# Achieving consistency between heat transfer and direct screen print?



## crkoester (Nov 8, 2011)

For those with experience in using both, I'd like to know if it is feasible to produce a plastisol transfer that is consistent (in terms of appearance and quality) with a screen print of the same design. That is to say, if you had the same design applied with a transfer, and compared to side by side with the same design via a traditional screen print, would there be any noticeable difference . . . and how would you go about avoiding this?

What would be the important factors in producing consistency between the two.... would be necessary to have the same printer producing both the transfers and the prints? Are there major differences in the inks used between plastisol transfers and traditional screen printing? 

I'm trying to hash out my production and inventory system for my branded apparel line, and I'm wondering if it is feasible to utilize both screen-printed and plastisol heat transferred products interchangeably. 

Interested to hear what the experienced forum experts have to say on this....



Chris


----------



## lben (Jun 3, 2008)

There is no difference in inks. The same plastisol ink is used for screen printing as well as the transfers. There shouldn't be a difference in quality between the two. The benefit of using transfers is that you don't waste inventory printing sizes or colors that don't sell. And you can have a ton of transfers made up and then press them on demand for a faster turn around time at your end. Unless someone else is doing the pressing of the transfers. 

With that said though there are limitations to the transfers. They don't do well with halftones from what I've been told because they require a thicker layer of ink and so need a bigger mesh screen which boils down to less detail in the print.


----------



## crkoester (Nov 8, 2011)

Thank you for your reply, and I'll be interested in hearing some more opinions on this. As you implied, my main interest in using transfers is inventory management. My ideal plan includes using both some fully printed traditional screenprinted inventory, as well as some "just in time" or "on demand" heat transfer production... I'm just concerned about consistency among the products with this plan. 

I'm also likely looking at the use of multiple different printers - (for obvious reasons of differing costs, locations, minimums, policies, lead times, etc)... I'm curious if I'm likely to run into issues with consistency if I'm using Printer A and Printer B for some contract printing, and Printer C and Printer D for producing transfers. 

I'm wondering if I can expect good consistency with color, tone, quality, surface finish, etc... or am I likely to run into noticeable differences between different printers, on the same design?

(Obviously this is assuming I am selecting high-quality printers in the first place - I understand that crappy printing won't compare to someone doing a good job, regardless.)



Chris


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

lben said:


> They don't do well with halftones from what I've been told because they require a thicker layer of ink and so need a bigger mesh screen which boils down to less detail in the print.


Transfers do not require a thicker layer of ink. You can actually get better opacity with a thinner layer of ink on a transfer than a direct print. There are companies who print transfers with halftones just not many. I suspect it has more to do with the company's comfort level and general level of quality control in the shop than anything else.


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

crkoester said:


> My ideal plan includes using both some fully printed traditional screenprinted inventory, as well as some "just in time" or "on demand" heat transfer production... I'm just concerned about consistency among the products with this plan.


The simpler the design the more consistency you will have but you'll never achieve it completely through the methods you're proposing. More important is how much consistency is necessary. If you are scaling to a volume that you'll need all these shops then what really matters is quality control as it's unlikely the shirts will be compared side by side if they are being shipped out to stores hither and thither.


----------



## franktheprinter (Oct 5, 2008)

Hi Chris. We have been producing transfers for several companies that are currently operating like it seems you want to be (ie..using both screenprinted products and transfers interchangably) for years now. 

If we are given the parameters concerning
what you want for your design (sizes,colors,etc...) we can consistently produce the same transfer
for you time and time again as should most good reputable transfer manufacturers out there. 

What we would
want from you would be a sample of your screenprinted design that you want created in transfer form as well as the vectored art that was used to create it and if possible the pms color numbers for each color used...this is so that we can make sure about colors,sizes,etc... involved. The inks used in both traditional screenprinting and printing transfers are the same...it boils down
basically to getting the colors to match. If this is done correctly the average consumer should not be able to tell which is
which when they are compared side by side.


