# DTG: Quality Vs. Speed



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Let me start by saying, I have screen printed for many years, even before DTG was around. My desire in printing was to always provide the absolute best quality of all of my competitors. At the same time, I realized the more shirts per hour I printed, the more money I made in a day. I'm biased. I like to make a profit without spending all of my time doing it.

I also would like to state, our company manufacturers direct to garment printers. Our goal was to provide a high quality print at a good speed, I believe we've accomplished that.

This topic is one that many people have, but the reality is, when looking back on these forums, it's essentially one company versus the entire industry. Since I believe this to be true, I have an open invitation for this company to discuss their position on this thread. It's not designed to be a fight or an argument, it's meant to be an open, honest discussion that will benefit the end user.

This company is All American Look, Inc. or better known as AA on these forums.

Why am I asking for this debate? I was reading another thread in which an end user brought the speed vs quality debate back to the forefront and the owner of AA jumped in. The problem is, the topic was not about speed vs. quality, and I wanted to bring that topic away from the thread in discussion and open it up to keep the topic alive and on point. Here is the response I am referring to.



opolis said:


> I hear a lot of people say this when they are buying a dtg machine that quality of print is the #1 deciding factor in the printer they choose. Imho almost all dtg brands produce a high quality print that 99% of people buying the shirts will think the print is outstanding and better then most prints they have ever seen. Remember almost all of the time your customer isn't doing side by side comparisons with another shirt from another dtg printer. I think it is most peoples goal when buying a dtg printer to build up a business of where they are keeping their machine busy at all times. So time of print seems like it should be a way bigger factor than most people look at when buying a printer to me.
> 
> I look at it this way. If it takes printer A 3:30 seconds to print a shirt, and printer B 4 mins to print a shirt with printer A you are printing a little over 2 more shirts a hour. If your avg profit is $5 per shirt(low end in dtg) thats a profit of $10 a hr, $80 an 8 hr work day, or $20,800 per year lost for a print quality that 99% of customers don't know the difference. Losing that 1% of customers that need a fine art piece printed on a t shirt doesn't make up the difference for me.
> 
> ...


I am in 100% agreement with this and always have been. Again, as a screen printer, my goal was to produce as many per hour as possible with the highest quality I could achieve. If the prints weren't all to my minimum standard, which was apparently higher than all my competitors, I wouldn't send them out. The argument that I have had many times over is quality does in fact count, but it's not the only deciding factor. And remember, the lowest quality dtg print is typically better than what most screen printers can produce.

I have witnessed at trade shows the printer AA sells produce a shirt in 9 minutes on black. This was 3 platens and printing in the highest quality mode possible on that machine. So in a 27 minute cycle, 3 shirts were produced, or 6 2/3 shirts per hour. This is the number I'll go by, since it's the highest quality. I know our printer with the same size design in our production mode, which is what I always used when I had my screen printing shop and owned a dtg printer (ours of course), would produce right around 15 per hour. To make it easier, we will use a 3 hour window making 20 shirts in 3 hours on AA's machine and 45 in 3 hours on ours, (any other printer can insert their own numbers here).

Using our handy dandy ROI calculator, these are the results:

Paying out an employee at $15 per hour (plus taxes of course and additional expenses) and charging $25 for a black tshirt (standard priced shirt) the profit on our printer is $19.23 per shirt and AA's is $17.54 per shirt.

Ours: 15 x $19.23 x 3 (hours) = $865.35 profit
AA's: 6.667 x $17.54 x 3 (hours) = $350.82 profit

So in the same amount of time, the quicker printer was able to yield a much higher profit margin. Now let's say there was only 20 shirts to print.

Ours: 15 x $19.23 x 1.333 (hours) = $384.50 profit. So the yield of profit is slightly more, but it takes a lot less time to do this. If we had a large number of these to print and go by an 8 hour work day, here are the numbers:

Ours: 15 x $19.23 x 8 (hours) = $2,307.60 daily profit (120 shirts)
AA's: 6.667 x $17.54 x 8 (hours) = $935.51 daily profit (53 shirts)

So you see, there is a tremendous difference in printing at the highest possible quality versus production. I've talked to many owners of AA's product and a good handful of them tell me they print in production mode. So the machine is sold on highest quality of print, but most end users end up reverting to a slightly quicker mode in order to make a better profit.

Taking this same debate back to AA, I'd also like to point out another quote in the same thread:



Airbrushdude said:


> From a quality of image reproduction standpoint, the Neoflex was the clear winner, with Belquette Mod1 coming in a very,very close 2nd place.


So here is someone who compared the two prints. Once again, AA's print quality wins. We've seen this time and time again, and I'll give them props for tweaking the RIP to come out with a beautiful print. But, ours comes in a very, very close 2nd place. What's my point here? If print quality wins, all the time, every time, as AA suggests, let's look at the Aeoon in which AA is the sole distributor in the USA. This is an impressive printer. It's fast, and the quality is getting better all the time. I've seen it stated, when compared to AA's printer, the Aeoon comes close, but not quite there. So here we have a printer that is fast, has great quality and of course, comes with a hefty price tag. I don't know the print quality of the Aeoon other than these threads. It looks impressive, but if we come in a very, very close second, I'm taking a guess here as to what printers place in print quality:

AA's = 1st
Ours = 2nd
Aeoon = 3rd

Now AA may disagree with this, but for sake of argument, this is the order I would deem to be accurate.

Does this mean that if someone could afford it, they would buy AA's printer over the other two? Someone could buy a bunch of AA's printers which would require more operators and increase the overall operating costs, but according to AA's logic, this makes sense, even though, your hourly rate of return would be a great deal less than the Aeoon machine. In my assessment of this, I could essentially be selling the Aeoon printer for AA, and I say if a company has the investment and they can truly get the yields claimed with minimal or no downtime and a high print quality, I say go for it. A company has to do what is best for their company.

So there you have it, my thoughts and invitation to have an open and honest debate. Not a fight or argument or even a selling point. This is the type of information that gets lost in the shuffle and one that I have used time and time again in my own company prior to dtg. As a business owner, I've understood that time is in fact money, and there is no denying that. I believe this thread will help bring light to the subject.

Now let the debates begin...


----------



## NZACO (Jan 21, 2012)

Great thoughts and can i add two things that may make the discussion more interesting: 

1, With a higher quality print you able to sell it above 'the market average' and then justify it, compensating the extra time involved.

2, The reason we print is not always for self pride, fulfillment of producing a quality product but getting the job done because of the bottom line. Yes companies do print to make money and making more money does make life easier.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

NZACO said:


> Great thoughts and can i add two things that may make the discussion more interesting:
> 
> 1, With a higher quality print you able to sell it above 'the market average' and then justify it, compensating the extra time involved


I would agree with your first point to a certain extent, but how much higher can you sell it for?

According to the numbers I used, to yield the same profit, you would sell the shirt on the faster printer for $25 and on the slower printer for $50.73. Will a customer pay that much more for quality that isn't extremely different?


----------



## opolis (Feb 18, 2009)

Perfectly said and the exact point I was trying to get across in the other post. Far to often on here I see people get caught up in print quality over speed. All DTG printers produce high quality prints. If you are printing The Mona Lisa all day then by all means get the highest quality print there is. But if you are printing t shirts look into the other factors. 

To Peters point. Which Peter I love your passion, and would love to play you in golf someday. But In the other post you asked me if $10hr profit is what I was looking to make? Of course its not. But I am always looking to trim fat and increase profitability. If I can add $10hr of profit to the bottom line of any aspect of my company at the end of the year I am a happy man, and my bank account likes me a little more. Peter I remember a few years back an airline company switched CEO's. The new CEO came in and cleaned stuff up. One of the first things he changed of all things was the trash bags they used. The new trash bags saved them $.10 for every bag used. You could of asked him the question you asked me of does .$10 per bag really matter to you? Ended up saving the airline millions of dollars at the end of the year. 

So yes finding anyway to achieve higher profitability is a big factor to me. If its printing with a printer that produces high quality prints that 99.99% of my customers will think is the best print they have ever seen, and I'm cranking out anywhere from 2 to 8 more shirts a hour then that is all good with me. I guess I just better hope a neoflex doesn't move in next door. Joking. I do think the neoflex is a really good printer. I just think far to many people think it will fit their business model because of the superb prints and get blinded to the other factors. When they get it in and have that first order of 200 shirts and are only able to print 6-7 hr when some machines would be cranking out the same order at 15 per hr that makes a huge difference. Hopefully one day we can all work up to getting the beast Aeoon. I just think some printers can get you there faster.


----------



## Teez310 (Nov 10, 2010)

I'm wondering, why you comparing the high quality mode of AA and your production mode? Is the production mode the mode you guys also used at the Same show and is that quality of print the one that came at a near 2nd? 

Part of the reason I also got the neoflex is the worker fatigue involved as the 3 platen design gives me a chance to keep up and be able to pretreat shirts while 3 shirts are running. Of course only an issue for people with 1 heat press and limited room.

I hear you guys also have a great product but havnt really researched. Do you guys have to reload a shirt after every print or do you have detachable platens that can be loaded while the current shirt is printing?


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Teez310 said:


> I'm wondering, why you comparing the high quality mode of AA and your production mode? Is the production mode the mode you guys also used at the Same show and is that quality of print the one that came at a near 2nd?
> 
> Part of the reason I also got the neoflex is the worker fatigue involved as the 3 platen design gives me a chance to keep up and be able to pretreat shirts while 3 shirts are running. Of course only an issue for people with 1 heat press and limited room.
> 
> I hear you guys also have a great product but havnt really researched. Do you guys have to reload a shirt after every print or do you have detachable platens that can be loaded while the current shirt is printing?


Good questions. Yes, we have a new mode that allows us to print with just as good quality as our highest resolution, but we can do it in our production mode. The reason why I was comparing the two is because AA's claims are that the highest quality print possible is what you want, irregardless of print speeds. Between production mode and our highest quality mode, there are very little differences in the print when profiled correctly. But we decided to still achieve a great print using a lower setting and further the capabilities of the software. We can also print 720x720 and achieve incredible results with smooth gradient transitions. We are always attempting to push our software to make the print quicker without sacrificing the quality of print.

As for platens, our first printer had a 4 up platen design, but our current printer only has one. The platen has a ball index system so you can swap platens in as little as 2 seconds and send it in to print again. The speed of the platen moving in and out of the system is very quick, much quicker than the moving printer design like on AA's printer and our first one. So there is essentially no downtime in between prints if you have a second platen.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Jerid,

I think to have a fair assessment regarding "margins" in the speed vs quality you would also need to include ink cost in the equation (speed and quality aside) reading the post it seems your referring to NeoFlex vs mod in the speed v quality. Lets also consider the ink cost between the products mentioned to get our bottom line. on the AA website they list there ink cost on 250ml bags at 52-58 dollars, and belquette list there cost at 85 dollars for 250ml for the exact same DuPont ink product. quite a difference in price, so your losing the profit you make up in speed to ink cost. this is just a general assessment without getting technical between the two printer models the 48xx and the 1800. If we look closer the A3/1800 is also going to have frequent ink resets due to the small Epson cartridge firmware read which also = more waste ink factor/ and wasted print time when compared to resetting the 48xx at 250ml intervals. We can then consider and add the time for the auto height adjustment factor in for the mod? comparing just on print time and quality of print alone wouldn't be a good evaluation of the complete daily production and cost scenario Imho. So there are many considerations overall when shopping for a dtg then the start to finish single print time.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

german13 said:


> Jerid,
> 
> I think to have a fair assessment regarding "margins" in the speed vs quality you would also need to include ink cost in the equation (speed and quality aside) reading the post it seems your referring to NeoFlex vs mod in the speed v quality. Lets also consider the ink cost between the products mentioned to get our bottom line. on the AA website they list there ink cost on 250ml bags at 52-58 dollars, and belquette list there cost at 85 dollars for 250ml for the exact same DuPont ink product. quite a difference in price, so your losing the profit you make up in speed to ink cost. this is just a general assessment without getting technical between the two printer models the 48xx and the 1800. If we look closer the A3/1800 is also going to have frequent ink resets due to the small Epson cartridge firmware read which also = more waste ink factor/ and wasted print time when compared to resetting the 48xx at 250ml intervals. We can then consider and add the time for the auto height adjustment factor in for the mod? comparing just on print time and quality of print alone wouldn't be a good evaluation of the complete daily production and cost scenario Imho. So there are many considerations overall when shopping for a dtg then the start to finish single print time.


Price on ink goes down with volume. So you are talking about $70 a bag, not $85. Even so, I assessed the ink costs the same but in this scenario I over estimated at $1.75 per print, the ml would be 6.25, so even using the lowest margin of $52 as you stated, their price would be $1.30. So instead of a profit of $17.54, their now profit is $17.99. You still cannot justify that type of price point because when it comes to a debate on speed, labor is the largest print cost.

And I will debate you all day long that they are not exactly the same ink. If this weren't the case, we wouldn't have customers who own the AA printer, buying our ink. We've been told that our ink performs better, but this isn't about that debate, we've had that countless times and in the end, what works for the customer is key to them.

As for frequent ink resets, this has already been factored in the numbers I provided. I would have used higher numbers if it weren't for that. Auto height only adjusts if something is wrong, for example a wrinkle. You load the shirt wrong, it will auto adjust. And it does it as it's going in (if needed), so the time is very slim. If you are printing the same shirt every time, there should be no need for the auto height to adjust itself.


----------



## TPrintDesigner (Sep 16, 2007)

I'm going to see how this thread pans out before posting my piece but the first thing I would look for is reliability.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

You have to consider the NeoFlex being a 3 platen machine and the work flow, free time during the print to do your loading/heat press/pretreat etc while its still printing. Its just to close to call between the two regarding the "time" depending end-user efficiency, IMHO the advantage goes to the 48xx with a multiple platen set up considering all factors quality,ink cost etc. I think the waste ink factor is higher on the a3 with the frequent resets and the time involved I disagree with your production time/output its really end user dependent on there efficiency . I don't want to get into three page debate I just disagree after using both machine models 48xx and the a3 (48xx with 3 platen). I have also seen and heard from seasoned veterans that the auto adjust is a p.i.t.a and a time waster if it kicks back out (not just your machine but all a3's with this feature).. That said im a huge fan of the Epson a3 and is the printer i understand the best, i would not even consider a single platen model dtg based on the 48xx . I don't have a horse in the race here so anyone can form there own opinion on whats best for there scenario. I highly recommend and enduser if it is at all possible go and check out "real world" production time at a print shop that uses the printer there in the market for to get the best view and assessment of there potential purchase.

