PDA

View Full Version : new to di sub-Which Ricoh should I use for start-up



myfotoshop
28-08-2011, 12:48 PM
Hi All,
I am a small photo shop owner.Up until now have been out-sourcing most photo-gifts. I am in the process of getting the kit together. I have a new single mug press enroute,but no printer. I get the gist from this forum the most reliable printer is a Ricoh (I know the GX 7000 is the ultimate) but I want to start small, only doing A4 printing for mugs ,mousemats coasters etc. I don't want to go down the CISS route with an inkjet printer.
Have you any experience on these models of Ricoh printers? Gx3300n,3000,2500,2600 or G3050 ?
Many Thanks

John G
28-08-2011, 12:54 PM
The A4 GXe3300n would be fine for your needs - its the A4 version of the 7000 and its available from BMS with the sublijet-r sublimation ink carts:

http://www.printerowners.co.uk/sublimation/489/ricoh-sublimation-printers.htm

(http://www.printerowners.co.uk/sublimation/489/ricoh-sublimation-printers.htm)Cheers John

edit: 3000,2500,2600 or G3050 - don't thing these are supported by sawgrass who manufacture the ink carts

bms
29-08-2011, 04:04 PM
Yes JohnG's correct. Only the GXe3300 is a supported A4 Ricoh printer. The A3 model, will be the GX7700 when it's available which should be any day now...

NASH
30-08-2011, 04:25 PM
[QUOTE=myfotoshop;29557]Hi All,
I am a small photo shop owner.Up until now have been out-sourcing most photo-gifts. I am in the process of getting the kit together. I have a new single mug press enroute,but no printer. I get the gist from this forum the most reliable printer is a Ricoh (I know the GX 7000 is the ultimate) but I want to start small, only doing A4 printing for mugs ,mousemats coasters etc. I don't want to go down the CISS route with an inkjet printer.
Have you any experience on these models of Ricoh printers? Gx3300n,3000,2500,2600 or G3050 ?


Is that you Denis?

AJLA
01-09-2011, 03:57 PM
Hey Nash long time no see! I'm just about to throw out my old Epson due to the ink running out, i dont want to buy more inks for this printer as throughout it's life i've had constand blockage issues, i'm hoping for a Richoh 3300 to arrive shortly.

NASH
02-09-2011, 09:40 AM
Hey Mandy, how have you been?. I`ve had my epson D88 for three years now and had no blockages, but this week i have a blockage and it`s been a nightmare to solve. I`ve got all the colours but now i`m having a problem with black. But in the mean time i bought some refillable ink cartridges for £63.00 for my backup D88 printer which is getting me out of trouble, while i work on the other to remove blockage. I have about 7 seven epson printers in my shop so i`ll try them all before i go for a Rioch. Anyhow did get a good deal for the the Rioch you bought?

NASH
02-09-2011, 09:55 AM
Hey Eureka!

Spent nearly ten hours trying to remove blockage, came in this morning and a perfect nozzle pattern. I think someone may have come in last night after i left and fixed it. Now i`ve got two epsons with subli ink, what should i do now, i don`t need two? One full of Artanium ink and the other with Rotech ink

AJLA
02-09-2011, 01:57 PM
Hi Nash , i'm fine, my gremlins don't usually fix things the blinking things get in everything and wreck em! So you're a lucky boy!

whitesquizzel
07-09-2011, 01:41 AM
Any more news on when the GX7700 will be available - am seriously fed up with my Epson as I dont print every day and spend more time trying to get the print right than I do printing at the moment so think its time to take the plunge for the Ricoh when funds allow.

bms
07-09-2011, 08:51 AM
Latest info is mid Sept, but SubliJet cartridges might be a short while after that.

whitesquizzel
11-09-2011, 11:34 PM
OK thanks - am so fed up with the Epson as I get horizontal lines every time I use it - despite cleaning and cleaning the head (and not cleaning in case I am over cleaning) Its just really stressy as I never know whether I am going to be able to do an order on time as it depends on how long the printer takes to behave - sometimes a couple of days. Am hoping this wont be the case with the Ricoh?
In reality I think I should of gone with a Ricoh originally as I am not doing big volumes as yet that require me to use the printer every day which I think is what the Epson needs really - a rather expensive mistake sadly as if i had known I could of paid a little more and got the Ricoh in the first place although lets hope I dont end up regretting that as a purchase for a different reason LOL. I wish dye sub printing was a little easier sometimes :-(

