Suggestions Which inks set would be best for color consistency and color matching?

[PhilSwatch]

Considering a new printer with inks that would be best with consistency of color and color matching. We have an HP 360 and 570 which run latex inks. Between UV, Solvent, Eco-Solvent, or Latex inks, (or another type of ink set that I don't know about), what would give the best color consistency?

A good portion of our revenue comes from wall paneled prints. Each panel can be roughly 50" wide by anywhere from 100" to 200" in height. After running about 5 to 7 panels, the inks tend to shift and the color going from one panel to the next will then not match, which renders some of the prints useless. We then have to reprint some panels and/or struggle to match something we've printed in the past. From my understanding, the cheap heads on the HP printers we have may be the culprit. However, I want to reach out and see if anyone has experience with running these kinds of jobs, and how other ink sets with different heads differ.

We also have a UV flatbed that stays very consistent with color, however we're looking for a roll-to-roll machine that isn't as expensive as our flatbed that can run for most of the day without stopping, and keep the color consistent. Thanks for any info. ~Phil

 

[iPrintStuff]

Would definitely look at the Colorado 1650. Especially for wallpaper etc.

(we just upgraded from the 1640 to the 1650) but I ran a job last week for a customer that was a reprint of panel of a van that was damaged and the old panels still matched in colour. The initial job was about a year ago.

Colour repeatability won’t be an issue. Print speeds will blow the HP’s out the water (though it is probably just a little under 2x the price of one of the newer HP models). Inks are cheap. And best of all you don’t need to babysit the thing. You load a roll. Start printing then come back in an hour and a half and your roll is done.

Providing you stay under 40sqm an hour, it will automatically correct any banding (AAC marks) and it will automatically compensate for any missing nozzles.

Inks are also pretty indestructible so less worries when installing the jobs too.

I do create all my own profiles though. Definitely worth looking into if you don’t already.

 

[Pauly]

+1 on the colorado. Canon are releasing a "budget" version very soon which is just 1650 with less options. no matte, 1 roll in the draw etc that's upgradable for a cheaper entry point.

 

[iPrintStuff]

I was going to mention that lol. Only 4 heads so not sure on the print speeds. Think the inks are smaller too so the ml price might be a little higher.

 

[SignMeUpGraphics]

+1 on the colorado. Canon are releasing a "budget" version very soon which is just 1650 with less options. no matte, 1 roll in the draw etc that's upgradable for a cheaper entry point.

Is that what that cryptic email was about... I thought it was the 3.2m Colorado finally available.

 

[Pauly]

Is that what that cryptic email was about... I thought it was the 3.2m Colorado finally available.

if it was a 3.2, id be pretty bloody annoyed. I believe that's in development though.
But yeah it's a watered down version. It's to compete with HP Latex i believe. Cheaper entry point etc. Makes it easier to get into a colorado then upgrade over time.

 

[iPrintStuff]

I also believe it will be modular. Even on the software side. I.e. if you want Matt and gloss you pay extra. I might have gotten the wrong end of the stick though!

 

[SignMeUpGraphics]

if it was a 3.2, id be pretty bloody annoyed. I believe that's in development though.
But yeah it's a watered down version. It's to compete with HP Latex i believe. Cheaper entry point etc. Makes it easier to get into a colorado then upgrade over time.

Yeah, the 3.2 was in development right after the 1640 was finished, but had to be dropped when all of the problems started so the 1650 had to be released to fix them all so it went on the back burner for a while. I reckon we'll see it one day...

Modular Colorado sounds pretty cool though.