----------



## rusty (Feb 9, 2007)

I'm a screen printer, and I've asked this same question because I've considered using plastisol transfers several different times. I keep hearing all these people say they are the same thing and just as good of quality as a direct screen print. But every time I've tried them, I've been disappointed. I've tried samples from probably 5 different transfer suppliers, and they are pretty much all the same. After applying to the shirt, it feels rubbery and thick, even dark color prints, compared to a direct screen print. If you gave me 1 shirt that was screen printed and 1 that was a plastisol transfer, I could very easily tell the difference. The transfers also tend to have blurry lines where 2 colors meet. And to me, it just feels like a "cheap transfer". Granted, that's fine for some shirts, where quality is not a big factor. But for the shirts I'm comfortable putting my name behind, it's just not up to par. I understand it's convenient for those that don't have the capability to screen print, but for those that do, there is a difference in quality.


----------



## treadhead (Jul 26, 2006)

I have to agree with Rusty. If you put the same design on two different shirts and 1 is direct screenprinted and the other is a plastisol transfer you will be able to tell the difference between them in my experience. That is not to say that transfers are bad quality as many of them are very good. But to expect consistency between the two methods without telling the difference I think is not really possible. I've wanted to do the same thing for our line of shirts...using direct printing for wholesale customers and then doing transfers for filling website orders but could never convince myself they were "close" enough. Also, the same transfer from various suppliers I think would open yourself up to even more "inconsistency".


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

The last job I subbed out for direct printing was rubbery and thick, from a company that's been in business for 20 years. Plastisol is plastic, the only way to not have a plastic feel is thinner ink coverage; transfer or direct. Now some transfer makers print thicker coverage than others and F&M for whatever reason is the shiniest I've used although the shine washes off quickly. Printing on paper also makes the ink smoother which can contribute to a more plasticy feel although hot split tends to overcome that. As for blurry lines where colors meet, that was possibly misregistration and can happen with direct printing. I've also had bleeding between colors if the pressure was too high. I would agree that a direct print can look better but in my experience there are too many screenprinters who really aren't very good.


----------



## macrooo (Nov 30, 2009)

Hello,
we produce plastisol heat transfer for 12 years, and direct screen printing, too. 
There is a difference betwen transfer colors and direct colors. I use Wilflex palstisol TF (transfer) inks for making transfers, and Wilflex plastisol Textile inks for direct printing. You can't get a same quality with only one ink, and the paper is very important, too. But, everything depends on colors.


----------



## rusty (Feb 9, 2007)

wormil said:


> The last job I subbed out for direct printing was rubbery and thick, from a company that's been in business for 20 years.


That just shows that the length of time a company has been in business does not equate to their ability to produce a quality product. When I first started screen printing, mine were also thick and rubbery. Then I learn how to screen print correctly 

But comparing transfers to a good quality screen printed job, there is a noticeable difference.


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

I used to work for a company that printed both direct and transfers and while as a printer you can probably spot the difference most of the time, the average joe will not. The transfers I've been getting lately from Semo are as close to printing as I've seen although the edge definition is sometimes less than ideal but some of that may have been my press being too hot. Another company with transfers that were exceptional was QuickTrans but their pricing is way too high.


----------



## franktheprinter (Oct 5, 2008)

As with any comnpany you try...your probably gonna
have pros and cons about what they do in both direct
printing and transfer making....

As the thread post states "Achieving consistency" is the primary goal when producing a line of prints whether you do it directly or indirectly.

Obviously if a transfer supplier tells you they can reproduce your screenprinted product they're gonna need/want a good representative screened product for camparison to get desired result.

There are plenty of reputable transfer companies out there that produce quality
transfers that in my opinion make it very difficult to tell
when printed if its direct screened or not...Wildside,Airwaves,ArtBrands...to name a few


----------



## Carmenrt (Feb 26, 2012)

wormil said:


> I used to work for a company that printed both direct and transfers and while as a printer you can probably spot the difference most of the time, the average joe will not. The transfers I've been getting lately from Semo are as close to printing as I've seen although the edge definition is sometimes less than ideal but some of that may have been my press being too hot. Another company with transfers that were exceptional was QuickTrans but their pricing is way too high.


Was just wondering if you could give the website for where you buy your transfers? Thanks!


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

Carmenrt said:


> Was just wondering if you could give the website for where you buy your transfers? Thanks!


They are listed here:
http://www.t-shirtforums.com/plastisol-transfers/t77081.html


----------