Let us not forget AA just introduced there A3 printer with a price under 10k using the same Kothari rip notorious for the quality print (proven on other a3 models) coupled with there ink cost. If you want to compare the a3 this is going to be your biggest competition on the a3 and something you can compare straight across the board and that's going to be a tough competition to overcome without lowering your machine and ink cost? To be fair i will also say i was a former employee of AA but the above is just my honest opinion. I think they are very diverse on there digital line up of products from the high end Aeoon,the new Epson dtg, the new A3 and another not seen yet  Back to the grind, you guys have a good day.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

german13 said:


> You have to consider the NeoFlex being a 3 platen machine and the work flow, free time during the print to do your loading/heat press/pretreat etc while its still printing. Its just to close to call between the two regarding the "time" depending end-user efficiency, IMHO the advantage goes to the 48xx with a multiple platen set up considering all factors quality,ink cost etc. I think the waste ink factor is higher on the a3 with the frequent resets and the time involved I disagree with your production time/output its really end user dependent on there efficiency . I don't want to get into three page debate I just disagree after using both machine models 48xx and the a3 (48xx with 3 platen). I have also seen and heard from seasoned veterans that the auto adjust is a p.i.t.a and a time waster if it kicks back out.. That said im a huge fan of the Epson a3 and is the printer i understand the best, i would not even consider a single platen model dtg based on the 48xx . I don't have a horse in the race here so anyone can form there own opinion on whats best for there scenario. I highly recommend and enduser if it is at all possible go and check out "real world" production time at a print shop that uses the printer there in the market for to get the best view and assessment of there potential purchase.
> 
> Let us not forget AA just introduced there A3 printer with a price under 10k using the same Kothari rip notorious for the quality print (proven on other a3 models) coupled with there ink cost. If you want to compare the a3 this is going to be your biggest competition on the a3 and something you can compare straight across the board and that's going to be a tough competition to overcome without lowering your machine and ink cost? To be fair i will also say i was a former employee of AA but the above is just my honest opinion. I think they are very diverse on there digital line up of products from the high end Aeoon to the new A3 and another not seen yet  Back to the grind, you guys have a good day.


Our printer doesn't do a head clean after the ink chip reset, so there is no waste of time and ink. If someone has a single platen, it resets in between shirt loading. If they have two platens, they have to wait. I also ran my own shop using our printer and I averaged higher than the 15 an hour I quoted for black. As for the AHD, we have quite a bit of updates on it and the seasoned veterans you've talked to make not be up to date. The only time it kicks the platen back out is if it doesn't read a platen at all. In other words, the head would be way too high and you would get a blurry print. So it's a much needed feature. As for multiple platens, we have a printer just like that. We stopped manufacturing it because you can't get the output you can on an A3 printer. Our's, in fact, was 54" long and could fit 4 platens. The people who have upgraded from our original printer or have the AA printer and now ours, see a great deal of difference in speed. 3 platens versus 1 will not make the machine print faster.

As for their new sub $10,000 printer, only time will tell how effective it is. When we built the 48xx based printer, all the ink lines and cartridges were already set. As you know, an A3 printer doesn't have ink lines internally, so it was an absolute necessity for us to design a system that works. Apparently AA took that queue because their new printer also has ink bags. We were the first to do this for a dtg machine and it solved the problems people were having. We do these things because we put every thought through their paces....


----------



## jim55912 (Jun 10, 2008)

TPrintDesigner said:


> I'm going to see how this thread pans out before posting my piece but the first thing I would look for is reliability.


I have to agree. We owned one of the fastest printers on the market, it just kept breaking down.

One of our current printers has 95,000 prints on it. We just replaced our first print head. In that time we have had one service call.

I don't know if our machine produces the best print or not. We have sold a ton of shirts, reorders, no complaints. Works for me.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

jim55912 said:


> I have to agree. We owned one of the fastest printers on the market, it just kept breaking down.
> 
> One of our current printers has 95,000 prints on it. We just replaced our first print head. In that time we have had one service call.
> 
> I don't know if our machine produces the best print or not. We have sold a ton of shirts, reorders, no complaints. Works for me.


Let me also add to the debate, the printer needs to be reliable. If it's not, then your labor charges are once again high, not to mention parts, etc.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> Our printer doesn't do a head clean after the ink chip reset, so there is no waste of time and ink. If someone has a single platen, it resets in between shirt loading. If they have two platens, they have to wait. I also ran my own shop using our printer and I averaged higher than the 15 an hour I quoted for black. As for the AHD, we have quite a bit of updates on it and the seasoned veterans you've talked to make not be up to date. The only time it kicks the platen back out is if it doesn't read a platen at all. In other words, the head would be way too high and you would get a blurry print. So it's a much needed feature. As for multiple platens, we have a printer just like that. We stopped manufacturing it because you can't get the output you can on an A3 printer. Our's, in fact, was 54" long and could fit 4 platens. The people who have upgraded from our original printer or have the AA printer and now ours, see a great deal of difference in speed. 3 platens versus 1 will not make the machine print faster.
> 
> As for their new sub $10,000 printer, only time will tell how effective it is. When we built the 48xx based printer, all the ink lines and cartridges were already set. As you know, an A3 printer doesn't have ink lines internally, so it was an absolute necessity for us to design a system that works. Apparently AA took that queue because their new printer also has ink bags. We were the first to do this for a dtg machine and it solved the problems people were having. We do these things because we put every thought through their paces....


Jerid,
I hope you are not taking my post as confrontational, i give you guys credit you have been at this along time and im aware of the flexijet. Its just printer talk! I think the multiple platen format was dramatically improved upon by NeoFlex you also have to give them credit for putting out a superior product and print. All these dtgs started somewhere beginning with the mastermind product and have been greatly improved upon from hardware to rip. It will be exciting to see where it goes with Epson in the market and to see what all the other manufactures have been sandbagging, its fun and ever evolving industry


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

german13 said:


> Jerid,
> I hope you are not taking my post as confrontational, i give you guys credit you have been at this along time and im aware of the flexijet. Its just printer talk! I think the multiple platen format was dramatically improved upon by NeoFlex you also have to give them credit for putting out a superior product and print. All these dtgs started somewhere beginning with the mastermind product and have been greatly improved upon from hardware to rip. It will be exciting to see where it goes with Epson in the market and to see what all the other manufactures have been sandbagging, its fun and ever evolving industry


Not thinking that at all. I'm trying to bring this to a debate without all the he/said she/said dialog that can go along with it. I will disagree about the platen system due to the fact that they are platens essentially sitting on a bed the printer moves over (and they made the bed shorter), but once again, this is all semantics. Once again, it doesn't change the Quality vs Speed debate.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

This is interesting thread.
To make this debate sleep in best way is.
Bring 50 shirts. Set up same image, size and DPI.
Timing Start to finish time = production time 
Not single shirts printing time.
I am very confident on NeoFlex will finish earlier. Quality? Let audience judge.
Glove is thrown. 
Place? Time?
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> This is interesting thread.
> To make this debate sleep in best way is.
> Bring 20 - 50 shirts. Set up same image, size and DPI.
> Timing Start to finish time = production time
> ...


Or, we can simply do videos. You can show the output queue showing print quality sent to the printer, measure the shirt left to right after it's printed and upload to Youtube. Are you wanting me to bring 50 shirts and you 20? 

Here's a video to get you started. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8MOQTro2aM&feature=c4-overview&list=UUh1eymDxiX_VNgvImXCFQfA[/media]


----------



## BQChris (Aug 16, 2012)

> Our printer doesn't do a head clean after the ink chip reset, so there is no waste of time and ink.


To add to Jerid's comment, the 48XX has to spit after every pass so this also adds to the ink cost and print time. The 1800 does it only after every 12 passes, give or take.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Jerid and others,
Talk is cheap. Action will show who is right.
Let's do actual side by side compare. I asked this years ago. I am sure TSF member will be very interest to watch.
Bring 50 shirts. Same size image. Same art. Same DPI.
It can be anywhere but yours or AA.
Anytime you want to.
Cheers!


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> Jerid and others,
> Talk is cheap. Action will show who is right.
> Let's do actual side by side compare. I asked this years ago. I am sure TSF member will be good interest to watch.
> Bring 50 shirts. Same size image. Same art. Same DPI.
> ...


Actually, the last time I made this challenge to you, I did it here and my post was removed. That's why I didn't challenge you this time. At the highest possible quality of print, you cannot achieve large numbered output. There is simply no disputing this. Out of all of the comments, the first time you spoke up, you stated yours would produce more than ours instead of looking at real numbers. I truly do not have a problem running machines side by side, but not sure what that will prove other than the printer we make is faster than the one you have.

Besides, this was supposed to be a debate about speed vs quality, not a throw-down, but I'm always game.


----------



## ETA (Mar 14, 2013)

allamerican said:


> Jerid and others,
> Talk is cheap. Action will show who is right.
> Let's do actual side by side compare. I asked this years ago. I am sure TSF member will be very interest to watch.
> Bring 50 shirts. Same size image. Same art. Same DPI.
> ...


I think this is a fantastic idea. As someone who is looking into purchasing a new printer, I would be very interested to see how these printers perform next to each other.

As helpful as the idea of both posting videos seems to be, there are so many other factors that can play into that, I believe it would be more interesting to see them together.

I really hope this ends up happening, not to fuel a rivalry, but simply to show pros and cons of each machine. Plus I feel it will inspire both companies to improve on their weaknesses instead of flaunt their strengths


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

ETA said:


> I think this is a fantastic idea. As someone who is looking into purchasing a new printer, I would be very interested to see how these printers perform next to each other.
> 
> As helpful as the idea of both posting videos seems to be, there are so many other factors that can play into that, I believe it would be more interesting to see them together.
> 
> I really hope this ends up happening, not to fuel a rivalry, but simply to show pros and cons of each machine. Plus I feel it will inspire both companies to improve on their weaknesses instead of flaunt their strengths


Thank you!
One shirts printing is never equal to production quantity. 
Jerid, I never recall you asked me to do this while i asked you everytime you bring up this issue. I even asked let's do it at the show floor. Now I am asking this again. Before you ask. Best way to proof your strange calculation is right.
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> Thank you!
> One shirts printing is never equal to production quantity.
> Jerid, I never recall you asked me to do this while i asked you everytime you bring up this issue. I even ask let's do it at the show floor. Now I am asking this again. Before you ask.
> Cheers! Beers are on me always.


If you ask me every time, please point me to every thread showing this. It hasn't happened. Let's do this. I don't have a problem with it. Let me talk to my peeps to find out when and where.

But back to point, after reading my numbers regarding profit margins and hourly rates, etc., what are your thoughts? I'm interested in knowing how print quality is the number one factor in determining how to print shirts.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Epson you are using is $295. AA is using $2500 engine. Are they are same printer?
Do not under estimate Epson. There are reasons.
You started, let's end it.
Cheers!


----------



## opolis (Feb 18, 2009)

I like the idea of a side by side comparison of a production run also. Think it would be super interesting. When will AA's a3 printer be available? Is there any videos or more info of it in action? Seems like AA might of come up with their a3 printer to be able to offer a faster printer? I may be wrong.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

opolis said:


> I like the idea of a side by side comparison of a production run also. Think it would be super interesting. When will AA's a3 printer be available? Is there any videos or more info of it in action? Seems like AA might of come up with their a3 printer to be able to offer a faster printer? I may be wrong.


You are 100% right on A3 printer. Faster than Epson 1800 and at near 1/2 price of market charges.
Cheers! Beers are one again.


----------



## 23spiderman (Jun 26, 2008)

the problem with this entire "can of worms" is the thread began with a false argument. the comparison is between the Mod1 in production mode, and the NeoFlex in hi-res. then speeds are noted along with price and the extrapolation occurs. this is silly! the Neo can also print beautifully in production mode. if an open debate is wanted regarding the two companies, then let's at least use the same playing field.

the majority of us who now use the NeoFlex put quality ahead of speed and we readily admit that, with no apologies. and while i understand that doubling our current output, extrapolated over days, weeks, years, would be great, it's not realistic. anytime you take one measurement and stretch it out into the future, you lose reliability of your original number. these numbers would need to be judged per order, and they are only really good for each order. otherwise they are just "suggested" speeds. quality, however, remains consistent regardless of one shirt being printed, or hundreds of shirts being printed. heck, if we just want a faster printer that is close to the same price point, lets all go get an AnaJet mPower printer. but then again, who cares how fast it can print if the quality doesn't compare. 

all that being said, i think both companies put out a great product. i'm not here to bash anyone, but i will defend the NeoFlex as it is the printer that i now use. my first printer was the AnaJet FP-125 which was based on the Epson r1800 (and was their best printer). i would still take the NeoFlex due to it's flexibility in what can be printed and the quality of the prints that i get...with ZERO tweaking of the artwork. in the other thread, it was mentioned that the Mod1 needed to tweak the artwork in order to get the print to be close to the original. i wasn't there, so i can't say if this is normal or not, but Jerid did allude that Belquette could adjust their profiles so that the end user could just print. anyway, in the meantime, adjusting the artwork takes time, and that wasn't included in the costs. i'm being picky here, but this isn't as ridiculous as comparing the Mod1 in production mode, with the Neo in hi -res mode.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Sean own Anajet(A3) very same as Mod on speed and quality and NeoFlex.
He know A3 in and out. He know NeoFlex in and out.
Cheers! I Need beers


----------



## 13 Stitches (Jul 31, 2007)

JeridHill said:


> I would agree with your first point to a certain extent, but how much higher can you sell it for?
> 
> According to the numbers I used, to yield the same profit, you would sell the shirt on the faster printer for $25 and on the slower printer for $50.73. Will a customer pay that much more for quality that isn't extremely different?


There is no way my customers would pay $25.00 for a shirt. I can't believe there are many out there that would pay that for a "normal" shirt order, even with an awesome design. Production speed is most important, without the many consistent maintenance issues that slow you down. Let the real users respond without "fear" and not company owners and employees, as to how their DTG actually perform. I too will see how this post pans out before further comments.


----------



## KristineH (Jan 23, 2013)

13 Stitches, in my opinion, the $25 per shirt is retail for small quantities. We have a customer that wants a left chest logo and a different name on every shirt. We have a Neoflex, and while I understand it's less work than screen printing and heat applied vinyl, we will probably charge $20 a shirt since each one is custom and he wants a high quality shirt.

While I appreciate the original intent of this thread, the throwdown/trash talk ruins it - just like every other thread when someone asks about the different DTG machines. 

I made my decision based on quality of print I had multiple manufacturers print - I physically went to them or someone near me that owns one. 

The Neoflex was the slowest printer of the ones I looked at for actual print time on one shirt. Since I'll be doing mostly one offs, I felt the quality from the Neo was much better and that was VERY important to me. When I need a production machine, I'll probably do the same testing and see the difference between those and the Neo. 

It's like Ford, Dodge and Chevy trucks. You have diehard fans and people looking to see what's best.


----------



## 4C Print Shop (Sep 8, 2010)

Speed over quality any day of the week. Our balance sheet can attest to this. From a drop shippers perspective there is no way to print 200-300 shirts sometimes in a day all with different artwork in a timely manner on the 48XX print engine. Heck, even with 3 Mod 1 some times I think production is not fast enough.


