I Image S

[Gilligan]

That also won't trilock for multi color jobs.  Unless your frames are perfectly true with no flaws at all.

[Alex M]

That also won't trilock for multi color jobs.  Unless your frames are perfectly true with no flaws at all.

This, that’s why I highly recommend doing it the way I suggested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dottonedan]

I don’t “highly recommend the procedure I stated either, specifically for the multi files setup. This tho, is an option for some shops like ours. For example, we always do our neck labels this way. Very efficient. I didn’t mention multi color. Im basing the comment on what our experience is. 90% of our pocket and left chest prints will be 1 color. Can do all day long.

(Edit). I thought about it and a while 90% of our jobs have pocket prints, probably half of those are really 1 color. We wouldn't normally do 4-6 different jobs on one screen (to save screens), due to the lbottlenecking I mentioned. It may cut down on a lot of screens but would take added art prep time to gather the 1 Colors  into one file. Some shops would. Shops have different needs. Maybe you have several manual presses in your arsenal but few or not enough screens for example.

Think about it this way.
The flipping once you print the top is the standard way. Everybody does that. People love that these machines have cut down their time on screens so much. No taping and aligning films, no pin hole blocking, prints a pocket in like 8 seconds?, (+ could expose on the machine depending), and then x that by saving 3-6 more screens and another 8 seconds each. You can have 6-1 color prints on one screen in 16-20 seconds. That’s pretty good.

[Dottonedan]

Also what would be your threshold to convert to the ST , based on 13x19 sheets of film , were currently using 250 sheets approx a month.

I think the 13X19 cost 120.00 for 100 sheets from Ryonet.
 That’s $300.00 in film cost gone. $3,600.00 a year in film alone. Doesn’t matter what brand DTS wet or wax. It’s far better in a valuable and measurable list of ways.

Also, add to that, the price you are paying for ink to film. I’ll bet it’s much higher than a DTS ink or wax.

[1964GN]

So, we are hoping to get a i-Image S and a auto coater in the very near future. We have 2 ROQ press with their pin system. So far we have been getting conflicting information on weather or not this can be set up for a pin system, and exactly how the warranty will be effected. We sent a frame to M&R last week and they should be getting it today, if not yesterday. While we wait for their response, has anyone made this thing work with a pin system (of any kind)?

[Alex M]

So, we are hoping to get a i-Image S and a auto coater in the very near future. We have 2 ROQ press with their pin system. So far we have been getting conflicting information on weather or not this can be set up for a pin system, and exactly how the warranty will be effected. We sent a frame to M&R last week and they should be getting it today, if not yesterday. While we wait for their response, has anyone made this thing work with a pin system (of any kind)?

When I was there we set up multiple machine for MHM and others with pins. If it is the standard 42cm pin placement it should be easily done. If it is pins on newmans it might be a little more difficult.

[Croft]

Also what would be your threshold to convert to the ST , based on 13x19 sheets of film , were currently using 250 sheets approx a month.

I think the 13X19 cost 120.00 for 100 sheets from Ryonet.
 That’s $300.00 in film cost gone. $3,600.00 a year in film alone. Doesn’t matter what brand DTS wet or wax. It’s far better in a valuable and measurable list of ways.

Also, add to that, the price you are paying for ink to film. I’ll bet it’s much higher than a DTS ink or wax.

Only paying $80 for Ulano inkjet  film and usually 2 Qts of bulk ink a year.,

[brandon]

Also what would be your threshold to convert to the ST , based on 13x19 sheets of film , were currently using 250 sheets approx a month.

I think the 13X19 cost 120.00 for 100 sheets from Ryonet.
 That’s $300.00 in film cost gone. $3,600.00 a year in film alone. Doesn’t matter what brand DTS wet or wax. It’s far better in a valuable and measurable list of ways.

Also, add to that, the price you are paying for ink to film. I’ll bet it’s much higher than a DTS ink or wax.

Only paying $80 for Ulano inkjet  film and usually 2 Qts of bulk ink a year.,

Let's not forget the recommended yearly head replacement of the CTS along with the tech and fly in and hotel which is about 4K +. The yearly recommendation was from the manufacturer. People need to be aware of this as it seems to be put on the sidelines when these machines are sold.

