PROS: Processes used in the contruction of this garment?

[jjs home]

I am interested in knowing how this company made this jacket. I can see they used a combination of printing and embriodery, but I am interested in if anyone can identify what TYPE of printing they used to do the mural graphics. Thanks in advance to everyone who helps

and this one

DOES WHAT I SAY INTEREST YOU?

I am available for employment,

full time, part time, & consulting, depending on the numbers

I am willing to work for major companies, brands, stores, and magazines

possibly whereever you want me to work, or what gap you need filled is up for discussion, from working directly with clothes to freelance writing

feel free to inquire about anything

contact email: [email protected]

Edited by jjs home on Mar 8, 2006 at 07:57 AM

Edited by jjs home on Mar 8, 2006 at 08:03 AM

[LA Guy]

Preliminarily, I'd say that it looks like a discharge for the white on black, and a good water-based ink for the black on white, based purely on the color (for the first - discharge on black baby rib often gives that cream/golden color, and the variations of color in the garment lead me to think that that was made using discharge) the amount of detail on each, and what looks to be a no-hand product. I am less certain about the black on white background. That type of detail is hard to get using water-based inks, imhe, but it doesn't look like plastisol. It would be helpful to get the same closeup image of the black and the white. Knowing the magnification on the closeups would also be helpful (take a photo with a penny in it). These are prinited on some sort of baby rib, right?

There are people on this board with much more intimate knowledge of printing techniques than do I who could probably chime in and tell me I am completely wrong at this point.

[lyingonyourdriveway]

the black with white print and red embroidery is really nice.

who produces these jackets?

[adsurgo]

Quote:

Preliminarily, I'd say that it looks like a discharge for the white on black, and a good water-based ink for the black on white, based purely on the color (for the first - discharge on black baby rib often gives that cream/golden color, and the variations of color in the garment lead me to think that that was made using discharge) the amount of detail on each, and what looks to be a no-hand product. I am less certain about the black on white background. That type of detail is hard to get using water-based inks, imhe, but it doesn't look like plastisol. It would be helpful to get the same closeup image of the black and the white. Knowing the magnification on the closeups would also be helpful (take a photo with a penny in it). These are prinited on some sort of baby rib, right?

There are people on this board with much more intimate knowledge of printing techniques than do I who could probably chime in and tell me I am completely wrong at this point.

--- Original message by LA Guy on Mar 8, 2006 09:04 AM

i pretty much agree with this dude. its real hard to tell without having it in front of you tho.

[Guest Berget__]

the jackets are REALLY nice. Would also like to know what brand and maybe where to get one.

I aint gotta get money man money get me

[Salem]

on the first design there is 5 screens involve, it has to be plastisol, there is no way water-base ink could look that solid on those kind of heavy weight knit: all together there is possibly 5 screens, 1 for each sleeve, 1 for each side of chest, and one big one for the back. the grfx artist have to design and cut the design precisely for the front to look seamlessly and the back is just by it self, the embroidery is apply to it after the print is done.

i seen a similar design like it before. can't think of the name right now, will update tonite

[LA Guy]

Quote:

on the first design there is 5 screens involve, it has to be plastisol, there is no way water-base ink could look that solid on those kind of heavy weight knit: all together there is possibly 5 screens, 1 for each sleeve, 1 for each side of chest, and one big one for the back. the grfx artist have to design and cut the design precisely for the front to look seamlessly and the back is just by it self, the embroidery is apply to it after the print is done.

i seen a similar design like it before. can't think of the name right now, will update tonite

--- Original message by Salem on Mar 8, 2006 01:07 PM

Agree on number of screens involved, and on the plastisol for the black on white jacket. Hadn't considered the weight ( how many ounces is that fabric, btw.) Still think that the white/cream/gold on black is discharge though.

