# epson C88+ okay for dye sublimation?



## Act

Like I have said in my intro post I know little about tshirt making, but I am really good at graphical art. Also, I have been looking into the new CromaBlast subdye for 100% cotton tshirt printing. I just want to know if the C88+ will hold up and print well. I have read that they need to be replaced each year, but at only 109.00 (to me) that seems cost effeciant. Does anyone own one of these or have personal experience with them?


----------



## martinwoods

*Re: C88+ okay?*

I have one and it is fine.
I love the sublimation. The colors are so good.

I also have a brother printer but cannot take it to festivals so that is where the sublimation comes in. I did buy some tranfers and tried one but I am not that happy with it. I did not realize youhave to cut it even on white shirts, I guess I was expecting too much.

But I think you will be happy with the c88
I would like to go bigger eventually, because you can only do 8 1/2x 11 but people do not seem to mind


----------



## DMS

*Re: C88+ okay?*

It's a good cost performence combination, with it's limitations...


----------



## Act

*Re: C88+ okay?*

What are it's limitations? I know size is an issue, but I dont see my self making to many designs well over 8.5x11. Thanks for the quick relies btw.


----------



## DMS

*Re: C88+ okay?*

limitations on size and durability of the colors once transfered (fade out after washing etc), no solution is perfect and yours must be the best quality/price ratio anyway.


----------



## martinwoods

*Re: C88+ okay?*



DMS said:


> limitations on size and durability of the colors once transfered (fade out after washing etc), no solution is perfect and yours must be the best quality/price ratio anyway.


 
I am not sure what you mean by fade out after washing
The colors I am getting are great, they pop (example, a childs face with the bluest eyes I have ever seen)

Have not had a problem with fade after washing


----------



## Act

*Re: C88+ okay?*

I think he is trying to say that there is a difference between ChromaBlast and subdye, but from what I have read they are the same thing but just a different type of ink.


----------



## rrc62

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Do you have to trim with the sawgrass transfer paper? Does it just transer the color or does it transfer a clear film that shows on the sirt outside the image? Thanks...Ross


----------



## imeccentric

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Ross,
I just happen to have a chromoblast printed t-shirt on right now. When you print them they have a slight scorched look around the design where the extra paper is. It usually disappears in a little while or always with the first wash. It's barely noticeable though. My colors are bright and durable.

Jim


----------



## Act

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Amazing Jim, Thanks for that info. I have read that they do leave a film if you do not trim the paper, but that all you have to do is wash it inside out and it goes away.


@Jim, me and my friend are about to go into a business using the chromablast ink for 100% cotton tshirts. Since you know quite a bit about this (asuming you are using it) do you have any suggestions or info that you would think would help me and him in our business revelant to the chromablast ink?


----------



## imeccentric

*Re: C88+ okay?*

You'll be happy with the chromoblast. Just follow the instructions that come with it, be sure you have the right profile for your printer, and experiment. There is absolutely NO hand at all with these prints. We all have different equipment and preferences. One thing though, how much printing do you plan on doing? I'm sure you've done your research and know the sizes you will use, cost per print, etc. Sawgrass and their dealers give great support for their products. Most have a great guarantee that you *will* be happy. I have the epson 4800 hybrid system ,only with artainium instead of the sublijet on the sublimation side. Not knowing your financial situation, I hate making recommendations on printers, but, when I compared the cost of cheaper printer plus bulk system, plus printer problems and wear, I concluded there wasn't much cost difference to get the 4800 which is made for commercial work. I think the first recommended maintenance on it is at around 13000 prints. That isn't to say it's right for all circumstances as it really depends on how you approach your business and if you need to turn a profit immediately with it. Keep me posted on what you decide and how long it takes to get to your first million By the way,where are you located?

Jim
Embellishments in Thread.


----------



## rrc62

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Are Chromablast bulk ink systems available for the C88? I didn't see any in a web search. Saw plenty for sublimation inks.

Ross


----------



## imeccentric

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Ross,
ChromaBlast C88 Starter Deal (Includes Printer, Paper, Ink, and optional Press) - C88 Starter Deal
Coastal is great and be sure to take advantage of their discount to members plus the free shipping.

