Epson halftones....

[acescreen]

When I first switched from our Xante to Epson for film output I always heard that with a good RIP program the halftones are just as good,crisp, and clean as a laser printer or image setter. When we first brought in the 1430 one of the first things I did was put my magnifying glass up to the halftone dots and noticed they were not so clean at all. Looking at it with the "naked eye" on the film they look pretty good, but under the glass you see that they have very jagged edges and look more like snowflakes than clean ellipse dots. I compared it to what my Xante Screen Writer had been putting out and there is a very visible difference, and more so I noticed a difference when doing fine halftone work and process work. I figured it was their entry level printer I would step it up ASAP. When the t3270 came out and I read about the new Revolutionary EPSON PrecisionCore™ TFP® print head and how accurate and clean it printed, I took advantage of the instant $500 instant rebate earlier this year and got it. To my disappointment the halftone dots seem to be exactly the same as what I was getting from my 1430. I have not contacted tech support yet as we've been absolutely slammed that last 4 months but I hope I am missing something or I have the settings wrong because there is not way they can advertise that it prints as good as a laser printer or image setter. Yes I did want to step up to the larger 24" film capability but more so I was hoping to get back to a clean halftone dot like was on my Xante.

I will post pics ASAP if I get a chance.

Please chime in with your thoughts or if you are with Epson or know the correct dept or person to contact at Epson let me know so I can get this setup right.

Here is what I am working with...
-Adobe Illy and Photoshop
-Mac based art dept
-Accurip Black Pearl
-Epson T3270
-Ulano Roll film

Thanks in advance guys!

[Dottonedan]

I don't know much about Epsons or other digital printers, but I really think the difference is in your ink resolution.  Look around in your settings, you should be able to change the output. Not "image" resolution, such as 300, 600, 1200, but rather your ink output resolution.

Look for something that gives you options.  6, 12, 18  (use more passes) for a more accurate print. It's slower, but better.

Then, also check for picoliter size options.  Small, medium, large.

Someone else who knows more will chime in.

[mimosatexas]

Not familiar with the settings on the new epson, but I know on both my 4800 and 9800 there are major differences in the final cleanness of the halftone dots based on a bunch of settings in accurip and the printer itself. The ink and film will make a difference as well. Pierre has tested all of it extensively and is probably the best person to ask.

[3Deep]

Here is my take on your subject an inkjet printer is always going to give you a splatter type halftone not a true nice round halftone your going to get from a laser printer, is the quality of the inkjet acceptable to many printers yes, but to some no.  If your looking to get what you had before your going to have to go back to your laser output printers or stop looking in your magnifying glass , I think if you look at some of the work posted you'll see some very good work printed with inkjet film printers.

[blue moon]

see examples here:

http://www.theshirtboard.com/index.php/topic,8018.0.html

pierre

[Inkworks]

An Epson will never be as good as an actual image setter, whoever told you that probably didn't need the resolution. For the average t-shirt printer a good epson and RIP will cover 99% of what you need. I'm still using my Epson 3000, including for a lot of tiny, detailed padprint films, but every once in a while I still need to send out for true image setter film on those picky, tough jobs.

[blue moon]

hi res printing on the 1400 looks better than 4800. Here's an example of  hi rez on the 4800. While not quite imagesetter quality, I feel it is close enough.

pierre

[Dottonedan]

Pierre, that's not a perfectly round or oval shape. Gotta trash that Printer. You can't get exact color reproduction with rough edges. Needs to have perfectly smooth, hard, "clean" edges.

Kidding.

That used to be my thought back when I used imagesetter film and the digital printers came out.
Laser printers?   Pfft. They have tonor overspray. That's worse that what you get from most digital printers.

Sure, a clean round shape does improve your chances of obtaining "the best" image reproduction by about 1.5% but that's about it. Not so much "shape" but opacity or "hard dot" will increase your image reproduction because you won't over expose the thinner areas because there are none. That's what I'm saying.


Most think "oval and round  "shape" is what you need.

Have you seen the award winning square dot shirts?  Mezzo tint patterns? Line patterns? They are done that way. How about DTG. They are little 7-15 picoliter sized "spatters".so "rough edges" I can take any day.  Just make them opaque.

It's not the "shape" of your dot. It's "is it the size you are holding, representing the tone in that color that counts.

[Lizard]

I have to agree with Dan's last post. Your dot could look like an Elephant but if it represents 10% you will see 10% tonal range when printing. The key is having your printer calibrated/linearized.  I could show you a print we have done with ink jet and the same print we have done since switching to cts and the print is virtually the same.  But the dots look differently on film and cts.

[Stinkhorn Press]

I haven't looked too close, as we do basic stuff that doesn't need the control yet.

But I still ripped off (most of) Pierre's setup. epson 4800, accurip. we only ever got middling to poor results from out various epson 1400s.

Settings that work for us in Accurip (no pearl whathave you):
we never change these:
1. "multi-black" BUT only printing black in that ONE channel, the rest just have cleaner in them.

2. ADJUSTMENT CURVE - unique to your stuff, but mine: 0=0% 30=48% 70+86% 95=99% 100=100% (pretty huge difference from unmodified)

settings we routinely change:
print resolution: 720x720 is fast and perfectly acceptable for anything basic, requires the droplet weight ALL the way up to 15 for us (accuink black on cheap imagestar roll film)
and
2880x1440 setting for anything we want the nicest dots we can make (takes FOREVER to print)

[acescreen]

Follow up to this post....

Talked with an Epson rep at ISS Ft. Worth. He recommended that when doing fine dot work to set printer at it's highest resolution (2880x1440) the only reason I did not do this before is that it took away your control of the droplet weight, but he said at that res the machine is preset at 12 which is ideal. Tested it today and I am getting much cleaner halftones.

Thanks for the input guys.