Here's what I know... help me with what I don't... which is alot depending on who you ask!
White pan plastic faces... Roland SP300 printer... printed vinyl... stop me if you've heard this one.
We've had some limited success printing on transparent material (clear). Looks great during the day... not dark enough at night. Increase the ink saturation... looks good at night... colors too dark during the day. Intelicoat and Oracal make a white translucent formulated especially for digital printing. Starting with a white translucent material rather than clear may do the trick... but these vinyls are double what a good high performance white translucent material costs. (Avery A9, Oracal 8500, etc.) We've had good success with our Roland printing on standard cast and calendered white vinyls. (Avery A4 and A8, Oracal 651, etc.) These are not marketed as digital media, but Eco-Sol inks do a great job on them. Non digital print white translucent can handle thremal printing... anyone try solvent inks on a standard white translucent? If the results are similar, and the quality is acceptable, I'd like to give it a try and see.
Thanks.
I also have an SP-300 and although I haven't done the projects you describe, I am more curious about the price sensitivity you allude to, as this is an area of continual concern in these forums. In this market, is the material price that much of a factor? You remark that the correct material is double the price of the conventional one. A quick check on the Sign Warehouse site (for reference only) reveals that it is more than double, comparing 3651 (4.85/ft.sq) transparent (or gloss) to 3850 (11.63/ft.sq) translucent. But when calculated over a 2' x 10' job (for example), the difference in materials is "only" 6.78. This, to me anyways, seems like a very small difference compared to the total price of the project for a material that is designed for the task. Would a price difference of under 15.00 (given "normal" materials markup) make or break the sale? Just wondering how it is in other markets as this is always a matter of consternation.
Cheers!
Lyle
I don't want to cut corners on quality. I just want to give my customer the best deal possible... and in this job's case, based on the square footage of the project and the pricing you researched, it's about a $1,500 difference in the material... my cost. If a standard white translucent, designed for use on plastic faces, will accept inks as well as or comparable to a translucent the industry says is made just for printing... and it's $1,500 less, I save $1,500, & my customer saves mark-up on $1,500. All this is, of course, subject to whether or not the project will suffer in quality. I've never attempted printing on a standard white translucent. I've printed on standard cast vinyl, and have been happy with the results. Just posting here to see if anyone else has attempted what I'm proposing.
I'm curious about your example... comparing a material that costs $4.85 a sq. ft. and a material that costs $11.63 a sq. ft.
Is your example including the cost of the plastic sign face mark-up, or just the material itself? A 20 sq. ft. digital print on both of these materials shows a difference in my cost of $135.60. ($97 vs. $232.60) That's a 140% difference in material cost. If the more expensive material is the only option... the choice is easy. If the less expensive material will still give you a good quality job, and is acceptable to the customer... and is formulated to last just as long, everyone is happy. Quality at an affordable price... keeps customers coming back for more.
In reference to your question about how it is in different markets, a wise and wealthy businessman once taught me that to win customers from your competition and keep them... your have to be 2 of 3 things... better, faster or cheaper. Which 2 depends on that individual customer's needs. If they want better and faster, cheaper may not be an obstacle for them. Faster and cheaper... might not be better than the competition... but the customer wants a good deal. Better and cheaper... speedy completion takes a back seat to quality & price. I'm usually not the only game in town, and I try not to ever think that way... even if sometimes, I am. This project I'm discussing, for example... I have the job. My customer is not going anywhere else for bids. I'm not competing for the work, but that doesn't give me cart blanch to just charge them a price way over what it could be. This customer brings thousands of dollars every month into my company... and they do this because I try whatever I can to keep my prices as low as possible without sacrificing quality. With some things, there's just no compromise. I pay more for good vinyls, some substrates, prefer using Lexan rather that Plexi on large faces... I pay more than some other sign shops do for materials, because I know that after 20 years in the sign business, some things are not worth nickel and diming... but some things are, when it can save you and you customer hundreds... even thousands of dollars a year.
Thanks for your question.
Im not from US, but from Europe. We do use Citylight papers for this tasks (its cheap and there are some with good quality aviable) or backlight banner. You will always lose some quality when backlith cos you lose some of the contrast, only one solution is double side mirror printing wich is very hard with XL class printers (some XXLs have the tools to print double sided).
I have found that in color-rip and versa works you can reduce ink limits and slow down your carridge speed and over print 2. The image will be a little over saturated durning the day but really pop at night.
Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.
Print twice.
One on clear, one on translucent white. Apply the clear one first, then register and overlay the image printed on translucent.
During the day image should look fine, at night when lighs on, the first one printed on clear will give the image the vibrancy you need. Depending how complicated your design is, registering them can be tricky. Have to consider this all in when you quote, twice the ink/media/waste.
Good luck,
RT