Jim
Embellishments in Thread imeccentric on yahoo IM


----------



## prometheus

*Re: C88+ okay?*

You might want to check your pricing on the C88+. I think I just saw one for $65. They are usually way cheaper than $109. And I think a lot of members here have had theirs for more than a year.


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



DMS said:


> limitations on size and durability of the colors once transfered (fade out after washing etc), no solution is perfect and yours must be the best quality/price ratio anyway.


There is no fading with DyeSub and very little with Chromablast. It sounds like you are thinking of inkjet transfers. They fade after washing.


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



Act said:


> I think he is trying to say that there is a difference between ChromaBlast and subdye, but from what I have read they are the same thing but just a different type of ink.


They are trying to promote ChromaBlast as identical to DyeSub, but don't believe the hype. It's not. The biggest difference is that you have to trim around the image for ChromaBlast if you don't want to sell a shirt with the clear box around it. The entire page does transfer to the shirt. Granted, most of it will wash out after a few washes, but do you really want to sell a new shirt to a customer with a clear box around it and tell them it's supposed to go away after a few washes? I don't. And if I'm going to have to trim around every image, you have to ask yourself if the extra cost is really worth the slightly less fading compared to a much cheaper inkjet transfer? It's not for me.

The colors do hold up better than and Inkjet transfer, but not as well as DyeSub.


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



rrc62 said:


> Do you have to trim with the sawgrass transfer paper? Does it just transer the color or does it transfer a clear film that shows on the sirt outside the image? Thanks...Ross


I was at the ChromaBlast booth at a recent tradeshow where they were showing samples. One was freshly pressed, and there was an obvious clear box around the design. They also had one that had been washed 3 times, and you could still barely see the box, but it was not as noticeable as the freshly pressed one. It was not up to my quality standards for shirts.


----------



## Darklight

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Does anyone know if ALL Epson printers can use Chromablast? I occasionally need to make a few transfers, but my big printer (7800) while excellent, uses k3 inks. Seems like Id be better off to buy a desktop for this method and leave the 7800 alone? Any thoughts? Thanks!


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



Darklight said:


> Does anyone know if ALL Epson printers can use Chromablast? I occasionally need to make a few transfers, but my big printer (7800) while excellent, uses k3 inks. Seems like Id be better off to buy a desktop for this method and leave the 7800 alone? Any thoughts? Thanks!


Chromablast has been designed for the C88, R1800 and the 4800.


----------



## Darklight

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Thank you Rusty!


----------



## imeccentric

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Rusty,
It's obvious you aren't a big chromoblast fan. I don't have any problems with mine, and neither did the display at the last trade show. If you press too long, you get the look you are talking about though but it still goes away. No, it isn't as good as sublimation, but you can't sublimate on cotton so it is different. We all have our preferences. I'd put my quality up against anybodys, but then I don't print many full size patterns on t shirts and just leave them at that. I use them mostly for backgrounds. Different strokes, Rusty


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



imeccentric said:


> Rusty,
> It's obvious you aren't a big chromoblast fan. I don't have any problems with mine, and neither did the display at the last trade show. If you press too long, you get the look you are talking about though but it still goes away. No, it isn't as good as sublimation, but you can't sublimate on cotton so it is different. We all have our preferences. I'd put my quality up against anybodys, but then I don't print many full size patterns on t shirts and just leave them at that. I use them mostly for backgrounds. Different strokes, Rusty


Honestly, I don't have any problems with ChromaBlast, the product. I think its an improvement over inkjet transfers. What I do have a problem with is they way they are promoting it, as an equivalent to sublimation for cotton. It is clearly not equal to sublimation. And I also just want to make sure people know that before they buy into the false advertising. And I think its important to tell people that it does leave a clear box if you don't cut around the image. Most people that have been sold the hype don't hear that part. But I do think it has it's place in the market. I would say it's an alternative to inkjet transfers, not an alternative to sublimation.


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Well, this post turned out to be longer than I planned. Sorry if it bores you.

I am a newbie in this business and have asked lots of questions here. I have been give some VERY helpful answers in return.

I am so excited that I can finally contribute some information, even though I haven't even had my first job.

