# Oki C3400N CLP & Durracotton Ht



## Ezekiel33Graphic (Jan 23, 2007)

Hi all,
does anyone own a Oki C3400N CLP & use the new Durracotton Ht transfer paper? I would love to hear your reports & feedback on these two working together on 100% cotton tees & 50/50. I am interested in the Durracotton HT & the Oki 3400 is on sale right now, but I don't want to waste my money. Once again, thank you!


----------



## royalflash (Feb 15, 2007)

I have the same question. is duracotton ht able to transfer white color on dark shirt? like a polar bear on a green shirt?


----------



## Mystic (Nov 26, 2006)

As far as I know they do not have a DurraCotten HT for dark shirts as of yet. I know that they have been working on it.

IN regards to the questions on Oki's check out this link

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/heat-press-heat-transfers/t6315.html


Hope this helps.


----------



## royalflash (Feb 15, 2007)

thanks for your help.
any idea how threadless's t shirt are produced? screen print?
another newbie question: those vinyl cutter can only produce single color printing, isnt it? I mean there is no product have been developed that you can print on vinyl, is it?


----------



## Jasonda (Aug 16, 2006)

royalflash said:


> thanks for your help.
> any idea how threadless's t shirt are produced? screen print?


Yes, Threadless uses screenprinting.



royalflash said:


> those vinyl cutter can only produce single color printing, isnt it?


You can typically do up to around 3 colors per design with vinyl.



royalflash said:


> I mean there is no product have been developed that you can print on vinyl, is it?


There is such a thing, it's called a print/cut system.


----------



## DuraCotton98 (Nov 29, 2006)

Ezekiel33Graphic said:


> Hi all,
> does anyone own a Oki C3400N CLP & use the new Durracotton Ht transfer paper? I would love to hear your reports & feedback on these two working together on 100% cotton tees & 50/50. I am interested in the Durracotton HT & the Oki 3400 is on sale right now, but I don't want to waste my money. Once again, thank you!


Hi:

We are currently beta - testing AutoARTransfersDARK and AutoARTransfersWHITE. To date, we have been testing with an Oki 3400 and Minolta 2300. Results are very encouraging.

have a great one!


----------



## rrc62 (Jun 2, 2007)

Regarding the C3400, it works fine with the DuracottonHT papers. The only issue I had with the C3400 was the photographic quality, which is pretty bad. For spot color printing it is fine.


----------



## DuraCotton98 (Nov 29, 2006)

Hi Ross:

Hmmm. Yours is the first negative comment that I have heard re: Oki printing photos. Any specific reasons?

have a great one!


----------



## rrc62 (Jun 2, 2007)

Basically, it's not a photo printer. It's designed for office graphics. We have a C8800 which prints very nice photos. I bought the C3400 to take on the road but the photo quality was night and day compared to the C8800, so I took it back. I even called Oki. The photo prints were so bad I thought something was wrong with the printer. They told me that it was not designed to print photos. It was great for spot color though.


----------



## ino (Jan 23, 2007)

Hi Guys

Would the oki 5650 or the 5700 be considered good for photographic quality?

thanks.


----------



## DuraCotton98 (Nov 29, 2006)

ino said:


> Hi Guys
> 
> Would the oki 5650 or the 5700 be considered good for photographic quality?
> 
> thanks.


Hi Ino:

Over the last year or so, I have printed with most of the current model Oki printers, testing our DuraCotton papers.

I do believe the c8800, c6100 and c6000 are the better output devices (have not tried a c8600). But, at the same time, I have the same sample prints (photos) from the c3400 and c8800 - it is almost impossible to identify any variance in the output quality.

But, I am not a photographer but rather a transfer paper guy. As such, I do not have a trained eye for photos.

my two cents

have a great one!


----------



## rrc62 (Jun 2, 2007)

Having tried the C3400 and C5500, I have to respectfully disagree. Neither comes close to the photo quality of the C8800. On the other hand, the C880 is almost 10 times the cost of the C3400, so one should expect better quality. I have not tried the C5800, but I believe it is basically a letter size version of the C8800 and does produce nice photos.

By the same token, the C8800's photo prints are not nearly as nice as a good quality inkjet photo printer. Lasers were never really designed to reproduce photos, but the high end lasers do a respectable job.


----------



## stuffnthingz (Oct 1, 2007)

I find the photo quality of the 5800 is a bit too "peachy" and somewhat grainy. If I get time tonight I will take a picture of a printout or two from mine for you all to see.


----------



## DuraCotton98 (Nov 29, 2006)

Hi Ross:

Given the overall subject is: 'Oki C3400 CLP & DuraCotton HT', and given that a huge percentage of our customer base has come from inkjet and sublimation users, I do not understand your reference to inkjet.

Back to subject, the technology of the Oki 3400 and 8800 - including those in-between - printers is virtually identical. The toners vary slightly to enable the higher output quantities.

The c8800 is the best laser (LED) printer that I have ever used - I value output quality, time to print, cost per page, cost of ownership, frustration issues, availability of consumables in the local market (so if someone runs out on a Saturday and needs to finish a job, competitively priced printer supplies are readily available), accurate colors that include true blacks without hassle (it took us maybe 15 minutes to set up our printer colors the first time but now they are saved), colors without bleeding and not having to worry about dye migration, printing to pastel colors and not having colors change, ....

Yes, the above reasons (for us) justify using an Oki when printing cotton.

have a great one!


----------



## rrc62 (Jun 2, 2007)

DuraCotton98 said:


> Hi Ross:
> 
> Given the overall subject is: 'Oki C3400 CLP & DuraCotton HT', and given that a huge percentage of our customer base has come from inkjet and sublimation users, I do not understand your reference to inkjet.


I was just making the point that even though the C8800 produces excellent photos, as printers go, it is still not as good as a $200 inkjet for printing photos. Lasers just are not designed for printing photos. Oki will even tell you that the C8800 is not made for printing photos.

I think what makes the C8800 better is that in graphic pro mode it uses an internal ICC profile. The difference between that and Automatic or Office Color is night and day. The C3400 and C5500 do not have this option.

Any of the Oki printers work great with DuracottonHT and the C3400 is fine if (1) you are doing spot color graphics or (2) you don't require exact photo reproduction.  I did have shirts returned that were printed on the C3400 because of color reproduction complaints. I reprinted on the C8800 and the customers were very happy.


----------



## DuraCotton98 (Nov 29, 2006)

Ross:

So, with an Oki c8800, everyone wins!

have a great one!


----------



## rrc62 (Jun 2, 2007)

You bet. I love my C8800.


----------



## crizalide (Apr 18, 2016)

any time i want to print something on my Loki c3400 it says "stopped, filter failed" do anyone knows why?
please need answer asap
thank you


----------

