Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. - Thomas Edison
Are these issues with ink jet cts related to printing directly on the emulsion vs film? That second image Danny posted is garbage and I've never seen anything even close to that with film. My halftone also look like his photo of wax and nothing like his photo of ink jet, again on film though. Honestly those look worse than my old 1400 when I hadn't even aligned the head properly and was just printing straight up stock settings with bitmap halftones. I can't imagine people have been making the switch from film to cts and accepting such a massive downgrade in quality...
All too many people confuse the need for a crisp clean perfectly round dot. It's not needed. What is needed is an accurate representation of the percent on the T-shirt hey.size that accurately represents the tone for that given area. The shape is of no concern unless it was to interfere with the screen mesh. As everybody is aware, you can print CMYK or simulator process or even a one color greydation with a square dot a round, oval, squiggly or even in the shape of TSB as a halftone representation. Now comes the question of is the edge of your.sharp and clean. By that I mean is it the best it can be based on the resolution of the printer? Because a wet ink jet printer sprint sprays The 8 to 15 pick a leader sized drops, it has more of a frayed edge similar to spatter painting with an airbrush on a canvas or a piece of paper. This is far more accurate than wax and I'll say currently. And I'm speaking in terms of mechanically during the output. It's better than wax. But the downfall of wax and it's ability to output the finest detail of the 600 or 1200 or 800 dpi, is a benefit to Screenprinter's. The reason the wax output downfall is a benefit to Screenprinter's is because it's inability to hold the detail actually smooth out the edges of the shape that is creating because it cannot produce the detail that small. I'm referring to the edges of the dot. Due to the consistency of the wax, and the liquid state, it's just thicker and tends to clump together faster. The result for you is a smoother edge on the outside of a.shape. In contrast the wet ink jet printer sprays so tiny that you start to see the edge as not a clean sharp defined hard edge. You see it as little speckles built up to form a dot and the edges can contain satellite dots. I like to think that none of my machines have ever produced the quality that you see in the inkjet comparison with Danny's. But in truth it may not be the case there may be two or three out there out of my two were 300 but I've worked on.Much of that might be due to the fact that the printer does nothing but big bold athletic looking solid prints. And will never see the benefits of that.For film printer, I want 600 800 or 1200 dpi out of it (because I'm printing on a glass surface. Set aside the ink resolution you could us, that has little to do with image quality and everything to do with Inc coverage or solidity. The higher the ink resolution on a film Printer, can improve the visual appearance of a.simply because it's starting to kick up or fill in any of the minute small areas of negative space due to coverage.i've got more to say on this pertaining to the 1200 dpi for Direct and Screen but will have to cover that later. I'm working at my Printshop on a Saturday.
Dan this was borderline unreadable. Please check your spelling as the autocorrect and the typos are turning large parts of your argument unfollowable!Pierre
I'd like to see t shirts printed with the same graphics one wax, one inkjet CTSand one film, would be interesting to see if there is a noticeable difference.