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

I can't wait to see this go down!! I truly believe that the NeoFlex with prevail as overall winner..but since I own one I am a lil biased


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

mrdean78 said:


> Speed over quality any day of the week. Our balance sheet can attest to this. From a drop shippers perspective there is no way to print 200-300 shirts sometimes in a day all with different artwork in a timely manner on the 48XX print engine. Heck, even with 3 Mod 1 some times I think production is not fast enough.


Did you ever meet customer asked you "how long it took to print?"
I am sure you met customer say "great print".
If your competitor present better quality?
Cheers!


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

23spiderman said:


> i'm being picky here, but this isn't as ridiculous as comparing the Mod1 in production mode, with the Neo in hi -res mode.


Sean, the argument all along was the highest quality possible. You cannot achieve that in the lower resolution mode. My argument for years has always been, you do not need to print in the highest quality mode. The premise of this entire debate is how the potential buyer of the equipment is wooed by quality of print. The majority of owners, I would guess, do not print all the time in the highest quality settings because the printer is too slow. So they lower the resolution. I can tell you with our new settings, our "production" mode prints out an image just as good as our highest quality mode. We can print them side by side and you wouldn't know a difference, so there is no reason for us to print in the higher setting. Even before we had this new mode, I always printed in production mode because the quality of print is superior to a screen print and the end user would never know the difference.

So the debate is not silly, it's actually what becomes the deciding factor for future owners. I'm simply bringing more of a reality as a former tshirt printing company that I would not sacrifice quality, but also knew I needed faster prints. This isn't coming from the standpoint of selling the printers, it comes from being a real world user.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> Sean own Anajet(A3) very same as Mod on speed and quality and NeoFlex.
> He know A3 in and out. He know NeoFlex in and out.
> Cheers! I Need beers


The speed may have been the same, but it's what we did on the in betweens that sped up the production. The auto reset chips in between load and unload and the Rapid Auto 2nd pass which at the time, no other printer had, all add to the bottom line production. I have customers who owned the Sprint and now ours, and they've told me they could produce more with ours. But again, this debate is once more about Speed vs Quality.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

13 Stitches said:


> There is no way my customers would pay $25.00 for a shirt. I can't believe there are many out there that would pay that for a "normal" shirt order, even with an awesome design. Production speed is most important, without the many consistent maintenance issues that slow you down. Let the real users respond without "fear" and not company owners and employees, as to how their DTG actually perform. I too will see how this post pans out before further comments.


Of course, you can insert your own $$ figure here. I see, on average, a black T printed and sold for $25 in this market. This is more of a 1-6 piece range.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

KristineH said:


> While I appreciate the original intent of this thread, the throwdown/trash talk ruins it - just like every other thread when someone asks about the different DTG machines


I agree and this is why I started the thread the way I did. I wasn't trying to challenge, I was attempting to get a good debate going on quality vs speed. The one company that touts this over anyone else is AA. So I felt it was important to call them into the debate. I tried refraining from the throwdown trash talk and if I personally came across that way, I apologize, it definitely wasn't my intention.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

While ou admit NeoFlex quality is superior I am not admit production speed is slower than yours. 
I am surprise his tread was still on, lol.
Your turn of
NeoFlex,
mod,
Aeoon 
Is NeoFlex, Aeoon and all others is IMHO. because Aeoon and NeoFlex are same technology and same XY system. Just bigger.
No secret!
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Cannot find big differences between Anajet(same engine, same technology as Mod), yours, bother etc. show me if there are. We recently have one TSF member post here. Check His experience at SGIA in general forum.
I am sure he is not BSing. http://www.t-shirtforums.com/direct-garment-dtg-inkjet-printing/t269241.html
Not just him there are tons of these in TSF forum.
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

allamerican said:


> Did you ever meet customer asked you "how long it took to print?"
> I am sure you met customer say "great print".
> If your competitor present better quality? Since Jerid admit Neo's better quality, I can use this.
> Cheers!


Waiting fo reply.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

I would laso want to know that. That R1800 rearly does head cleans after reset I know. That this proces can be automated via circuit board I know. But reseting procedure between prints seems strange - it still takes 15 - 20 seconds and if you are pulling the shrt of the platen and putting new one then this is ok, but the reason for producrion run is to have a second platen and switch it after the first print quicly, with resets every print it slows production time.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> Aeoon and NeoFlex are same technology and same XY system. Just bigger.


What? Do you think the people that created the Aeoon will agree with this statement?

Again, though, this isn't the speed vs quality debate I'm trying to address.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Smalzstein said:


> I would laso want to know that. That R1800 rearly does head cleans after reset I know. That this proces can be automated via circuit board I know. But reseting procedure between prints seems strange - it still takes 15 - 20 seconds and if you are pulling the shrt of the platen and putting new one then this is ok, but the reason for producrion run is to have a second platen and switch it after the first print quicly, with resets every print it slows production time.


I did mention this already. If you are using a single platen, it resets in between. So if you are unloading a shirt, putting it on the heat press, then loading a new shirt, it's plenty of time. If you are using two platens, I already mentioned you would have to wait.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Smalzstein said:


> I would laso want to know that. That R1800 rearly does head cleans after reset I know. That this proces can be automated via circuit board I know. But reseting procedure between prints seems strange - it still takes 15 - 20 seconds and if you are pulling the shrt of the platen and putting new one then this is ok, but the reason for producrion run is to have a second platen and switch it after the first print quicly, with resets every print it slows production time.


Bigger the image it is (which is all customers want big image these days)
It will do more often.= more wasting time.
Do not under estimate Epson. $295 vs $2500.
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

$295 become how much while $2500 become how much?
Something to think about it too.
Cheers!


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

Thank you Jerid for clarification.

To add smething to this I will tell how my production envoirment works. I have two a3 units and two a2 units for white printing. Now forget a moment about images larger that a3 (which are less than 10% on my orders) and about super duper quality.

When I have designs with a lot of white, then they go to a2 unit. When I have designs with less white then they go to a3 unit. Perfect synergy.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> Do not under estimate Epson. $295 vs $2500.


More like $600 and $2,000, but either way we use the same print head as the 48xx.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

allamerican said:


> Best beneficiary will be end users. Modify printer price tag will drop crazy. Maybe to the point no one want to modify because there are no money in it.  I cannot say it will never come.
> Innovation of modify is very limited while some one using EPSON's engine. I think there are few reached where to the limit of modifying. Ink circulation is sold by "package part" in oversea. IMHO is why you filter out something we create during circulation? Rather not create something to filter is much better to me.
> Cheers! Beers are on me always.





JeridHill said:


> I disagree. Our printer's price is staying right where it is. If we lower it, then we are showing signs of needing to compete with Epson. As a matter of fact, our first discussions were to increase our price to match Epson to give the end user a choice and put them both more on an even footing when it comes to price. We decided to leave it where it was and move on from there and let the individual printers speak for themselves. As I mentioned before, we'll find what fits the customer and it's not based on price.


$295 become? $2500 become? When engine got bigger body gets automatically gets bigger like a cars. Cost? you figure,  How many horse power you will like?
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

JeridHill said:


> More like $600 and $2,000, but either way we use the same print head as the 48xx.


It is never $600. Maybe at Office max but you know and I know we never buy from them.  I will sell to you at that price. Good profit, lol. How many do you need? Also discontinued years. You are just buy board and use 1900 body now.
In same time I will buy many container full from you at $2000. No, I will pay you $2400(unlimited) while Epson still produce.
My words are good.
Cheers! You do not drink beers so pops are on me always.


----------



## 4C Print Shop (Sep 8, 2010)

allamerican said:


> Waiting fo reply.


Peter,


Did you not see the ROI comparison between both printers in Jerid's first post.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

As a company who once purchased these printers, I know the cost. Sorry, it wasn't $600, it was $595. Just as your printer isn't $2,000, it's $1,995.

Again, please refrain from these types of conversations, it's simply distracting from the topic. I'm trying to get the debate going about Quality vs Speed. If you can't contribute, then I mistakenly invited you to this thread and need to ignore your postings and talk with other users to get their honest opinion.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

mrdean78 said:


> Peter,
> 
> 
> Did you not see the ROI comparison between both printers in Jerid's first post.


Do you trust that? 
Simply joke. I wish I am not tired enough to use my calculator than broken one. I am at Austria for Aeoon Production meeting. I hate long post while I have handicap of English and tired. I am in hotel bar now and enjoying this thread.  No same league.
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

allamerican said:


> It is never $600. Maybe at Office max but you know and I know we never buy from them.  I will sell to you at that price. Good profit, lol. How many do you need? Also discontinued years. You are just buy board and use 1900 body now.
> In same time I will buy many container full from you at $2000. No, I will pay you $2400(unlimited) while Epson still produce.
> My words are good.
> Cheers! You do not drink beers so pops are on me always.


Jerid,
You can make quick money and also I can too. Let's do it.
Back to what you want is race! I am ready whenever you are.
If customer wants 13.5 x 15"? 
My rule is "never say no to customer" 
Cheers!


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

allamerican said:


> Jerid,
> You can make quick money and also I can too. Let's do it.
> Back to what you want is race! I am ready whenever you are.
> If customer wants 13.5 x 15"?
> ...


Apparently you can't understand my requests, so I am now officially, and once again placing you on ignore.... I can arrange the contest with someone else either using your printer or another AA employee.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Since you cannot print bigger than 12" wide. I lower in NeoFlex at your category to match.
Image area will be 12x 16.golden rule for artist 3:4.
When is the last time you went malls?
Did you see all big images on Rag?
No to customer again for large size while this is in trend?
Cheers!


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

I will put a stick in to this bee hive again.

There is always Epson 3880 - faster than 4880 (dosent spit every time), cheapper, printing 1440x720 white is possible on black with acceptable quality.

With normal 1440x1440 printing I really dosent see difference with 4880 in print quality (mayby even a bit bettter to 3880 because it has interweave).

Kind of a compromise in some situation.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

What make you think AA is not thinking about NeoFamily's future? 
No one loves them more than me. I covered their future. I promised and I will carry out.
I am their partner and I will do all with my last breath. If better than 3880? Just change printer and use same base? Lol.
3880 electronic is done but cannot find advantage to changing to.
Surprise is on the way.
AA's biggest revenue is NOT NeoFlex. but I love NeoFamily as myself.
My family and my soul.
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Can you see NeoFlex and go to NeoIII? Leave NeoFlexII? Lol.
Use same base they already paid?
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## g.lupo (Aug 20, 2007)

Hi everyone, great thread, I remember when I started one with same topic before I got machine. Theres many things I want to bring up and will separate them. One important factor first we need to look at is, who is buying machine; single business owner or printing shop with 20 employees. I believe that over 50% of dtg owners are small business with themselves being the main person, and maybe one other employee. So we need to calculate with in this choose what is best for us. 

Now we can look at return on investment with print speed and quality. Jerid you are claming that mod 1 is at 15 an hour at production while neoflex is 6 at high res. This is 100% inaccurate. You cannot justify of what happens at shows, there are 30 people around touching things asking for artwork to load while trying to move through the pack to dry shirts. Also these images are being printed at 11x15. I can print 5 images an hour at 14x19, 10 an hour at 11x11. In production mode I can produce that 11x11 at a rate of 20 an hour. So now that production is compared to production 20>15. also I belive that my production quality will be your mod1 production quality. I was at SGIA and your machine looks cool, has some cool easy features to remove something is breaks, but disappointed in the softness of hand, and image quality itself. So now we need to do recalculations of neo at 20 shirts and hour and mod1 at 15. Also everything I print is at high res, but there are 30% occasion I print at production and is same quality because of simple basic image I received. 

Neo-1, mod1-0

2nd point is what is actual production of printer. How many can mod1 produce in 2 hours, including sorting, pretreating, printing, folding, boxing and shipping. This is important because when I purchase I was only employee so I need do all, I wasn't paying another to do that. So with Neo I can still produce 20 in 2.5 hours and that is everything completed done and shipped. That is a big factor, and if you want to look at well someone else is going to pretreat, that is another $10 your dishing out. 
So the 3 platen system works if you use it the right way. I do many drop shipping and its still benefical because I am loading 3 different design and printing them all as I get other shirts ready or packing. I do have an employee now but she mostly does billing, but when I have a lot of chest size prints. She pretreats with machine im printing and we are doing 35 black shirts an hour high res, pretreat and printing. 

Final point is about well no one is comparing your print to my print, so 99% of time my print is good enough. If I knew my printer thought that I would leave and find the better printer, I would be pissed. half of my orders are people who all they care about is quality prints, and they pay for it, because they don't want to waste there money on something and it just be average. 
I tell all my clients when they want to search around I say that's fine, get a sample before you do your order of 100, because not DTG all is created equal. I do apologize now if I did or do take any of your clients based on this. 

Final conclusion. speed is important, but just as important as quality, and functionality. Do I love my neoflex yes, has it made my business grow from my house to a storefront downtown; yes, is it productive and reliable yes, is the mod 1 a good printer yes, is it a very close 2nd in quality, I dont think so, is it reliable, as far as I believe yes. is it better than majority of other dtg yes. Would i pay more $$for the mod1 than neoflex based on speed and quality no. 

This is good for DTG because we all know that we are far form perfecting it and it keeps everyone on there toes. and I hope mod1 creates something extremely awesome to force others to step up, because I would hate it to get stagnant.


----------



## Teez310 (Nov 10, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> I'm trying to get the debate going about Quality vs Speed.


Its hard to debate against the Neoflex and if anything is misleading about AA touting the quality. The truth is the Neoflex has just about won every competition on this forum as well as the shows. Why AA would not use that as a great marketing piece I dont see whats wrong. Now with speed, it cant be compare because some people look at quality and some look at the bottom line. Now its your job as the salesmen to convince them otherwise. I know Ive seen you guys write things like real production time but I dont know if I have ever seen AA write that it was a faster machine until now. I've always seen things mentioned like the fact that you can walk away from the machine and still be able to pretreat or do other tasks as it prints. 

I've always wondered though how the prints are for 1 shirt printing as the time the white ink has to gel seens so short. But then again, thats really a software issue and managing profiles correctly which its seems like you guys have done a great job.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

g.lupo, I am speaking not only from what I witnessed at a trade show where three platens were on and it was printing with no one touching anything, we also have a 48xx based system. When printing at high resolutions, the print is slow. The printer in AA's booth was printing in 9 minutes complete. 3 shirts took 27 minutes. I'm only speaking about what I saw. Your numbers are better, but even your first was 5 an hour, so 6 2/3 isn't far fetched.

I can tell you we have had this debate of which print is best and I do not disagree that the AA printer is top (right now). But we have consistently been told we are in 2nd place. Sure we want to be in first, but when it comes to speed over print quality, at the end of the day, it makes a very big difference.

