Activity Feed Forums Sign Making Discussions Gallery digital printing: toku

  • digital printing: toku

    Posted by Robert Lambie on October 8, 2002 at 7:01 pm

    I thought I would post this job I did. Not because its great or unusual just because it was done on a Roland pc60.
    You can see just how large it has printed standing next to one of our fitters.
    The job was for an exhibition. The graphic had to be contour cut, so as it looked like it was free standing at the exhibition stand. There was also an added speech bubble coming from her mouth saying, โ€œhi guys! How big is your peckerโ€ (cheeky, I know)
    They asked for a digital print, but one that would last outdoors long life. The reason was because after the exhibition they wanted to put it on a wall at the entrance to their factory.
    We printed it and covered it in clear vinyl. Then mounted onto Foamex. Cost ยฃ280 +vat
    The company make hammerheads, bucket heads and pecker heads for large JCB machines.


    Tim Shaw replied 21 years, 7 months ago 11 Members · 18 Replies
  • 18 Replies
  • Phill Fenton

    October 8, 2002 at 7:05 pm

    I can perfectly understand why the company that commisioned this work would wish to mount it ๐Ÿ˜‰

  • Tim Shaw

    October 8, 2002 at 8:59 pm

    What is the significance of printing this on a pc60

    Is this a big job for this machine?

  • Robert Lambie

    October 8, 2002 at 9:03 pm

    well…in a way yes but no!
    lots say you cant print large images yet it had no problems with this… you can tile 4 foot by 2 foot comfortabley but can run much bigger in one peace. the machine is probably about 5 years old also….
    im not saying they are the best for this kind of work but thought ide show it is easy to do and at the same time make very good profit! ๐Ÿ˜€

  • Martin Pearson

    October 8, 2002 at 10:37 pm

    Robert, I’m not trying to be funny, maybe I have missed something here, but what was the point in contour cutting it and then mounting it on a piece of rectangular board ?
    I would have thought the board would have been shaped as well.

    Also why did you cover it in clear vinyl ? Was it just to make it a little harder wearing ?

  • Robert Lambie

    October 8, 2002 at 10:45 pm

    ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† no martin the picture was taken before we cut round the image.. it was mounted onto foamex to make it rigid…..

    yeh covering it in clear i think makes the images life multiply by at least ten times. we are just re-doing our work vans at the moment. we had 22inch full colour logos on the headboard still in perfect condition and they where put on about 5 years ago… ๐Ÿ˜€

  • Martin Pearson

    October 8, 2002 at 10:53 pm

    Yer I understand why it was mounted onto foam Robert, looking at the picture I thought it had already been mounted onto board.

  • Mike Brown

    October 9, 2002 at 8:04 am

    …well give me one then!…no, hold on – I’ll rephrase that (<(

  • Steve Broughton

    October 9, 2002 at 8:06 am

    Ah! almost Gray, just another knob joke, suits you Sir! Ohhhhh!

  • Lee Attewell

    October 9, 2002 at 9:10 am

    Err “pecker”…” Mounting”…”cut out”( or was that “chop up”)…I’m confused…I’m going for a lie down.

  • eddie cotter

    October 9, 2002 at 8:50 pm

    nice one robert, ive never seen a print job done on a colour cam before!
    looks fine considering the age of the machine, eddie

  • Robert Lambie

    October 10, 2002 at 9:14 am

    yeh it is a great print eddie. the resolution on the pc60 is 600 dpi.
    but the new model pc600 1200dpi which is fantastic compared to the likes of the edge. im sure its is around 360 dpi but they may have improved on that… ๐Ÿ™„

  • Bob Gilliland

    October 10, 2002 at 8:09 pm


    The Edge and Edge2 devices are 300 dpi. (Edge2 can do a 600 x 300, but the head itself is still 300 dpi). Outputting to my Edge2 with the new SignLab software makes a โ€œHUGEโ€ difference in some instances from an overall appearance of process jobs. Postscript Level 3 support with Supercell technology and true Hexachrome output means I will be willing to put one of โ€œmyโ€ prints against one of โ€œyourโ€ prints. The machine โ€œdpiโ€ is important, but the โ€œinformationโ€ going to the machine is just as important.

