Metal Halide vs led

[GraphicDisorder]

250 screens a day, 40-50 jobs. Film? No thanks

Now 

You know you want to add a lot more!

[3Deep]

Bottom line is CTS is right for some and not for others, like Steve I would love to have all the new toy's just to keep up with the Jones, if our shop was was busy say setup at 7a.m. printing start's at 7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.  printing all day yeah I would say CTS and it would move production so much faster.  I just talk with a guy yesterday and they have a room dedicated to nothing but film storage dating back many years and I told they could really benefit from the CTS machine and keep years worth of art on a thumb drive.

[GraphicDisorder]

I think CTS is one of those things were you don't know what you are missing until you have one. Just that simple.

[mimosatexas]

Just want to chime in a bit on the whole film vs CTS thing from the perspective of someone who uses film and would have to grow a ton to justify CTS, but also as someone who frequently does the same day orders and occasionally remakes screens to adjust something etc.  I use a DIY FPU that is modeled on Alan's and it does not use carrier sheets, positions the screens in the exact same place and makes positioning the film exactly in the same place very quick and easy.  I literally do not use my micros when setting up on press unless my press is in need of zeroing/recalibrating or something shifts mid-run, so rarely...

I definitely get that CTS means someone who has no attention to detail and is unskilled can do the same, and obviously you are saving on the film cost and time to print the film then place it on the screen, but I disagree with the idea that without CTS you can't remake a perfectly aligned screen ad hoc vs having to remake all of them.  I've never gotten the whole "time to catalog and find films" thing either.  I can find a film for a job in the same amount of time it takes me to find the digital file on my computer.  I also keep films next to my FPU until the job is completed in case I do have to remake a screen for any reason.  Obviously I am not a large shop so I am not relying on dumbasses to make my screens and suffering setbacks and slowdowns as a result, but I think that is a tangental issue from CTS vs Film.  With a few "best practices" and some attention to detail, I think they function similarly when it comes to registration and the ability to reshoot screens in alignment.  At least, for a small shop like mine that is currently going through 50ish screens a week max, it is hard to justify the cost vs just being smart about using what I already have.

[screenprintguy]

When your orders pick up and time in your day becomes very thin, you would see the difference. There is no such thing as, "a dummy" can use CTS. I don't let anyone touch ours yet. If you don't lock your frames in perfect, you will have issues on press. Also, if the person using the CTS isn't careful there are other things that can go wrong, too rough, may pop a screen, loading a dirty frame makes messes. Roller frames that may have fabric pop up in the corners while imaging can cause head strikes. Basically, the operator of the CTS MUST pay attention to detail. The upside of a CTS over films way justifies the investment. If you are going through more than 20 screens a day, even if those are reshoots, there is no way that its not worth it, even to a small shop. We are a prime example of this. I was very skeptical at first but took the money back guarantee challenge and actually paid that sucker off in less than 2 years. Ive stated this a ton of times, you just can't know how awesome having one is, an how much you will kick yourself for not going CTS sooner until you have one. A guy in Orlando went to M&R last December the same days my wife and I did. He was looking at a new press which he got, 16 co GT3. He was DEAD SET AGAINST CTS. Even after he spent time with one at the factory, he was still not convinced. His shop does amazing work, and tons of work, so much they are running 3 autos 40 hours a week and expanding to 15,000 square feet. Mainly sim process jobs, big and smaller runs, receiving pallets of shirts a day. Bottom line, he took the chance and can tell you that there is noooo freakin way he would go backwards. That being said, it's not cheap but you just can't go off of people ROI calcs on one of these units. If you had a chance to get one or run one for a  full week of jobs, it's a no brainer. We were 2 years with an Epson based model, and now in our 3rd year of CTS with the I-Image ST. No way would I go backwards, I thought at one point I might have to when we had some issues with the Epson and I didn't know if we could afford the move up, but weighing out the film bla bla bla stuff, no brainer, move up from there.

[mimosatexas]

My point was to specifically address the idea that you can't remake a screen with dead on alignment ad hoc. 

I also think CTS would only be a good investment if you already had a good auto, fast exposure unit, nice dryer, and a handful of other items that will make your shop more money and help out quality of life and product etc a lot more.  I see it is a worthy upgrade eventually, but it definitely isnt as important as other stuff in the process, and it would be reaaaaallly hard to justify for a shop that didn't have tens of thousands of dollars to spend without being able to upgrade other things.

Having seen Alan's setup I also know he wouldn't see the same drastic and immediate benefits that other shops might, but that is only because he already worked through a lot of those issues by nailing down his film storage and FPU setup.  Seeing a few of the setups in other large shops around Austin, I can definitely see how it would help some of them A LOT though.  I went into one shop (which I wont name) that had 3 auto's and was clearly spending money like crazy, that had probably about the most ghetto and chaotic screen department I could even imagine.  Films everywhere, dust everywhere, screens everywhere, employees that couldnt have cared less, etc.