I have been working with Chromoblast for the past week, with the anticipation and hope that it would be my only (or primary) resource for making transfers. (I make shirts primarily for youth sports tournament souveniers).

However, I must say that I was disappointed with the whole 'box' around the image thing. My competitors all use plastisol transfers. But they are large enough to own their own plastisol printing machines. I'm just me and can't afford that.

I wanted to use Chromoblast for a number of reasons. I can print them myself, I can use as many colors as I want (plastiols transfer makers charge by the color), I can make complicated graphics with fine lines (can't do that with plastisol), and I don't have to place my order 2 weeks in advance. The best part was that I could print 1 transfer or 1,000. I had that flexibility, which would be great for a small time business like me...not having to be at the mercy of a middle man.

But, I was disappointed to see that the Chromoblast transfers left too visible of a 'box', as mentioned by others in this thread. Maybe I'm being too picky, after seeing the competitions' plastisol transfers. But, to add to that, I thought the fading after one wash was too much. AND, I could still see the 'box'. I haven't tried washing any of my tests more than once, but....I'm almost too scared to find that I'll still see the 'box', even after that.

I tried to have a rush plastisol job ordered for my event this weeked, but they said they could not (two different companies - First Edition and Horizon [referred to me by Wild Side]). Both companies were SUPER nice and tried to be helpful as much as they could, but the effects I put on the graphics were 'too complicated'. 

BTW, Sawgrass has been EXCELENT in trying to help me figure out my issues with the Chromoblast.

All that to say that now I have no choice but to use my Chromoblast transfers at this weekend's event. So, I redid my graphics to include some kind of box shape in a 50% opacity background to justify a box around the image. I'll cut as close as I can to that background, so if they see any box, it will look intentional. But, the graphic looked better before...with out that background. However, the customer never knew what the first design looked like, right? Plus, I'm selling the shirst for less than the usual t-shirt vendor, so we can try to get as much of our money back on this event as possible.

I figure, if anyone complains then I'll just tell them that I was going for the organic and faded look, which seems to be so popular now. Hopefully they'll buy into it. 

If not, I'll try to return what I haven't opened of my Chromoblast stuff, if it all turns to heck. I bought 1000 transfer sheets, Chromoblast bulk ink system (with tubes), Chromoblast ink cartridges, and the Epson R1800. In other words I spent a LOT of $$$$$. Then, I guess I'll try to use plastisol like everyone else and only use Chromoblast on small jobs.

Hope that helps. I'll post the results of the customer's reactions after the event, if you're interested.

Well, I'm off to a rocky start, but there's no stopping now.

Novelty Stuff


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*

I'm sorry to hear that, Novelty Stuff. Unfortunately, I'm sure you're not the only one that has spent a lot of money on Chromablast and been disappointed. On the bright side, by adding the box into the graphic and cutting around each image, I'm sure they will look very good. And honestly, I don't think anybody will complain about the quality. Good luck at your tournament.

By the way, 



NoveltyStuff said:


> I can make complicated graphics with fine lines (can't do that with plastisol)


I didn't realize that plastisol transfers could not make complicated graphics with fine lines. I'm a screen printer so I've never tried transfers, but I know that you can do it with screen printing, and I assumed you could do anything with plastisol transfers as you could with screen printing.


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Rusty,

Well...I'm no expert with any of this stuff, but that is what Horizon told me. They said that fine lines were not possible with making plastisol transfers. First Edition also told me my 'feather effect' (which is a gradation effect) was not doable, either.

You probably understand more about it than I do, since you screen print.

Thanks for your message.

Novelty Stuff


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



NoveltyStuff said:


> Rusty,
> 
> Well...I'm no expert with any of this stuff, but that is what Horizon told me. They said that fine lines were not possible with making plastisol transfers. First Edition also told me my 'feather effect' (which is a gradation effect) was not doable, either.
> 
> You probably understand more about it than I do, since you screen print.
> 
> Thanks for your message.
> 
> Novelty Stuff


Well, if that's what they told you, I'm sure they know their stuff. That is good to know.


