HP problem or material... IDK

[eahicks]

So I just ran a big job of window perf on our 560. Of course it's one of those "hurry and get it laminated-gotta install in an hour (thanks salesperson)" jobs. Installers call me later to let me know the prints are an inch too short in height. I checked my files, checked the RIP. Nope, all good there. I watched them being trimmed out so no one cut off too much (or THAT much). I have already set the compensation for this printer, as I had discovered it was running about 1/4" short for every 8 feet (very small amount, but detrimental on a 24' banner). But 1 inch?? on 5'6" windows. That's crazy. I'm running the output compensation again to see what is going on. Could window perf shrink like that after printing? The widths are all correct, so I can't see that being the case. I may have to reprint the entire job, and add a couples inches to them, which the installers hate; having to trim inside the windows with the seals around them.

 

[ewded]

Wow (eco solvent user here)

 

[ColoPrinthead]

Just use the take up and it will add that length back

 

[jawdavis]

Heat sensitive materials are always susceptible to wacky length issues on the Latex series printers. Compensating for length via the RIP is a solution but it is only effective on the media which was measured, it's not an across-the-board type of thing. What we do is we KNOW that one of our materials shrinks about 1% on the length and we set our file up accordingly. For instance, a 96"h panel would be saved out of photoshop at 97" and when printed, the final result is very close to 96". We only know this through trial-and-error and experience and of course, every material is different. Many materials will not shrink at all, you just have to test each one and see.

 

[bannertime]

This length inconsistency is a major disappointment. We've got a solution that has worked for us.

In Production Manager you can duplicate the setup. It's the green plus sign by itself. It can be setup with it's own hot folder too. We have a setup for our 13oz vinyl that is size compensated for that specific material. Then any banner jobs get sent to that particular setup. Gets us closer than anything else and we can generally get a consistent size on reprints months down the road. Pretty sad either way. The compensation isn't even that accurate. We did the regular 12x12 square and our 96" was still like 95.5" rather than 94". So we did a 36x96 compensation print and that gets us like 95.5-96. Then we did a few 50fts the other day and they were 6in short. Super annoying.

 

[eahicks]

Heat sensitive materials are always susceptible to wacky length issues on the Latex series printers. Compensating for length via the RIP is a solution but it is only effective on the media which was measured, it's not an across-the-board type of thing. What we do is we KNOW that one of our materials shrinks about 1% on the length and we set our file up accordingly. For instance, a 96"h panel would be saved out of photoshop at 97" and when printed, the final result is very close to 96". We only know this through trial-and-error and experience and of course, every material is different. Many materials will not shrink at all, you just have to test each one and see.

But if this is the case, it is shrinking the film AND the paper liner together? Because after pulling it off the printer, the vinyl isn't shrunk to where there's 1/2" of blank paper on each end, or 1" on one end. This does not compute. It has to have something to do with feed rate, but that is set. I ran the compensation on an 8' run (on int. vinyl) and it was dead on when measured. So that has not changed. I haven't run it on the Perf yet, as I don't want to waste it. I will run it when I have another job to print and can slide it over next to the print it creates.

 

[dypinc]

No mention here if your printing with OMAS on or off. With OMAS on the printer will adjust its feed rate based on what if perceives as the best quality/least banding in the print.

But I then I am assuming that you guys already know to turn OMAS off to get more consistent length but just failed to mention it.

 

[eahicks]

No mention here if your printing with OMAS on or off. With OMAS on the printer will adjust its feed rate based on what if perceives as the best quality/least banding in the print.

But I then I am assuming that you guys already know to turn OMAS off to get more consistent length but just failed to mention it.

You might be on to something. Just checked and the profile for perf has it ON. I will turn it off and run another perf job to see what happens. Seems to me that could throw a wrench in things on perf. Great suggestion.

 

[eahicks]

I'm curious, what brand perf are you using? I've only used some from Gans, clearvue, and 3m's ungodly priced stuff myself, and I haven't noticed shrinkage but I also don't tend to print to size, always excess.

Using 3M and Clearfocus...this was on Clearfocus. I do oversize on all vehicle perfs, but try to do exact size on storefront stuff, even 1/8" undersize in many cases.

 

[bannertime]

I do oversize on all vehicle perfs

Off topic, but don't do that on Honda White Diamond Pearl paint. The excess ClassicVue ripped the paint right off the body. Didn't even require squeegeeing, it laid down without pressure and lifted paint off when I went to trim the excess. In fact the blue tape we use for placement pulled paint up. What a nightmare.

 

[BigfishDM]

Using 3M and Clearfocus...this was on Clearfocus. I do oversize on all vehicle perfs, but try to do exact size on storefront stuff, even 1/8" undersize in many cases.

My clear perf will smoke the clear focus material in quality and in price if you ever want to check it out.

 

[Dan360]

We had a lot of problems with clearfocus with print, delamination and install, switched to Contravision performance and still using 3M.

