QuoteApologies I feel a bit beligerent, just find it a bit odd that you keep asking for advice on specific machines that no one has mentioned, but ignoring what mulitple people are saying.

Okay, yes, I think you are a bit over the top but I am okay with that as I want the best, and do appreciate your help.

However, your bit about not taking what people are saying, well, that's just plain wrong if you re-read the thread. I asked about experiences with Canon printers and others shared that bit about the sponge collecting unused ink that eventually fills up, leaving the printer dead. There was another suggestion about Samsung printers, but then was told they are not all part of HP...so a bit of a dead end.

So yes, I am listening but I am trying my best to navigate what is out there and what can do the job. A few people have made positive comments about Epson - which is a brand I have absolutely no experience with.

As for the laser v inkjet debate...at first I was all for getting a color laser, and even suggested a Lexmark model...only for others to say Lexmark isn't any good...okay, perhaps I just got lucky with my Lexmark (which up until recently has outperformed my HP color printers). I also don't like inkjets for the same reason others have commented, the ink dries out if you don't use them enough. And cartridges aren't cheap. I have looked at the Eco Tank type printers but then you have the question of quality of the color...which from all reviews isn't that good.

For me and what I want to do, it really is a matter of achieving the best possible resolution and color correctness, and from all I have researched thus far, that would have to be an inkjet. Now I get this doesn't make sense, as lasers are supposed to be so much sharper. Yet, when I am comparing a 600 or 1200 dpi color laser to an inkjet that can produce 4200 or 9600 dpi, well, that appears to be a no-brainer.

Finally, thanks so much for sharing those OO gauge photos of the decals up close, as that has really helped. Can you please tell me what printer you are using to make those decals?

Thanks Alan, those do look sharp...much sharper then I would have thought from just 1200x600 dpi....

In your experience with Canon printers, is there any issue with the colors being accurate?

Also, you mentioned decal paper, and that is my next topic...so please do share any recommendations. I have tried a few decal papers over the years and with mixed results. I had come across a decal company that made inkjet decals using a reverse printing method, where you essentially wet and place the image on the model, pat down, and remove the paper. They used a type of Avery decal paper but I am not sure which one...and sadly the guy who makes them doesn't share.

This might help https://www.littlebigmenstudios.com/how-to-use-our-transfers/

I have been told it might be some sort of transfer decal paper, like one uses to make iron-on transfers or tatoos...but still haven't figured out which type of Avery paper it is, and searching through the Avery product list is a bit daunting.

Doc

Those are the base images, the forum distorts them and its a jpg.
They are sized to fit a UM City Of Truro, printed 18 months ago and still not fixed..........................
I have used the boiler lining on a couple of dean goods as an experiment and they look quite good.
Need to be printed on white decal paper otherwise the orange disappears.
I use Mr Decal paper and tell the printer to go High Quality Photo glossy paper.
It prints on the A4 in the top left hand corner.
It works for me but I'm a cheapskate. And it looks good from 2ft, the closest it will be, better but still detectable the further away you are. (Bit like me
If anyone wants the artwork correctly sized at 300dpi PM me with email addres and I will email it. Free.

Alan

It's "horses for courses" with me... For photos, I've an Epson 870 5-colour inkjet. Now c 20 years old, still going strong and its yet to be equalled for the subtlety of natural tones the 5-colours can give.
For text documents and for a few decals, I now use a Samsung Laser for the sharpness and depth of colour.

As an aside, For both photos and decals, I've found that the paper is as much a factor as the printer in the quality of the final product. The best decal papers I found were those supplied by "Crafty Computer Paper" (sadly no longer in business, though the web address lives on and offers reviews of decal papers among other craft products!)

Quote from: Doc Pye on June 20, 2023, 11:02:12 PM

QuoteApologies I feel a bit beligerent, just find it a bit odd that you keep asking for advice on specific machines that no one has mentioned, but ignoring what mulitple people are saying.

For me and what I want to do, it really is a matter of achieving the best possible resolution and color correctness, and from all I have researched thus far, that would have to be an inkjet. Now I get this doesn't make sense, as lasers are supposed to be so much sharper. Yet, when I am comparing a 600 or 1200 dpi color laser to an inkjet that can produce 4200 or 9600 dpi, well, that appears to be a no-brainer.