----------



## moontown

*Re: C88+ okay?*

I used a lot of Chromablast transfer paper in the last two months. It took me a while to figure out how to make it work with the help of sawgrass technical person. Based on my experience, the heat press temperature, pressure and press time are the key to get good image quality and wash durability, and also dno't forget to stretch the transferred area to get a soft hand. I compared the chromablast paper with the other tranfer papers on the market. I would say Chromablast gives me the best results so far for 100% cotton. the "box" after transfer is a problem, but I don't think anybody can do better based on this tranfer technology. I am thinking about a digital cutter for my picky customers.

hope this will be helpful





NoveltyStuff said:


> Well, this post turned out to be longer than I planned. Sorry if it bores you.
> 
> I am a newbie in this business and have asked lots of questions here. I have been give some VERY helpful answers in return.
> 
> I am so excited that I can finally contribute some information, even though I haven't even had my first job.
> 
> I have been working with Chromoblast for the past week, with the anticipation and hope that it would be my only (or primary) resource for making transfers. (I make shirts primarily for youth sports tournament souveniers).
> 
> However, I must say that I was disappointed with the whole 'box' around the image thing. My competitors all use plastisol transfers. But they are large enough to own their own plastisol printing machines. I'm just me and can't afford that.
> 
> I wanted to use Chromoblast for a number of reasons. I can print them myself, I can use as many colors as I want (plastiols transfer makers charge by the color), I can make complicated graphics with fine lines (can't do that with plastisol), and I don't have to place my order 2 weeks in advance. The best part was that I could print 1 transfer or 1,000. I had that flexibility, which would be great for a small time business like me...not having to be at the mercy of a middle man.
> 
> But, I was disappointed to see that the Chromoblast transfers left too visible of a 'box', as mentioned by others in this thread. Maybe I'm being too picky, after seeing the competitions' plastisol transfers. But, to add to that, I thought the fading after one wash was too much. AND, I could still see the 'box'. I haven't tried washing any of my tests more than once, but....I'm almost too scared to find that I'll still see the 'box', even after that.
> 
> I tried to have a rush plastisol job ordered for my event this weeked, but they said they could not (two different companies - First Edition and Horizon [referred to me by Wild Side]). Both companies were SUPER nice and tried to be helpful as much as they could, but the effects I put on the graphics were 'too complicated'.
> 
> BTW, Sawgrass has been EXCELENT in trying to help me figure out my issues with the Chromoblast.
> 
> All that to say that now I have no choice but to use my Chromoblast transfers at this weekend's event. So, I redid my graphics to include some kind of box shape in a 50% opacity background to justify a box around the image. I'll cut as close as I can to that background, so if they see any box, it will look intentional. But, the graphic looked better before...with out that background. However, the customer never knew what the first design looked like, right? Plus, I'm selling the shirst for less than the usual t-shirt vendor, so we can try to get as much of our money back on this event as possible.
> 
> I figure, if anyone complains then I'll just tell them that I was going for the organic and faded look, which seems to be so popular now. Hopefully they'll buy into it.
> 
> If not, I'll try to return what I haven't opened of my Chromoblast stuff, if it all turns to heck. I bought 1000 transfer sheets, Chromoblast bulk ink system (with tubes), Chromoblast ink cartridges, and the Epson R1800. In other words I spent a LOT of $$$$$. Then, I guess I'll try to use plastisol like everyone else and only use Chromoblast on small jobs.
> 
> Hope that helps. I'll post the results of the customer's reactions after the event, if you're interested.
> 
> Well, I'm off to a rocky start, but there's no stopping now.
> 
> Novelty Stuff


----------



## binki

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Inkjet printers are disposable. We go through them like crazy for document printing. For garment printing we have both a c88+ (inkjet transfer) and a c1280 (dyesub). Both are very forgiving of abuse. For the price of these things I would say don't even worry about it. $100 to get into t-shirt printing is absurdly cheap. You only need to sell 10 shirts with a $10 markup (ink and paper cost included) to make this printer pay for itself. Even if it doesn't work out, it is better than spending $5K for a setup that doesn't work out. Plus, you will have the advantage of going into markets your competition can't go because you can price well below them and do shorter runs.


