# The year is 2014 and sublimation ink "laws" have changed.



## dcdesigns (Sep 8, 2010)

Hypothetical question 1. The year is 2014. Sublimation Ink "laws" have changed. What's the best quality sublimation ink and pricing for bulk ink used in a carriage of ANY width.
Hypothetical question 2. We laymen all know "they" say one can't put "regular sublimation ink" into a Ricoh printer. Is it a marketing hype to protect a desktop printer ink market/patent or really true due to viscosity concerns that might damage the nozzles due to engineering/formula concerns?


----------



## lben (Jun 3, 2008)

I believe the Ricoh uses a gel ink of some kind. I know I'll be looking for a vendor for the ink for my printers.


----------



## pisquee (Jan 8, 2012)

I think it is hard to predict the future.
Sawgrass' own brand inks currently retail for around £60 per 100ml bottle. So, for people selling 100ml bottles of large format inks, or non-licensed inks there is a lot of room for profit margins. When/if the playing field changes to be more level, there will be a lot more competition driving down prices. Looking at somewhere like Ebay where un-official inks do sell, there seems to be a cycle of no ink availability, and then one seller pops up selling, a few more follow and then a small price war happens, and after a few weeks they normally all disappear without trace (I assume after Sawgrass sends them threatening emails/letters) ... In the future the price wars will just continue, and Sawgrass will be powerless. Not sure how many sellers can compete for what is relatively a small market.


----------



## charles95405 (Feb 1, 2007)

Ricoh does use a gel ink and who knows what new method will pop up in the next two years


----------



## dcdesigns (Sep 8, 2010)

Ideally, Epson and Ricoh would simply sell sublimation ink in bulk too along with their pigment ink even though it's a smaller market. Epson/Ricoh refillable carts and chip resetters as well and then they can capture the entire sawgrass printer ink market and most subbers would be happy campers if they would sell it let's say 2-300 bucks a liter and it would be an even field when SG patents are up. Funny how Epson is happy to profit off all our printer sales but if we were to say we use sublimation ink they won't honor a warranty. Sublimation should not cost this much in order to make a buck but people have gotten so greedy and somehow the federal goverment allowed it to happen by allowing this silly 42 inch carriage rule to be honored in SG patent. Had they simply sold their inks controlling inks by volume of purchase instead of getting greedy and destroying the competition in the sektop market, things would be differant now. Someday it's going to come back to haunt them after 2014 when someone will sell liters of ink for 100 bucks to anyone as they will have to much overhead to compete and they will be the onese forced out of business for every company they ruined or took out.


----------



## pisquee (Jan 8, 2012)

100 bucks per litre is closer to current prices than your 2-300 bucks desire for the future.


----------



## Conde_David (May 29, 2008)

I wonder how many companies will even
care about the desktop market?

From my calculations, almost all sublimation
ink goes to wide format markets where there
are many ink companies.

Regarding price, I think that it can only fall
until it is in parity with wide format inks.

If Ricoh or epson sell sublimation inks, I don't
think they will sell them for less than they
now sell normal inks.

And I wonder how much hand holding they
would do. And I wonder if they will charge
a premium for printers?

In the end, I think our market will continue
to go viral.

Sort of like asking Thomas Edison, "what 
comes after Electricity?"

The journey had barely begun.


----------



## pisquee (Jan 8, 2012)

I think it will be more a question of how much ink you want to buy at a time and over a time period, rather than how big or small your printer is. So people needing or wanting to buy in bulk will get a better price in a normal market sense, and not restricted by their print width. Although there may be better prices for professionals/companies - ie people "in the trade" rather than people more with a hobby/craft set-up at home.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

dcdesigns said:


> Ideally, Epson and Ricoh would simply sell sublimation ink in bulk too along with their pigment ink even though it's a smaller market.
> 
> *Ideally for us, however, no consumer desktop inkjet or laser printer would ever sell their inks in bulk, these companies go to great lengths to protect their inks, they can't really keep other inks out of the printer with ink patents, so they use technology (sealed chipped carts) to keep out competition.* *Even if the sub ink market was not too small for Epson they would still try and protect sub inks from competition in their printers as well.*
> 
> ...