And..... we are always working on something.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Teez310 said:


> I know Ive seen you guys write things like real production time but I dont know if I have ever seen AA write that it was a faster machine until now. I've always seen things mentioned like the fact that you can walk away from the machine and still be able to pretreat or do other tasks as it prints.


It's because it isn't faster. The 48xx engine just moves slower, there is no denying that. You can get it to print faster, but only by lowering resolution, which lays less ink down. So there's only so low you can print before it's not a sellable shirt.



> I've always wondered though how the prints are for 1 shirt printing as the time the white ink has to gel seens so short. But then again, thats really a software issue and managing profiles correctly which its seems like you guys have done a great job.


Software, profiles, pretreat and ink. Multiple factors, but you can lower the white ink just enough that it is still bright but isn't pooled up when printing the color.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

allamerican said:


> Did you ever meet customer asked you "how long it took to print?"
> I am sure you met customer say "great print".
> If your competitor present better quality?
> Cheers!


Jerid, we skipped this.
Lol,
Who is not working on something? Tell me one.
Let's do race with Epson and do others too.
Instead keep saying mine is thick and long.
Action says not talking.
At least you admit yours is thin(less quality). Lol 
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

12:30am here. Bartender called last call.
Cheers! Beers are on me always. From Austria. Mountain is already covered by snow.


----------



## g.lupo (Aug 20, 2007)

JeridHill said:


> g.lupo, I am speaking not only from what I witnessed at a trade show where three platens were on and it was printing with no one touching anything, we also have a 48xx based system. When printing at high resolutions, the print is slow. The printer in AA's booth was printing in 9 minutes complete. 3 shirts took 27 minutes. I'm only speaking about what I saw. Your numbers are better, but even your first was 5 an hour, so 6 2/3 isn't far fetched.
> 
> I can tell you we have had this debate of which print is best and I do not disagree that the AA printer is top (right now). But we have consistently been told we are in 2nd place. Sure we want to be in first, but when it comes to speed over print quality, at the end of the day, it makes a very big difference.
> 
> And..... we are always working on something.


Jerid my 5 shirt an hour is at 14x19 print, what can mod1 do at this print size. and im getting $30-$40 a shirt when at this size. 

In the 27 minutes are you including the drying time for each and not calculating in that another 3 shirts where almost done printing in that time. I would bet my storefront that 3 shirts doesnt take 27 minutes unless the image is bigger than 15x15.


yes speed is important and we all want speed with quality, but I still don't see how mod1 is claiming to bring in double the amount of $$ when its not any faster.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

Goddam Peter you remined me how late is it:/


----------



## Belquette (Sep 12, 2005)

allamerican said:


> 12:30am here. Bartender called last call.
> Cheers! Beers are on me always. From Austria. Mountain is already covered by snow.


 People here are actually tying to make a difference to provide logic, understanding and integrity, while _last call_ is of no relevance in any regard.


----------



## Belquette (Sep 12, 2005)

allamerican said:


> Jerid, we skipped this.
> Lol,
> Who is not working on something? Tell me one.
> Let's do race with Epson and do others too.
> ...


This topic is not about any kind of race especially regarding Epson a product that is not available yet.
It's about trying to shed some logic....and in your case smell the coffee..


----------



## NZACO (Jan 21, 2012)

It looks like the 'Speed v Quality' thread is drifting but what is becoming noticeable is that depending on the size of the printing firm indicates where their importance is directed.

Smaller firms, smaller production runs, are more concerned with Quality (the person making the graphics is also printing the shirts)

Larger firms normally have consistently larger production runs and sell the products at lower rates so speed is vital. At times the person making the graphics does not see the printing been done.


----------



## erka (Mar 10, 2013)

*Quality Vs. Speed.hmmm.....this post at last going to speach about Mod1 VS NeoFlex.generally if you RETAILER=your choice must be first Lower maintenance .and then Quality.Thise are printers such as -brother gt series now maybe Epson f2000 etc.And if you are more semiliar to production shops, screen printers ,your choice of caurse SPEED then quality.But ink cost more important than quality and same as SPEED. this is Anajet Mpower .DTG M2 -4 etc.for NeoFlex ,quality is there but low maintenance **and speed no.so do you put it which generation machine?.is it "RETAILER" machine? or "production" machine? or even ?
*


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

g.lupo said:


> Jerid my 5 shirt an hour is at 14x19 print, what can mod1 do at this print size. and im getting $30-$40 a shirt when at this size.
> 
> In the 27 minutes are you including the drying time for each and not calculating in that another 3 shirts where almost done printing in that time. I would bet my storefront that 3 shirts doesnt take 27 minutes unless the image is bigger than 15x15.
> 
> ...


The 27 minutes was how long it took for the printer to move from the front to back printing white, then the front to back printing color. You can fold, box and load more shirts on the pallets, but it won't change the fact that it was only 1 shirt every 9 minutes. As for the Mod1 not being any faster, for anyone who knows anything about the R1800 vs the 48xx series, you will understand this is simple facts. I'm not making something up, it's the way Epson designed them. I have a customer who has an AA printer and ours and he is quite astounded at how much quicker ours is. I'd also like to point out that AA is coming out with an A3 printer that they claim will print faster than the Mod1. If their other printer didn't need an increase of speed, why come out with this other printer anyway? Just because it's a sub $10k printer or are they trying to give faster offerings as well? By their own words, it prints faster.

So getting back to the speed vs quality issue, let's take these printers off the table. Let's speak in generalities. If we don't, then it's going to be my printer, your printer and all the fighting words in between. I get it, you love your printer and no one can make a true claim if it paints it in a bad light. So again, let's refrain from comparing these two printers and begin to look at the what if's. What if there is a printer that prints twice as fast and has great quality, but not as good of quality as the slower printer.

Now make a true argument as to why the slower is the better option.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

NZACO said:


> It looks like the 'Speed v Quality' thread is drifting but what is becoming noticeable is that depending on the size of the printing firm indicates where their importance is directed.
> 
> Smaller firms, smaller production runs, are more concerned with Quality (the person making the graphics is also printing the shirts)
> 
> Larger firms normally have consistently larger production runs and sell the products at lower rates so speed is vital. At times the person making the graphics does not see the printing been done.


This, I agree with. I see a trending pattern, the shops without the large volumes (for the most part) do tend to gravitate towards not caring about how quickly they can get something done. The production shops can't stand around waiting for a printer to finish.


----------



## KristineH (Jan 23, 2013)

JeridHill said:


> What if there is a printer that prints twice as fast and has great quality, but not as good of quality as the slower printer.
> 
> Now make a true argument as to why the slower is the better option.


That is definitely something everyone would be interested in. As long as detail and color vibrancy are available with the twice as fast speed, that would be HUGE. 

Thanks for bringing this back on point. 

Now for some people printing art (high quality photography, painting reproductions, etc.) on garments, canvas, whatever, you need the top quality because it's art, not just a multicolor graphic. And the slower speed may give the better end product when printing art.


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

Its called the Aeoon. /end thread


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Dekay317 said:


> Its called the Aeoon. /end thread


The vast majority of people in DTG cannot afford this printer, so IMO this is not a valid point.


----------



## KristineH (Jan 23, 2013)

Dekay317 said:


> Its called the Aeoon. /end thread


I guess I should have mentioned the price point. Something that doesn't cost over a quarter million dollars would be nice. While I'm a Neo owner and think the Aeoon is amazing, it's not a practical option for the majority of businesses.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

NeoFamily, I am repeating again, you own Aeoon all you need is job to print.
Please, get jobs and call me. 1000s 
4sets are coming in next months. One will stay in AA for you because we sold our demo at show.
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## g.lupo (Aug 20, 2007)

JeridHill said:


> The 27 minutes was how long it took for the printer to move from the front to back printing white, then the front to back printing color. You can fold, box and load more shirts on the pallets, but it won't change the fact that it was only 1 shirt every 9 minutes. As for the Mod1 not being any faster, for anyone who knows anything about the R1800 vs the 48xx series, you will understand this is simple facts. I'm not making something up, it's the way Epson designed them. I have a customer who has an AA printer and ours and he is quite astounded at how much quicker ours is. I'd also like to point out that AA is coming out with an A3 printer that they claim will print faster than the Mod1. If their other printer didn't need an increase of speed, why come out with this other printer anyway? Just because it's a sub $10k printer or are they trying to give faster offerings as well? By their own words, it prints faster.
> 
> So getting back to the speed vs quality issue, let's take these printers off the table. Let's speak in generalities. If we don't, then it's going to be my printer, your printer and all the fighting words in between. I get it, you love your printer and no one can make a true claim if it paints it in a bad light. So again, let's refrain from comparing these two printers and begin to look at the what if's. What if there is a printer that prints twice as fast and has great quality, but not as good of quality as the slower printer.
> 
> Now make a true argument as to why the slower is the better option.


if a printer printed twice as fast with better quality, why would you buy, is it double the cost as other slower, than it still makes sense, is it 10x the cost the other than maybe not. speed and quality together is like killer combo.

Also I never said the the Neo was faster than mod1 when it comes to actually print of shirt. what I am including is everything else you can do during the print. which at the end of day you can get more done because more productive during print time. I don't know all the inside and outs of the pieces of machine and every Epson print head, I just make sure my prints are awesome. So shirt to shirt I know its slower but my definition of speed is all around, least maintence, down time, print speed, time to pret reat, fold, box, labe, ship. so for me in my shop I can do that quicker with longer bed option. make mod 1 with at least dual platen and that could increase speed(productivity) and make me think about it. 

I hope one day we can just stack shirts, and machine loads them selves and we just need to take off. lol


----------



## 23spiderman (Jun 26, 2008)

JeridHill said:


> So getting back to the speed vs quality issue, let's take these printers off the table. Let's speak in generalities. If we don't, then it's going to be my printer, your printer and all the fighting words in between.


and yet using specifics, "AA", "NeoFlex", was exactly how you started this thread. the title of the thread is fair, so that when words get tossed back and forth, we can point back to the "topic", but you started this thread by calling out AA and the NeoFamily. this is why my first post said that a "can of worms" was opened. and, yes, i'm doing the "air quotes" as i type this... 

so now, pages later, we want to discuss speed vs. quality in general terms. well, yes, the 1800 system will generally print faster when compared to the 4880. in fact, i was ignorant of the fact that the Mod1 was based on the 1800. so now your original post comparing speeds and "profits" really is apples to oranges. 

the 27 minutes print time was on a print that took up the full width of the print head's movement. (this would be the full length of the shirt when 3 platens are being used.) this was also printed in hi-res, with a 1440x1440 white underbase and a 1440x720 cmyk layer. the whole point of the show is to exhibit your best "wow" print. once we have the best that is out there, we can tweak those settings to our production in our individual shops. comparing the Mod1 production print to the absolute slowest print on the Neo is incredibly misleading. and the irony is that you are trying to bring clarity to this issue.

here's the problem...you didn't begin this thread in general terms. you named specifics. that is what took this thread from the "speed vs. quality" to "your printer" vs "my printer". and, yes, i'm still doing the "air quotes". can you print 16"x42" canvas on the Mod1? or what about a 5 minute switch to being able to print with solvent inks, or edible inks? or how about ANYTHING i can fit on my bed. if it fits, it prints. these things really have nothing to do with "speed vs. quality", but as soon as you called out AA, you made it personal...specific. so now we have to compare everything that both printers can achieve.

all that being said, you can't compare the two systems side by side. they are built on different platforms. the profiles that the TIGERS have come up with within our RIP put the Neo at the top with regards to quality of print. and yet we also have the ability to still print in a faster mode when we need or want to and STILL have the quality print to go with it. it doesn't matter how much faster my AnaJet may have printed. at the end of the day, the way they were using the EK Print Studio RIP was/is inferior to the NeoRIP Pro/NeoFlex combo. so my AnaJet is now just consuming space. my preference would be to have multiple Neo's so that white ink jobs don't hold up my production flow, but in the meantime, i'm perfectly happy to be putting out the "wow" factor a little bit slower.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Sean, I did open the debate as you described. I was trying to get an answer as to how quality is can supersede production. I do believe there are times as mentioned by others where quality must play a larger role, but we are printing shirts. I gave examples of a pricing structure on the differences between quality vs quantity. I was trying to get more information as to how quality must win every single time, regardless of how long it takes. I called out AA since they are always selling their product on this. I wasn't calling out "NeoFamily", I was calling out users of the AA printer without all the drama that goes with it.

What were the results? My printer is faster than yours. You don't know what you are talking about. Let's have a competition. But no real open and honest debate, also which I called for. It became a thread about how I'm wrong in every area and how the AA printer is the best. I've tried multiple times to get the thread back on track, only to continuously be steered away.

So I restarted the thread with new information. I am now completely ignoring the person who I called out to have the debate, because no matter what, the debate gets back to targeting me as an evil outsider. So there you have it. The reason why I now stopped going down that pathway and tried going down the original intent of the questions. Speed vs Quality. There are a few posts here and there where people are offering valid input, but outside of that, it's been a back and forth of claims I don't know what I'm talking about. I've been in this industry even before white ink was offered. I sold the first FlexiJet, the original 48xx based moving platform printer. I know what it is capable of doing and what it is not. I owned a screen print shop with dtg, and time is money, and I lived by that, without sacrificing quality, but there is only so much quality you can achieve without sacrificing the additional time needed. So I am speaking from experience.

And once again, this thread got off topic by you calling me out. I had already tried steering it back. So I will either continue to let this thread thrive on its own, or I will respond when it's on topic and ignore the postings that are pitting the machines against each other. If you reread what I was writing, you will see my intent was to get to the heart of why the quality must win over production every time when the dollars say different.


----------



## 23spiderman (Jun 26, 2008)

i'm not calling you out at all. i'm simply stating why this thread went off-topic (which i don't think it did based on your first post). honestly, Jerid, what did you really think would come of this? if you had began this thread without mentioning a manufacturer and their specific printer, you might have different responses. but you didn't; you pitted the Mod1 vs. the NeoFlex, and with that comes other things that can be done with a 3 platen system that a single platen system can't do. that's the problem with naming specifics. it's quite obvious that the Mod1 can put out nice looking prints, and can do so a little bit faster since it's based on a small format system. but your numbers in your first post are greatly extrapolated and very misleading. and since you represent a manufacturer yourself, it comes across as a sales' pitch. i have nothing against you, and i'm not calling you out. i'm just confused as to what you thought this would develop into.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

23spiderman said:


> AnaJet is now just consuming space. my preference would be to have multiple Neo's so that white ink jobs don't hold up my production flow, but in the meantime, i'm perfectly happy to be putting out the "wow" factor a little bit slower.


