Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. - Thomas Edison
I have a shop shirt that we did on film years ago, and I can not reproduce the quality with my CTS. Its close, but not as good.
I love my CTS and wouldn't go back to film, but.....I have a shop shirt that we did on film years ago, and I can not reproduce the quality with my CTS. Its close, but not as good.
those are pretty rough dots Danny. Is there no way to make them cleaner? We recently bumped the resolution and ink deposit on our old school M&R CTS and are seeing much better results. The dots are cleaner and the deposit is much thicker (to the point of pooling so we had to back up).Dan as an ex tech you would know, can the resolution be increased on the units with RICOH heads?pierre
Quote from: DannyGruninger on January 27, 2017, 12:13:16 AMQuote from: ZooCity on January 26, 2017, 09:18:50 PMCongrats!Danny, what dpi are you running at?1200Sounds about right. Anything under 900 and a struggle is going to ensue trying to linearize your 1-10% range, not enough pixel to work with at 600 to get that kind of control necessary for a higher end print, imo. Great work as always.
Quote from: ZooCity on January 26, 2017, 09:18:50 PMCongrats!Danny, what dpi are you running at?1200
Congrats!Danny, what dpi are you running at?
We actually get very similar results with cts vs what we were getting with film. I like to think we had our film dialed in very well and before ever printing a single job with cts we did a densitometer reading with the cts printed to film and adjusted it to match our film output. There is some slight difference though just in the overall dot shape in the very light tones. Now I must say I have never been overwhelmingly excited about the quality of the ink jet printing onto the screen. I have never used wax but if day in and day out the print quality is consistent I could see why wax may be preferable. Top is cts, bottom is film