----------



## treadhead

*Re: C88+ okay?*



NoveltyStuff said:


> Rusty,
> 
> Well...I'm no expert with any of this stuff, but that is what Horizon told me. They said that fine lines were not possible with making plastisol transfers. First Edition also told me my 'feather effect' (which is a gradation effect) was not doable, either.
> 
> You probably understand more about it than I do, since you screen print.
> 
> Thanks for your message.
> 
> Novelty Stuff


Novelty...

Check out F&M Expressions Freedom process. They are a forum member (nathananderson or zachellsworth) are who you contact.

They are now pushing a 3 day turnaround (I believe) and can do almost an unlimited number or colors and charge the same for 3 or more. I've been very happy with them. Just be careful with larege areas (i.e. 10" diameter solid designs) where the transfer may get a bit thick and stiff feeling.

Good luck!!


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*

I will take your advice and suggestions and apply them. I appreciate the feed back.

Just to follow through with the results of my event last Sunday...it turned out to be very hectic. It made me realize how impractical Chromoblast is for one other reason (in my type of events, anyway).

It takes about 25 seconds to press an image. I was offering a tournament shirt that had a front, back, and two sleeves images. So, it took me about 2 minutes to press one shirt (with all the turning of the shirt and situating sleeves on the press and what not). My competitors are doing 3 - 5 seconds per image with plastisol. And believe me, at a decent sized event, the customers are lined up. 2 minutes per shirt is just not going to work. 

Fortunately, at this last event, it was quite small and I only sold a whopping 10 shirts. The worst part about it was that the gymnasium had only one working electrical outlet which was too far from the vendor area. I had to try a 100 foot extention cord, which my press could not get to 400 through. So, they ended up setting my press up in a custodial closet in order to access an outlet directly. 

My booth was about 50 feet away from the closet. The closet was in a roped off area where no one was allowed to go. 

So, it was a bit on the stressful and hectic side. Normally I would have been upset that only 10 shirts sold. But, in this case, I was glad because my set up was totally inefficient. If I had to press 2 shirts, I had to leave my booth for almost 5 minutes. It was too crazy.

So, this weekend, I'm using plastisol. BUT, I plan to definately keep Chromoblast for small custom jobs and I plan to heavily advertise the services I will be able to provide with Chromoblast. It is an excellent option for some things. I'll also exchange my bulk Chromoblast system for an Epson C88 sublimation system. 

Thanks for the interest and input. Hope this helps someone out there in T-shirt world.

Novelty Stuff


----------



## trishtaz

*Re: C88+ okay?*



NoveltyStuff said:


> Just to follow through with the results of my event last Sunday...it turned out to be very hectic. It made me realize how impractical Chromoblast is for one other reason (in my type of events, anyway).
> ...
> Thanks for the interest and input. Hope this helps someone out there in T-shirt world.
> Novelty Stuff


Novelty Stuff,

Thanks for giving us the results of your event. It was very helpful information. I do wonder, though -- do you press a certain number in advance so that you don't have to be pressing to order, only to refill as you run out? Also, do the events you attend normally have two or three t-shirt vendors all directly competing against each other? That seems pretty crazy. You might want to consider convincing tournament management to let you be the only official shirt in exchange for sharing some of the profit.

Another issue is having four transfer locations on the shirt. Even with plastisol transfers you are still going to have customers waiting around for too long. I would definitely have a fair number of each size pressed in advance, then have a 2nd person man the booth while you run back to the machine to press more as you start to run low. You probably had more sales walk away by not having a small ready inventory than you would have lost by having unsold leftovers.

You didn't show us the image but I was surprised that First Edition said they couldn't do a gradient. They just did a design for me that included a neon yellow to neon green halftone gradient. When the transfers arrived I was more than a bit dubious because it looked a little blotchy, but when the ink melted on the shirts they looked good.

Trish


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*



trishtaz said:


> I do wonder, though -- do you press a certain number in advance so that you don't have to be pressing to order, only to refill as you run out?


No, I didn't do that for a couple of reasons. First, I had never done this sport and I knew it was going to be a small event. I didn't want to over commit any shirts. And with only selling 10, it was good I didn't pre-press, because the sizes I sold were quite varied(youth - adult XXL).



trishtaz said:


> Also, do the events you attend normally have two or three t-shirt vendors all directly competing against each other?