[mk162]

We've replaced the head in our Epson based machine twice now(4 years).  It has totaled about $3k.  Add in the other maintenance/repairs and it's closer to $5k.

Still cheaper than film.

[brandon]

I think it depends on the shop. There is one on here that went back to film because they are the rare shop that has things dialed in. For us we use CTS and still use film for certain reasons. My point is that if a single head machine is say around 35K and then factor in 12K for 3 heads over three years I might have a look at going Lazer and bypass ink or wax. Since Lazer is around 90K that might be the way to go. Would rather have paid twice as much and then you can turn the machine off and walk away for days without worrying about messed up heads since there are none. Very important in New Orleans where power goes out all the time and we have these things called hurricanes.

[brandon]

I apologise I am derailing the thread.

[Dottonedan]

Only paying $80 for Ulano inkjet film

. Ok. You save $200 a month on film.

and usually 2 Qts of bulk ink a year.,

.  The I-Image ink is about $90.00 I think for a liter (been a while) I'm a little fuzzy on the cost ion the ink. I may have gone up. Not sure. How much you get out of that one liter is different for different shops.

[Dottonedan]

Also what would be your threshold to convert to the ST , based on 13x19 sheets of film , were currently using 250 sheets approx a month.

I think the 13X19 cost 120.00 for 100 sheets from Ryonet.
 That’s $300.00 in film cost gone. $3,600.00 a year in film alone. Doesn’t matter what brand DTS wet or wax. It’s far better in a valuable and measurable list of ways.

Also, add to that, the price you are paying for ink to film. I’ll bet it’s much higher than a DTS ink or wax.

Only paying $80 for Ulano inkjet  film and usually 2 Qts of bulk ink a year.,

Let's not forget the recommended yearly head replacement of the CTS along with the tech and fly in and hotel which is about 4K +. The yearly recommendation was from the manufacturer. People need to be aware of this as it seems to be put on the sidelines when these machines are sold.

In my opinion, I think this new statement of "a head lasting one year" only came out over the last year. When I started, the longevity of print heads was not covered well in discussion. I believe largely due to variances in shop usage nobody was 100% certain. It was common for heads to last 3-5 years. The (Lasting only one year) is/was a statement to cover previous expectations and the I feel stems from issues they were having with the D2.  I'm expecting this new T6 to be much better and allow a head to last for much, much longer. With that tho, it's still a safe thing for M&R to exceed your expectations when you see it last for 2-5 years but you've been told only one year. And lets not forget, the average life of a wax print head has long been known to be 1 year with the makers recently promoting new advances that enable a wax head to last longer. How long that is for sure, time will tell, similar to the new T6 and heads.  I do hear tho, that there has been some with wax machines that have lasted very long, like 4-6 years.


The good you hear and the negative you hear form either Wax or wet ink, comes from two types of sources.
1, those who abuse the machines and expect to have no issues but do,
2, Those who really take care of their machines and still have a major hiccup of some sort.


#2 is far less prevalent.


This falls in line with your shop differences, and how you treat the environment it's in and how the people treat the equipment and maintenace. I've seen plenty that abuse the machines and they don't go bad. They run them to what looks like death, but they still run with no issues... while other abuse them and they do have multiple problems. Those who always stay up on maintenance and treat them well, run them for a very long time with no issues ever. Multiple years without a hiccup.


There's no litmus yes to say (if you don't do this or if you do this), this will happen.  History will prove whats the best option and then all of you will chime in with answers to peoples questions. I can only tell you what I know or have experienced, good or bad.  We currently run one at our shop and they were/are a major game changer.


Having said all of that, going back to the film cost per year and perhaps in many cases, the film cost is still higher than having to replace a single head each year. So a I-Image S is advantageous in either direction, Add to that, all of the known benefits a DTS brings in versus film.  No matter how you slice it, DT wax or Ink is a great choice!


Thats my thoughts on it.

[brandon]

#2 is far less prevalent but I can confirm it happens.

[ZooCity]

#2 definitely happens.  I see what looks like a lot of that regardless of masking media or brand of machine. 

The issue I see with all masking type CTS units is the sheer weight placed upon them to perform reliably in a shop v. the current state of reliability of these systems.  Again, regardless of masking media, brand or even one company's approach v. another's to a nearly identical overall machine.