M&R iImage rocket launcher

[inkman996]

Our I Image sits in a room in the front half of our building, so it is fully climate controlled for heat or AC. In other words its in a low humidity environment at all times. Our typical humidity level is in the low 20's. I know for a fact if it was kept in the printing half of the shop it would be dripping with moisture because its always humid here. Regardless it works for us with little fuss so no complaints.

We use the T6 ink that it shipped with and do not want to bother trying to change ink types and potentially have issues to deal with. Our emulsion is Ulano QTX, a high solids fast drying emulsion. We never coat a hundred screens at a time, at most 30 at a time with about 50 screens ready to go. It is what it is, its not a deal breaker, love the machine but environment is a quirk one has to deal with.

[Dottonedan]

Our I Image sits in a room in the front half of our building, so it is fully climate controlled for heat or AC. In other words its in a low humidity environment at all times. Our typical humidity level is in the low 20's. I know for a fact if it was kept in the printing half of the shop it would be dripping with moisture because its always humid here. Regardless it works for us with little fuss so no complaints.

We use the T6 ink that it shipped with and do not want to bother trying to change ink types and potentially have issues to deal with. Our emulsion is Ulano QTX, a high solids fast drying emulsion. We never coat a hundred screens at a time, at most 30 at a time with about 50 screens ready to go. It is what it is, its not a deal breaker, love the machine but environment is a quirk one has to deal with.

But let me point out, THIS situation is where WAX sellers say (Oh, how horrible, look at all of the issues the WET ink can give you). But it’s not really the WET INK that is the issue.


Moving it out near the production area (could be the simplest answer). The issue (from what your are saying). is LOW humidity, causing the dryness of the screens...and therefore, you must use a dampening cloth).  It’s controlled up there in that front office area (for the comfort of humans) and not necessarily for the operation of the equipment.  For example, from what you are saying, it’s (more dry up there). “10%” less than a typical minimum should be for running the equipment. A RH of below 30 is leaning towards (too dry), so having it in a room at 20% is pushing it beyond a comfortable range for the machine. A common range of RH is above 30% and as high as 55. I’ve seen 60 or above but those worked with other inks or even from a Tech adding in some accommodations in the settings. As a result, for you, you must add moisture (dampening cloth) to your screens for the screen to have some stick’m.


You currently have issues, but don’t want to switch inks...that could be (and commonly is) your answer...to clear up that issues?  Ok.  Understood. You don’t want to potentially introduce additional issues. But as another answer/alternative, you may want to relocate your machine away from that dryer area and have less dry screen issues and not have not dampen your screens. You can also, keep it as is, and continue to just dampen the screens. At least you know, you have choices.  But now, we know, there is no need to blame “the machine”.

[inkman996]

Our I Image sits in a room in the front half of our building, so it is fully climate controlled for heat or AC. In other words its in a low humidity environment at all times. Our typical humidity level is in the low 20's. I know for a fact if it was kept in the printing half of the shop it would be dripping with moisture because its always humid here. Regardless it works for us with little fuss so no complaints.

We use the T6 ink that it shipped with and do not want to bother trying to change ink types and potentially have issues to deal with. Our emulsion is Ulano QTX, a high solids fast drying emulsion. We never coat a hundred screens at a time, at most 30 at a time with about 50 screens ready to go. It is what it is, its not a deal breaker, love the machine but environment is a quirk one has to deal with.

You are twisting things a little. I am not having issues with the ink and humdity since I have a solution that is very easy and fast. If I was always struggling with humidity issues or inkspreading on the emulsion then yes I would consider an ink change, but there is no practical intelligent reason to do so now. As for moving the machine, that is a non starter, there is no room for it in the print area so it has to live where it lives.

Again I will stress the environment issue is not as trivial as you may imply. Imagine a customer bought the machine new, tech arrives does install and humidity is far to low and a new ink has to be sent and changed. Thats not an ideal situation, it wasn't ideal when I had to try two different humidifiers and not have it work. But again its NOT a deal breaker.

And BTW the Douhit base model and the I Image base model are not tens of thousands apart in price, the douhit was fairly close to the I Image after shipping and tech install cots. If I remember the reason we chose the M&R had to do with head replacement cost, I forget the numbers but I know it was quite high on the wax. I also was given a few numbers to call of Wax owners because I wanted to get a rough idea from actual owners the print life of the heads and from what I gathered the wax heads had a lower life expectancy than the ink head if well maintained.

But let me point out, THIS situation is where WAX sellers say (Oh, how horrible, look at all of the issues the WET ink can give you). But it’s not really the WET INK that is the issue.


Moving it out near the production area (could be the simplest answer). The issue (from what your are saying). is LOW humidity, causing the dryness of the screens...and therefore, you must use a dampening cloth).  It’s controlled up there in that front office area (for the comfort of humans) and not necessarily for the operation of the equipment.  For example, from what you are saying, it’s (more dry up there). “10%” less than a typical minimum should be for running the equipment. A RH of below 30 is leaning towards (too dry), so having it in a room at 20% is pushing it beyond a comfortable range for the machine. A common range of RH is above 30% and as high as 55. I’ve seen 60 or above but those worked with other inks or even from a Tech adding in some accommodations in the settings. As a result, for you, you must add moisture (dampening cloth) to your screens for the screen to have some stick’m.


