When I ask people in the printing industry about innovation, they usually want to have a ten-year program for innovation, and whenever I see a publication offering predictions on what is going to happen in the next ten years, I have to either smile or laugh. There is no way to predict what’s going to happen in the printing industry in the next ten years, because innovations happen so quickly, and lot of things that start to be innovative die fairly quickly. So it’s much more realistic to talk about the next 5 years, and in reality, we’re pretty comfortable when we talk about just the coming year.
What counts as innovation in the printing industry is in the advances of inks and print heads. The ink is the crucial ingredient and the print head is the crucial hardware. The printer is primarily the structure which delivers the ink to the printer through the electronics of the print head. Therefore, the release of a printer is meaningless without novelty in inks and print heads. It’s the innovation in inks and print heads that leads to innovation in the printing business.
The best example of innovation would be the latex technology by Hewlett Packard, which I mention because there are lots of other inks out there, but it’s a real good example. Many new inks have been introduced in the past couple of years, which seemed to have a great future, but they all failed one by one: Staedtler Lumocolor and Sepiax are two good examples.
When Sepiax ink was introduced, I had great hopes. But most distributors dropped it after it turned out that it could not be used in Roland, Mimaki, Mutoh, or Epson printers without sophisticated curing systems. Printer manufacturers who make the key brands for signage decided not to build such specialized printers when they learnt that this resin ink did not work adequately on PVC.
Sepiax ink is a good case study on what doesn’t work with ink. Initially, the ink worked only on Epson DX print heads, but serious printers use Ricoh, Konica Minolta, Spectra, and Seiko print heads. Xaar has been a leader in print heads for ceramic in-line printers for several years, but most Xaar print heads are not made to handle water-based ink. Although Sepiax now works on print heads other than Epson, it is too late for this ink to be adopted by signage printers designed for billboard and building wraps.
The main problem with preparing new inks is that if they’re made for Epson print heads, Epson itself has no interest in any new ink if the ink company is not willing to pay money to Epson to run their ink through Epson printers. However, most new innovative ink companies are not willing to pay Epson all of their profits. So any new ink company that comes out with an ink for an Epson print head is almost guaranteed of failure, and this has been proven year after year over the past 6 or 7 years.
Two companies Eastech and Jetbest introduced totally different inks under the same name of Magic Ink. Both inks were developed for Epson print heads, and they all pretty much failed, not chemically, but in the market place. And the reason they failed is because there was no printer to make the ink work.
The Staedtler Lumocolor was a great ink when it came out because it printed on all kinds of things, but no company made a printer to use Staedtler ink. Similarly, no company made a printer to use Sepiax ink. That’s why Hewlett Packard latex ink is successful, because there is a company making a printer for it. Canon’s latex-like, outdoor ink has utterly failed to be completed in three years. It is the fastest disappearing ink I’ve ever seen.
So any ink company that has offered innovation and didn’t have a printer company behind it almost failed automatically. That has been the sad state of our industry.
Every time a printer has been made for Sepiax ink, the printer company has not put in effort to make that printer fully functional. Human Digital Technology, which is one of the better Chinese companies, did make a physical printer, but it pretty much didn’t work. Hence, a lot of these inks companies didn’t and their new products didn’t gain traction.
European companies such as SmartColor and Bergstein which make printers for dedicated applications are good examples of how these inks can be applied. If you go to these companies and tell them what you need to print on, they will select what ink in the market place they can use. The Staedtler Lumocolor ink, which didn’t become popular, and Sepiax ink which wasn’t successful, are still used by companies that make specialized printers to print on specialized material.
Sepiax was sold to a consortium, and although the source of the buyer was withheld, if you look at who is working in that company, you’ll find out that is a consortium between Durst and Marabu. What they make out of Sepiax ink is hard to say, but we could assume that Durst and Marabu would change that formula and Durst will hopefully finally come out with a printer that could use Sepiax ink. If that works, that will be an example of innovation and something totally new will be available in the coming year.