[Salem]

for the full color tiger could be a technique called sublimation where as you creat a poster size of print and transfer the deisgn onto garment, the color will stay on the garment as if it belong to it, have a really smooth surface and it wont fade after wash

[Salem]

Quote:

Quote:

on the first design there is 5 screens involve, it has to be plastisol, there is no way water-base ink could look that solid on those kind of heavy weight knit: all together there is possibly 5 screens, 1 for each sleeve, 1 for each side of chest, and one big one for the back. the grfx artist have to design and cut the design precisely for the front to look seamlessly and the back is just by it self, the embroidery is apply to it after the print is done.

i seen a similar design like it before. can't think of the name right now, will update tonite

--- Original message by Salem on Mar 8, 2006 01:07 PM

Agree on number of screens involved, and on the plastisol for the black on white jacket. Hadn't considered the weight ( how many ounces is that fabric, btw.) Still think that the white/cream/gold on black is discharge though.

--- Original message by LA Guy on Mar 8, 2006 01:15 PM

i think it's around 16-20 oz. jersey knit

[Kane]

Interesting elaborate artwork.

Not sublimation. You can't sublimate white onto black fabric.

Probably as LA Guy says. Discharge / Waterbase prints. Waterbase can look pretty solid on the heavyweight fleece. It's way more likely than plastisol 'cause plastisol covers. You wouldn't be able to see the grain of the fabric on the white on black if it were plastisol.

For the record, the first garment with the skeleton buddhas is probably 3 screens. Same screen for back and left and right sleeve, then left and right chest. Note that on a garment, sleeve panels are almost as big as a back panel.

Also note that the sleeve graphics do not line up to the body graphics. IMHO, cool graphic, but not tremendous in terms of execution.

Notes of interest:

- They managed to get a really bright white discharge on black. I've got a good idea how it's done, but we've never really had the call to do something like this.

- The coloured tiger print on white probably has hand-airbrushed colours. Hard to tell from the small pic, but based on the design, it's probably very small runs. Hand painting wouldn't be out of the question.

[Jay Allen]

Another option not discussed is the new direct to t-shirt/fabric printers that have been hitting the market for the last couple years. They are getting to the point where they have solved the issues with printing on dark fabric.

As Kane mentioned....these garments were obviously done in panels and then assembled. The white discharge on black isn't that hard to do if the fabric is prepared correctly.......and you use a pigmented white discharge.

I don't think sublimation is possible on a fleece garment. Unless something has changed with the technology in the last few months you have to have an extremely high polyester content for sublimation to work well. Hanes actually makes a t-shirt specifically for this process. It is a two panel shirt....cotton on the inside....poly on the print side. That's why you see a lot of sublimation done on biking jerseys......high poly content.

Conceived and executed on the working waterfront of Portland, Maine. www.jayallen.biz

[6MT]

wow, this is great, people are discuss productive issue, yes, this si how it should be

[Kane]

I imagine people would be a little hesitant to discuss methods and techniques because this isn't widely held knowledge. An edge is an edge, and this is a competitive business.

Our company stopped going to the pool show after people would come visit our booths with pen, pad and digicam, skim the cream off, and go off to the next booth.

That said, there has been quite a bit of buzz regarding the new straight-to-fabric printers. We're supposed to be getting a few with some of the local suppliers. I'd be interested to see how well they work.

As usual, I'm skeptical. But I'd be pleased to be surprised. No setups, unlimited colours, perfectly smooth colour transitions. It all sounds really cool. But what about colour fastness? Limitations?

I don't know. I have a love-hate relationship with technology sometimes. Sure the digicam is great when paired up with photoshp and a inkjet printer, but the proliferation of such devices devalues the amount of work and craftsmanship that's gone into a perfectly exposed and printed glycee print.

[ABELnyc]

***WARNING I AM NOT A PRO BUT I'M POSTING ANYWAY B/C I HAVE A QUESTION.

why can't you sublimate onto cotton? i noticed using a plastisol ink in screening, after the shirts were dried, certain glittery ink washed off the cotton, but not the polyester, so i guess it's the same reason?

