. None of which will be shared because they will certainly offend almost everyone in some way. There was a day it it felt great trying to share experiences with others. It won't be called knowledge, because he's not that smart. But those days are gone. Is this where he drops the mic?
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 02, 2019, 11:50:25 PM
So, for educational purposes, I will start to get this back on track and lay out some photo's of wet ink examples to discuss. You can knock on them, and I can dispute the argument of the ugly dots.
Wax Density being of any higher Dmax than wet ink having any impact, has been debunked already as should be clearly defined in a few post back with the link referring to Dmax needing to be 3.0 or higher and wet ink default settings already being of 4.3 - 4.8.

I remain Dot-Tone-Dan, like him or not.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 02:22:09 AM
These black and white prints are on vinyl and all at 65lpi, Not on emulsion for the sake of capturing the most accurate replication of what is going onto emulsion from the print heads. Here they are in all their nakedness. Very good solid area, but the camera picked up a lot of reflection and color blowout, but you get it.
The one that looks like bird tracks is a 5% halftone fill in a .5 line stroke. Mighta been a 10% fill. I can't remember exactly.The 6 pt helv reg type is pretty good, (not perfectly smooth, but would print well and (once on the shirt), you wouldn't see any imperfections anyways. The shirt does just as much.
Sure, it has imperfections and sure, the small dots are not 100% consistent nor are the larger dots perfectly round, but as I stated many times, "shape" doesn't matter, percentage matters. Does it represent whats needed "correctly enough" once it's burned and washed out. If you've done your job well in dot gain compensation and linearization, you have no worries. Some will say "oh, look at those crappy small 1-3% dots. Some aren't even a single dot, but two side by side.  Makes no dif.  I get the same thing from Epson 1430 and AccurRip, but the prints can be great. Customers never complain, Judges never notice and kick it out.  They resolve just fine, density is beyond what is required.  I'm ok with using them.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 02:28:02 AM
Here are some images on emulsion.  Auto coat with a 1:1 coat with the sharp side on a Satti 305 mesh (at this time of photo). We had changed to an additional coat later on on the back side after these photo's.Pics are a little blurry. As you coat a little thicker, the edges/walls of line art and dots become sharper.
I had to increase the resolution to enlarge them. The images were about 2" wide.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: jvanick on July 03, 2019, 08:43:00 AM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 09:55:30 AM

(I had to add this part in after I posted and wanted to touch on the "rough wet ink dots".


Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...


Agreed on the dots are rougher than wax.  I've said that, but it doesn't matter. The rougher dot doesn't matter to me. It could be pointy star shaped. This is kind of like saying you can't use a hybrid stochastic square dot with traditional dots of varying sizes.  It's ok. You can still produce great prints.

Agreed on the laser. Great detail/better then all other options, but not there yet for production and cost.  This kind of brings me back to my point of my specific choice at this time.  Cost over ROI.  A laser is just way too expensive over wax or wet ink at the moment, taking production out of the equation. Why wold I buy a laser (even tho it's better).  It's just not good business sense (for me).  So, I have this nice used I-Image 3 head STEll available at a very good price. It will be able to handle any production I would encounter for years to come.  The quality results (better or worse than wax, does't matter. It's good.  It does what I need even if I were to want to go after awards. So, in my mind, I'll take the used I-image.  Take the tech experience out of it.  Knowing the real story of the I-Image issues and capabilities, there is nothing about the I-Image that would deter me from this decision.  Wet ink "issues", Dot density, dot shape, satellite dots, environment, mechanical, electrical, computer parts/boards, (any issue you might encounter) are all less than major factors to sway my decision.

I can get all that I need done with a used I-Image STEll. Good seps, good screens, (The fact that IF, it were to ever have any issues, I can fix stuff on it is a bonus) etc. But, I'm not mechanic. I was an artist and always had been. I can't fix a carburetor on my car, but they are easy enough to work on and understand. It doesn't take a mechanical or electrical guru. I'm a simple man.  I don't need the exposure on it either, (We have a star-lite already, but the used one happens to have it. BUT, having the STE;;, enables me to decrease used up space from the star-lite. They talk about the foot print of the wax machinesbeing smaller. That parts is good, but depending on what wet ink machine you get, you can remove your exposure unit as well. So there is that.