JSR
12-09-2011, 12:16 AM
If you're used to doing 13" wide (A3+) prints on your Epson printer, you might want to check if the new Ricoh is capable of printing that wide. I think the last one was limited to A3 (11.7" wide) paper.

bms
12-09-2011, 06:55 PM
You could get a bypass tray for the GX7000 which enabled it to take 13" (A3+) paper and this also enable long lengths to be accommodated. Should be the same for the GX7700 when available.

JSR
12-09-2011, 09:19 PM
You could get a bypass tray for the GX7000 which enabled it to take 13" (A3+) paper and this also enable long lengths to be accommodated. Should be the same for the GX7700 when available.
Do the Ricoh print the full 13", then? Seems odd to have the ability to print 13" wide, but only supply a paper tray capable of 11.7" wide paper.

bms
12-09-2011, 09:34 PM
Agree, but bypass tray allows the slightly wider print AND much greater length.

JSR
12-09-2011, 11:30 PM
Agree, but bypass tray allows the slightly wider print AND much greater length.
Ricoh are crazy. Don't they think they'd sell more printers if they put the right tray with it to enable it to print A3+ out-of-the-box? Perhaps they just don't want to sell any... :D

bms
13-09-2011, 07:37 AM
Ricoh are crazy. Don't they think they'd sell more printers if they put the right tray with it to enable it to print A3+ out-of-the-box? Perhaps they just don't want to sell any... :DPossibly, but I think Ricoh (a) are small players compared to EPSON, HP and CANON, (b) see the Ricoh A3 as a business printer where A4 and A3 are more standard and (c) sell the bypass tray for banner printing. Just my thoughts.

John G
13-09-2011, 10:19 AM
When you buy a car do you always get a top of the range Bose sound system FOC - no its an optional extra. The Ricoh tray is exactly that, an optional extra - you don't need it to print A3.

JSR
13-09-2011, 12:03 PM
Well, clearly I'm the only one who thinks it's silly to develop a 13" wide printer that can't print 13" wide out of the box.

13" carriage Epson printers aren't crippled so that you can't print 13" out of the box. If a 13" wide Epson printer can support roll paper, you're supplied with the attachments in the box - they're not extra. If the Epson printer can print CDs, they don't expect you to buy the CD tray as an "optional extra". Yet people say that Epson are the spawn of the devil for their high prices.

All I can conclude is that Ricoh know that they've priced the printer too high in the first place and so cripple it in order to price it more favourably in the market against competitor printers that can print 13" wide "out of the box" - knowing that, in order for you to print the same as that competitor, they'll get more money out of you when you buy the "optional extra".

What next from Ricoh? A 13" wide printer supplied only with the parts that let you print A4? :rolleyes:

I'm surprised Ricoh haven't stooped to the "Lexmark selling practice" of only supplying the three coloured inks in the box and no black, just to keep the price low in the knowledge that you'll go out immediately to buy a black ink.

Paul
13-09-2011, 12:30 PM
I am with Jonathan on this one :) is no much to do with me as I am not ricoch user and I wont be but for me it looks silly too :)


When you buy a car do you always get a top of the range Bose sound system FOC - no its an optional extra. The Ricoh tray is exactly that, an optional extra - you don't need it to print A3.

I think is more like buy a 4x4 car with no wheels :) you need to buy them as a extra to go for off roading :tongue:

John G
13-09-2011, 12:54 PM
I think is more like buy a 4x4 car with no wheels :) you need to buy them as a extra to go for off roading

No Paul, all new 4 x 4 vehicles sold in the UK come with Wheels, if you want to go off roading, and require special wheels, then that would be an optional extra :wink:

Paul
13-09-2011, 01:12 PM
i can go off roading with standard ones too :)

John G
13-09-2011, 01:27 PM
Just quoting what you said :eek: thought it was a bit strange you buying a car with no wheels.