Finally, thanks so much for sharing those OO gauge photos of the decals up close, as that has really helped. Can you please tell me what printer you are using to make those decals?

Yeah, it is kinda weird - hence my going off and doing some reading, as 9600dpi seems utterly incredible, and if you read that Stack Exchange link it appears to be that it's not quite true. I've added some more pictures of the decals I've printed to the Google link, they're mainly N gauge. There's a good example of the limitation too on the N gauge JGA here:



I could almost certainly make this better by making it larger and pasting as an image before shrinking. Notice how much crisper the handbrake gradient sign is. Obviously all of this means the printer isn't actually the limiting factor. In fact now I've looked at that photo I'll probably do that! 

I also use Mr Decal Paper papers, my biggest criticism is that the blue backed stuff (which I use for white toner) changed to a much better dark tone, and then changed back, and I didn't get a repsonse on when/if he'd get the other stuff in again!

So perhaps this might help, as this is the sorta item I am looking to print and retain print quality. FYI, this is for a 28mm 1/56 scale. Given the detail, this is why I am after good resolution.



So this was an earlier B&W quick test print, to make sure I had the size of the item correct to what it would be attached to. The actual physical size of the item is around 5 x 6mm.



FYI, I searched and found that 'Stack Exchange' topic on dpi, and that was interesting. I continue to learn...perhaps too much

Quote from: njee20 on June 21, 2023, 12:16:31 AM
...Notice how much crisper the handbrake gradient sign is.   ...

Nick, could you please explain what the cause of the difference is there? Were all those different parts printed at the same time on the same system or is that purely an artefact of the image preparation work done before printing? I've seen this sort of effect before, when scaling bitmaps vs vector imagery.

Ross.

On the subject of paper:
When I was creating decals regularly with my Microdry printer a decade or more ago I used Tango Papa decal paper as recommended by the ALPS user groups.   I also used Microscale decal paper.  Both types are really thin film water-slide papers designed for laser printers rather than inkjets.   I still have sheets of both brands in my folder and they're both still perfectly usable.

Tango Papa is still going by the look of it.
https://www.tangopapadecals.com/paper.html

Instructions for Microscale Trim Film paper, note it says run through laser printers on "transparency" setting and it's not good for inkjets.
https://www.microscale.com/Merchant2/graphics/Instructions/TrimFilminstr.pdf

Quote from: RBTKraisee on June 21, 2023, 01:24:17 AM

Quote from: njee20 on June 21, 2023, 12:16:31 AM
...Notice how much crisper the handbrake gradient sign is.   ...

Nick, could you please explain what the cause of the difference is there? Were all those different parts printed at the same time on the same system or is that purely an artefact of the image preparation work done before printing? I've seen this sort of effect before, when scaling bitmaps vs vector imagery.

Ross.

Yeah that whole decal is printed as one. It's excatly you say - it's a (poorly) scaled bitmap versus a vector image. Essentially with the text I usually get it all to look right at a font size which is legible, and then convert to an image and scale to suit. That can give these results, because it's a scaled image. You can get better results by either being more intelligent with the image scaling, or better still sticking with actual text on things like the data labels. That's a lot more time consuming though, because whilst the difference between 24 and 25pt is tiny, obviously between 1 and 2pt it's huge, and that means you're compromised on how much you can fine tune the elements. Turns out those labels are about 1.7pt though, condensed 0.1pt on the spacing, as I've just done them 'properly'. The thinnest lines you can get on the table and what not is 0.25pt though, which I suspect will look too heavy, I'll try later! The fuzzy table is 2.2mm high, so my appetite to make it much better is limited! 

I've found I get better results, especially with text, by designing at a larger size and scaling down at the printing stage. Always use a scale factor of 2ⁿ though i.e. 2x/ 4x / 8x / 16x etc

Yeah that makes sense. I always cram as much as I can onto a sheet, but I ought set my sizing to be 4x A4 or something so I can just scale to 25%.

Re-did some of the decals, actually worked well.