I made some mark ups to your comments, some misconceptions exist. I understand your grievances though,


----------



## DAGuide (Oct 2, 2006)

I don't see Epson or another larger printer manufacturer getting into the dye sub ink business if the price drops. Look at all their other inks and they are much higher price compared to the cost of large format dye sub ink. Hate to say it, but the smaller / cheaper the printer is... the more technical support costs exist for just about any type of ink / printer. Shear numbers alone will drive up the cost for technical support. If the larger manufacturers want to keep the same profitability of ink as they have with their other types of inks, the price must be higher. Because dye sublimation has so many factors that can affect the final product, the risk can very easily outweigh the rewards when you want to provide the same level of support. The real winners will be those that sell the blank products as more people jump into the dye sublimation business with the lack of knowledge and will burn through the blank substrates as they learn the decorating technique.

Open up the doors for just about any ink company to compete and you will find the that the variance between ink from one batch to another will vary more. This is what has happen in the solvent ink market in the past. The larger solvent ink manufacturers went through a period of time when their users switched to the cheaper inks and then later came back from one reason or another. Sure, it helped drop the overall price of the ink... but for those that did not use that much ink, the cost of replacing components in the printer did not really outweigh the initially savings.

Personally, I see the price of dye sub ink dropping some for a while... but then going back up a little bit. It definitely will be interesting.

Mark


----------



## royster13 (Aug 14, 2007)

Call me a "cynic" but I think sawgrass will find another feature of the ink they can patent and keep things locked up for another period of time...Drug companies seem to get away with this practice....


----------



## dcdesigns (Sep 8, 2010)

I fully understand consumables (sub ink for example) is the real bread and butter of the major printer manufactures. Sublimation ink is a very small market of total ink sales globally. Epson is a wonderful product but unfortunately SG has given it a bad reputation because sublimation ink is not truly compatible with it. They got a patent for something without fully developing the technology in Ink quality as others were working before they got told to stop and it's based on greed. I tried SG ink when it first came out but chose Artainium when they were in biz because it did not fade and cost less when it first came out in the era of late 80's or early 90's. It simply was a better ink based on quality and price till it got in the hands of SG I'm basing my ink opinions after "consuming" 10 or more printers with failed permanent head clogs in my 15 year career as a decorator from the 1280 through 4880 series and making perhaps a meager 100,000 units of this or that in my time as a decorator hands on and not basing it on other people's history of using this or that. Simply trying to supply a quality product at a reasonable price making sublimation a viable wholesale product competing with technoLogies that don't charge so much for consumables. My HP office jet could sit for a month and i can almost predict it would run fine on the first print. This is how far behind we are because of what SG has done or not done to the industry by preventing creative minds to create something that will truly work for us all. That should probably be one of the quality control test requirements involved..let it sit for one month and then see if it fires up properly after 30 days without the use of a Harvey head cleaner every day. What I would love to see is a printer truly designed specifically for Sublimation compatible with sublimation ink rather it's 2 inches or 100 inches wide and fair priced ink based on a companies desire to make it's money based on how much someone buys per sale, it's quality and reputation and not by controlling the competition based on greed with inks costing 110 buck for 60 to 110 mil a cart. Heck i could go out right now and start selling imported inks illegally pre-filled with free inks at 50 bucks a cart and make a profit but obviously I would be sued. The thing is SG knows it can still make a "reasonable" profit at half of what they charge. That's how we take the sublimation industry to the next level in my humble opinion..throw out the greed and share the pie and not take it all. We make it affordable to all in the consumable departments regardless of what machine you are using. We have come a long way from the days of Sony printers where you had to squeegee the print half way through and the days of Fargo ribbon printers. I was so happy when the days of the 40 dollar 4 oz bottle of ink was available when Artainium was Artainium and not SG along with all the other companies competing to supply a quality and competitively priced ink. Somehow things changed when SG decided to choose to control the market using slick attorneys so now we have 110 bucks for a 60 ml cartridge of ink for the moms and pops of this industry trying to make a buck. Come to think of it I believe i heard a rumor that prices are going to be raised again soon if they have not already? One should expect to pay higher prices for smaller bottles of ink but at the liter level it should be open game regardless of what printer it goes in. I know every one says just buy a 42 inch printer and your problems are solved. Well some of us have devoted our life to imprinting smaller format products and prefer using less wide printers that require less paper cutting. This is what has destroyed this field and taken so many companies with it as well as so many smaller decorators out just trying to sell a good low cost product in the wholesale arena because they can't get fair prices in consumables and ink is one of the major areas in need of the most improvement. Run off 500 fully covered mouse pads using 110 dollar carts and any mom and pop company will understand what they are up against in setting a price that will at least put food on the table. 
The newbie decorators thinking they might be able to make a fair profit soon end up spending far more in ink and equipment that is not really working as it should be. Ok I agree people have to make a profit to stay in business especially when they have to pay a huge staff of employees and fund R & D but do we all have to pay the price of this price manipulation much like the oil companies have control of what ever they want to charge us for gas at the pump or make it like we can only fill one size of car or brand? Or let's use the stock market and insider trading as an example? I respect the works of folks like David from Conde and his business model and efforts to clean up the industry but obviously he can't sell you SG ink cheaper even though I'm sure he could because SG would take him under just as they have every inventive creative person in this industry that has said enough is enough. So who is going to be the first one to create a truly compatible "Sublimation only" printer and offer affordable inks at around 100.00/liter after 2014 and can sit for a month and no problem worrying about if you will have to buy another printer? My guess it might be the Meikeda Company. I remember when they fist offered a mug press distributed under a Phoenix brand name in the US. Low and behold a little later I see it being sold to many US vendors painted black at a much lower price and with a little different chirp and obviously they chose a different approach understanding that quality to the masses is a much better way to do business and business growth then selling something way overpriced trying to control the market.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