While Sean is master on DTG (read all his knowledgable posts), his Key word is "Anajet just consuming space".
Sean own NeoFlex and Anajet.
Anajet 125= Mod. Same category and same engine.$295.
IMHO: Anajet out put quality = next to next to Mod. If we change RIP, it will be identical.
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Another innovation to keep an eye on with all these printers is the one pass rip option where the white and color is printed separate but in one pass (not like the former version where it mixed cmykw) . I think Cadlink was the first to the table with this originally developed for the solvent printer line? and it looks like its improving dramatically. EK Rip also has this in there latest versions of rip and I must say its pretty cool. currently its not practical on every image but can be used on most and this speeds up the print time production dramatically along with eliminating sequence time of the electronics. Im sure the one pass will continue to improve and this will certainly affect this speed vs quality debate and printer options of the future.. Does iproof have a one pass feature? I don't think they do yet from what I understand.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

In Anajet the reseting is done by a button so it adds some to reseting time so mod would be faster on this.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Smalzstein said:


> In Anajet the reseting is done by a button so it adds some to reseting time so mod would be faster on this.


Im pretty sure all epsons based on the same format operate the same with resets. Its in the firmware of the Epson board itself and I haven't seen anyone able to manipulate the Epson firmware! If that were the case we could just program the original firmware control without third party electronic modifications in the form of servo drivers and the likes  the 1800 does reset differently than some of the other a3 models but current versions have a reset all to full chip with external battery supply not needing a decoder like the 1900 Epson printers. The 1800 model was discontinued shortly after the Epson 2200 model and its hard to get parts for the 2200 so you can bet the 1800 demise is in the near future regarding getting the Epson 1800 boards etc in parts form to convert current models to the 1800 for those that use the 1800 base format. just look at all the 2200 base printers like the t-jet and kiosk there a dime a dozen on ebay and the likes as these parts become short hard to get items. people cant risk/depend on running there business with no parts for the printer.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

You R1800 resets by itself. If you have bare printer you just press the ink button. In mod and in Kiosk 3 process is further automated by external control board which gives the signal of the ink pressed button automaticly after the ink runs low.

Head cleaning only happens periodicaly - on my Kiosk 3 about once in 10 resets.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Jerid,
I hope this thread did not back fired to you.
Instead challenging AA/NeoFlex indirect way, let's support our exist customers with Respect and Love. This is better way to win on any competition.
Cheers! Since you are not drink adult's drink, pops are on me always. Last night in Austria. So many starts, snowed mountains,
Goose dishes, deers (season now), excellent beers 
All came down to who has more happy end users? Isn't it?


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Smalzstein said:


> You R1800 resets by itself. If you have bare printer you just press the ink button. In mod and in Kiosk 3 process is further automated by external control board which gives the signal of the ink pressed button automaticly after the ink runs low.
> 
> Head cleaning only happens periodicaly - on my Kiosk 3 about once in 10 resets.


Yes, and probably why the 1800 model has been run for so long, regardless if there is an external device doing the reset it still has to be reset and dependant on the Epson firmware. there just automating the reset button press. The 1800 parts life timeline is coming to an end and it makes more sense to modify a current model printer regardless of the ink reset function from a parts/business standpoint from both modifiers and endusers . Imho you have to use what you have to work with and the most current model. Imho

Im sure Epson looks at ink sales as a determining factor of when the parts get the axe, keep in mind most of these are desktop office printers that the enduser will just update to a new model after 5 or so years. A little different with the pro series printers Imho when and enduser spends up to 2,000 for a printer they will generally spend the money to get it fixed and not throw it out like a desktop model, hence keeping it on the market and using ink  what Epson is in business to do is sell ink  so im sure you will see pro series 48xx models parts available for longer time periods for that fact alone..


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Going different direction here  Typical, lol.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

I agree with most of your points Jeff, but:

1. I don't see economic reason to use R2000 engine with current reseting technology - there is just to much in wasted on headcleans.

2. There are literaly thausands of R1800 carcases in China. This is the model that started the "take the printhead out and put it in the wideformat printer" trend. So mainboards will be avaible for some time.


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Smalzstein said:


> I agree with most of your points Jeff, but:
> 
> 1. I don't see economic reason to use R2000 engine with current reseting technology - there is just to much in wasted on headcleans.
> 
> 2. There are literaly thausands of R1800 carcases in China. This is the model that started the "take the printhead out and put it in the wideformat printer" trend. So mainboards will be avaible for some time.


If your building your own this is ok, if your a manufacturer selling multi thousand dollar printers to end users and all the sudden parts are extinct this is a problem  keep in mind the 2200 based heads were used in some of the wide format printers also like the 7600 etc, they may make the head still but if you cant get a board/parts for your 2200 its a paper weight  this is whats going on with the 2200 so what makes you think it will be different for an 1800 as far as Epson stocking those any longer? 

remember that 1100 based cmyk printer that was being sold? where is it? Its discontinued also it was only out a short time, I brought that point up a year ago regarding that and they all said its still available. how you like to be the guy who paid 6-7,000 for that printer  and it being a $200 retail printer im sure the parts are limited supply (after originally posting, I checked and they do carry the parts but how long)? I would waste a bit of ink in exchange for a good 7-10 year run on a current model.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

Buy thausand mainboards at once  Rest of the parts get from R2000. Power unit maybe custom made


----------



## 102557 (Mar 6, 2010)

Smalzstein said:


> Buy thausand mainboards at once  Rest of the parts get from R2000. Power unit maybe custom made


I doubt an Epson authorized dealer would be allowed to sell 1000 of boards to a single buyer without question. A good example even on the Epson store your limited to how many printers you can buy within a period as they know people are salvaging the head for resale so then your only choice is to buy from retail outlets. 

Also you would need the 1800 carriage which is different from the 1900/2000 its cisc board plug is a different configuration, then you need the cisc board and ink light board to modify the current chasis, the power supply board is also different its the same as the 1400 power supply, along with the encoder sensor and asf relay board! a lot of work and expense.. its more than just the main board for a hybrid conversion


----------



## BQChris (Aug 16, 2012)

> Anajet 125= Mod. Same category and same engine.$295.


Using your logic(?), then there is little difference in the Free-Jet, iDot, Viper, and the Flexi-Jet/NeoFlex as they are all based off the 48xx series printer costing $4995. Ignore the fact that each company has invested time and money into innovations that help make the entire process simpler, faster, and more efficient for our end users. 

Just because some chose to spend 10x as much on the printer does not mean it is de facto a better printer. It certainly is not 10x faster and, as it has been pointed out in this thread and others, certainly does not possess 10x better image quality than the $495 printer others chose.

Something being cheaper does not necessarily make it sub-par. To use your beloved car analogy, I'll take my Hyundai Elantra over your Benz any day. It does the job I intended when I bought it, gets better gas mileage, and is far cheaper to fix when something fails. 

Yes, Mercedes is engineered beautifully but the customer pays a premium for that in the initial purchase and maintenance/repair for something that adds little benefit over the Hyundai in terms of functionality and purpose. Both are great cars but one being more expensive does not make it superior, as this industry has clearly seen. IMHO, the only reason to own a Benz is to make up for inadequacies in other areas. LOL 

Having the best quality images is great and good job on that! I can concede that we come in a close second in the quality department but we have paired that with the speed advantage. A combination that some of the largest DTG companies in the world have decided was (*is) what fits their business model.


----------



## TUANISAPPAREL (Oct 14, 2012)

I will sacrifice some quality for speed. Speed is what counts if you want to make big money.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using T-Shirt Forums


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

In reality this is an apples to oranges argument. People need to figure out their market then decide on a if speed or quality is of higher value based on their business plan. 

That said I believe over the course of an entire production day the NeoFlex will win both battles..speed and quality!


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

In quality always and without a doubt - in speed that I'm not sure but I would gladly see a comparission.

If I had Kothari for 4880 engine I would make the test myself. 

But I made test with my Kiosk 3 (1900) yesterday out of curiosity: 

a4 image on black -1440x720 underbase, 1440x720 color layer - 4 minutes 23 seconds (kothari RIP)

EKprnt (720x720 for both white underbase and color) - 3 minutes, 10 seconds.

On this design resetings took place every 8 prints - reseting time 23 seconds, every 6 - 7 reset was head cleand 3 minutes.


----------



## g.lupo (Aug 20, 2007)

We also have to look at pricing. In not sure of cost of all machines, but Ido know anajet, brother and Kornit. So we all agree Neoflex best quality. And I can but 2 Neoflex for price on 1 mP5, or brother381. 

So actually we can add more of a quality machine that will actually produce more than a single machine with less quality. A lot of us new shop when start don't have $30-40k to spend on a machine that's poor quality so we pay less for quality and that add to the arsenal when we can. 

Speed always brings in money, but a lot of small business shops can't afford to lose customers because quality not good, if such and such online company is cheaper online and my prints are if same low quality, why would they purchase from me. I need to make sure my prints are better than the cheap fast dtg printers online. 
Just imagine if 50% of the people who bought from you in 2012, comeback as purchased in 2013 plus your new clients. And than again in 2014. You would get very busy. So good quality keeps customers which makes u more money too.


----------



## Teez310 (Nov 10, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> Sean, I did open the debate as you described. I was trying to get an answer as to how quality is can supersede production. I do believe there are times as mentioned by others where quality must play a larger role, but we are printing shirts. I gave examples of a pricing structure on the differences between quality vs quantity. I was trying to get more information as to how quality must win every single time, regardless of how long it takes. I called out AA since they are always selling their product on this. .


I understand how annoying it can be to hear them tout their quality all the time but if they are winning all the quality based contest, would you not?

Say I understand the numbers you are giving. Now I don't know how many people are doing dtg consistently on a couple hundred shirt orders. I'd think you would screen print after a certain number. So then I'm thinking that a lot of the orders are in the 10s with multiple artworks. How is your workflow with the software? Of course with the neoflex rip I can do 3 one offs. With yours do I only get to setup one artwork and then have to wait to set up the next one or can I manipulate a new layout while the one is printing? The setup from job to job is important in our environment as it seems to take a few minutes that can basically be tacked on to the print time of the machine.


----------



## madfenix (May 28, 2012)

g.lupo said:


> We also have to look at pricing. In not sure of cost of all machines, but Ido know anajet, brother and Kornit. So we all agree Neoflex best quality. And I can but 2 Neoflex for price on 1 mP5, or brother381.
> 
> So actually we can add more of a quality machine that will actually produce more than a single machine with less quality. A lot of us new shop when start don't have $30-40k to spend on a machine that's poor quality so we pay less for quality and that add to the arsenal when we can.
> 
> ...


i agree with u
quality is 10 times more important than speed for me,

because from my experience, i have many returned customer / loyal customer because i print better than my competitor even though i sell 30-50% more expensive than my competitor and take more 1-2 days longer

btw i dont own neoflex... 
only a freejet 320tx, which is using khotari RIP like neoflex

i rather have new 5 loyal customer everyday which will return to me because my quality prints, and maybe tell their friends because they like my quality prints
not 20 new customer everyday but never return again because not satisfied with my product

if u need speed that much, why not buying 2nd machine

also i rather have my neoflex (if i had one) to print non stop while i pretreating/curing and preparing my other platens
than wasting my time to loading / unloading shirt before prints, because i always wasting 1-2 minutes each time i put my shirt on platen to center it

i dunno why epson F2000 only using 1 platen system, AA should teach them how effective 3 platen system was lol


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

Teez310 said:


> Say I understand the numbers you are giving. Now I don't know how many people are doing dtg consistently on a couple hundred shirt orders. I'd think you would screen print after a certain number. So then I'm thinking that a lot of the orders are in the 10s with multiple artworks. How is your workflow with the software? Of course with the neoflex rip I can do 3 one offs.


Just an FYI...I have printed 1000+ piece orders with my NeoFlex. The artwork really dictates how it is printed more than the quantity being printed at my shop.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

To Jerid as a thread starter:

Are we comparing here only Epson engines or other? because if you take others then the math is getting a bit more complicated.


----------



## Airbrushdude (May 14, 2013)

I've been asking myself and others around me which is more important to them as a customer....#1. Quality of print. #2. Durability of print. #3. Turnaround speed.

In the for what its worth dept...So far when I show a DTG printed shirt and pose these questions to my friends, family, and potential customers, the answer I've gotten most often is #1...Quality of print, with #3 coming in next....So it seems most folks want the best print they can get first, and then they want it as quickly as possible...Durability of print seemed to be their least concern.


----------



## opolis (Feb 18, 2009)

madfenix said:


> i agree with u
> quality is 10 times more important than speed for me,
> 
> because from my experience, i have many returned customer / loyal customer because i print better than my competitor even though i sell 30-50% more expensive than my competitor and take more 1-2 days longer
> ...


This make it seem like all other dtg printers put out junk. Which is not the case at all. If you read the original post in another thread of how this debate got started, the guy saying the faster printer which happens to be the mod 1 in this case put out a very very close second in quality of print. Which I believe he called it such a close second that it was a tie really. So I don't see how that minute difference would run all of your new customers off. Being in the clothing business for awhile now the thing that I see that turns customers off is someone taking to long to get the order done.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

I agree with Zack. 

Kothari + R1900 beautiful prints, prints from R4880 even better but only pros see the difference and most customers are not so prudent.

Only when I deal with graphic guys from big advertising agencys they are picky and see the difference, sometimes the difference that even I don't see


----------



## VTG (Dec 16, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> Using our handy dandy ROI calculator, these are the results:
> 
> Paying out an employee at $15 per hour (plus taxes of course and additional expenses) and charging $25 for a black tshirt (standard priced shirt) theprofit on our printer is $19.23 per shirt and AA's is $17.54 per shirt.
> 
> ...


.
Jerid, please help me understand ... not trying to be a smart a$$ and not trying high-jack your thread ... I'm just curious how you came up with $19.23 "profit" per shirt? Based on your ROI calculations, an owner of your machine could print 120 shirts per day, working only 4 days a week (taking every Friday off), for 48 weeks per year (taking a 4 week vacation) ... and turn a "profit" of $443,059 ??? Holy cow !!!

120 shirts x 4 (eight hour) days = 480 shirts per week

480 shirts x 48 weeks = 23,040 shirts per year

23,040 shirts x $19.23 profit = $443,059 PROFIT ???

Can you please explain how you came up with your definition of "profit"? 

Thanks.
.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Just get off from UNITED #426.  20 minutes ago. Home now.
Good to be home. Cannot miss my club Sunday last golf tournament on 2013 and Wednesday Epson meeting. They probably will visit couple dealers in this area. 
AA's dream has been to cover A-Z by the price($8000-400,000), speed(up to 400/hr), quality(had covered), size (13" to 104"). 
All will be on AA's menu by Jan 2014. Serve all different tastes owners include vegetarians. Serve from many locations in USA and Other countries. No more this and that.
Cheers! Popping 2nd Yuengling. I wish you are here for my company.


----------



## g.lupo (Aug 20, 2007)

We don't know who the guy was that judged them. My mom thinks everything looks good even when it's messed up. I'm not saying he doesn't know what he's looking at, but what's he credibility. I don't think I have ever seen a mod1 place anywhere in a competition before, why is this?