 

[Christian @ 2CT Media]

What temperature are you running?
We try to keep our materials around 205 and if it won't cure at 205 we cut the ink load till it does.

 

[jawdavis]

No mention here if your printing with OMAS on or off. With OMAS on the printer will adjust its feed rate based on what if perceives as the best quality/least banding in the print.

But I then I am assuming that you guys already know to turn OMAS off to get more consistent length but just failed to mention it.

I agree with dypinc here that OMAS factors into this, as the printer is trying to intelligently read the back of the media, but it's not always helpful. I was told recently that the OMAS was developed on the non-latex Z series printers which these are based on. It was designed to read the microscopic fibers in papers and track the material as it moves on the Y axis, then adjust accordingly. This theory wouldn't necessarily translate well to other non-paper backings. I was also told that until recent firmwares, even when OMAS was turned off in a media preset, it was still functioning as though it were turned on. If you're having length issues to the degree the OP was having, make sure you're up-to-date on firmware and turn OMAS off on your preset and retry the exact same print, I'd be interested to know the result.

 

[jimmmi]

I agree with dypinc here that OMAS factors into this, as the printer is trying to intelligently read the back of the media, but it's not always helpful. I was told recently that the OMAS was developed on the non-latex Z series printers which these are based on. It was designed to read the microscopic fibers in papers and track the material as it moves on the Y axis, then adjust accordingly. This theory wouldn't necessarily translate well to other non-paper backings. I was also told that until recent firmwares, even when OMAS was turned off in a media preset, it was still functioning as though it were turned on. If you're having length issues to the degree the OP was having, make sure you're up-to-date on firmware and turn OMAS off on your preset and retry the exact same print, I'd be interested to know the result.

And how about banding with OMAS turned off? The result is acceptable?

 

[bannertime]

I'm not calling BS, but surely this was not a factory paint job... I've been wrong before though.

That's what I said. In fact there were sanding marks underneath the paint that our collision repair rep pointed out. The customer swore that it was factory cause he bought it new. The collision guy also said that they've repainted vehicles at the dealership too. The vehicle is only like 4 years old too.

 

[MHester]

Heat sensitive materials are always susceptible to wacky length issues on the Latex series printers. Compensating for length via the RIP is a solution but it is only effective on the media which was measured, it's not an across-the-board type of thing. What we do is we KNOW that one of our materials shrinks about 1% on the length and we set our file up accordingly. For instance, a 96"h panel would be saved out of photoshop at 97" and when printed, the final result is very close to 96". We only know this through trial-and-error and experience and of course, every material is different. Many materials will not shrink at all, you just have to test each one and see.

I'm having the same shrinkage problem, seriously noticed it yesterday. I printed a 10' banner and it shrunk it nearly 1-1/2". WTF? Banner material was 15oz. double sided keystone (only printed 1 side) on my HP310. I've noticed shrinkage before when I was printing Arlon clear vinyl for a backlit sign, 5' long run, it shrunk about 1/2". This is unacceptable HP. I use to love you as a latex printer, but now my love is questionable....

 

[bannertime]

I'm having the same shrinkage problem, seriously noticed it yesterday. I printed a 10' banner and it shrunk it nearly 1-1/2". WTF? Banner material was 15oz. double sided keystone (only printed 1 side) on my HP310. I've noticed shrinkage before when I was printing Arlon clear vinyl for a backlit sign, 5' long run, it shrunk about 1/2". This is unacceptable HP. I use to love you as a latex printer, but now my love is questionable....

The HP L310 and L330 need manual feed calibrations. We were doing a job a few weeks ago and noticed that about half way through the second roll that the signs were getting shorter. I've always had issues with banners being shorter, but never on self adhesive. Turns out we needed to do the "Advanced Feed Calibration" (settings>image quality something something>advanced feed calibration) on ij35 it was +7.5 off. I've since run this on all my materials and things have become a bit more accurate. Even banners are starting to be within 1/4in finished size rather than 2 inches.

The HP L360 has OMAS which does this automatically. These days I quite regret going with the 330 over the 360. At the time I was thinking "eh, I don't need latex on fabric and I can manually line up double sided prints." Well, that was the wrong idea.

 

[Reveal1]

Interesting - with our 560 have no length issues on print length - dead on. But strangely, line up an 8ft print with liner on ACM panel and it fits, once applied it shrinks about 1/4-1/2" on length and 1/8"-1/4" on width. Usually with calendared but not cast. What would cause that?

 

[bannertime]

Interesting - with our 560 have no length issues on print length - dead on. But strangely, line up an 8ft print with liner on ACM panel and it fits, once applied it shrinks about 1/4-1/2" on length and 1/8"-1/4" on width. Usually with calendared but not cast. What would cause that?

The 560 has that OMAS that automatically calibrates material feed. So it should be pretty accurate. But that's odd. You'd typically except it to expand during mounting. How are you doing the installation?