That is an important factor. They only have one official tournament shirt vendor at these events. Very seldom will another shirt vendor come. When they do, they offer general sports themed graphics. Their sales rarely, if ever, effect the tournament souvenir shirts sales, though. 



trishtaz said:


> Another issue is having four transfer locations on the shirt. Even with plastisol transfers you are still going to have customers waiting around for too long. I would definitely have a fair number of each size pressed in advance, then have a 2nd person man the booth while you run back to the machine to press more as you start to run low. You probably had more sales walk away by not having a small ready inventory than you would have lost by having unsold leftovers.


I know it sounds crazy, but people will line up and wait as long as 45 minutes to get one of these shirts, depending on the tournament. They are used to the fact that sometimes they have to wait in line. Offering 4 graphics per shirt is standard. The more graphics offered, the more money we can make. So, we tournament shirt vendors try to make as many choices available as possible, actually. And having to have the press in a separate location than the booth is HIGHLY unusual. I've never seen that before and hope never to see that again. So, needless to say, I was unprepared for that scenario. 



trishtaz said:


> I was surprised that First Edition said they couldn't do a gradient. They just did a design for me that included a neon yellow to neon green halftone gradient. When the transfers arrived I was more than a bit dubious because it looked a little blotchy, but when the ink melted on the shirts they looked good.


I was surprised about the gradient issue with First Edition, as well. Maybe my effect was too fine. I had a lot of issues with my graphic. But, I think I've got it figured out, as far as what the limitations are. So, I definately plan to give First Edition another try. They are very nice there.

Thanks for the message, Trish.

Novelty Stuff


----------



## VinnyYak

*Re: C88+ okay?*

The reason why I decided not to purchase Chromoblast is because of the system requirements of the color profile. Pentium 4, and speed is in gigabyte range. I don't want to buy another computer at this time.


----------



## Twinge

*Re: C88+ okay?*



NoveltyStuff said:


> I can make complicated graphics with fine lines (can't do that with plastisol), and I don't have to place my order 2 weeks in advance.
> 
> [...]but that is what Horizon told me. They said that fine lines were not possible with making plastisol transfers. First Edition also told me my 'feather effect' (which is a gradation effect) was not doable, either.



You CAN do fine lines and gradient effects with plastisol. How effectively you'll be able to apply it (and whether or not they offer it at all) will depend on the company. For example, the first company I used for plastisol (Silver Mountain) didn't work very well with thin lines (the designs wouldn't transfer completely).

I suggest giving Howard Sportswear a try. They are a bit more expensive than some of the companies, but they definitely can do very fine lines and gradients. On one of our orders I even went so far as to have little fine line/gradient samples in some of the extra whitespace to test the capabilities, and I was impressed =) If you'd like, I could probably post some pictures of these sample patches transfered; 1-pixel width lines transfered fine.

I was using their 'Super-hold' variety of transfer which is a tad thicker than some inks, but it really sticks on well. I recall that one of their sample normal transfers had a gradient on it and it did well enough too. Toss them an email or call and get a sample pack to try out. You might also check with F&M as mentioned earlier in this thread as well.

Oh, almost forgot to mention - one more bonus of using Howard is that they have a pretty quick turn around time as well. We've gotten our transfers in less than a week every time we've ordered from them. The downside is, as I mentioned, that they cost a bit more. You might even consider using both, say, First Edition and Howard depending on what you need when and such.


----------



## Eastdsm

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Novelty,
Why not goto dyesub and use 100% polyester vapor apparel shirts? I'm super-impressed with them, and although the cost can be $5/shirt, the quality is awesome, no fading. They don't have a HUGE choice of colors, but I do some for some softball teams and they love them. Get the refillable cartridges and it's cost effective. $140 for a 125ml bottle(compared to $74 for a 18 ml cartridge). I love sublimation and wish I could do ONLY sublimation and no heat transfers.


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*



Eastdsm said:


> Why not goto dyesub and use 100% polyester vapor apparel shirts?


I'm actually just starting to get into the whole dyesub stuff. I'll definately incorporate the shirts into what I offer. But all polyester shirts will not give enough of a range to offer my customers. Many (most) will want cotton. But, I'm totally excited to get going with the dyesub stuff and start putting the polyester apparel out there to see how people will respond.