dcdesigns said:


> So who is going to be the first one to create a truly compatible "Sublimation only" printer and offer affordable inks at around 100.00/liter after 2014 and can sit for a month and no problem worrying about if you will have to buy another printer? My guess it might be the Meikeda Company I remember when they fist offered a mug press distributed under a Phoenix brand name in the US. Low and behold a little later I see it being sold to many US vendors painted black at a much lower price and with a little different chirp and obviously they chose a different approach understanding that quality to the masses is a much better way to do business and business growth then selling something way overpriced trying to control the market.


No one will ever build a desktop printer designed only for sublimation, it would have to be priced so high as the actual number of sublimation users and their ink usage would not begin to cover the R&D, tooling, component costs, manufacturing costs, and distribution. 

I design electronic products for a living. It would take millions of people (not thousands) doing desktop sublimation for a manufacturer to be able to sell these at the low prices we pay now. If everybody with a computer had a need for a "sublimation only" printer then that would be the only way, but they don't.

Do you have any idea how many plastic parts exist in desktop printers that are made by plastic injection molding and what the tooling costs alone are for those?

We only get good prices on complex electronics because there is a _huge_ consumer demand for those.

Mug press casings are made with formed metal, those can be fairly affordable to produce in low volume. The electrical components are not complex nor numerous in those presses, and the design is not that complex either.


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

There is no need for a dye sub specific printer only quality dye sub ink which already is available to wide format users today. We use J-teck ink and never had clogging issues whether it be in an Epson 9800 or now Mutoh. For years people have blamed Epsons for the clogging when they printer has zero to do with clogging. When Sawgrass and their Cartel members started selling the Ricoh solution they used this myth to sell the much more expensive Ricoh then the Epsons. People flocked to the Ricohs only to find out "oooops, we were wrong. The Ricohs have to be used frequently as well."

Quality ink with great colors, virtually no clogging, etc is available just not generally available to desk top users.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> For years people have blamed Epsons for the clogging when they printer has zero to do with clogging. When Sawgrass and their Cartel members started selling the Ricoh solution they used this myth to sell the much more expensive Ricoh then the Epsons. People flocked to the Ricohs only to find out "oooops, we were wrong. The Ricohs have to be used frequently as well."


Poor quality ink of course can cause clogs, however to state the printer has zero to do with clogging is wrong.

_Epson and Ricoh printers using OEM inks must be used often enough or else the inks will clog the print heads._

I know this from actual experience, however ...

http://files.support.epson.com/htmldocs/wf1100/wf110000ug/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html/wwhelp.htm?context=Epson&file=Maintenance.5.4.html#1041439

"Clean the Print Head Nozzles

If print quality has declined and the nozzle check pattern indicates clogged nozzles, you can clean the print head."

What you imply is a myth because if it wasn't it wouldn't be necessary for Epson to provide a head cleaning function.