JSR
13-09-2011, 01:35 PM
No Paul, all new 4 x 4 vehicles sold in the UK come with Wheels, if you want to go off roading, and require special wheels, then that would be an optional extra :wink:
Yeah, 4x4 vehicles all come with 4 wheels... Just like all 13" carriage printers come with 13" paper support... ...well, except the Ricoh. :biggrin:

John G
13-09-2011, 02:22 PM
Ah! but its not a 13" printer - its sold as an A3 printer, not an off road printer or a printer with no wheels :eek: now i'm confused :confused:

JSR
13-09-2011, 03:59 PM
Ah! but its not a 13" printer - its sold as an A3 printer, not an off road printer or a printer with no wheels :eek: now i'm confused :confused:
Selling it as an A3-only printer puts it down in the same market as the A3 Brother printers that cost £130 (and they come with a scanner). I wonder how Ricoh justify £500+ (or whatever the Ricoh price is).

I looked up the multi-pass tray for the Ricoh, and it costs about the same as a brand new Epson B1100 - which prints A3+ out-of-the-box. So you can either have a brand new printer, with ink, and the ability to print A3+... or you can have a tray... Hmm... great sales tactic, Ricoh!

John G
13-09-2011, 04:26 PM
Selling it as an A3-only printer puts it down in the same market as the A3 Brother printers that cost £130 (and they come with a scanner). I wonder how Ricoh justify £500+ (or whatever the Ricoh price is).

Because they can market it as a printer that sawgrass sub ink will go through - people are prepared to pay a premium if they want supported sub A4 / A3 printers.

If you browse tinternet you'll find that the supported Ricoh printers are more expensive than unsupported - The Ricoh 3300 which is supported is around £25 - £50 more expensive than and Ricoh 3350 which isn't supported - even though they are the same machine.


OK - just checked and its the other way round so it doesn't make any sence - the suppoted 3300 @ £107.09 and the unsupported 3350 @ £121.45 (all + del + vat). I'm sure when I looked the other day the unsupported was cheaper.

Paul
13-09-2011, 04:47 PM
Because they can market it as a printer that sawgrass sub ink will go through who you mean by that John?? Ricoh or sawgrass?

JSR
13-09-2011, 04:50 PM
Because they can market it as a printer that sawgrass sub ink will go through - people are prepared to pay a premium if they want supported sub A4 / A3 printers.
Ricoh don't sell it as a dye-sub printer, though, so that's makes no difference to them.

In the past, I've printed those glass clocks and worktop savers that are 12" diameter. I would have been very miffed if I'd bought an A3 Ricoh printer for ~£500 and found out that it will only print 11.7" and, for that extra few mms, I'd need to spend another £140 - especially given that the £140 would get me an Epson B1100 printer that would print more than the required 12", thus saving the original ~£500.

They must sell Ricoh printers complete with stickers saying "Doh!" that customer stick on their foreheads. :biggrin:

John G
13-09-2011, 05:01 PM
who you mean by that John?? Ricoh or sawgrass?
Well I was meaning anybody that sells it. If it appears on the Sawgrass website, for the powerdriver or profile, then its supported.


They must sell Ricoh printers complete with stickers saying "Doh!" that customer stick on their foreheads
Ah, so thats why i've been bumping into things today - the sticker must have slipped over my eyes! :biggrin:

JSR
13-09-2011, 05:09 PM
Ah, so thats why i've been bumping into things today - the sticker must have slipped over my eyes! :biggrin:
Oops, sorry, didn't realise you had one.

So - urm - present company excepted, of course! :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

My "printer rants" come purely from my frustration that this industry has been around for years now, the ink market is strangled by one supplier, and there is no printer that's been designed to use dye-sub inks. We're forever having to use "square peg in round hole" Heath Robinson mentality. That can't be good for long-term future of this industry.