A new ink called Epoxy ink which was offered several years ago by a company Novus Imaging and Redwood Technologies. Like every other new ink in the market, they offered promises like the ink would do incredible things. Unfortunately, it didn’t function chemically. So, when you see such claims for new inks, you have to be very careful to notice whether the inventors get carried away and excited about their inks and make unrealistic claims without finding out how it would function outside of the demo room. And that was pretty much the case with Epoxy ink. It disappeared fairly quickly. Ink chemists are skeptical, but I personally hope that Epoxy ink can work outside an R&D lab. If it does, it can potentially surpass and bypass latex ink or at least be the prime competitor. Also, Epoxy ink could replace UV-cured ink.
UV cured inks
It’s hard to call UV-cured ink an innovative ink, but it has innovated itself over the years. Eight years ago, most ink and printer companies could not even achieve their own logo colors accurately with UV-cured ink. The colors are better today.
Most UV inks fail in doing yellows, greens, certain blues, and certain reds and oranges. I must admit that the HP ink I saw in the Scitex FB700 is actually better. Fujifilm and Agfa have done a pretty good job with their inks, but most of the colors in the reds, yellows, and greens are very inaccurate in terms of rendition, so I hope that would be an innovation that will be coming in future, but it won’t come unless people recognize those colors are not adequate.
Let’s hope that in the next five years, the following improvements, the following improvements can be made in UV-cured inks: (1) greens need to be really green, and not yellowish; (2) yellows need to be bright yellow and not greenish; reds need to have the full gamut of reds, not orangish or magenta.
Another thing people like to pretend doesn’t happen is the need for primers with UV inks. UV ink will print on everything but it won’t stick or stay on everything. You have to be very careful about that. Fortunately, inks and primers are getting better.
Keep in mind when we talk about UV ink, it’s not just one ink. Many different kinds of UV-cured ink are available for thick, rigid material, flexible material, for printers that have to handle both rigid and flexible material, thermoformable ink, and solvent UV ink.
We can look forward to UV-cured ink which is more flexible for roll material and more rigid for flat material. As Latex ink slowly improves and when all Latex inks can print on rigid material, UV-cured printers will still be an industry mainstay, especially for industrial applications.
UV-curing technology is changing. Mercury-arc will gradually lose market share to LED curing. But at what point does an operator or print shop manager decide to spend the money to replace them?
Efi Vutek printers are good examples if LED curing. Otherwise, LED curing is primarily used in low-end Chinese printers with Epson DX5 or DX7 print heads. Within five years, Durst, Inca Digital, Gandy Digital and comparable printers will offer more options with LED curing.
The primary issue with LED is curing power, currently limited to 18 watts in high-end units. Printer manufacturers would like to have 50% more curing power as soon as possible, and within five years, would like to have even more power from LED.
Stay with solvent or switch to latex?
This is a question that people ask over and over again. There is no perfect solution whether its UV ink, solvent ink, water-based ink, or latex ink. However, if latex works for you and your clients, or the material you are printing on, it is a good solution.
If you need to replace your roll-to-roll solvent billboard printer, just realize that although the HP Latex 3000 is better than earlier generations, it’s the ‘first’ generation of its kind, and I’d prefer to see one more, improved generation.
Despite need for improvement, Latex is still a useful option, unless in three to five years, a Japanese ink company can beat HP Latex ink in all respects or Epoxy ink finds success.
Occasionally, new inks come out using the word latex. Ignore any ink branded or labeled as ‘latex’ unless it requires sophisticated curing and a special heater. Also, realize that Sepiax is not latex ink although it is sophisticated and requires special curing. Once you eliminate the ineligible inks that try to jump on the HP bandwagon, you are left with Mimaki, Meijet, HP, and after-market inks from Sam Ink, Jetbest, and STS Inks as the only viable inks I can accept as being eligible to be labeled as latex inks.
I estimate that every year at least one new aftermarket brand will be launched. Roland and Epson are informally indicated to have latex/resin printers under development, but Epson will probably introduce its UV-cured printer first.
