Jump to content

Dye sublimation vs inkjet printers


hjoseph7

Recommended Posts

The other day I pulled out my Hiti Dye sublimation printer that had been sitting in storage for more than 5 years. There was still some paper and a ink cartridge inside the printer. After a little juggling I got the printer to start up. I figured the ink would be all dried up by now, but I decided to give it a try anyway. I inserted a flash card inside the printer picked a picture from the 2 inch monitor and hit the print button.

 

To my surprise, I got a perfectly colored 5x7" print. It all took about 25 seconds ! I got to admit the print had some slight spots on it, so I fired up another one. The next one came out clean, no spots and the colors looked natural. No computer, no complicated calibration, no lengthy and expensive cleaning cycles and the prints are decent. Unlike ink jet printers, Dye sublimation printers have that smooth (continuous ) look like the pictures you used to get from the corner drug store. This printer also puts a protective coating on the print as a final step.

 

My expensive Epson printer died a long time ago. It lasted about 6 months until it kept getting clogged and finally died. The good thing about ink Jet printers is that they have a much wider choice of paper grades and sizes. With a Dye sublimation printer you are lucky to get 2 grades and a couple of sizes. However, if you are not a frequent printer then Dye sublimation might be a better choice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only a dye-sub printer can produce glossy prints comparable to mini-lab prints. They are also very fast, producing a print in as little as 10 seconds. However you are limited in size, and are obliged to use paper and foils from the manufacturer.

 

I had a Kodak 9x12 dye-sub, and used it for many years. However Kodak discontinued that printer along with the rest of their printers and development personnel. The last driver worked only with WinXP, and after a couple of years, supplies dried up too. Most of my album printers were produced on this machine, at the same or lower cost than from a mini-lab. When Kodak loses interest, it's as though the product never existed.

 

Now I have a 4x6 Canon "Selphy" printer for refrigerator prints. It wasn't very expensive, nor are the supplies. My first Selphy predated the Kodak printer above. The current one is #2, but uses the same supplies as the first. It's wireless, so any computer or smart phone can use it. As noted, the paper can get dusty and skip, but the second print is usually fine. It never dries up or clogs, though. It can't.

 

I purchased a Canon Pro-10 inkjet three years ago, which serves for album and exhibition prints up to 12x18. If I need larger, I farm them out. Unlike it's Epson predecessors, the Canon can go weeks between prints, and start up like new. Also unlike Epson, the print head can be replaced at home if it dies or clogs permanently. For me, that was a selling point on the same level as print quality, which is excellent.

 

If you have a dye-sub printer, I suggest you cover it when not in use. Dust on the paper only affects the first print. Dust on the rollers is really hard to remove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a (now) old Epson R1800 that I let dry up. I bought a bunch of very ¢heap dye-reloaded cartridges for it and used those to clean the nozzles etc.

Then went back to the more nearly archival pigment inks made for it, and it now works as well as it ever did. The cost of using those pigment inks for cleaning is really high.

 

That is one reason it may be better to farm out printing if you do it only rarely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...