Hi, let me start with, I've been in the game for about 6 years now in total. I have used basically every method available, and tried everything since. From the photo's, this film absolutely looks just like film that I have used before, and still had some of. But it's not.
my findings from the years of " trial and error' and " trying to be cost efficient" I have learned a few things about exactly what you have asked. I have also learned, how much money I can waste and I can see how much hair I have pulled out trying to save money.
In the end, each process out there has slight modifications done to it to work properly, while some may work, it's not worth the hassle to do 80 percent as good, for 80 percent of the cost. A perfect example is this film. The coating on this film, reacts to heat, and provides a release method for the ink, However, it also absorbs the carrier from the ink. Will this carrier be the exact same formula as the previous generation of similar products? Probably not. The ink is NOT the same as DTG ink, although it may look like it I can attest that it is not. The way it dries, the weight, and even it's water Resistance after it has cured( not even cured, just dried). Things I have tested in the last 2-3 days...
*The ink doesn't respond the same way to air, so it's less likely to air dry
*The ink carrier absorbs into porous material after a bit of time ( like thick paper) unlike DTG inks. What is left behind reminds me of ( looks exactly like) plastisol ink left on something that has since had it's carrier removed( like leaving it on a screen for a week, kind of like an oily substance around the ink, leaving the ink hardened since the carrier was wicked away since it doesn't air dry)
*The cure time is less than my DTG ink. this stuff dries very quickly once a heat source is applied, Exactly like the difference in waterbased VS plastisol Screen printing.
*Once printing on the film, you can see a clear difference. DTG inks carry a A LARGE amount of carrier, which bubbles off the film because it cannot absorb it. The DTF ink seems to create a thin layer without as much carrier, as if it's more dense, and again, like plastisol, It's not runny.
I think the most shocking thing to me was the way the print felt. I have screen printed plastisol transfers, ( no it doesn't work, it doesn't have the coating to absorb the carrier from the ink) and printed directly for years. I cure them on a heat press, mainly due to the quality difference I get. It's smooth, not rubbery, almost like a thick waterbased ink print. Heat pressed Plastisol is about the softest thing I have ever printed, until now. This stuff feels like an UPGRADED version of a plastisol print. Probably where it gets it's name.
Once I applied the DTF transfer, peeled that film from the shirt, pressed it again ( I always double press everything) and felt that print- It was amazing. I know I sound stupid, but when you have a passion for this stuff and have been doing it for years, that " Hand" really means something to you. Anyway, It is the softest print I have ever touched, not like a non-existent feel, but a very smooth, yet flexible/comfortable feel. It stretched VERY well, washed very well, and overall is one of the best methods( I'm not going to say IT IS the best method until I've used it for awhile) I have ever used in the transfer side of options.
For the PET film, PET is going to be one of the best, most reliable things for any heat pressed type of thing. Look at HTV, Looks like PET to me, but I know it won't work. It's just the material of choice for the temperature range and providing a good release.
If your thinking about using transfer powders for typical plastisol transfers, Don't. It's a nightmare. Like I previously stated, it's the same, but modified for it's use. The powder provided by Andy was course, like tiny grains of salt. Transfer powder for Screenprinting, is like flour. That sheet you just printed on? It absorbs that carrier. That powder? It sticks to moisture. What you get, is a HUGE mess if you use a fine powder( Just in case, Basically the sheet absorbs the carrier, the longer it sits without being powdered and cured, the larger this area that it will stick to becomes). It's possible a COURSE powder may work with it( Screen-printing powder), But I'd rather support the guy who made it happen over here, for the exact same price, without pulling out my hair.
Basically, What I'm saying is, What is wrong with the current price of things? Is it worth pulling your hair out, spending late nights trying to justify purchasing something that "MIGHT" work? To me, The cost is what it is, and it's on par with DTG costs. As a previous post mentioned, I chose the more expensive route to sell my products. I actually make the same amount of money Vs screen printing though, so it equals out in the long run.
I for one wanted it to be the same, Because I have an entire 800 SQ FT building filled with failed crap from the past ( that included several types of this PET film).
This is one thing That WILL NOT make it out there.
Good read I do too struggles with price and quality but I usually go with quality it's not worth pulling your hair and second guessing just to save 50cent or a dollar. Plus the merch speak for itself when you use high quality material.
Overall cost per transfer question
in General Direct to Film Discussion
Posted
Good read I do too struggles with price and quality but I usually go with quality it's not worth pulling your hair and second guessing just to save 50cent or a dollar. Plus the merch speak for itself when you use high quality material.