Are dye sub printers dead?

[Flash]

Anyone still lusting after a dyesub printer?

 

[Jeff]

Some event photographers I know still use them because

1. they're trouble-free,
2. fairly quick,
3. not very sensitive to environment,
4. easy to transport
5. and the prints with the integral clearcoat overcoat layer applied by the dyesub printer are totally water resistant and quite difficult to damage when handled.

But largely they've been replaced by pigment based inkjet printers which offer:

1. Greater Print longevity in terms of fade-resistance of the pigment based inksets
2. Greater resolution
3. Greater color gamut using 8- and 12- colors vs. just 3 (CMY) in dyesub printers.
4. Much more media flexibility in size and weight
5. and lower cost per print for proofing, etc.

I still like the unmatched gloss of the high-gloss prints from my dyesub, but all the other aspects are now heavily favoring a pigment based inkjet.

 

[Adam Mertzer]

Take a look at Sony's UP-GR700 8x12 dyesub offering both gloss and beautiful matte dyesub prints http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Broadcasta...?navid=up_gr700_digital_photo_package_printer in 43-58 seconds per print depending on size/finish, or even the small Sony UP-D75 -- http://bssc.sel.sony.com/Broadcasta...pd75.shtml?navid=up_d75_digital_photo_printer

and lower cost per print

Even though the UP-GR700 is a $3k printer, it can deliver a cost per print (fixed) of only $1.31 for an 8x12 full "ink" coverage. Can you match this counting ink and photo paper on any current pigment inkjet?

 

[Tim Somers]

Been years since I've used a dye sub printer - Tim

 

[Niallphoto]

Dye sub printing on 9 colour epsons is far superior to pigment ink. Look up bayphoto aluminium prints.

 

[hgsmachines]

I think they are not dead, but its uses are being lowered as compared to other digital textile printers. I have been using dye sublimation printer from hgsmachines(dot)com