You currently have issues, but don’t want to switch inks...that could be (and commonly is) your answer...to clear up that issues?  Ok.  Understood. You don’t want to potentially introduce additional issues. But as another answer/alternative, you may want to relocate your machine away from that dryer area and have less dry screen issues and not have not dampen your screens. You can also, keep it as is, and continue to just dampen the screens. At least you know, you have choices.  But now, we know, there is no need to blame “the machine”.

[Dottonedan]

Well, I wouldn’t go as far as to say ”I am twisting” anything.  That’s a bit hard on my sensitive skin.  It’s just how what you wrote reads to me.

Again I will stress the environment issue is not as trivial as you may imply.

Feel free to stress it, but it’s not a common factor. It’s odd. I mean, should M&R just stop selling the machines now, because you like to keep your machine where it is and dampen the screens?
Is M&R making a mistake?  For the shop you toured that has the same issue, I would suggest that since you know them, give the my number, or let them know to call M&R and resolve that for them. Let them know it can be addressed without expense.


Ok. I agree with you.  “environment is not as trivial as I may be implying”.


When it happens, it’s a serious issue to be dealt with.
Having given that fact, THIS, is not as common as one might think, when reading this. Therefore, (IMO), trivial in terms of quantity of events. In terms of the individual company that it is happening to at the time, it’s a serious beast.


So to me, with it being a not so common thing, there is little to be concerned about (as a whole).  Your feedback (negative or positive) is valued and appreciated. We want to have people be aware of this, but not overreact at the same time. Like a year or two ago, when 10 out of 500 would post on the internet that (There is an M&R ink is clogging their head and the ink is “bad”). Everyone saw those 10 people. Nobody ever mentioned the 490 that worked with that same ink and had no issues. Ok. I did.  I mentioned it.  It’s true, there were some that had a head go bad or (3 heads) on their particular machine and it would be something devastating to that shop and piss me off. It would if it happened to me. It didn’t happen to me, and we also used that same ink. But again, those stories weren't all that common either. It was a case of “a few were having a bad reaction, everybody should know it” sort of thing...and I’m not fond of that practice.  I don’t know for sure. I’m just giving a close example of the numbers. How do I know?  Cuz I work with many of these shops directly on a daily or weekly basis still today. I also work with WAX ink machine users daily. I hear things. Some I-Image shops STILL want and use that ink that was said to "cause other peoples heads to go bad” and they won’t change because it works so well for them.  Like you, they feel "Don’t fix what ain't broke”. So it’s another example of "each shop is different". But THAT, (the part that each shop is different) doesn’t make an M&R machine a bad machine or a poor choice.
Same for WAX.  I would never imply that going wax is a bad decision.  I’d never imply that the wax dots are inferior to wet ink or even Laser. "Inferior as it pertains to dot quality in CTS on a shirt is subject to preference.


But some people (competitors and this who dislike M&R or want to justify their personal decisions for whatever reason...make it out to sound as if environmental issues are abound (like 500 out of 500) when they talk about WET ink. Trust me, I’m aware, that there are issues with WAX machines that are not a big issues either. I don’t shout them out, I don’t call them out (and make them bigger than they are). Only a competitor might feel the need to do that. I don’t pretend that they will end your shop if you use a WAX machine or a laser. They have some issues too. I just want (US/WE), to be fair and balanced. Tell it like it is. Let the machines speak for themselves instead of allowing for some exaggerations not explaining the full story to pour into the feed. Some crap happens to both machines.


You have an issue with your use and operation. And justifiable and duly noted. We must all tell and talk about all issues with each. Thats my beliefs, but I also want to be correct about it and say what I know also.
No I’ll will or twisting intended.

[Dottonedan]

I forgot to comment on this one.

"And BTW the Douhit base model and the I Image base model are not tens of thousands apart in price, the douhit was fairly close to the I Image after shipping and tech install cots. If I remember the reason we chose the M&R had to do with head replacement cost, I forget the numbers but I know it was quite high on the wax. I also was given a few numbers to call of Wax owners because I wanted to get a rough idea from actual owners the print life of the heads and from what I gathered the wax heads had a lower life expectancy than the ink head if well maintained.[/size] [/size]

[/size]
TRUE when comparing apples to apples.  My eyes are on sight of an I-Image S that is near 30k. I forget that I keep that number in my head.
An I-Image S, and the I-Image ST (one print head) are equal machines in terms of output to the Douthit. That is where I get the comparison.
The difference between a I-Image S and an I-Image ST is that the S can never be upgraded and it’s body configuration is more specific or unique to the S only.

[dirkdiggler]

I was told by an M&R employee that the S is slower than the ST 1 head.