  • Andrew Blackett

    October 10, 2002 at 8:10 pm

    yeah but it aint 1200 is it bob ๐Ÿ˜Ž

    Go on treat yourself, buy a camm


  • Robert Lambie

    October 10, 2002 at 10:34 pm

    Im no expert in digi printing bob… ๐Ÿ˜€
    i tend to judge things based on what i have seen rather than in theory.
    now i know you are not eather… i know fine well you probably have tested these machines until they beg you to stop.. ๐Ÿ˜‰
    But! what i have seen is excellent rez fonts and the like from the edge, but when it comes to digital images they always seem very pixelated…
    again i know this can be down to the quality of the image used.. but i have seen this kind of result from variuos edge using sign companies..
    ive always just blamed the fact of the low rez output…. ๐Ÿ™„ ๐Ÿ™„

  • Bob Gilliland

    October 12, 2002 at 9:31 pm


    ๐Ÿ˜€ ๐Ÿ˜€ Iโ€™ve been working to hard lately; perhaps Iโ€™ll heed your advice and get a CC. That will force me to slow down!! ๐Ÿ˜€ ๐Ÿ˜€ ๐Ÿ˜ฎ


    For the time being, I do agree; in most situations the CC device is going to produce a nicer raster based process job then an Edge can. With the new SL package, the gap closed up rather nicely IMHO (still a gap thought!). For myself, I do very little process stuff to begin with so it isnโ€™t much of an โ€œissueโ€ here.

    The DPI of the device is important, and with thermal, there is no significant โ€œdot gainโ€ or โ€œbleedโ€ per say like ink based delivery methods. So DPI is more apparent of an โ€œissueโ€ in this environment compared to inkjet production. Additionally, there is no denying that a CC is going to kick butt in small, high detailed process output. That is a case where โ€œactualโ€ DPI matters tremendously no matter how good the software is. I donโ€™t care how good anyoneโ€™s mathematics are, you simply canโ€™t overcome physical limitations. In fairness and balance, the Edge isnโ€™t really targeted for that market (small process images). Plus I still stand by words in recent history; comparing both machines is a disservice to both manufactures and is detrimental to the marketplace.

    The weakest point in both machines has been and will continue to be for a long time, the operator. After all, the end result from a brush in a โ€œmastersโ€ hand looks much different then in mine. Itโ€™s still the โ€œnutโ€ behind the keyboard that makes the machine do what it does. Some nuts are better then others.

  • WP_Graphics

    December 6, 2002 at 8:33 am

    Can I just ask where the image is???


  • Robert Lambie

    December 6, 2002 at 10:10 am

    ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† how many times do i have to explain???? ๐Ÿ˜ฎ ๐Ÿ˜ก ๐Ÿ˜ก ๐Ÿ˜ก ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜† ๐Ÿ˜†
    just kidding gav… thats the image sorted.

    rob is working on the veiw image problem. its not a difficult fault he tells me, just that hes having bother with his computer just now… all will be well soon.

    an answer would be for me to go through all posts fixing it manualy. but my problem would mean when rob fixes the snag… every post i fixed will then show 2 images. the one i put in and the original… then im back round them all to fix again…

    anyway, bare with me please
    ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜€

  • Tim Shaw

    December 6, 2002 at 10:56 am


    You seem clued up on the Edge.

    What output DPI should we save at , from Photoshop etc.

    I save everything at 72dpi at full size, this does give acceptable output, if a little pixalted on close viewing.

    What size are you saving your files at, 300 dpi gives a larger file size and longer rendering times, but when I have tried differnet dpi the finished print is not much better.


Log in to reply.