If other suppliers were "legally" allowed to sell dye-sub ink, I'm sure we'd soon see the equivalent of an OEM producing (or getting a printer manufacturer to produce) a printer designed for dye-sub ink. After all, they'd make enough money on ink sales (just as today's OEMs do) to invest in R&D for a dedicated, properly supported, dye-sub printer. The fact that the market is in the stranglehold grip of one ink supplier means that no one that's interested in the future of this industry benefits.

John G
13-09-2011, 05:22 PM
I don't have the A3 - wish I did, just the A4 5050n.

I understand your frustation about sub inks but have you looked at it from their point of view. If they let anyone sell sawgrass inks they would have no control over who stocked what, prices and every tom dick and harry would be buying or selling supposed sawgrass inks that could be sawgrass but also could be copy inks. In my opinion it would totally devalue the market and put us all out of business. At least the way it's ran now, Sawgrass know who should be selling there inks and at what minimum price!

JSR
13-09-2011, 05:36 PM
I understand your frustation about sub inks but have you looked at it from their point of view. If they let anyone sell sawgrass inks they would have no control over who stocked what, prices and every tom dick and harry would be buying or selling supposed sawgrass inks that could be sawgrass but also could be copy inks. In my opinion it would totally devalue the market and put us all out of business. At least the way it's ran now, Sawgrass know who should be selling there inks and at what minimum price!
Unfortunately, that doesn't work. If you know where to look, it's possible to get "cheap" dye-sub inks today. Sawgrass can't stop them all so, if cheaper inks devalue the market (I'm not saying they do), then it's happening here and now.

What really devalues the market, though, is that mugs like us who do the right thing have to pay through the nose for "authorised ink" that's supposedly supported. But what "support" do we really get? We still have to put third-party ink through a printer that wasn't designed for it. For all the extra money we pay we get ---- a generic profile that's worth about 20-quid that may or may not work. We can't choose what printer we want, we have to be told which to use by Sawgrass. That's a hell of a bargain - not!

This is very much the tail wagging the dog. It should be for us to make the decisions for our businesses - not to have lead and collar strangling us by those who couldn't give two hoots whether our business lives or dies.

Being led by the "authorised ink" manufacturer is a worse scenario than the guy who spends one-tenth of the money on "unsupported" ink and chooses any printer he wants to. Mugs are what we're supposed to print - not what we're supposed to be!

We're led to believe that "authorised" inks are the best that there is, but how do we know this? Most of it hasn't changed for 10 years - that's why you can use the same stuff in an ancient Epson 1290S that you can use in today's R1400. What progress has been made in all this time? Nothing, beyond us having to wait for the next profile to be issued for some printer that we probably don't want to use anyway.

My frustration is due to the industry being choked into stagnation.

John G
13-09-2011, 07:51 PM
Sawgrass can't stop them all so, if cheaper inks devalue the market (I'm not saying they do), then it's happening here and now.

Yes it is happening now - just take a look on ebay and there's plenty of people selling individual, personalised, one off mugs for between £4.50 and £5.50 including delivery. You take off the delivery costs, packaging, paypal fees, ebay Final Value fees, Listing fees, mug, ink, paper and making costs there cannot be much left for profit.

Without the unauthorised inks I think the playing field would be a bit more level!

JSR
13-09-2011, 08:10 PM
Yes it is happening now - just take a look on ebay and there's plenty of people selling individual, personalised, one off mugs for between £4.50 and £5.50 including delivery. You take off the delivery costs, packaging, paypal fees, ebay Final Value fees, Listing fees, mug, ink, paper and making costs there cannot be much left for profit.

Without the unauthorised inks I think the playing field would be a bit more level!
True but the unauthorised inks aren't going anywhere any time soon. The only way to keep the playing field level is to use the unauthorised inks ourselves. The tactics of pricing the ink high, supporting only a tiny few printers, and not planning for the future, is what makes the playing field unlevel.

bms
13-09-2011, 08:57 PM
Yes it is happening now - just take a look on ebay and there's plenty of people selling individual, personalised, one off mugs for between £4.50 and £5.50 including delivery. You take off the delivery costs, packaging, paypal fees, ebay Final Value fees, Listing fees, mug, ink, paper and making costs there cannot be much left for profit.

Without the unauthorised inks I think the playing field would be a bit more level!

