CTS Wax - Taking the plunge

[Maxie]

I took a electric wire and stripped the plastic off, it’s about 5 “ long.

[CBCB]

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!

[RICK STEFANICK]

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 

[CBCB]

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.

[CBCB]

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.

[markdhl]

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

[Dottonedan]

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.

[markdhl]

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


 

[CBCB]

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

[Dottonedan]

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.

[blue moon]

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

[markdhl]

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

[CBCB]

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

[CBCB]

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

[Dottonedan]

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.