What’s interesting about latex ink is how few companies have been successful with it. The best way to explain why other latex companies have not been successful is by understanding why HP has been successful. That is what it takes. Between 2008 and 2013, HP improved its latex concept significantly. Imagine if Epoxy, resin, and other inks had as much dedication and investment behind them.
HP puts its money where its mouth is. I don’t support some of the claims made by HP for latex ink. But the fact is it’s been a commercial success and a chemical success, and the reason it’s an innovative ink is because somebody has taken the time to make a printer to run on latex ink and improve the printer construction and latex ink chemistry every year.
If you are a Japanese company and simply launch a latex ink in the market along with a printer, but don’t put your money behind it, it’s going to fail. Mimaki’s latex ink has not been a successful ink, and I don’t think it’s going to be successful whatsoever. It doesn’t mean it’s a bad ink. It just means that not enough was done to make it a success. Even at SGIA 2016 in autumn this year, there was no SUV and no latex printer any more in the Mimaki booth (however the latex printer was in the Ricoh booth).
Meijet is another example. Like many Chinese companies, they claim everything is made in the United States, but it’s basically a Chinese development. They failed to show up at the trade shows for several years and now occasionally they are back and forth. They tried to make their latex ink print on thick and rigid materials, and now they’ve withdrawn it from the market. This indicates that either the ink didn’t work or there wasn’t a market for it, because it couldn’t compete against UV ink on flat, rigid materials.
Print heads
At a print trade show, you should not be looking for the printers first; instead, you should be looking for new inks and new print heads. Print heads are introduced certainly almost every 18–24 months.
What I find out is that most print shops don’t really seem to pay too much attention to what kind of print head they have. That is unfortunate because the print head, in addition to the ink, is the most important single component inside their printer.
Xaar was once a market leader in entry-level Chinese eco, mild, and solvent printers, but probably more than 50% of all entry-level brands in China have switched to Epson DX5 and DX7 print heads. Other brands have switched to Konica Minolta, a few others to Spectra and Seiko. Xaar is now dominant primarily for in-line single-pass printers for ceramic factories. Now, in 2016, Xaar is trying to get back into the Chinese entry-level print head market, but their print heads for this market are so new that it will be 2017 before we can see these new Xaar heads actually in new Chinese printers.
Every time a print head manufacturer in Japan has a printer manufacturer as their distributor in China, it severely limits people’s interest in the print head. Why would a printer manufacturer who is the main distributor want a competing manufacturer to use the print heads they distribute? This is why the use of Seiko and Ricoh print heads has stalled in China for many years. Ricoh finally named an additional distributor in Hong Kong, but that company is not widely known. So we do not yet know if they will be more open that the previous Chinese distributor in Beijing.
Konica Minolta is extremely innovative, as is Ricoh. So I think if you want to look for new things, new trends, or new products, see what Ricoh is going to do. Indeed, Ricoh now in 2016 has a print head to try to replace Epson.
The problem with Epson print heads is at Epson doesn’t want brands other than Epson. If you buy a printer with Epson print heads today that is not made by Epson, you face the possible problem that at anytime that Epson want to, they can cut off the supply of those print heads and you will not get replacements at reasonable cost. The end result is that the cost of Epson print heads will become double that of last year. Over the last two years the price of Epson print heads probably doubled or tripled even though there is no extra benefit or good extra features in those print heads.
If Ricoh comes out with a new print head that works better than Epson and cost the same or a little bit more, that will be an incredible breakthrough in our industry. It will change literally the entire landscape, especially for entry-level Chinese printers. Mimaki was clever to switch to Ricoh print heads two years ago. As soon as Mutoh fully realizes that Epson wants to take over UV-cured and latex printer market share, they will switch print heads too. Roland, finally this year, dropped Epson ink and Epson printheads with their Roland “TrueVIS” printers. These new improved Roland printers finally use a printhead of another brand.