[Dottonedan]

I don’t see how that is mechanically possible thus far. I haven’t heard anything to mention.
Both use the same print head and programs. Both run at 6 pass, high and low speed and uni and bi directional.  The only difference is in the travel. So there might be some minute difference in total screen per shift because of that. Like the only way I can explain that might be to say a couple screens less than an ST out of the full day due to the difference in travel.

They watch this forum. They can chime in and correct me if so.

[Homer]

honestly, I think for 75% of us wax vs ink doesn't matter as much as DTS VS Film.... Anyone would be miles ahead of film snagging Pierre's Rocket do-hickey....just in tape alone, I mean..Come'on man

[bimmridder]

It's all about the tape!

[Dottonedan]

honestly, I think for 75% of us wax vs ink doesn't matter as much as DTS VS Film.... Anyone would be miles ahead of film snagging Pierre's Rocket do-hickey....just in tape alone, I mean..Come'on man

True. I’m 100% in agreement with this.  There are many parts to the beauty of CTS wether it’s WAX, WET INK or LASER. Direct To Screen being the most affective in terms of imaging quality.  Funny thing is, Film dots are about as good as wet ink and wax ink.  It’s the DIRECT contact the makes them all that much better (not the shape of a dot).  Now LASER, that’s another story.

[GraphicDisorder]

honestly, I think for 75% of us wax vs ink doesn't matter as much as DTS VS Film.... Anyone would be miles ahead of film snagging Pierre's Rocket do-hickey....just in tape alone, I mean..Come'on man

This, people arguing about Wax VS Ink are basically arguing if the sky is sky blue or light sky blue IMO.

I have seen people doing some of the most amazing work on Flo bulbs. I have seen people on wax that their best print would be a misprint in a lot of our shops. So these tools are only as good as you are in most cases.

Anyone trying to suggest your going to do crap work because you are on either ink or wax and not the other is a idiot.

[3Deep]

Anyone trying to suggest your going to do crap work because you are on either ink or wax and not the other is a idiot.

There it is!!!!!, so much agree with Brandt, I seen some killer work come from the craziest setup, but they made it work, everything has it's place for someone

[Dottonedan]

I was told by an M&R employee that the S is slower than the ST 1 head.

My statement came from the concept of lumping both together (the bare minimum of the St and apparently what is the max of the S.
It’s advertised at 100 min per shift. But I overlooked the potential at various settings can enable a single print head on an ST to print as many as 150 per shift.  I assume dit was only 100.


I did incorrectly lump the two together at 100 screen per shift.




This is the basic disclaimer “sales talk” but does give you an idea that the S is going to be less in quantity per day than a ST and potentially, but a substantial amount (as many as 50 screens less).

The outcome per day, (as most of you know already), generally depends on the size of what you are printing and also on the quality level you want to print at.  (standard sized solid vector) at a 6 pass, high speed, bi directional printing with the occasional halftone or sim process in the mix. 12 pass provides more consistent coverage and is a bit more accurate in the halftone shadows than a 6 pass. 12 pass runs about 20% slower than 6 pass. That may mean about 10 more seconds printing.  More heads means faster printing to completion.

These are just estimates.
I-mage S   1 head      80 - 100  per shift. - Not upgradable in number of print heads or exposure.
I-image ST  1 head      100 – 150 per shift. - Upgradable.


So there ya go.  I was wrong. I do apologize for miss informing and assuming. Dirkdiggler got me on that one.


I have some actual real world numbers from a shop I visited reentry that is running a ST 1 head.My trip was almost exactly 5 years minus 1 week. It was to replace a print head that we quickly found to not need replacing, but just some good cleaning.


This customer ran 26,023 job numbers (as of the time of my services). This did not included re-orders.
5205 per year on average, averaging 433 jobs (per month).Thats an average of 21.65 (jobs) per day in a 5 day work week. This does not count number of screens.
I could have gotten that total number of screens off of the machine but didn’t remember to grab it.

So you can consider that most jobs have at least two colors and almost half can have more than one side.
100-150 screens per day on an ST sounds about right.


1 person works that screen.
Coating, drying, imaging, washing out in the eco-rinse, drying and loading into the rack, all screens for each job.

[Dottonedan]

Also, as I suspected. The difference is in the movement. On one, the table moves. The other, the gantry moves. The gantry weights more.

[inkman996]

Dan I think you are blowing my issue with humidity way out of proportion. You are showing your knee jerk defense of the machine you represented and serviced. I am fine with MY I Image, the second it takes to dampen the screen is trivial and always works. I am not bemoaning it at all and have not done so. What started all this is my telling you that environment is a non trivial thing when it comes to owning and operating an ink imaging system. That holds true for a whole myriad of ink systems, such as DTG and other digital printing machines. You should not be so arrogant towards the people that have to buy and pay for this type of equipment, we are the ones that have all the risk.

should M&R just stop selling the machines now, because you like to keep your machine where it is and dampen the screens?

That above is an example of blowing out of proportion this whole discussion, I never talked bad about the I Image, I love the thing and would always recommend it going forward.