Just to break up the JohnG v JSR discussion! :)

If an authorised ink cost of a mug costs, say 14p (Sawgrass figures of using GXe3300 to print something 6" x 6.6" medium density ~ approx same coverage as a mug in different dimensions) then using unauthorised inks would cost less (admitedly), but even if it was 6-10p less I don't think this is going to suddenly change the market and make the playing field so much different. Yes the inks are expensive, but the cost per mug isn't very large at all.

John G
13-09-2011, 09:03 PM
Its not the cost per mug - its how much you have to buy. For my Ricoh I have to buy 4 x carts at £60.00 each, + vat, a smidge off for bulk purchase. Fake ink and you can buy smaller bottles at a cheaper price (presumably with no vat) so people with long pockets and short arms can afford to fill up there epson's and trounce the competition on price.

bms
13-09-2011, 09:10 PM
Its not the cost per mug - its how much you have to buy. For my Ricoh I have to buy 4 x carts at £60.00 each, + vat, a smidge off for bulk purchase. Fake ink and you can buy smaller bottles at a cheaper price (presumably with no vat) so people with long pockets and short arms can afford to fill up there epson's and trounce the competition on price.

Yes, but the cost of the ink going onto the mug isn't hugely different. At 14p (using the figures below) for Sawgrass ink in a Ricoh GX3300 (cheaper per ml for the GX5050) then the absolute max difference in ink cost is 14p!

As for VAT, it has to be paid somewhere - in import duty (plus VAT), but this isn't necessarily the issue - the differential in cost on this example mug, comparing GX3300 Sawgrass ink cost v, say an Epson using some chinese ink, is (max) several pennies.

Paul
13-09-2011, 09:41 PM
now you talking about epsons like some evil machines that are responsible for all the bad things in this business... :rolleyes: dont forget that you fill up your ricoch too ;)

John G
13-09-2011, 10:02 PM
I have nothing against epson's printers - epsons are the main sub printers and I consider the ricoh's as the minority - but at this stage the Ricoh's are my favourite after owning both - although my epson wasn't printing sub inks.

Paul, I was kidding and it was meant as tongue in cheek :wink:

What I'm trying to say is the people who are selling mugs on ebay, for that price, are devaluing the trade. The only way these traders can do this is by having zero overheads and buying cheap inks as the profit made selling at that price wouldn't get them a full set of ricoh carts. Without fake inks the cowboy traders wouldn't exist - they couldn't afford to compete without putting their prices up as the next time a red light comes on, on the printer, they wouldn't have enough money to fill the inks up again.

They buy cheap gear, cheap inks, sell a few boxes of cheap mugs, with the help of this forum with any problems that may arise, then realise how little they are making. 5 - 6 months down the road and the whole system ends up on ebay for sale to the next punter and the damage has been done.

As for the vat on fake ink - anybody selling unauthorised sub ink is hardly likely to be vat reg.

JackB
13-09-2011, 10:04 PM
I have seen first hand what somebody produced using cheap inks and cheap equipment, and their sales soon withered. that is why with the advice of a couple of the forum members we went for the Ricoh Gx700 with Sawgrass inks and the Adkins swing and mug presses.
The mugs and T shirts that we are printing are outstanding compared to what the other person (no names no pack drill) were churning out. My son inlaw showed some examples to the organiser of a gig taking place next week and he siaid produce as much as you can and whatever does not sell he will buy personally. Plus we have had several orders of facebook. ( Not bad for the first week).
We may try some of Coralgraphs products as they seem to get good reports by forum members.