[Sbrem]

One thing that seems to get over looked on the CTS "I can't justify it" thread is...when we ran a FPU, we had to have a skilled person, aka"someone that gave a sh*t" to do it...you had to be super accurate, and understand how the process works. With a DTS, we can stick ANYONE in in that spot and have them cranking out spectacular screens.  The exposure time is already set in stone -thanks to our Starlight- the mesh count is called out in the file and all you have to do is put the screen on the machine. We aren't even talking about reg time / film / ink/ tape / labor time or any of that savings....but I don't want to go into the things you can save on that you have NO idea about.....

OK, and I'm not arguing here, but my screen guy gives a crap and has been making screens for over 30 years, so not an issue, and if super accurate means lining up films on an MHM FPU, which might take about 15 seconds on a bad day, that's not an issue, and because of what we use, registration is also not an issue. Film needs to be printed once, whereas CTS has to be printed every time you need to make it. Tape? Seriously? $50.00 a year over 4000 jobs? Ink? 2 to 3 pints a year at $90.00 total? And you still have labor anyway, and if someone is there 8 hours a day, then you're paying it out whether they are setting up and burning or washing out or coating and all the rest. Daily cataloging the films is about 15 minutes, in a small room that was formerly our dark room, with a process camera and film processor. Now, if we were in need of considerably higher screen output, I wouldn't even bother typing this. Someone like ScreenDan is producing 200 and up, 100 on a slow day, it's a total no-brainer. The Starlight I can certainly see, which is not tens of thousands of dollars. Now Brandt mentions mentions imaging the screen and being ready to burn 30 seconds later; so it can image a full size, say 12 x 15 image in about 10 seconds, because you have to take it out of the CTS and put it in the Starlight, start the vacuum, wait the short drawdown and begin burning? Well, that's mighty impressive but I suspect a little embellishment. However, I'm very interested to understand the savings that I have NO idea about. What could that be?

Steve

[jvanick]

Now Brandt mentions mentions imaging the screen and being ready to burn 30 seconds later; so it can image a full size, say 12 x 15 image in about 10 seconds, because you have to take it out of the CTS and put it in the Starlight, start the vacuum, wait the short drawdown and begin burning?

if you have a I-Image STE or STE2, it exposes the screen immediately after it makes it... so no need for moving it to the starlight.  Also... no vacuum needed with CTS screens... you don't need glass either...

(We expose 160S screens at 12 seconds with the starlight... actually had to get a SLOWER emulsion because the one we were playing with at first was a 2.8 second exposure and just too fast)

on our epson unit, it typically takes about a minute to image a screen, 5-10 seconds to move it to the starlight and we're good to go... 2 minutes from opening the file to putting it in the soak tank.

[ebscreen]

An Epson based unit is slower than the equivalent film, image for image.
We can gang up films and print 4 feet of it continuously.

[GraphicDisorder]

One thing that seems to get over looked on the CTS "I can't justify it" thread is...when we ran a FPU, we had to have a skilled person, aka"someone that gave a sh*t" to do it...you had to be super accurate, and understand how the process works. With a DTS, we can stick ANYONE in in that spot and have them cranking out spectacular screens.  The exposure time is already set in stone -thanks to our Starlight- the mesh count is called out in the file and all you have to do is put the screen on the machine. We aren't even talking about reg time / film / ink/ tape / labor time or any of that savings....but I don't want to go into the things you can save on that you have NO idea about.....

OK, and I'm not arguing here, but my screen guy gives a crap and has been making screens for over 30 years, so not an issue, and if super accurate means lining up films on an MHM FPU, which might take about 15 seconds on a bad day, that's not an issue, and because of what we use, registration is also not an issue. Film needs to be printed once, whereas CTS has to be printed every time you need to make it. Tape? Seriously? $50.00 a year over 4000 jobs? Ink? 2 to 3 pints a year at $90.00 total? And you still have labor anyway, and if someone is there 8 hours a day, then you're paying it out whether they are setting up and burning or washing out or coating and all the rest. Daily cataloging the films is about 15 minutes, in a small room that was formerly our dark room, with a process camera and film processor. Now, if we were in need of considerably higher screen output, I wouldn't even bother typing this. Someone like ScreenDan is producing 200 and up, 100 on a slow day, it's a total no-brainer. The Starlight I can certainly see, which is not tens of thousands of dollars. Now Brandt mentions mentions imaging the screen and being ready to burn 30 seconds later; so it can image a full size, say 12 x 15 image in about 10 seconds, because you have to take it out of the CTS and put it in the Starlight, start the vacuum, wait the short drawdown and begin burning? Well, that's mighty impressive but I suspect a little embellishment. However, I'm very interested to understand the savings that I have NO idea about. What could that be?