Thanks for everyone's ideas and input. It's really helpful!


----------



## Eastdsm

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Novelty, have you gotten the Vapor Apparel 100% poly T's? Nothing like Jerzee's MOVE t's or most other polyesters you've seen. They are very soft like cotton, some people probably couldn't tell the difference.


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*



Eastdsm said:


> Novelty, have you gotten the Vapor Apparel 100% poly T's? Nothing like Jerzee's MOVE t's or most other polyesters you've seen. They are very soft like cotton, some people probably couldn't tell the difference.


Eastdsm,

Yes, I have seen those shirts. They are pretty impressive. I was surprised how nice they are. Really, super soft. And a very heavy duty T. I haven't checked the pricing on them, yet, though. But, they will definately find their way into my collection of choices for my customers.

I love that I can make only one, if that is all the customer wants.


----------



## rahul

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Hi
I got my chromablast system last week. I followed the instructions in the manual, but the results were not good. So, I used default settings of printer and corel; this gave me excellent results.

Any idea that why is this happening. I am using a C87+, and using D88 ICC on it


----------



## charles95405

*Re: C88+ okay?*

rahul...you should have received a cd with your chromablast system that will automatically set the right profile...in my case, I just have to select 'chromablast driver c88' from my printer list and then print...works everytime


----------



## rahul

*Re: C88+ okay?*

yes I have received a cd....but i need to follow intructions in pdf to configure my printer and corel draw. Moreover, I also need to install the Chromablast ICC profile.

Please let me know if i am doing something wrong


----------



## NoveltyStuff

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Rahul,

Whenever I had any problems, I just called Sawgrass. They are VERY helful. 1.843.884.1575

NoveltyStuff


----------



## jackie01915

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Everyone talks about Epson's C-88...is that because it is the least expensive? Since I also need a scanner & fax, I am considering purchasing the new Epson CX7000 during this upcoming tax-free weekend here in MA. It's only $89.98, but is the C-88 better? Thanks in advance.


----------



## trishtaz

*Re: C88+ okay?*



Twinge said:


> On one of our orders I even went so far as to have little fine line/gradient samples in some of the extra whitespace to test the capabilities, and I was impressed =) If you'd like, I could probably post some pictures of these sample patches transfered; 1-pixel width lines transfered fine.


Twinge, I would like! Did you ever get around to taking some pictures of these transfers?


----------



## trishtaz

*Re: C88+ okay?*



jackie01915 said:


> Everyone talks about Epson's C-88...is that because it is the least expensive? Since I also need a scanner & fax, I am considering purchasing the new Epson CX7000 during this upcoming tax-free weekend here in MA. It's only $89.98, but is the C-88 better? Thanks in advance.


Jackie, if you are using the C88 for sublimation, I don't think you'll want to use your expensive inks on faxes, unless they are outgoing only.


----------



## Chani

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Good point.


----------



## jackie01915

*Re: C88+ okay?*

good point!!!


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



jackie01915 said:


> Everyone talks about Epson's C-88...is that because it is the least expensive? Since I also need a scanner & fax, I am considering purchasing the new Epson CX7000 during this upcoming tax-free weekend here in MA. It's only $89.98, but is the C-88 better? Thanks in advance.


Yes, they are dirt cheap, especially for this industry. Some people really like them, but others just view them as a disposable printer since they are so cheap.


----------



## prometheus

*Re: C88+ okay?*

The C88+ & 1280 were also two units that were better equiped to take CIS. I have seen a few places that offer it for other machines though. My All in one CX4200 works just as well as my C88+, if not better and faster.