Jack.

bms
13-09-2011, 10:30 PM
I have nothing against epson's printers - epsons are the main sub printers and I consider the ricoh's as the minority - but at this stage the Ricoh's are my favourite after owning both - although my epson wasn't printing sub inks. Paul, I was kidding and it was meant as tongue in cheek :wink: What I'm trying to say is the people who are selling mugs on ebay, for that price, are devaluing the trade. The only way these traders can do this is by having zero overheads and buying cheap inks as the profit made selling at that price wouldn't get them a full set of ricoh carts. Without fake inks the cowboy traders wouldn't exist - they couldn't afford to compete without putting their prices up as the next time a red light comes on, on the printer, they wouldn't have enough money to fill the inks up again. They buy cheap gear, cheap inks, sell a few boxes of cheap mugs, with the help of this forum with any problems that may arise, then realise how little they are making. 5 - 6 months down the road and the whole system ends up on ebay for sale to the next punter and the damage has been done.As for the vat on fake ink - anybody selling unauthorised sub ink is hardly likely to be vat reg.I don't disagree with any of that :) re the vat though, they may not be vat registered, but that means they can't reclaim the vat paid on the ink in the first place so this won't make much difference to final costs, but the general principle of what you say is fair points.

Paul
13-09-2011, 10:51 PM
fair enough John :)
But I can not agree with all you say about cowboys...
few years a go when Chinese ink was only in storys (on very popular sublimation forum runed by one of now not-existing suppliers) but no one ever seen it and no one ever try this so most people used to use only artanium. you still had a clowns then on eaby who was selling mugs for £3.99 :)
And I know they used artanium inks! :eek:
So I know wat you are comming from John! but before chinese inks you still find like you said cowboys with no overheads who was undercutinhg they prices only to get sales on ebay.
I must say now when I look on ebay (I do it every day) every day I can see some unbranded inks for sale. brand new in large quantity. this listings going to the end of the listing time. lt say 3 years a go sawgrass never let no one sell ink on ebay. every auction that was listing unbranded subli ink was removed in 24h! so it looks like they dont care to much at the moment :)


wow... I hope you know what I wanted to say as even I dont understand most of this post lol! sorry. cant write any better :P

JSR
14-09-2011, 12:29 AM
Yes, but the cost of the ink going onto the mug isn't hugely different. At 14p (using the figures below) for Sawgrass ink in a Ricoh GX3300 (cheaper per ml for the GX5050) then the absolute max difference in ink cost is 14p!
I agree with you that on a print-per-print cost, the ink isn't the sole price factor here. I've said before that Sawgrass ink is actually significantly cheaper than OEM ink.

However, it's the perception that's the problem. When you're running low on ink, you're invariably running low on more than one colour. When four colours run out around the same time, that's £240 you have to find at least. That's a huge chunk of money if you don't have it. Cheap non-authorised ink might cost a quarter or less than that - so for the cost of just one ink, you could have all four. That's what they call a no-brainer.

The main problem is in the way Sawgrass ink is sold. You can't buy smaller quantities than 125ml, so there's no way to offset the cost. If inks were sold in 30ml or 60ml bottles, buying it in wouldn't be the huge wallet-tugger that it currently is.

JSR
14-09-2011, 12:40 AM
I have seen first hand what somebody produced using cheap inks and cheap equipment, and their sales soon withered.
The trouble is that it's difficult to generalise like that.

Some time back I posted a review to experiment with using a Brother printer with giant size ink tanks. Each ink cartridge holds around 100ml of ink, and it takes 4 inks. Due to the unique way that Sawgrass sells their ink, I would have had to pay £240 just for the ink to use in this experiment. With the risks involved (it might not have worked and I could have ended up with £240 of ink on my carpet), there was no way I could justify that kind of expense with using the "authorised" ink, so I sought out a cheaper alternative.

To cut a long story short, I did a comparison between a 4-ink printer using Sawgrass Artainium ink and the 4-ink Brother using someone else's ink. The result:

http://www.mugsandgifts.co.uk/offsite/mug_compare.jpg

The above photo was taken at 11pm at night with camera flash and overhead "economy" bulb, but I can assure you that the quality of print was *identical* between the two mugs. Different printers, different inks, and you just cannot tell the difference.

As I said on that review and I'll repeat here, I'm not an advocate of "cheap" inks (which is why I'm not going to say where they came from) but this experiment proved to me that cheap ink can produce just as good quality as "authorised" ink - which is why I say it's important not to generalise. Clearly the person who printed the items you saw didn't use the same ink but, had they done so, you might have made a different decision.

JSR
14-09-2011, 12:47 AM
Chinese ink
This phrase always amuses me. How do we know that "authorised" ink doesn't come from the same sources?