Posting this mainly to show the limitation of a laser though with the dot dithering, which is oddly visible on the Tarmac logo. I also printed your 'shields'. Excuse the light, they're in the shadow of my phone - but gives you a benchmark to compare to your existing printer. Obviously this is just on ordinary paper (and standard quality).

So Njee20, what exactly did you print those French Sabretaches on (printer type)?

My test print on my current faulty Lexmark X9575 is actually a lot better than what you have shown. Yet, this is all good info to have. So thanks for sharing.

Quote from: njee20 on June 21, 2023, 12:57:22 PM

Quote from: RBTKraisee on June 21, 2023, 01:24:17 AM

Quote from: njee20 on June 21, 2023, 12:16:31 AM
...Notice how much crisper the handbrake gradient sign is.   ...

Nick, could you please explain what the cause of the difference is there? Were all those different parts printed at the same time on the same system or is that purely an artefact of the image preparation work done before printing? I've seen this sort of effect before, when scaling bitmaps vs vector imagery.

Ross.

Yeah that whole decal is printed as one. It's excatly you say - it's a (poorly) scaled bitmap versus a vector image. Essentially with the text I usually get it all to look right at a font size which is legible, and then convert to an image and scale to suit. That can give these results, because it's a scaled image. You can get better results by either being more intelligent with the image scaling, or better still sticking with actual text on things like the data labels. That's a lot more time consuming though, because whilst the difference between 24 and 25pt is tiny, obviously between 1 and 2pt it's huge, and that means you're compromised on how much you can fine tune the elements. Turns out those labels are about 1.7pt though, condensed 0.1pt on the spacing, as I've just done them 'properly'. The thinnest lines you can get on the table and what not is 0.25pt though, which I suspect will look too heavy, I'll try later! The fuzzy table is 2.2mm high, so my appetite to make it much better is limited! 

It's not the scaling that causes the issue but the type of image file you are using and scaling. Bitmaps, jpegs etc are composed of dots in the same way the printer makes an image out of millions of dots of coloured ink. A vector graphic is made up of lines and equations and other clever stuff.
All that means a vector graphic is still crisp when you zoom in (I can zoom-in up to 1 million percent in Affinity Designer ), it can be scaled down infinitely and definitely to a size that even the highest quality printer couldn't replicate. You can also convert text in a vector image to curves, which essentially makes them graphics objects just like the lines that make up the rest of the image and you don't have to worry about the font changing unexpectedly which is often helpful if you send things to print.

I could knock one up for you quickly if you fancy seeing if the difference is worth it.

Quote from: Doc Pye on June 21, 2023, 04:19:50 PM
So Njee20, what exactly did you print those French Sabretaches on (printer type)?

My test print on my current faulty Lexmark X9575 is actually a lot better than what you have shown. Yet, this is all good info to have. So thanks for sharing.

HP MFP M177FW laser. Suggests your thoughts may be correct about inkjet, I will say they do look darker in the photo versus IRL, but I can't get a closeup without a better light to hand. I think it's 600dpi by default.

Thanks for confirming all that!

As for the debate of inkjet vs laser, I've been looking at this question for some time, even before the recent spate of posts in this thread, so I'm thoroughly interested in what everyone has to say.

I can get a new colour laser with 600x600 resolution for about $300. But to achieve 1200x1200 on a colour laser would cost me about $750. Unfortunately, with all my recent expenses that's well beyond my reach for this year.

The practical solution is that a Canon Pixma 3620 inkjet can be had new for $60. It's supposed to have 4800x1200 resolution, and while that's likely to be arguable, it isn't likely to be any worse than the laser. I do note that getting a white ink cartridge for it does appear to be difficult, if not impossible - there are Chinese suppliers who say they do, but... Anyway, there are loads of people out there who swear by them as a great solution for water-slide transfers.

Maybe the 1200x1200 laser could ultimately do a better job. But maybe not. The jury's verdict seems far from unanimous. But at more than 12 times the cost of the inkjet, I sure see the appeal of going for the cheaper option. Even if it ultimately doesn't do what you want, you can still sell in on ebay and you won't have lost much at all.

Ross.