I feel if you know print can begetter and your giving ur client less your basically saying, screw u client I just want ur money and don't want to go above and beyond for u. I strive to give best, because when I go out and get service I want the best.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

Yes but as I said many times before differences on quality are not that big.

And as I say again and again the key is versatility. That what I do by owning both a2 and a3 models. 

Remember that some clients don't want to pay more for Ultra quality. They will go with very good quality. And you can get that on a3 engine.


----------



## Teez310 (Nov 10, 2010)

Dekay317 said:


> Just an FYI...I have printed 1000+ piece orders with my NeoFlex. The artwork really dictates how it is printed more than the quantity being printed at my shop.


I take it you are doing cmyk prints? I just don't know if I'd ever do that qty with white underbase, just too much labor unless it's a super small pocket print and no other jobs on board. Also Unless you just don't have a reliable screen printer with an automatic or if you are someone doing it out of your garage and don't have to pay any workers.

At that qty I can only see charging a customer near wholesale pricing but if so it's still a good thing to have.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Smalzstein said:


> Yes but as I said many times before differences on quality are not that big.
> 
> And as I say again and again the key is versatility. That what I do by owning both a2 and a3 models.
> 
> Remember that some clients don't want to pay more for Ultra quality. They will go with very good quality. And you can get that on a3 engine.


If you own A2 (NeoFlex) can do all A3(Mod) job
But Mod cannot do NeoFlex can do.
Am I wrong?
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

german13 said:


> Also you would need the 1800 carriage which is different from the 1900/2000 its cisc board plug is a different configuration, then you need the cisc board and ink light board to modify the current chasis, the power supply board is also different its the same as the 1400 power supply, along with the encoder sensor and asf relay board! a lot of work and expense.. its more than just the main board for a hybrid conversion


We've used all 3 carriages you mentioned in the Mod1, the 1800/1900/2000, truly a hybrid.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Teez310 said:


> I understand how annoying it can be to hear them tout their quality all the time but if they are winning all the quality based contest, would you not?
> 
> Say I understand the numbers you are giving. Now I don't know how many people are doing dtg consistently on a couple hundred shirt orders. I'd think you would screen print after a certain number. So then I'm thinking that a lot of the orders are in the 10s with multiple artworks. How is your workflow with the software? Of course with the neoflex rip I can do 3 one offs. With yours do I only get to setup one artwork and then have to wait to set up the next one or can I manipulate a new layout while the one is printing? The setup from job to job is important in our environment as it seems to take a few minutes that can basically be tacked on to the print time of the machine.


You can process your jobs while printing or beforehand. I have a customer that just did 6,000 shirts front and back on 2 printers. Not me, I would have screen printed it, but his customer asked specifically for it.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Smalzstein said:


> To Jerid as a thread starter:
> 
> Are we comparing here only Epson engines or other? because if you take others then the math is getting a bit more complicated.


Not only Epson based. Any printer that can print quickly at a good quality, but not maybe the absolute best quality.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Airbrushdude said:


> I've been asking myself and others around me which is more important to them as a customer....#1. Quality of print. #2. Durability of print. #3. Turnaround speed.
> 
> In the for what its worth dept...So far when I show a DTG printed shirt and pose these questions to my friends, family, and potential customers, the answer I've gotten most often is #1...Quality of print, with #3 coming in next....So it seems most folks want the best print they can get first, and then they want it as quickly as possible...Durability of print seemed to be their least concern.


I'd agree. I'd also say that when I was screen printing, everyone was amazed at the quality of print I produced. I didn't think I was out of the ordinary, but when I began to take notice of what others were producing, I could see why they liked my printing so much better. If the quality was much different compared to the speedy print, then I think quality trumps. If it's negligible, then the end user don't care how quickly you print the job, but you do. The more you print in a day, the more money you make.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Jerid,
What happened with Kevin? He left or lost job? Why he is no longer with BQ? Back bone of Belquete? So shocked. I wish I can talk with him.
He have so many followers in TSF. He helped many mod owners here. Sometimes more you do.
Cheers!


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

VTG said:


> .
> Jerid, please help me understand ... not trying to be a smart a$$ and not trying high-jack your thread ... I'm just curious how you came up with $19.23 "profit" per shirt? Based on your ROI calculations, an owner of your machine could print 120 shirts per day, working only 4 days a week (taking every Friday off), for 48 weeks per year (taking a 4 week vacation) ... and turn a "profit" of $443,059 ??? Holy cow !!!
> 
> 120 shirts x 4 (eight hour) days = 480 shirts per week
> ...


This was based on a retail price of $25 per shirt. I have customers who charge that or more for every single shirt they print and they print nonstop all day long. This is obviously not the norm. Pricing is a tough thing because people are either afraid to charge more, or the market for their product isn't strong enough to justify the price tag.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

g.lupo said:


> We don't know who the guy was that judged them. My mom thinks everything looks good even when it's messed up. I'm not saying he doesn't know what he's looking at, but what's he credibility. I don't think I have ever seen a mod1 place anywhere in a competition before, why is this?
> 
> I feel if you know print can begetter and your giving ur client less your basically saying, screw u client I just want ur money and don't want to go above and beyond for u. I strive to give best, because when I go out and get service I want the best.


As a side note, the last tshirtforum contest, only one person who owned a Mod1 entered. He tied for 2nd place.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

A3 cannot do : a2 size and extreamly small halftoning. For example last time when that was an issue was the Kitekat cat food masqot cat. On a a3 I could not get texture on white fur, on 3880 after tweaking I got it. The printing took little belowe 6 minutes. 

On a a3 this design would print about 3 minutes. So even if you take time for reseting yoi still have 40 % more productivity. 

For someone that prints alone this is not a problem. But I have employees who I have to pay. 

On the other hand I'm 100% sure that I would lose this particular order if I have only a3 printer.

But on a normal day speed also counts.

But we are talking only about epsons which is getting to stupid confronation MOD vs Neoflex.

This topic is more interesting if you take in to account other printers.

For example aby epson VS brother or Ricoh engine printer - so far I havent seen any trully good prints on darks on this printers and I would definetly chose any epson over them nevermind their speed.


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

Teez310 said:


> I take it you are doing cmyk prints? I just don't know if I'd ever do that qty with white underbase, just too much labor unless it's a super small pocket print and no other jobs on board. Also Unless you just don't have a reliable screen printer with an automatic or if you are someone doing it out of your garage and don't have to pay any workers.
> 
> At that qty I can only see charging a customer near wholesale pricing but if so it's still a good thing to have.


Nope. I do very little cmyk only prints. I charged $15 a shirt and it was a full color photographic print. On premium blank and with the my labor it wasn't as profitable as it might seem tho. However I did put my NeoFlex to the test on that order and it was more than up to the task.


----------



## opolis (Feb 18, 2009)

g.lupo said:


> We don't know who the guy was that judged them. My mom thinks everything looks good even when it's messed up. I'm not saying he doesn't know what he's looking at, but what's he credibility. I don't think I have ever seen a mod1 place anywhere in a competition before, why is this?
> 
> I feel if you know print can begetter and your giving ur client less your basically saying, screw u client I just want ur money and don't want to go above and beyond for u. I strive to give best, because when I go out and get service I want the best.


He was just a guy looking at what dtg to buy to get started. Calling out a mans credibility seems a little much. We all have two eyes and can tell what we are looking at. Even so, your point would go to proving the point that quality shouldn't always be the number 1 factor. If a guy wanting to get in the business can't tell the difference in quality, then why would anyone coming in off the street be able to tell. And congrats on the competition wins, but I run a business to make money not win trophies. This whole debate kind of got started by me, because I have noticed how many people looking to buy a dtg only base their decision off of the quality of print a printer has produced. I was just pointing out other factors should be weighed more heavily since the quality or prints are so close. Every printer that has been brought up seem like they are very good products. They all have their pros and cons and all have happy end users. Speed and reliability is what I am looking for in a printer.

I won't even go into the screw your client comment. That is just absurd and ridiculous. All dtg printers put out high quality prints.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Dekay317 said:


> Nope. I do very little cmyk only prints. I charged $15 a shirt and it was a full color photographic print. On premium blank and with the my labor it wasn't as profitable as it might seem tho. However I did put my NeoFlex to the test on that order and it was more than up to the task.


That is a great price for that quantity.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Smalzstein said:


> But we are talking only about epsons which is getting to stupid confronation MOD vs Neoflex.


Thank you. 
I am glad I did not start this "Stupid" LOL.
Someone start and I see many back fires on him.
Cheers!
Poland is my next vacation list. My gf has best friend there.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

allamerican said:


> Poland is my next vacation list. My gf has best friend there.


Then I hope that the common opinion that koreans can't drink much is false


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

The best Vodka is made in Poland not Russia. LOL. Many people do not know this fact.
I had this whenever she brought bottle to USA. Forgot the name. Keep in freezer. Maybe Korean vs Polish shot race?
Sausage, pork Pierogi, Golabki, Potato pancake are my favorites. Lol.
One day soon we will cheers!


----------



## Teez310 (Nov 10, 2010)

Dekay317 said:


> Nope. I do very little cmyk only prints. I charged $15 a shirt and it was a full color photographic print. On premium blank and with the my labor it wasn't as profitable as it might seem tho. However I did put my NeoFlex to the test on that order and it was more than up to the task.


Man, Eric I give you props on your salesmen skills.. $15 on 1000+ order is amazing. Ether that or there isn't anyone around you with that capability.


----------



## VTG (Dec 16, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> This was based on a retail price of $25 per shirt. I have customers who charge that or more for every single shirt they print and they print nonstop all day long. This is obviously not the norm. Pricing is a tough thing because people are either afraid to charge more, or the market for their product isn't strong enough to justify the price tag.


.
Got it, thanks, I must have skipped over the $25 sell price. So your saying that your estimated Cost of Goods is $5.77 per shirt. Right? What probably needs to be clarified (in your original post), is the fact that your calculation is an estimate of "Gross Profit" (Net Sales - Cost of Goods Sold) ... not "Operating Profit" (Gross Profit - Operating Expenses) ... and not "Net Profit (Operating Profit - Taxes - Interest) ... big difference. When it comes to running a business, NET PROFIT is what really matters, and EVERY shop is different, so I find it kind of hard to swallow any DTG "profit" claims unless it applies directly to my business (or someone else's). At any point, some TSF readers may not understand the difference and may accidentally misunderstand your original comparison (claiming $X amount "Profit" per shirt or per day). Not a big deal, just trying to help clarify. 

Concerning the actual debate ...

As everyone knows, Quality (like Beauty) is in "the eye of the beholder", which includes the DTG Machine Manufacturer (who makes and sells the machine), the DTG Machine owner/operator (who prints and sells the shirts), and the Customer (who purchases and wears the shirts). As you mentioned, the NeoFlex seems to have the edge in the quality department. Many folks seem to agree on this point. However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If you like your quality, you can keep your quality. Period. (said with a smile, of course).

With respect to Speed, I believe you were making a comparison between your machine (at Production Quality mode) and the NeoFlex (at the Highest Quality mode). Why? Most NeoFlex owners that I know, print the majority of their jobs in Production Mode. So I again, I find the original comparison a little hard to digest.

Also ... IMHO ... the Speed of the printer, while vitally important, is NOT an accurate or reliable predictor/indicator of how many shirts any one particular shop can produce in an hour, in a day, or in a week. There are just too many other factors involved. Only the most "efficient" operators can take advantage of printer "speed". If your Operations or your DTG operator(s) are not "efficient", it doesn't really matter how fast your DTG printer prints, the operator (or shop inefficiencies) will slow the process down ... again, making the original comparison a bit tough to agree with.

I'm not trying to be confrontational, and I do understand the point you are trying to make. I love both Quality and Speed ... however, I tend to look at things a bit more pragmatically. There are many factors that must be considered when looking into purchasing a DTG, not just Quality and Speed. Here's a short list:

- Quality (in the eyes of the beholder)
- Printer Speed (limited by shop efficiency/operator ability)
- RIP Capabilities
- Printer Reliability
- Service/Maintenance history
- Training
- Technical Support
- Cost of Ink, PT, and other ancillary supplies
- etc, etc.

Enough said, just my two cents.

My #$% beer is warm now , time to get a fresh one.
.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

VTG said:


> .
> Got it, thanks, I must have skipped over the $25 sell price. So your saying that your estimated Cost of Goods is $5.77 per shirt. Right? What probably needs to be clarified (in your original post), is the fact that your calculation is an estimate of "Gross Profit" (Net Sales - Cost of Goods Sold) ... not "Operating Profit" (Gross Profit - Operating Expenses) ... and not "Net Profit (Operating Profit - Taxes - Interest) ... big difference. When it comes to running a business, NET PROFIT is what really matters, and EVERY shop is different, so I find it kind of hard to swallow any DTG "profit" claims unless it applies directly to my business (or someone else's). At any point, some TSF readers may not understand the difference and may accidentally misunderstand your original comparison (claiming $X amount "Profit" per shirt or per day). Not a big deal, just trying to help clarify.


I'm attaching an image to show the costs I used. I do know overall there are other costs, but what I needed was a baseline to go by. The company that invests, their internal structure would be the same. This isn't to compare between companies, it's to compare printers used within the same company, so the numbers would be the same (i.e. overall overhead).



> With respect to Speed, I believe you were making a comparison between your machine (at Production Quality mode) and the NeoFlex (at the Highest Quality mode). Why? Most NeoFlex owners that I know, print the majority of their jobs in Production Mode. So I again, I find the original comparison a little hard to digest.


The printer is being sold on absolute quality being the selling point, yet when confronted with large orders, you have to print at a faster rate, thereby foregoing some quality. We don't advocate printing in the best quality mode, because in our opinion, it's not necessary. The quality in our production mode is almost just as good as our high quality mode and with our new settings soon to be released, I'd find it hard to believe anyone would be able to find a difference. So the comparison is a fair one since that's the selling point used.



> Also ... IMHO ... the Speed of the printer, while vitally important, is NOT an accurate or reliable predictor/indicator of how many shirts any one particular shop can produce in an hour, in a day, or in a week. There are just too many other factors involved. Only the most "efficient" operators can take advantage of printer "speed". If your Operations or your DTG operator(s) are not "efficient", it doesn't really matter how fast your DTG printer prints, the operator (or shop inefficiencies) will slow the process down ... again, making the original comparison a bit tough to agree with.


I agree, so say both workers on a faster and slower machine are equally efficient. The idea isn't to try to find all the fallacies of the argument, place them all on equal footing, then you can assess whether one is a better viewpoint than another. I've heard the argument that you can do other things while the 3 platens print. That is a valid point, but if it prints very slow, then the printer will only go so fast. On our printers, I know a single operator can handle 2 printers at one time and include pretreating and curing in the mix (with multiple heat presses of course). So efficiency does play a pivotal role and is necessary, but for sake of the debate, again, they would be equally efficient on each of their machines.