Trouble-free printing requires both good inks _and_ frequent usage. Bad inks can only make it worse.

I have few clogging problems with the sublimation inks I have used, but also I respect and understand the limitations of the printers I use, even with the inks they were designed for.

Users printing habits by itself is a significant reason for clogs. Poor ink delivery systems or poor quality inks are other reasons as well, but not the only reasons.


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

mgparrish said:


> Poor quality ink of course can cause clogs, however to state the printer has zero to do with clogging is wrong.
> 
> _Epson and Ricoh printers using OEM inks must be used often enough or else the inks will clog the print heads._
> 
> ...


What I imply is not a myth but spoken from actual real world experience in dye sublimation using J-Teck ink on both an Epson 9800 and a Mutoh. Your constant arguing for the sake of hearing yourself is old and tiring.

REAL WORLD - when we installed our Mutoh it required a different profile and the color values used were completely different then the Epson. For 4 months we would run older jerseys designs once a month on the Epson 9800 for our customers reorders. Not one single time after sitting a month did the Epson have a clogging issue. 

Of course I am sure if you left a printer sit for a year or two you could get a clog with high quality ink but your point is silly and made for argumentative purposes only.

Personally I have NEVER had a desktop printer of any brand have a head clog using OEM ink.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

Riderz Ready said:


> What I imply is not a myth but spoken from actual real world experience in dye sublimation using J-Teck ink on both an Epson 9800 and a Mutoh. Your constant arguing for the sake of hearing yourself is old and tiring.
> 
> REAL WORLD - when we installed our Mutoh it required a different profile and the color values used were completely different then the Epson. For 4 months we would run older jerseys designs once a month on the Epson 9800 for our customers reorders. Not one single time after sitting a month did the Epson have a clogging issue.
> 
> ...


In the *real world* I have used just about every basic desktop Epson pigment ink printer made. Prior to finding decent 3rd party inks I always used Epsons OEM inks for tshirt transfers and for photos. Typically I kept OEM carts installed and swapped in sub carts when I needed to sub print, before I swapped I always checked if nozzles were not clogged and head cleaning was not uncommon.

If your 9800 sat for months you wouldn't know if it was clogged or not as when you went to print it would have _done a head clean for you automatically_. So any clogging could have been cleared and you would not have known it.

My 4880 I only used Epsons ink for the first year I had it, it does a head clean automatically once a week, even turning off "auto clean". If it sat a couple of weeks I was nearly always guarranteed clog heads even after the head cleaning, so several head cleans were required to clear the nozzels.

Epson desktop pigment ink printers can clog if not used in much shorter periods of time, weeks, not years. 

I suppose all these OEM ink users in the "real world" would agree with you?

Rant: my Epson R1800 is killing me (banding, etc): Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review


Epson stylus photo 810 missed colors(banding) - fixyourownprinter.com

Epson 1280 banding etc. problems - Photo.net Digital Darkroom Forum

Clogging after one idle week.: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

Should I toss my Epson R1800 in the dumpster? - Page 3 - Steve's Digicams Forums

Epson Stylus Photo 1270 magenta banding - fixyourownprinter.com

Epson 1410 Help
Epson Printer - Yellow Lines?

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/printers-inks-inkjet-laser-transfers/t107987.html#post629796

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/printers-inks-inkjet-laser-transfers/t108811.html#post635148

Re: Epson Printers print-head clogging and other issues: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

Epson 3880 vs 4880 - FM Forums

Epson R2800 started printing with purple/magenta cast recently: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

3880 with clogged nozzle and comparison with 9000 Pro II: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

Re: clog on epson 3800, what to do?: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

Printer that doesn't clog?: Printers & Printing Forum: 

How to keep R2880 from clogging, etc.: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

4880 clogging: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

Which brand has the least number of clogging issues?: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

inkjets that never clog?: Printers & Printing Forum: Digital Photography Review

Epson R1900 review
Re: Epson stylus Pro 4000 print head banding


----------



## Riderz Ready (Sep 18, 2008)

BTW - 

I can only talk for myself - NEVER had a head clog on our desktop printers using OEM ink. 

Surely hobbyist like yourself that do not do this professionally and go weeks without printing may have an issue but even at that it would make no difference the brand or model of the printer. It is the ink that matters - it is so simple for most to understand. 

By the way our Epson did not automatically clean heads.