I understand, and can appreciate, "and agree with you" in your post in all points. I'll clarify tho, that I-block is not something The I-Image family uses since they drifted away from the Epson guts you were using. They quit working with Epson years ago, like well before I got there 5 years ago.


I agree with the RIP too. I know the Harlequin is/would be a better more fun and detailed RIP. Agreed.  I have never used one, so I don't know all of the options. Kind of the same story with the user interface on a Roque press and a M&R press. The M&R is not as flashy, Roque has some extra fun features. But I can also say that "everything" anyone would need to do in their rip for screen printers "can be" done in the Color Print Rip that the I-Image family uses and it's easy.


Operation and flow is easy. Can auto drop, can auto archive a copy, etc. You can do cmyk seps with the different angles in two methods.
1, set up a different auto folder for each color set at a different angle. 2, you can load the cmyk file in manually, then change each cmyk color individually in the options once you double click on the loaded file (before it's ripped).  It's not flashy, Pretty basic level, but also detailed. It's say, (three times better than your typical screen print rip), and Harlequin is the low level, most cost efficient option for off set printers that a screen printer can take advantage of and find to be exceptional. The color print rip just does what It's supposed to do. Nothing fancy about it.


It would be cool to see a full list of things needed to be done and all available options in each.  Like, I can do a vid on the Color Print rip, and you can do one on the harlequin. Step for step and compare how they are done.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: DannyGruninger on July 03, 2019, 11:57:14 AM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.



Great post, I have calibrated over 25 cts machines and this is absolutely true.... The harlequin rip gives you the ability to fine tune better, and the wax gives better control..... In the fine tonal ranges our curves for the i image were pretty odd in order to get our densitometer readings close.

I wish I could get some really good photos of our stuff because after fine tuning its a world of difference.......


Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 03, 2019, 12:08:43 PM
I feel I may be one of the lucky few that has bought an I Image that also had a supply rep that spent a great amount of time in our shop calibrating everything. We are not a shop with all the fancy tools nor knowledge to go through all the calibration from screen to print. But since we bought our I Image through Martin AKA Tubelite our rep was here during the install and spent several days with me fine tuning everything, not just the machine but everything from density, angles, exposure, on press etc. That I feel is not something most shops that are not doing their own calibrations will ever get unless they are as lucky as we are. That I also feel is probably why my results with the I Image are far and above what we ever got with film printing. So in a typical smaller shop like us they can get an I Image installed and that is it, would their quality increase dramatically with out all the extra help we got? Probably not.

I would reccomend anyone going to the point of investing in a CTS of any kind also invest in having someone with the tools and knowledge to come in and fine tune all the variables and have get the best out of that machine you invested so much money in.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 12:12:01 PM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.



Great post, I have calibrated over 25 cts machines and this is absolutely true.... The harlequin rip gives you the ability to fine tune better, and the wax gives better control..... In the fine tonal ranges our curves for the i image were pretty odd in order to get our densitometer readings close.

I wish I could get some really good photos of our stuff because after fine tuning its a world of difference.......

Is that a photo of wax or your old wet ink images. "Don't shoot me", They are not labeled, so I just want to understand what I'm looking at.  They looks clean.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: DannyGruninger on July 03, 2019, 12:16:25 PM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.



Great post, I have calibrated over 25 cts machines and this is absolutely true.... The harlequin rip gives you the ability to fine tune better, and the wax gives better control..... In the fine tonal ranges our curves for the i image were pretty odd in order to get our densitometer readings close.

I wish I could get some really good photos of our stuff because after fine tuning its a world of difference.......

Is that a photo of wax or your old wet ink images. "Don't shoot me", They are not labeled, so I just want to understand what I'm looking at.  They looks clean.