> I'm not trying to be confrontational, and I do understand the point you are trying to make. I love both Quality and Speed ... however, I tend to look at things a bit more pragmatically. There are many factors that must be considered when looking into purchasing a DTG, not just Quality and Speed. Here's a short list:
> 
> - Quality (in the eyes of the beholder)
> - Printer Speed (limited by shop efficiency/operator ability)
> ...


I agree wholeheartedly. I don't believe speed and quality are the only deciding factors and I think you laid out most of the others to consider as well.


----------



## Teez310 (Nov 10, 2010)

opolis said:


> And congrats on the competition wins, but I run a business to make money not win trophies..


Wow. I guess you wouldn't have any idea how to use that belt to your advantage in your market place? I'd have at least one brochure saying I'm the absolute best at what I do since this site is held in high regard.

Also These guys have a rich history that dates back years and will debate any and everything they can. It's always a great read till Rodney steps in.


----------



## erka (Mar 10, 2013)

hi all.
Quality isnt most important factor.As AA - childrens say in this forum that -quality is number-1 factor and NeoFlex wins in this field.But all they love Brother and Epson f2000[MEDIA][/MEDIA].And sad "we are dont match against Epson not only economical also technology".So to surve to be an dealer only.Actually AA go out 20K-league and went down entry level machine/under 10K/.
In fact Brother and Epson f2000 both only "RETAILER" machine.More expensive ink and spaire part ,not faster speed ,good but not as best NeoFlex 's qualty.But most people love these printer .why?.because lower maintenance...................So big company like Brother and Epson desided to work in this field.And succesfully.lower maintenance is safe your machine and save your business.And everone no stress.Everyone want this.Most trusted machine.Very simple.For "retailer" machine which is more important?.Answer is that..if really Quality is more important AA -say NO to Epson.At last stop by this and lets speak about Epson vs Others as sad Smalzstein.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Anajet125=Mod. Will be identical when use same RIP = Sean said his Anajet125 nothing but "Wasting space" in his shop who owns both NeoFlex and Anajet. Should we believe between your self promo or End user?
Cheers! I really dislike long writing. Did you do same in school? 
Simple and short works for me. Obviously Harvard univ did not accept you. Lol
Cheers! You wish Kevin still work for BQ to support you, shame he quit.


----------



## erka (Mar 10, 2013)

There are "RETAILER" machine and "PRODUCTION" machine only.There arnt category "faster" or "quality" machine.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

erka said:


> hi all.
> quality isnt most important factor.As  AA - childrens say in this forum that -quality is number-1 factor and NeoFlex wins in this field.but all they love Brother and Epson f2000.and sad "we are dont match against Epson not only economical also technology".so to surve to be an dealer only.actually AA go out 20K-league and went down entry level machine/under 10K/.
> in fact Brother and Epson f2000 bouth only "RETAILER" machine.more expensive ink and spaire part ,not faster speed ,good but not as best NeoFlex 's qualty.but most people love these printer .why?.because lower maintenance...................So big company like Brother and Epson desided to work in this field.and succesfully.lower maintenance is safe your machine and save your business.and everone no stress.most trusted machine.for "retailer" machine which is more important?.answer is that.


Cannot agree more.
Many people thinks Circulation system will reduce maintenance but my opinion is
While use any energy to move ink it will create residue. Same as our blood line (lucky blood does not bad as ink). This is basic which we cannot get out. Pigment and TIO2 will build up at valves and corners and pumps --etc. this is why everybody use filters. Cannot clean out totally.
Why create something to filter out?
If filter is too fine you will see water only.lol.
Epson also has this system.
1. Ink has to match to this system. Not same as DuPont.
2. Mechanic has to be smarter not as on the market already.
3. Filter change and cost should be right.
4. No circulation system reached inside of damper and Printhead where most trouble starts.
Etc.
Maintenance at car level is impossible but less is always the better.
I met the guy in Austria who owns Ferrari and he said "When I ride mine I need mechanic at passenger seat". We laughed our butt off. I understand your point.
I used to own car which has Headlight dirt/rain wiper. This gave me lots of headaches. Always gave me red blinking light on dash board and sounds and I never used once. Cost me too.
Some people will go with SAVE $12000-$7000 for little more maintenance. Some will not.
Like car market. We have all kind a cars. What's your car? 
I want all the options and big engine at KIA price?(I love KIA)
Best way is offer all and let end user choose.
Cheers! Beers are on me always.


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Erka,
Where are you located? Isn't it too early to you? I woke up early because Tee Time and TSF. Lol.  How about you? Oversea?
Cheers! I read all your posts  interesting.


----------



## koroisthebest (Mar 11, 2012)

madfenix said:


> i agree with u
> quality is 10 times more important than speed for me,
> 
> because from my experience, i have many returned customer / loyal customer because i print better than my competitor even though i sell 30-50% more expensive than my competitor and take more 1-2 days longer
> ...


LOL 

I will believe whatever you said above if you can produce and sell more than my Anajet Sprint machine


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

freejet 320tx virtualy the same speed as sprint.


----------



## koroisthebest (Mar 11, 2012)

Smalzstein said:


> freejet 320tx virtualy the same speed as sprint.


Yes I know sir, i just want to tell madfenix that i can have more customers, more production rates than him with this pre historic anajet stuff 

In my Country (and Madfenix) Indonesia, the quality of the graphic is not the main factor (still important thou)  , often customer print tshirt from us because we can provide more speed than screen printed tshirt. 

And because the ink price factor, speed, maintenance, etc.. i think we can have good price margin in here if we can sell more white tshirt than dark tshirt. and from what i see RIP like khotari, ekprint, anarip, AcroRip produce in the same +- quality pictures and color in white tshirt, if there is any different i think it's not much. 

and how the DTG business is still growing in my country is amaze me,

for the info:
the avg price for dark tshirt only $10 / tees in my country,
the avg price for white tshirt only $ 8 / tees


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

allamerican said:


> Cannot agree more.
> Many people thinks Circulation system will reduce maintenance but my opinion is
> While use any energy to move ink it will create residue. Same as our blood line (lucky blood does not bad as ink). This is basic which we cannot get out. Pigment and TIO2 will build up at valves and corners and pumps --etc. this is why everybody use filters. Cannot clean out totally.
> Why create something to filter out?
> ...


As the HUGE car guy that I am...you are speaking my language here for sure!!!!


----------



## VTG (Dec 16, 2010)

Jerid, I still have a hard time accepting the comparison as it was originally presented. I have no skin in this debate, or ax to grind, so allow me to try to explain my perspective.

Making a comparison concerning Quality and Speed is fine, as long as the comparison is apples to apples (i.e. using the same Print Mode in the comparison). A comparison that is not based on how a machine (like the NeoFlex) is actually "marketed" or "perceived" by those who see it in action.

IMO, if you want to make a valid comparison, we first have to accept the fact that Quality is "subjective" or as I said, Quality is in "the eye of the beholder". Regardless of the general consensus that NeoFlex has an edge in the Quality category and regardless of the fact that AA uses this distinction as a selling point ... that's all "it" is (the Quality factor) is a selling point (and one that I think they've earned).

Speed, however, is quantitative. However, as we've already discussed, the ability to take advantage of the speed of a printer is dependent upon the ability of the user/operator.

So let's say that (with all else being equal), you conduct a head to head test, using the same DTG operator (his/her skill to operate both machines is equal) under the same roof (overhead is the same), using the same shirt, same artwork, same quantity of shirts to be printed, etc. In other words, everything in the head-to-head comparison is the SAME. In the real world, the DTG operator would run the job using the same PRINT MODE, otherwise, it's really not a fair or valid comparison, right?

So with all else being equal, and using the idea that most DTG owner/operators would run the job using the same PRINT MODE ... regardless of whether it's your machine or the NeoFlex ... which printer is faster in PRODUCTION MODE?

Again, I have no skin in the game, and I'm not trying to be confrontational ... I just think you have to present the comparison in the scope of how an owner/operator would approach a real production job in the real world.

Gotta go, sorry for the long posts (it's a bad habit of mine).
.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

John, I understand your hesitation to accept my premise of highest quality vs our production mode. I am simply using this as the illustration because, once again, what is touted is quality is the absolute and that is what is being sold. But, in order to make my point clearer, I attempted to take these two machines off the table and point to a printer that, let's say at it's highest resolution, doesn't print as good as another, but it's capable of doing twice the volume in the same amount of time.

If you want me to compare the Mod1 in the highest quality mode, then I can give you better numbers. If we were at 4 minutes in production mode, then the high quality mode would end up being around 5 1/2 minutes. Still much less than 9 minutes per shirt. But again, our newest developments in the RIP will allow us to print in production mode (1440x1440 white / 1440x720 color), and even 720x720 mode (the color layer) with results that rival the 1440x1440 mode (currently it's hard to tell between production and high quality, but with these developments, I would dare to say it's practically impossible). We can't make the head move any faster, so to speed it up, we have to focus on making larger steps on the platen itself, which means it's an improvement that has to be made in the RIP.


----------



## VTG (Dec 16, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> If you want me to compare the Mod1 in the highest quality mode, then I can give you better numbers. If we were at 4 minutes in production mode, then the high quality mode would end up being around 5 1/2 minutes. Still much less than 9 minutes per shirt.


.
I understand, however, since you (Belquette) don't advocate printing in the Highest Quality Mode (because it's not really necessary to get good quality prints) ... and since (I believe) AA tells their NeoFlex owners the same thing (i.e. that printing in the Highest Quality Mode is not necessary to achieve great results) ... and because most potential DTG buyers would print the majority of their jobs in PRODUCTION mode. It seems to me that the only comparison that matters (regarding the "speed" of the printer) to a potential DTG buyer, would be a head-to-head comparison in PRODUCTION mode.

We may not agree on this, however, I think it's important to note that you are approaching your comparison from the point of view of a DTG manufacturer (trying to express your view that your machine can print more shirts in Production mode than a competitor's printer can print in High Quality mode) ... that's fine, but it just doesn't resonate with me.

From the point of view of a DTG owner (or a potential DTG buyer), a more realistic comparison would be one comparing both printers in Production mode (since the majority of jobs that they will actually process would be done in Production mode) regardless of which printer they purchase or own.

Again, just my two cents.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

John, If after this you still can't grasp what I'm saying, I'm simply going to have to agree to disagree with you.... I've explained it well enough, but you are having a difficult time understanding my POV and that's ok. It may be difficult because I work for a manufacturing company. But when I was not part of the manufacturing side of BelQuette, I ran my own shop and I never used the highest quality setting and ALL of my customers were blown away with what I provided them. The point being, you can get incredible prints and not have to sacrifice the time needed. But this is different than the message at hand. If it weren't so, the owner of AA wouldn't have stated that their printer even wins over the Aeoon. So by his logic, it's a better investment to purchase their printer instead of the Aeoon due to the quality.

Once again, I do agree with owners of their printer not using the highest quality setting all the time (at least most owners), but the discussion is quality vs speed.

So..... let's take 2 printers out of the discussion and bring it down to 1 printer. I could care less what printer, I could care less what print head. What if you can print with one printer with the absolute best quality, but it's very slow, or you can get pretty close, but not quite as good, but you can achieve twice the speed? What do you choose?

I wasn't pitting our printer against theirs, I was pitting every dtg printer on the market, that was reliable, against theirs, but I used ours as an example because I knew what the speeds were. Why was I trying to make this comparison? Because it was a run on from another thread and I found it intriguing that there are people who choose to print at the absolute highest quality on the AA printer regardless of how much time it takes to do so. For the people who sell with higher profit margins in mind, maybe it's not so much an issue, but it's been my experience as not only an end user, but also a provider to the industry, that people want quality with speed. AND, if the quality isn't absolutely head and shoulders above the rest, but very good, then the compromise is not achieving the absolute best and actually producing more by adding the speed value. As everyone knows, time is money and of course if I could get paid by the time needed in this thread, I think I'd be at 7 figures by now.


----------



## VTG (Dec 16, 2010)

JeridHill said:


> John, If after this you still can't grasp what I'm saying, I'm simply going to have to agree to disagree with you....


.
With all due respect, it's not about an inability to grasp what you're saying, and for the most part we agree. It just seems kind of obvious (at least I would think it's obvious) that a DTG machine will print faster in Production Mode than it will in High Quality Mode. I guess I just struggled to see the point of the entire thread. If it was in response to another thread or post that claimed the opposite (that you can print more shirts in High Quality mode than you can print in Production Mode), then I'd understand the point of your original comparison.

At the end of the day, if some DTG users want to print in High Quality mode, that's their prerogative. If others want to print in Production Mode, that's their prerogative too ... and most of us do, which is why I fail to see how the original comparison is of any significant value to the majority of TSF readers. Maybe it is of value, I don't know, it just seems pretty obvious to me, that's all.

Like you, I wouldn't recommend printing in High Quality mode on your machine or on the NeoFlex, because the Production Mode quality is good on both. The NeoFlex just has an added advantage over most other DTG printers (with the help of the RIP software) that allows a higher quality print if it's needed, wanted or required.

That's all ... be good and have a good week.

And remember, competition is good. Keep after it.
.


----------



## api (Nov 22, 2009)

The title of this topic is “*Quality vs. Speed*”

The source of the disagreements here is that in real life situations quality and speed is always a trade-off, so everybody is (both sides are) right. Up to a certain limit. J

If you want to answer to this question you have to step back a few steps from the actual t-shirt printing, and answer to a more basic question:

*“What is the reason you are in this t-shirt printing business?”* 

If it is just a hobby for you, you will answer differently than if you have to earn your bread with t-shirt printing on a daily basis. Hobbyists can ignore the productivity aspects more easily so the trade-off between quality and speed can lean toward the quality in these cases. Also, if somebody has a customer base where people always want the best quality, and they are ready to pay higher price for that, the trade-off must be decided in favor of the quality.

On the other hand however, if a t-shirt printer company has an “average” customer base, so the speedier production (with lesser quality) is still more than satisfactory for the customers, he or she has to choose the speed vs. the quality.

Explaining the same topic (for the bread earners) with a different approach: 

1. If you could double, triple, quadruple the *quality* of your print, would it be converted into much higher *net profit*? 

2. Alternatively: If you could double, triple, quadruple the *speed* of your printing, would it be converted into much higher *net profit*? 

My answer is: Higher productivity would definitely generate more profit for MY DTG PRINTING BUSINESS, higher quality (higher than an average DTG quality), probably would not. We have printed out over 50K shirts and we have NEVER had any customer who wasn’t satisfied (or expressed dissatisfaction) about the quality. We have tons of returning customers and - for your horror - we print 600 x 600 with a Brother CMYK printer. J

If the quality would be the ONLY important factor, there would be no other cars, except Rolls-Royce, Bentley, etc.. 