----------



## iegraphics

*Re: C88+ okay?*

Hi all ... coming in late here but I'm new to this whole process and would like to ask some questions. Briefly, I work for a digital sign shop and people always ask if we do t-shirts. So I'm interested in purchasing a system that will allow me to take an image (_jpg, pdf, or from Corel or Adobe_) and put it onto a t-shirt. They often come in on Thur or Fri and need it by the weekend. Some have their own shirts. 
I've been looking around and the C88+ and the 1280 interest me. My thought is that I want versatility so I may buy 2 C88's, one setup for cotton shirts and one for polyester. This a workable plan?
*To print on polyester*, this process is called "sublimation" (or dye sublimation?), right? The C88 will do this with the right transfer paper and ink, right?
*To print on cotton*, this process is called "inkjet heat transfer"? I've read the posts about Chromablast and I would prefer to avoid that clear box. Therefore I would need a different transfer paper than for polyester, as well as a different ink, right? Thus the two C88's. This, though is cheaper than polyester (_the inks, transfer paper and shirts_) it produces an image of less quality (_vibrance_) than with polyester and will fade out much sooner. 
Also, if we decide to do mugs, we could use the inkjet transfers for this, right? Or is that another ink/transfer paper combination altogether?
Am I on the right track here? I've gathered these thoughts from reading the posts on this forum but many are not easy to understand.
We don't get customers asking for t-shirts every week so there may be times when the machine(s) will sit for a week or two. Does this cause a problem, or are they pretty reliable at immediately starting up and printing good quality?
Finally, is there a different process to put an image onto a cotton and/or polyester shirt than what I described above that would be *better*? That's assuming I'm correct in my thoughts above to begin with. We wouldn't do a lot of shirts so we're not interested in expensive equipment, though the 1280 seems reasonable, even if we buy two (_or maybe one C88 and one 1280_).
Thanks!


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



iegraphics said:


> *To print on cotton*, this process is called "inkjet heat transfer"? I've read the posts about Chromablast and I would prefer to avoid that clear box.


The inkjet transfers actually produce a more obvious clear box than ChromaBlast. So for inkjet transfers, you will have to trim (with scissors) around every image that you transfer. So keep that in mind. The clear box that ChromaBlast leaves is similar but not quite as apparent, and supposedly washes mostly out after a few washes.

If you have a sign shop, the obvious method for T-shirts would be using vinyl cut in your vinyl cutter.


----------



## jwildeman

*Re: C88+ okay?*

FYI to any interested in a C88+: Check the Epson website. They have a number of refurbished C88's for under $50, as well as wide-format inkjets.


----------



## iegraphics

*Re: C88+ okay?*



rusty said:


> The inkjet transfers actually produce a more obvious clear box than ChromaBlast. So for inkjet transfers, you will have to trim (with scissors) around every image that you transfer. So keep that in mind. The clear box that ChromaBlast leaves is similar but not quite as apparent, and supposedly washes mostly out after a few washes.
> 
> If you have a sign shop, the obvious method for T-shirts would be using vinyl cut in your vinyl cutter.


This brings up another question. Is there a way to apply an image onto cotton without the clear box? And if so, can it be done with the C88?


----------



## prometheus

*Re: C88+ okay?*



iegraphics said:


> This brings up another question. Is there a way to apply an image onto cotton without the clear box? And if so, can it be done with the C88?


The best way is to cut it. By hand or by plotter.


----------



## rusty

*Re: C88+ okay?*



iegraphics said:


> This brings up another question. Is there a way to apply an image onto cotton without the clear box? And if so, can it be done with the C88?


Not in the sense you are asking. The only way to avoid the clear box is to cut out your image with scissors, for both inkjet and ChromaBlast. That is a real pain, and almost impossible with text. Any white areas on an inkjet transfer or ChromaBlast will transfer the clear carrier onto the shirt.

However you can put vinyl on a Cotton T and it works great, and is much more durable than inkjet or ChromaBlst. You are just limited to the # of colors and you can't do gradients or halftones. And of course, screen printing puts images on shirts without a clear box, but I don't think you were considering that.


----------



## Twinge

*Re: C88+ okay?*

The clear box effect isn't a big deal when a design is trimmed, though. If you trim up to your design (about 1/8th of an inch away), you should be good to go on white or ash tees. If you look reaalllly closely you can still see the border and slight color difference, but with a good paper (e.g. Transjet II) it should be barely noticeable at all this way (even with white areas in the middle that were not trimmed, such as with text).


----------



## mikyak87

*Re: C88+ okay?*

What type of sublimation paper do you use with your epson c88 plus? The paper my kit came with was....no good to say the least. Any suggestions?


----------



## sweetharmoney

*Re: C88+ okay?*

I can't get the colors on the screen to match out what prints and most of the stuff comes out dull looking, can you help?


----------