This is a screen I went and snapped in production that we are currently using........ Douthitt machine, xitron rip and lots of my time spent making it as clean as possible......... But I do agree with you the shape of the dot isn't super important unless your doing super high end 4cp with rosette work as our i image used to print clean but not in the shape of a dot but still could produce amazing quality prints..... Also food for the thought with our current rip settings we do not print round or eclipse shape, we print euclidean shape which for us here has produced the best results on finished garments......
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 12:17:06 PM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.



Great post, I have calibrated over 25 cts machines and this is absolutely true.... The harlequin rip gives you the ability to fine tune better, and the wax gives better control..... In the fine tonal ranges our curves for the i image were pretty odd in order to get our densitometer readings close.

I wish I could get some really good photos of our stuff because after fine tuning its a world of difference.......

Also, with you knowing both machines well, is there anything unique about the Harliquin Rip that the Color Print Rip does not include?  Like folder setups, auto archiving etc?  Stuff like that.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: blue moon on July 03, 2019, 12:26:16 PM
We’ve been back to film for a while now and keep trying to figure out why we should fix our CTS. The replacement parts have been here for 6 months and the only reason to fix it has been so we have redundant systems. Our 4800 seems to be producing better screens and it’s easier in the workflow...
Pierre

Curious about this. Easier in the workflow? A big selling point for CTS is the registration. Were you not seeing the CTS give those registration gains in production?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We are a small shop, 50 screens a day, so our labor division does not work that well with CTS. If the artis, who has extra time during the day, prints the films, then the screen guy can just grab them and place them on the screen and burn. It is  very quick and efficient. Placing the screen into the CTS and having to wait 2 min to image the screen is disruptive and does not flow very well. We also could not get it to work well with the preregistration system so the time savings we were expecting did not materialize.
We are also seeing the variations in the ink deposit/density throughout the week. Not sure whats causing it, but it’s there. Additionally, the surface of the emulsion is not flat so the dots fall into the valleys or sit on top of the hills and distort. There is also the issue of ink pooling in the valleys and being darker there than on the top of the strand of mesh. My experience has been that we get a far superior dot on the film and as a consequence, the dot in the emulsion is better. It is also more consistent over time.

When we get our CTS back up, it will be for the spot color work only. While, i think a newr CTS than ours Will probably do better, the ROI is just not there until we can get the registration system working, which does not look like it will happen as long as we still keep using our MHM with pins on the frames. Once we get rid of it and replace it with another ROQ we should be able to remove the pins from the screens and get it all going. Considering we only use the MHM for the sleeves, it will be few years before that happens.

Pierre
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: DannyGruninger on July 03, 2019, 12:32:58 PM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.



Great post, I have calibrated over 25 cts machines and this is absolutely true.... The harlequin rip gives you the ability to fine tune better, and the wax gives better control..... In the fine tonal ranges our curves for the i image were pretty odd in order to get our densitometer readings close.

I wish I could get some really good photos of our stuff because after fine tuning its a world of difference.......

Also, with you knowing both machines well, is there anything unique about the Harliquin Rip that the Color Print Rip does not include?  Like folder setups, auto archiving etc?  Stuff like that.

The harliquin(xitron) rip that we are currently using has everything automated which is nice. Our art department just opens the art in illy and hits save as. The art then goes into the rip and it can auto underbase what we tell it to, trap or choke any pre sets that we have and then hits the cts machine. Once the file is printed on the cts it goes into a rip storage folder. Everything is setup where its an automatic function within the rip. I remember when using the I image we had the colorprint software and the printer control software which had some nice features but there were more steps for the artist to get the file imaged as they have to bring it into colorprint so its an added step. Artist goes from art program to colorprint to printer control where with the xitron the artist just saves the file from the art program and everything is auto from there. I remember something as basic as when we used the i image with roq presses we had to image the screens upside down because the rip or printer control didnt have the option to image on the opposite end of the screen, our artists had to actually flip the artwork in the psd or ai before sending to colorprint where as on the xitron rip our artist saves the file normal and xitron flips it and positions it on the screen where we need it. Much less brain damage for our artists when they can just setup a file like normal and not have to worry about flipping it. Overall the workflow has been better for us and to be 100% honest we have not even scratched the surface of what this rip can actually do. I feel like I need more education on the rip as it has options that are over my head. I'll try to dig in more when I get time as it's something I need to do regardless.


Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 12:36:39 PM
I feel I may be one of the lucky few that has bought an I Image that also had a supply rep that spent a great amount of time in our shop calibrating everything. We are not a shop with all the fancy tools nor knowledge to go through all the calibration from screen to print. But since we bought our I Image through Martin AKA Tubelite our rep was here during the install and spent several days with me fine tuning everything, not just the machine but everything from density, angles, exposure, on press etc. That I feel is not something most shops that are not doing their own calibrations will ever get unless they are as lucky as we are. That I also feel is probably why my results with the I Image are far and above what we ever got with film printing. So in a typical smaller shop like us they can get an I Image installed and that is it, would their quality increase dramatically with out all the extra help we got? Probably not.

I would recommend anyone going to the point of investing in a CTS of any kind also invest in having someone with the tools and knowledge to come in and fine tune all the variables and have get the best out of that machine you invested so much money in.




That's a BIG one!  Probably the most important post on here.  It's also probably why Mark Dieli (spelling) does so well. The machine alone, is not what makes it a great choice. It's the training and customer service that comes with it. Kind of like Rich Hoffman installing and selling a press himself. He's knowledgeable enough to do the things you mention "about the machine".  I don't know what his emulsion and exposure knowledge is like, but I hear he goes above and beyond and stays with you and spends several days. That's key.  A good sales person that is capable of doing this is gold.


I do consulting for the Art Dept for separation and process/screen room I-Image re-training, calibration etc. and can even install after market, but can't do repair due to insurance reasons.  I don't do much of it or promote it due to my recent schedule over the last couple years but I like doing that a lot.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 12:51:59 PM
Dan -- these pics prove exactly what the others were saying about rough edges on the wet-ink CTS machines... whether that's noticeable (likely not) when printing on a t-shirt that's mostly air or not, is a different question...

We've had an original I-Image (epson based)
We did a very solid evaluation of an I-Image S (as well as an I-Image ST refurb)
We now have a Douthitt unit that was refurbed (came in at around 5k under the cost of the I-Image S).. I can tell you that under a loupe, the wax machine is far superior, but when correctly calibrated and, the printed shirt isn't a whole bunch different than the I-Image... the key here is proper tuning... and I feel that the wax machines have a far wider tolerance to improper tuning than the ink machines.

Also, the Harlequinn Rip is FAR superior for creating calibration curves, and even doing color-controlled 4-cp seps than the M&R rebranded Kohari I-Block/Color Print stuff, to be fair tho Harlequinn has been doing this for MANY more years in environments that are way pickier than ours.

All that being said -- in a high-production shop, my current preferred combination would be:

Image-ST with 3 heads (no on-board exposure as I feel single-point is still the way to go)
Wax machine for higher detail work.
and for the Andy Anderson type prints, an ImageSetter. (we don't do any of this style of work right now)

For the record, when the laser machines are ready for prime time, that's where I'll be spending our next $$$.. I don't feel they're quite ready yet.



Great post, I have calibrated over 25 cts machines and this is absolutely true.... The harlequin rip gives you the ability to fine tune better, and the wax gives better control..... In the fine tonal ranges our curves for the i image were pretty odd in order to get our densitometer readings close.

I wish I could get some really good photos of our stuff because after fine tuning its a world of difference.......

Also, with you knowing both machines well, is there anything unique about the Harliquin Rip that the Color Print Rip does not include?  Like folder setups, auto archiving etc?  Stuff like that.