But in reality, there is always a trade-off, where the main factor is NOT the trade-off itself, but the fact *whether the trade-off was PROPERLY CHOSEN for the given business environment...*


----------



## api (Nov 22, 2009)

One more thing: 

Is McDonald's makes the BEST QUALITY hamburgers?
Are they still successful in business?
What is THEIR answer for "Quality vs. Speed"?


----------



## Belquette (Sep 12, 2005)

Nice to see some common sense logic and put emotions aside in this thread...


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Facts of DTG market: IMHO
Printing job is never enough for one machine to all starters. This is unfortunate but fact.

When and if Good quality printer owner and Poor quantity owners become a competitor on same customers (chance is bigger everyday because all Mfgs are keep selling) less will lose automatically. Ink cost price will effects this deal also. 
How much mfg's will supports end users by quality, service, price of supplies, machine's versatility(such as change to CYMK x2 in 2 minutes, other markets such as Cell phone cover etc) and price of the machine will swing our customer's Success chance. 
After enough job and after make business won over competitors Re-invest for more equipment $350-400/month will be a piece of cake but will they survive or not until success (won) is big question.

So ask questions to ourself.
Customer is more than King, will we offer to King a less quality food while there are the Best exist?
Will we hold our mouth shut to King "there are better foods are exist but eat this because I want to cook faster?".
When place hire new chef and King find this out? Death or alive?
So will we cheat customers and King? I will feel bad everytime when I talk to myself "I made my decision over my time not by the Best". 
Customer will say only Good/bad print not how long it took you to print (seconds).

Who will stay in business longer between getting more customers everyday or losing customers one by one over better Printer?
Do we know the % of success on business? Very slim, we have to start with strong engine and great support and prices. Let's be honest to who entering this market instead show them Dream world only. 

While Mod vs NeoFlex on production speed are the same or NeoFlex is faster(?) All Talk is cheap.
Let's do the real race. At Long beach show. Same booths, pay 1/2 each.
Design,
Size,
Minimum 5 doz shirts. Light and black.
Glove has been thrown days ago. Truths, facts will win.
I will show you why your calculator was Broken one. Lol.
Also you only show Dreamland to TSF members which is far different in real world.
Thank you for you choose NeoFlex as your target because NeoFlex is way ahead of you. TSF thread/post counts are one of the Proofs. http://www.t-shirtforums.com/direct-garment-dtg-inkjet-printing/
Cheers!


----------



## allamerican-aeoon (Aug 14, 2007)

Like someone said here "maintenance" is the key. I agree this is one important element to success in Dtg. This is why you and I choose Epson(we hope they will as they claim) dealership. Now, customers will choose less maintenance over $6000-$12000? This is big question too. 
Jerid addressed below over my prediction.


allamerican said:


> Best beneficiary will be end users. Modify printer price tag will drop crazy. Maybe to the point no one want to modify because there are no money in it.  I cannot say it will never come.
> Innovation of modify is very limited while some one using EPSON's engine. I think there are few reached where to the limit of modifying. Ink circulation is sold by "package part" in oversea. IMHO is why you filter out something we create during circulation? Rather not create something to filter is much better to me.
> Cheers! Beers are on me always.





JeridHill said:


> I disagree. Our printer's price is staying right where it is. If we lower it, then we are showing signs of needing to compete with Epson. As a matter of fact, our first discussions were to increase our price to match Epson to give the end user a choice and put them both more on an even footing when it comes to price. We decided to leave it where it was and move on from there and let the individual printers speak for themselves. As I mentioned before, we'll find what fits the customer and it's not based on price.


Really? Once, what am I going to eat next meal and where to sleep tonight were my most concern for every day at starting of my immigration. I know money value very well. Now I am in position to share and support and willing to do so.
No reason to present Dream Land only to others for own benefit.
Let's lower the price of machine and inks for them to succeed.
Cheers!


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

If anyone wants to know the history between AA and BQ, they are free to PM both of our companies. I am 100% positive, you will get 2 very conflicting stories. The discussion isn't meant for a public thread and the debate at hand, is Quality vs Speed. I am bringing the debate back to that. I believe it begins going in a great direction, then gets pulled off center. So once again, let's keep the debate going.


----------



## Inkognito (May 5, 2012)

no one cares about your company histories, OP plz give us the facts on speed in prod mode, your printer verses aa printer in prod mode plz, no spin, just facts then we continue debate
thx


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

I figured most people don't care and the very reason I suggested taking it offline and go private. As for speeds, I already stated what our speeds are in both production and high quality mode. But again, the debate is not specifically about their printer and ours. I'm not sure how many more times I can say that??


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

Tee side by side production video would be nice.

I think that Justin Walker owns both, maybe Jerid will ask him?


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

api said:


> One more thing:
> 
> Is McDonald's makes the BEST QUALITY hamburgers?
> Are they still successful in business?
> What is THEIR answer for "Quality vs. Speed"?


To add..

Is Ruth's Chris the fastest cheapest steak you can get?
Are they still successful?

There is and always will be a place for both. This is basics of a free market and a lil thing called Economics.


----------



## Inkognito (May 5, 2012)

OP you keep saying the debate is about quality and speed and you asked for this debate specifically regarding aa's machine and you work for the company who makes mod and i'm asking you what the difference is in prod mode, your machine vs their machine, in prod mode. why can't you post that info just like you did in your first post, yours vs theirs. makes us all wonder if its just spin from a manufacturer which means the debate is only half baked, give all the facts plz


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Inkognito, I've already given my times here. I know there are a lot of pages, but for your sake, I will once again consolidate many of my replies into 1 posting, here it goes:

1) I started this thread as a spin off from another posting in another thread. I wanted it to keep going, but did not want to take the other thread off-topic.
2) I openly called AA into this debate because they state that quality is absolutely the most important thing to consider when purchasing a dtg printer.
3) I called for an open and honest debate. This is my quote, and note, I'm not saying us versus them, I talking about them versus the entire industry since they tout quality as always being the deciding factor:


> This topic is one that many people have, but the reality is, when looking back on these forums, it's essentially one company versus the entire industry. Since I believe this to be true, I have an open invitation for this company to discuss their position on this thread. It's not designed to be a fight or an argument, it's meant to be an open, honest discussion that will benefit the end user.


4) Even after calling for an open and honest debate and me trying to bring it back to that multiple times, the owner of AA proves to be wanting to discuss nothing associated with the debate, giving no numbers and who has an infatuation about publicly speaking about his private parts. So I decided to ignore him and not continue debating with him.
5) In ignoring him, I wanted to take our printer out of the mix. Yes, I started it with our printer, but once again, only because those are the numbers I know and instead of comparing it every other printer, I figured most others would include their own numbers if necessary.
6) I stated in production mode, our printer, on average, will do 15 per hour. When I ran my own print shop, I averaged around 17 for a full size print, but I took it down to 15 to give a good average.
7) I stated in high resolution mode, our printer would take the same design and print that in about 5 1/2 minutes per shirt, whereas theirs was 9 minutes.
8) The owner of AA continues to try to prod me into discussing private matters on open forums and I refuse to do so, even though he has his own version of what happened and is not afraid to publicly announce that, whereas you won't see me or anyone of the BQ team talk about how we remember things going down (publicly) because once again, it's not a public matter. So once again, I reiterate, I choose to ignore him and will not discuss anything with him.

Hope that helps clarify things.


----------



## Smalzstein (Jul 22, 2008)

About Coldesi I really didn't get it why he don't want to sell Kiosk 3.

In Europe Kiosk 3 is far more popular than Viper mainly due to speed.


----------



## EricDeem (May 7, 2011)

What I don't understand is why this thread was created to begin with. The question of speed vs quality has to be one of the most asked questions on the entire site. It's the battle of every segment of the garment decorating business. In fact it's the same battle that happens in almost every industry and market. There is no exact answer, no right or wrong and if there were we wouldn't have competition and thus no innovation.


----------



## g.lupo (Aug 20, 2007)

The mod1 is stated that it's doing 15 an hour in production, Neoflex can do 20 an hour full size in production. At times production equals same quality as highres depending in image, this is where quality and speed come together in combo. Speed is important to make money, but when you have an artist, clothing brand owner. They don't care about speed it quality, so use your judgment when to use both to keep clients and make money. 
By these number AA same speed, even faster in production mode at better quality. So her equality and speed are together.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

g.lupo said:


> Neoflex can do 20 an hour full size in production.


Show me the video.

Our 48xx printer cannot do this with white ink printing, neither can yours. It's not possible unless you lower your resolution quite a bit. If it were, that's faster than most other machines on the market, and it simply won't happen. We can make our printer go even faster, but the end product is better suited for a vintage look. But again, you and others want to keep bringing this debate back to yours versus ours, when I'm clearly trying to take that off the table because of everyone's personal opinions and passions.


----------



## NZACO (Jan 21, 2012)

"What I don't understand is why this thread was created to begin with. The question of speed vs quality has to be one of the most asked questions on the entire site. It's the battle of every segment of the garment decorating business. In fact it's the same battle that happens in almost every industry and market. There is no exact answer, no right or wrong and if there were we wouldn't have competition and thus no innovation."


I think you answered your first question with your statement that followed.

And that is why the thread was started so we could have an idea how the speed v quality relates to peoples present printing.


----------



## api (Nov 22, 2009)

In my opinion, in this topic, this is the ONLY statement which should be debated:

"*I openly called AA into this debate because they state that quality is absolutely the most important thing to consider when purchasing a dtg printer." - JeridHill*

Nobody cares about the length of allamerican's private parts, traveling schedule, drinking habits, or about the tension between the two companies. Even the speed race between the two printers is irrelevant with regards to the merits of the original statement. 

So, the question again:

*Is quality the absolutely most important thing?*


----------



## BandPrints (Feb 4, 2007)

One factor that seems to be neglected is the printer and company logistics running either machine. You will most likely get different speeds form company to company even if the same Mod or Neo was used. Also the quality of the output can vary. For example, I run FreeJets at our DTG location and have gotten new customers that were previously printed on Neo's and Mod's. They switch to us with two main complaints, 1. turnaround time and 2. quality of printing from their current printer. With that said, I think it will always depend on the printer (human) himself and both the Neo and the Mod can be used to match the exact needs of the user. Which in turn their customer is the ultimate person to decide if "production" mode quality or high quality matches their needs.

If the market demands quicker "production" output to cut costs then that is what sells, or if it needs to be the ultimate quality it will go.


----------



## NeoBud (Aug 4, 2013)

to me quality is the most important, followed by customer support and neoflex wins both departments


----------



## api (Nov 22, 2009)

BandPrints said:


> ...
> If the market demands quicker "production" output to cut costs then that is what sells, or if it needs to be the ultimate quality it will go.


Exactly! 

And I can add one more thing: The quality is subjective, so what is "perfect" and "beautiful" for an average customer, can be "just acceptable" for the professional printer who sees shirt images 8 hours a day, 6 days a week 300 days a year.

We do embroidery too, and we always use the "3 feet rule": If it looks very nice from 3 feet, it is good quality. Otherwise you could go nuts with small stitch details on an embroidery image.

I am NOT saying that the quality is not important, what I am saying is that the quality is NOT the only factor in the decision making process...


----------



## Inkognito (May 5, 2012)

this is officially the least informative and helpful thread ever



api said:


> *Is quality the absolutely most important thing?*


since the OP is intentionally avoiding sharing the _real_ facts, which is a simple request that he share the speed comparison of his machine vs theirs in prod mode, similar to the data he shared in his first post, i'll give you an the answer to your question in _his_ words.

it depends on your "*personal opinions and passions*".


----------



## Inkognito (May 5, 2012)

api said:


> I am NOT saying that the quality is not important, what I am saying is that the quality is NOT the only factor in the decision making process...


exactly, i think someone else said this too, there are lots of factors to consider not just quality, but the OP is clinging onto his strange little comparison, that his machine is faster in prod mode vs another machine in high quality mode. really? duh.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Inkognito, I'm not sure what else you want me to do?? I gave the information for our printer already.


----------



## BandPrints (Feb 4, 2007)

More importantly on the end buyer of the said finished goods. I think both printers are great, and when we have new customers call in we always make it a point to ask about what their past printer's machine was. Mostly looking for them to say Brother, Kornit, or Anajet so we can explain the difference they will be getting. But when they say Neo or Mod we are shocked and always think that it must be the operator not the machine. 

Also every owner will be bias towards their own machine, unless they are having a nightmare with it.

The bottom line is these are great machines and any operator could print faster or slower, "higher quality" or lower. I wouldn't mind using either, but I know my VP of Operations would say differently


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Inkognito said:


> exactly, i think someone else said this too, there are lots of factors to consider not just quality, but the OP is clinging onto his strange little comparison, that his machine is faster in prod mode vs another machine in high quality mode. really? duh.


I also addressed this. Can you take a moment and go back and reread everything that I've said? Then you'll see I've addressed the very concerns you are having with me not be forthcoming.


----------



## Rodney (Nov 3, 2004)

> In my opinion, in this topic, this is the ONLY statement which should be debated:
> 
> "quality is absolutely the most important thing to consider when purchasing a dtg


I'm sure the original poster knows this statement would have easier to debate without all the drama if it would have been posted by and end user and not a vendor for a machine 

Even better, if the question had been posted on its own without calling out specific competitor printers that they have a long drawn out history with, it might have gone better. 

With the way the thread was posted (ours is better than yours), it's no surprise the thread went the way it did. If you want vendors to tell you why their machine is the best, give them a call. Hearing actual users experience (who don't make money from the sales of the machine or receive perks from the vendor), gives a much clearer picture


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

BandPrints said:


> More importantly on the end buyer of the said finished goods. I think both printers are great, and when we have new customers call in we always make it a point to ask about what their past printer's machine was. Mostly looking for them to say Brother, Kornit, or Anajet so we can explain the difference they will be getting. But when they say Neo or Mod we are shocked and always think that it must be the operator not the machine.
> 
> Also every owner will be bias towards their own machine, unless they are having a nightmare with it.
> 
> The bottom line is these are great machines and any operator could print faster or slower, "higher quality" or lower. I wouldn't mind using either, but I know my VP of Operations would say differently


The operator definitely needs to be able to know how to handle the product. The big issue in dtg is how to create a process so the user can have a good workflow with minimal effort. This is definitely a focus of ours on how to make improvements in the industry.


----------



## JeridHill (Feb 8, 2006)

Rodney said:


> I'm sure the original poster knows this statement would have easier to debate without all the drama if it would have been posted by and end user and not a vendor for a machine
> 
> Even better, if the question had been posted on its own without calling out specific competitor printers that they have a long drawn out history with, it might have gone better.
> 
> With the way the thread was posted (ours is better than yours), it's no surprise the thread went the way it did. If you want vendors to tell you why their machine is the best, give them a call. Hearing actual users experience (who don't make money from the sales of the machine or receive perks from the vendor), gives a much clearer picture


Hindsight is 20/20.

I do look at how it came about and tried to correct it and steer it back to essentially this point.


----------