Steve

No need to vacuum here, also my CTS and Starlight basically are touching, so no walking really either. Yes image size would affect print time of course, just a loose number I forgot we gotta be real specifc around here haha. But the ST prints pretty fast. Certainly faster than our Epson unit did and our 4880 did. Our shop we have a cycle, start a screen imaging, one is burning while your doing that, your washing one while both of those are going. Move one to the next. Our exposure times are in the 30-50 second range depending on screen.  They are not really waiting on anything in most cases it just continues to move every 30-50 seconds. For what its worth most of our shirt backs are 15x17.

[Sbrem]

Thanks Brandt, and Homer and the rest too, I really do appreciate it. I do see a Starlight in our not too distant future, a great step for us for sure. As we make a push for a newish 5 year plan, I also see the need for CTS, just not quite yet...

Steve

[Homer]

for me - and I think Steve has a better set up than we ever did - we were HORRENDOUS at filing films. We couldn't do it once a day which would have been the proper way to do it. we waited a week or more. Sometimes once a month before we could file it. That makes a huge impact on us right there. And then we would get one wet or loose one in the pile, it was a mess...SO I needed a solution to that and this has done it.

What I mean by some one that gives a damn - and again, this is MY shop....there are only 5 of us here. not all of us can do each others' job. Out of the 5, 2 can print on the auto... So those guys should not be doing the films / exposing. BUT Everyone can expose screens. What we had happening is the printers were reg'n film, exposing screens and so on. I want those guys printing! SO moving to DTS allows a window for those less skilled / knowledgeable guys to jump into screen making. I am NOT saying they couldn't use an FPU, it just takes a bit more time and has a higher learning curve. With the DTS, Mike is right, it's not an "any idiot can do it" but you take a ton of the problems we had with an FPU and solve them with a click of a button...skill is still needed, but no where near as much....

40k is a spicy meatball to invest into a system that isn't broken,I  totally get it...Look at Al, I think he knows his numbers and still can't see any benefits. My point is for MY shop, we can not go back to the mess we called film.... I would if I had to, it wasn't hell on earth, honestly. But this is better.

Things you have no idea about? well, those things will show up when you install your DTS. One thing I never thought about, it made me get more organized. That in itself is huge....but again, results may vary...

[dirkdiggler]

Once you have CTS and a Starlight, you will see you can't afford NOT to have it!  That big of a deal, and I am a small shop,  I would probably quit before I gave up either of those machines.

[ABuffington]

What is the highest tonal percentage you can hold on a CTS?  in the 85-95% range?  Not the lowest percentage but can you get a hard dot on high tonal percentage on 55LPI?
And to make it even more fun, At the opposite end of the tonal range, if you can hold a 4% dot whats the highest tonal percentage on the other end you can image and have a good strong dot that will not come off in print?   

[Dottonedan]

I've done 85 Lpi myself and printed samples on the shirt. We held a strong 3% but the highlight was bumped up to output more like 5%. The shadow tones need adjusted more in the shadow tones with each higher lpi. At 84 lpi the shadow tone is opened up so much 99% area cut back to more like 70% in order to maintain some shadow detail at the 95% range. You reach a point diminishing return since the negetive space gets so much smaller and smaller. That's also dependent on how many heads you have. You may get 100lpi with a 1 head versus a 3 head (as it pertains to the I-Image.  For example, you can get very good results using the M&R standard 80/60 curve when only using 45-50 lpi. Anything higher and you need to test and open it up more for each jump.

To do this, you have to work with the options you have available.

Print pass modes. 6 pass = fastest production but least accurate for high end sim process and thin line work detail. It's very acceptable for the every day prints. Best for solid vector work and basic halftones is say 45 lpi.  Every pass higher than that like 12, 18, 24 get better and better, but slower and slower print production. When I say slower, 12 pass is double the time of a 6 pass print but we are taking about 6 pass having a print time of 15 seconds and 12 pass having 30 seconds. The 30 seconds is a small fraction of film print time. Most of my customers opt for the 12 pass.

Different curve based on the lpi you want to use.

# of heads:  1 head prints slightly slower than a 2 or 3 head, puts the coverage down slightly thinner but prints the finest high end halftones. Most 1 heads work best at 12 pass.

Most importantly, is to test your exposure using a fine halftone test file that turkey matches up with the lpi you are using so that you get both an accurate exposure as well as holding the best dots with your adjusted curves.

Coating technique is another factor. A 2/2 coat on high mesh may be too much emulsion to hold the finest dots. It's been proven that when the emulsion is properly exposed, it's already durable enough for long runs of the average shop using poly of orders in the 75-150 range and even in the 1000-5000 shirt range.  If you are needing discharge/waterbased emulsion then those numbers may change and exp time obviously changes but the theory of coating all mesh the same (when you have 230 and 305 in the mix is not feasible with thick coats and trying to hold the finest dots.  If you don't need 4-5% dots in the 55lpi range then it's a moot point.

All of these can be a player on image detail.