----------



## pisquee (Jan 8, 2012)

So, the year is now very nearly 2014, when is the magic date when the Sawgrass hell will freeze over?!


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

pisquee said:


> So, the year is now very nearly 2014, when is the magic date when the Sawgrass hell will freeze over?!


Suegrass Patent Expiration Countdown Clock | CountingDownTo.com


----------



## freebird1963 (Jan 21, 2007)

Riderz Ready said:


> There is no need for a dye sub specific printer only quality dye sub ink which already is available to wide format users today. We use J-teck ink and never had clogging issues whether it be in an Epson 9800 or now Mutoh. For years people have blamed Epsons for the clogging when they printer has zero to do with clogging. When Sawgrass and their Cartel members started selling the Ricoh solution they used this myth to sell the much more expensive Ricoh then the Epsons. People flocked to the Ricohs only to find out "oooops, we were wrong. The Ricohs have to be used frequently as well."
> 
> Quality ink with great colors, virtually no clogging, etc is available just not generally available to desk top users.


So if one had a desktop Epson with a CISS could they use the J-Teck inks ? Or is the ink makeup such that the printheads in the wide format printers can use it ?

I suppose then the desktop epson would have to have iCC profiles built but using any new ink normally requires that.


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

freebird1963 said:


> Do they have a patent of some sort expiring in Feb 14 ? Read on another forum that some SG sublimation patent expired. Could have been wrong but they seemed pretty sure.


The patent that Sawgrass claimed in all the lawsuits is the 5,488,907 patent

Sawgrass Technologies, Inc. v. Texas Original Graphics, Inc., et al., (Fed. Cir. 2007) - Federal Circuits - Docket Number: 06-1190 - May 17, 2007 - March 02, 2007 - Partes: DCT - vLex

It expires 9/1/2014


The Feb. date going around in various forums is incorrect, and comes from the date of _issue_, which was actually Feb. 6 1996

US Patent # 5,488,907. Permanent heat activated transfer printing process and composition - Patents.com

Patent duration changed post June 1995, 

2701-


"For applications filed on or after June 8, 1995, Section 532(a)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465, 108 Stat. 4809 (1994)) amended 35 U.S.C. *154* to provide that the term of a patent (other than a design patent) begins on the date the patent issues and ends on the date that is twenty years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, if the application contains a specific reference to an earlier filed application or applications under 35 U.S.C. *120*, *121*, or *365(c)*, twenty years from the filing date of the earliest of such application(s). This patent term provision is referred to as the “twenty-year term.” Design patents have a term of fourteen years from the date of patent grant. See 35 U.S.C *173* and MPEP § *1505*. 

All patents (other than design patents) that were in force on June 8, 1995, *or* *that issued on an application that was filed before June 8, 1995*, *have a term that is the greater of the “twenty-year term” or seventeen years from the patent grant. *See 35 U.S.C. *154(c)*. A patent granted on an international application filed before June 8, 1995, and which entered the national stage under 35 U.S.C. *371* before, on or after June 8, 1995, will have a term that is the greater of seventeen years from the date of grant or twenty years from the international filing date or any earlier filing date relied upon under 35 U.S.C. *120*, *121* or *365(c)*. The terms of these patents are subject to reduction by any applicable terminal disclaimers (discussed below). ""

*****************************************

The application date (application date = filing date) was September 1, 1994 (SG filed before June 8 1995) so the second paragraph above is the dictating law. So the "twenty year term" from 9/1/1994 is greater than the seventeen years from Feb 6 1996, which would have already passed.

BTW regarding the other post you made in this thread ... FYI appears Elvis has left the building.


----------



## pisquee (Jan 8, 2012)

mgparrish said:


> The patent that Sawgrass claimed in all the lawsuits is the 5,488,907 patent
> 
> It expires 9/1/2014


Ah, I had read that as 9th January 2014 which is today, forgetting in USA the month and day are the opposite way round to UK - a few more months to wait then!


----------



## mgparrish (Jul 9, 2005)

pisquee said:


> Ah, I had read that as 9th January 2014 which is today, forgetting in USA the month and day are the opposite way round to UK - a few more months to wait then!


Yes, the rest of most of the world is opposite of the US, the only thing we get right is New Years Day, 1/1/2014 for example, that works either way. LOL 

We screw up your "gallons" too.


----------