A few years back, when I was casually looking into cheap dye ink, there were many rumours around that a lot of the "good" sources of cheap dye ink came from exactly the same factories as the "official" ink sold by the likes of Epson, HP, Canon, etc. The only difference is that they didn't have the OEM brand on them, and so they were about one-tenth of the cost.

I don't know how true that is, but it has always made me think. Those factories are making this ink - how easy it would be to let a little slip out the back door. After all, it isn't the factory making the huge profits on the high markup of the product that's sold to the end-user - it's the OEM (the middle man between the factory and the end user) that's making the vast profits. Whether the factory sells the ink to the OEM or sneaks it out the door and sells direct, they'd be making the same profits.

Makes you think, doesn't it?

SciArtImages
14-09-2011, 01:56 AM
As ever, thinking aloud. So if I were to sell to a customer the following (which is what we do after all, sell - not tell them the intricate details of ink):
a) a really cheap deal with non-dishwasher proof mugs and unknown ink, which may or may not impress the customer after a few months;
b) properly priced with the quality I would want, more expensive but I would be happy with it lasting.
Would a customer be best pleased with a or b (presuming that they, like I, would like to do repeat business)?
I would imagine there are a lot of different answers out there - mine to be honest is to give the best quality I can at the best price. Quality first.

Neil.

Paul
14-09-2011, 08:18 AM
Neil. Quality will be this same. If you use unbranded ink on good quality mug quality of ptint will be same as with branded ink. Look jsr photo.

John G
14-09-2011, 10:02 AM
When I first started I used xpres mugs and was happy with the results, then to save a bit money I bought cheap mugs off lovecut and had the same quality of print. A year later one of my 1st sales came back to me and told me that the the mug they bought didn't have a print on now - it had totally washed off to the point where you couldn't make out what the print was. I did state at the time of sale that these mugs weren't dishwasher proof but offered a half price replacement. The customer did buy but I felt terrible charging him again - so lesson learned, I only use mugs off xpres and bms that state they are dishwasher proof. I've received samples off Henry at Coralgraph but they are still getting wash tested at the moment.

Back to the inks - there could be another theory about cheap sales, nothing to do with fake ink though. If you have a wide/large format printer you can buy litres of ink at a reduced price compared to the prices we are paying for small qty's - could peeps be filling up their systems with ink that was destined for wide/large format machines?

Funny how this thread has strayed a bit:cool::redface:

Paul
14-09-2011, 10:48 AM
yes john! agree 100% quality blank is diferent story :)you ca use dogs b*** inks for 100's of £££ and use crap mug :) few months later picture will be gone :)

JSR
14-09-2011, 11:49 AM
Very true, Paul.

A couple of years ago, I did some testing on various mugs to understand for myself what "dishwasher safe/proof" really meant. I put the results on my website at http://www.mugsandgifts.co.uk/dishwashing-mugs.

All mugs were printed with the same approved/authorised ink - because that's all I had at the time. They were each washed in a domestic dishwasher and checked for results. Okay, it's not the same kind of test as the Orca & Duraglaze mugs got at the hands of Listawood - their tests demonstrated that both Orca and RN mugs would stand in excess of 750 washes, whereas my test mugs didn't do more than 30 over the course of a month. So, bearing in mind that my testing was extremely soft compared to other tests, it's even more astonishing to see the results of those mugs that are either not dishwasher-safe (they fade almost immediately) and those that were claimed to be "dishwasher safe but not dishwasher proof".

In short, it made no difference that the inks were "authorised" ink - they faded just as badly on non-dishwasher mugs as anyone else's ink would.

It's the same kind of question as UV resistance for when the prints are displayed outside. Even with approved/authorised ink, you'll still be lucky to get more than a couple of years. This isn't like regular OEM dye/pigment ink in which cheap ink will fade in 6 months while OEM ink will last 30 years. There isn't that kind of difference between authorised dye-sub ink and ink you may find elsewhere. There should be - after all, Sawgrass have had decades to improve their ink - but the fact that it still fades so fast answers many unasked questions.