# Epson or Xante



## kraze (Dec 7, 2007)

Hi,

I am looking to print out positives to screen print. It would be from small to tabloid sizes, 1 to 6 colors. My budget is about $2K. Would you use an Epson and purchase a RIP (RIP suggestion) or a Xante Screenwriter 4? I know that with the inkjet registration is a lot better, uses a lot more ink, but how are the halftones? Does anyone know how much shrinkage there is on the Xante even with Myriad and other films?

Please let me know.
Thank you.


----------



## adawg2252 (Dec 12, 2007)

We started using laser vellum and positives (paper and delta laser film) and I got an Epson 3000 years back and have NEVER ever considered going back to laser printers.

Laser Toner can't produce dense black images. It has to do with the electrons on the imaging drum, so you're blackest black isn't nearly as black as an ink-jet.

My epson 3000 prints 1440dpi and I've never had an issue with registering half-tone dots or high-resolution lines. I have a RIP program (FastRIP - US Screen) but I don't use it all that much, since I don't do too many seps anymore.

I would ask different companies for sample prints of ink-jet and laser samples. Try and see if they will print samples from your own file. Then you can do your own exposure tests and see how good the lines are from each one.

But my personal recomendation is ink-jet.


----------



## kraze (Dec 7, 2007)

Hi adawg2252,

Thanks for your feedback. I think I'm going to buy a Epson R1800, but I don't know what kind of RIP to get. I don't know whether to get ScreenRip Pro, Accurip or FastRip. If you have any suggestions, let me know.

Thanks again


----------



## adawg2252 (Dec 12, 2007)

Honestly, I don't think it matters. I went with FastRIP (US Screen) at the time just cause it seemed like it was the most popular at the time. But I seldom use it, even when I'm doing seps.

I know the R1800 is a great printer, but in comparison to the Epson 3000 I really don't know where it stands. The 3000 is 16.5" wide and the R1800 is 13". 3000 uses dye inks (allows for use of non-waterproof film). 

R1800 is pigment ink so you'll need waterproof film unless you "convert" to US Screens FastINK dye based ink. Personally I don't see a difference from regular prints vs their ink, but some people swear by it.

I recommend waterproof film anyways because you can re-use the positives over and over or save them for later use. Plus in high-humidity areas you don't need to worry about simply brushing across the film, which in some cases is enough to smudge ink off a non-wp sheet.

I would look around on the forums to see if anyone else has tried the other RIP programs, or maybe someone made a comparison thread. If there aren't any, like I said. Call them. US Screen will definitly send out a FastRIP sample to you, so I assume the other companies would too.

Ulano sells a "PowerRIP" program that I think isn't bad at all (also for the R1800). I saw output onto their pigment film from the R1800 at this past SGIA and it wasn't bad at all.

I guess I would try to get a sample/look at all of them. See if one is easier/compatible with mac/pc, etc etc. before you buy.


----------



## kraze (Dec 7, 2007)

Thanks. I'll try contacting some of the companies and searching around the forums.


----------



## XYLisa (Jan 20, 2008)

I have a Xante Screenwriter 3 and I don't like it at all.....I would research the Epson. My positives are never dark enough and the film does shrink during the process. Good luck


----------



## 14dateam (Jan 8, 2007)

I saw a company at the ISS show in Long Beach that addresses the issue of laser film not being dark enough. The company is Magic Dark. They claimed it is image setter quality. You sprayed it on the film and used a roller on it. I must admit the sample is much darker on the side they used the solution on. I think they were in Balwdwin Park Ca. 
I have heard of printers spraying a laquer on there films which will darken the toner.


----------



## XYLisa (Jan 20, 2008)

I use the toner spray and it does darken them enough to get your screen to wash out but after you pay all that money for a printer you don't really want to go through all that!


----------



## Kellyb (Jan 30, 2008)

I would go with the Epson! I've had terrible problems with Xante in the past. As for RIP's I'd recommend that you do your homework and make sure your dealer will be able to help install or offer enough phone support to get it set up correctly. I have a lot of customers that like their FastFilms. We Rep the Ulano RIP from I-Proof and Autotype's version of Wasatch SoftRIP. Both are very easy to use.


----------



## Paul204 (Apr 21, 2007)

Like most people say, for general output purposes, most RIPs will probably be similar.

I use fastRIP and can't really comment on its quality because I don't know much about different RIPs or what they really should do, but I can say their support has been A+. You can call them toll free at all hours of the day to get help with whatever and they always resolve stuff quickly.


----------



## kraze (Dec 7, 2007)

Thanks all for all your feedback and comments. Since I'm still a newbie to screen printing, every little bit helps. 

Thanks again,
K.A. ~


----------



## mk162 (Sep 24, 2007)

We run an Epson 3000. It's a bit slow, but the films are amazing. We've had it now for around 7 years, we've had to have the heads replaced once. Other than that, it's perfect.

I would recommend one in a heartbeat. You can get rebuilt ones for around $800 and a RIP for $500. Leaving you $700 for a night out at a shoe and jewelry show.


----------



## Steelheader100 (Jan 18, 2007)

We had a Xante for years and the films shrank they were never dark enough unless you ran them through the film star. The film star made them dark but the chemicals smelled horrible. We have an Epson now and it's much better.


----------



## kraze (Dec 7, 2007)

Hi Steelheader100

Thanks for your response. I finally decided I'm going to order an Epson after talking to a local printer. 




Steelheader100 said:


> We had a Xante for years and the films shrank they were never dark enough unless you ran them through the film star. The film star made them dark but the chemicals smelled horrible. We have an Epson now and it's much better.


----------



## edro100 (Jan 28, 2007)

Andrew,

Could you explain what one must do to get dark enough blacks on positives using a epson 3000 without using FastRip? I have tried everything I can think of to no avail... I sent you an IM but decided to post here too as someone else might later enjoy the thread.

You also said you seldom use your FastRip because you don't do much color sep anymore. Can you explain a bit what FastRip facilitates and if there is any other good Rips that will work and are more affordable?

I would appreciate any help you might lend.
Thanks,
Ed


----------



## edro100 (Jan 28, 2007)

Andrew,

I saw that you have been using an Epson 3000 and are quite satisfied with it. I have had one for over a year but have never figured out how to get it to print dark enough blacks to use it for film positives. What am I not doing or doing wrong? I know this is an old work horse that has been used by screen printers for ever. I was thinking that I might need to get a RIP program to get it to work right. 

However you noted that you seldom use your FastRip unless your doing color seps. 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Ed
[email protected]


----------



## RichardGreaves (Nov 7, 2006)

The Epson 3000, 1280 and several other turn of the century printers have an "Ink Jet Back Light Film" media setting that increased ink deposit very nicely. Epson stopped making the 3000 in 2002.

You have to 'flop' the image in your graphics program, because the Epson Printer Driver 'flopped' the image again.

Screen printers need increased ink deposit to make transparent inks opaque to UV energy.


----------



## AddVenture (Jul 12, 2006)

Steelheader100 said:


> We had a Xante for years and the films shrank they were never dark enough unless you ran them through the film star. The film star made them dark but the chemicals smelled horrible. We have an Epson now and it's much better.


same thing here. i ended up selling our xante to some guy down in mexico for cheap. i told him of the issues, but he was happy to take it. his plan was to just do one color jobs.

we use an epson stylus pro 4000 with a Wasatch RIP now. little if no issues, no chemicals, no mess. makes my job a lot easier!


----------