The harliquin(xitron) rip that we are currently using has everything automated which is nice. Our art department just opens the art in illy and hits save as. The art then goes into the rip and it can auto underbase what we tell it to, trap or choke any pre sets that we have and then hits the cts machine. Once the file is printed on the cts it goes into a rip storage folder. Everything is setup where its an automatic function within the rip. I remember when using the I image we had the colorprint software and the printer control software which had some nice features but there were more steps for the artist to get the file imaged as they have to bring it into colorprint so its an added step. Artist goes from art program to colorprint to printer control where with the xitron the artist just saves the file from the art program and everything is auto from there. I remember something as basic as when we used the i image with roq presses we had to image the screens upside down because the rip or printer control didnt have the option to image on the opposite end of the screen, our artists had to actually flip the artwork in the psd or ai before sending to colorprint where as on the xitron rip our artist saves the file normal and xitron flips it and positions it on the screen where we need it. Much less brain damage for our artists when they can just setup a file like normal and not have to worry about flipping it. Overall the workflow has been better for us and to be 100% honest we have not even scratched the surface of what this rip can actually do. I feel like I need more education on the rip as it has options that are over my head. I'll try to dig in more when I get time as it's something I need to do regardless.


You hit the nail on the head for most shops. Just look at film Most have never had the time to dig into their digital film printer setup to know thy can do dot gain control or even should do dot gain control. They think that's what they get. I never used much of what Color Print was able to do. With this same scenario, there are things in Color print "options" that do enable you to do a flip this in the folder setup.  (Perhaps you needed something more unique about your press and flipping it that was outside the capabilities of Color Print. Not sure.

You can flip, rotate, Move to the left right, top, bottom a specific distance, (whatever distance you put in) for example. At my last job for example, we dropped pocket prints into a folder that would flip it, and move it down .25" for me. You just go into the folder setup and do the initial set up one time the exact way you want it to repeat. Then that becomes your pocket folder. back print folder, Tote bag folder etc.  Drop it and forget about it. Auto rips, auto loads into Print Production and auto archives (if you set it up to do so).  That is an area where I think M&R lacked. They didn't train "long enough" and in detail enough. They rely on the customer to do their own digging. Same for dot gain. They would rather you build your own custom curves.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: inkman996 on July 03, 2019, 03:28:05 PM
I feel I may be one of the lucky few that has bought an I Image that also had a supply rep that spent a great amount of time in our shop calibrating everything. We are not a shop with all the fancy tools nor knowledge to go through all the calibration from screen to print. But since we bought our I Image through Martin AKA Tubelite our rep was here during the install and spent several days with me fine tuning everything, not just the machine but everything from density, angles, exposure, on press etc. That I feel is not something most shops that are not doing their own calibrations will ever get unless they are as lucky as we are. That I also feel is probably why my results with the I Image are far and above what we ever got with film printing. So in a typical smaller shop like us they can get an I Image installed and that is it, would their quality increase dramatically with out all the extra help we got? Probably not.

I would recommend anyone going to the point of investing in a CTS of any kind also invest in having someone with the tools and knowledge to come in and fine tune all the variables and have get the best out of that machine you invested so much money in.

While I am sure Mark is fantastic and has great knowledge, he is not the one I am talking about. We bought a I Image not a Douthitt. Our rep from Martin is Charlie Thorpe, a very knowledgeable person. I am sure others here that know him would agree.




That's a BIG one!  Probably the most important post on here.  It's also probably why Mark Dieli (spelling) does so well. The machine alone, is not what makes it a great choice. It's the training and customer service that comes with it. Kind of like Rich Hoffman installing and selling a press himself. He's knowledgeable enough to do the things you mention "about the machine".  I don't know what his emulsion and exposure knowledge is like, but I hear he goes above and beyond and stays with you and spends several days. That's key.  A good sales person that is capable of doing this is gold.


I do consulting for the Art Dept for separation and process/screen room I-Image re-training, calibration etc. and can even install after market, but can't do repair due to insurance reasons.  I don't do much of it or promote it due to my recent schedule over the last couple years but I like doing that a lot.
Title: Re: CTS Wax - Taking the plunge
Post by: Dottonedan on July 03, 2019, 04:21:16 PM
Oh, I knew that. I was just pointing out that Mark is another "like that'.  Rich Hoffman is like that. I know you're guy Charlie also. We did two different an installs together.  Good guy. Very knowledgeable. He's like that.


There are a hand full like that (that I know personally). There may be more that others know, but I only know a hand full. Not everyone likes all of them, but not everyone likes me either, and I'm a great guy :). LOL.
Matt Osborne is another one, from Screen Process Supply.


Not all sales people get in the trenches.