Panasonic has recently come out with a print head that has been used in Chinese printers. Nobody talks about them. The companies that use them just use them. There is not much knowledge about them, so I don’t consider those print heads are a major breakthrough. The breakthrough will come from Ricoh. Companies like Spectra or Konica Minolta are not likely to come out with a cheap replacement for Epson. That’s not their market. They are focused on the high-end market. But now more and more Chinese printers are using the Ricoh GH2220 printhead.
Memjet is an MEMS technology but thermal print head concept, and can handle only dye-based water inks currently. Hopefully, the combined efforts of Own-X, Fuji Xerox, Oce, Gongzheng, and Xante can produce a viable printer when a second-generation print head is released. I estimate by the third generation print head, the system will get even better. But in the meantime, HP PageWide technology is leading the way over Memjet.
Most of the advances in print heads is in smaller picolitre drop size.
Six years ago, 80 to 90 picolitres was what you expected from a billboard printer. Since then, industrial printers have reached 14 picolitres. Now, even smaller drop sizes are becoming the norm, although you don’t need such quality for a billboard or building wrap.
When you look at a billboard driving down the highway you can’t tell the difference between variations in dpi but when a sales manager goes into a print shop and inspects it, he is the one who looks at it just a couple of inches away, so the drop size is still very important.
A good print head alone is not good enough. A major obstacle in advances in print head technology is the rudimentary nature of some brands of electronics and firmware. A good print head with cheap electronics means the entire system will fail, and end-users and distributors will no longer want that printer brand anymore.
Textile printing
In textile printing, everything is getting brighter and easier. I think the main thing going on in textile printing is pigment ink. Presently, most of the entry-level and mid-range textile printers are used for polyester. The reasons are many, but the foremost one is the easy workflow and impressive color pop. I predict that printing on cotton with pigment ink will gradually increase in popularity now that pigment ink for cotton allows brighter colors. For example, you can see remarkable colors with Kornit printers (using their special pigment ink and their unique workflow).
What’s holding back textile printing is the costly workflow equipment for acid dye and reactive dye. The reason is why reactive ink and dye ink is not making a breakthrough as they promised because the workflow is too complicated.
I went to a printing company that used reactive ink, and their print shop occupied a factory-like space just to handle the preprinting, printing, and post work you have to do on reactive ink. In a mom and pop print shop, you can’t have that many people working and you are not going to have that kind of space. So, they’re going to continue with solvent.
Every UV and solvent printer manufacturer wants to produce a textile printer. But the majority of them have not been successful. The textile workflow is what counts the most. Reggiani (now EFI Reggiani) is a good example of a textile printer manufacturer who is successful because of a long dedicated to textile printing.
Media and substrates
Another area where there is definitely room for improvement at the moment is in the media and there is so much new innovative media coming out. When I go into a print shop and ask why they are not using innovative media, they pretty much say they found what they like or their clients like it, and that’s pretty much all they’re going to do, but there is new media coming out and hope that will change. The obvious trend is moving towards PE from PVC. However, PE can be used best with LED-cured UV and latex printers, and not solvent ink.
Greenwashing is a major problem. Calling UV-cured ink as eco-friendly is the most silly trend. Yes, LED curing does get rid of mercury arc lamps and lower electrical usage, but the chemicals in them, and most other inks, are not exactly eco-friendly. A trend I enjoy is seeing more use of innovative materials such as honeycomb sandwich board.
As latex ink gradually gains market share, as UV-cured ink chemistry changes, and as other new inks continue to be developed, the chemical companies that develop coatings will also be busy at work. So, even in media, there will be advances and improvements every year, just not as noticeable as new inks and dramatically improved print heads.
In conclusion and summary, if you want to look at ink right now, there are now exciting inks from Sensient, Sun Chemical and other multi-national ink companies. You also want to look at print head because that’s where the action is. If you want something new and better than your competitors, learn more about the print heads and get a machine that has a good print head. And the other thing is try to look at some of the innovative media that’s coming out and if you are using textile printing, you’re probably using dispersed dye or dye sublimation, but take a look at some of the pigmented inks because there are lot of new pigmented inks coming out. So again, focus on innovations in ink, print heads, and to some degree in media.
56 Comments