Unrelated sorta: How can i quickly beat to hell a crisp new poly hoodie? want to quickly fade, and maybe even sand it a bit for fraying. any tips?

Thanks in advance fashion heads.

~multiflavored RodLavers~

http://abelnyc.com

ALPHA/BRAVO/ECHO/LIMA

[keeperofthelittlemen]

what brand are these does anyone know

[Kane]

Quote:

***WARNING I AM NOT A PRO BUT I'M POSTING ANYWAY B/C I HAVE A QUESTION.

why can't you sublimate onto cotton? i noticed using a plastisol ink in screening, after the shirts were dried, certain glittery ink washed off the cotton, but not the polyester, so i guess it's the same reason?

Unrelated sorta: How can i quickly beat to hell a crisp new poly hoodie? want to quickly fade, and maybe even sand it a bit for fraying. any tips?

Thanks in advance fashion heads.

--- Original message by ABELnyc on Mar 11, 2006 03:29 PM

The sublimation process is designed strictly for synthetic fabrics. It works best on polyester, but I believe that it can work with Nylon as well.

Think cycling jersies or all those fancy stretchy garments that olympic athletes, etc, wear with all the graphics and stuff. That's sublimated polyester.

The process itself refers to the change of state from a solid to a gas, without undergoing a liquid state (like dry ice evaporating). In fabric, prints on paper are transferred to the fabric through the application of heat (typically at around 400degF+). The dye, in a gaseous form, bind readily to polyester fibers, and saturate them with colour. Bingo. Sublimation. The gaseous dye doesn't stick to cotton.

Some facts about sublimation:

- has absolutely no hand.

- typically is done on white or light fabrics because the dye is transparent. So you can't dye a light colour on top of a dark one.

Unrelated answer: Tie it to the back of your car/bike/bus and drive it the hella all over town?

[ABELnyc]

Kane, thanks for the wisdom. Sorry that it provokes further questioning.

This has eluded me for some time and, well if there's an SF postup clearing up the mystery, then tell me and I shall seek same. I understand that people like to keep their methods and production tips a secret, so if anyone AT ALL feels like privatetalking the answer to me, I won't be mad

Even back in the early 90's, i would see tees with a flawless photo-to-cotton transfer. Even years of wear later, the photo would be faded but still look great, almost like the ink was IN the cotton, not ON it (like plastisol inks). I asked around, people gave me the obvious answer: Heat Transfer paper. Increasingly, I'd see the proliferance of shit-quality paper transfer all over nyc. Picture that embarrassing Scarface photoshirt you saw on the train last week...with the cracking and peeling of a shiny, almost tacky coating on the fabric. Yuck. Then someone mentioned "You need commercial heat transfer paper" suggesting that was a better quality. Fine, okay...so I'd seen those in boutiques too. A nicer transfer, doesn't feel as thick and chealy coated...it's more matte, thinner, the photo seems to actually be IN the cotton fibers.

But it seems I'm wrong?!?! Is there no process not prohibitively expensive that would enable me to apply photos, whether custom shaped, rectangle or whatever, to COTTON tees? And further, why is it that some of those 1-hour photo places offering to put your dog on a tee...sometimes they look pretty damn good! I'll take a better feel of the transfer over picture quality. In fact, a somewhat faded pic would be okay, if I knew it was really on that cotton and not going to crack if the fabric stretched

Kane, btw the Olympic stretchy example, that cleared things up perfectly. However, what does 'no hand' refer to?

Lastly (thank you everyone for your patience...) how can I put pics on this site? I'd like to show some examples of tees that baffle me insofar as process, # of inks, colors, etc.

thank you thread gurus.

~multiflavored RodLavers~

http://abelnyc.com

ALPHA/BRAVO/ECHO/LIMA

[Jay Allen]

It is likely that some of the "photo" shirts you've seen that don't have a heavy hand (BTW-hand refers to being able to feel the ink with your.....hand) were done using 4 color process inks. These inks are significantly thinner than "regular" plastisol and allow you to produce virtually any color in the spectrum by combining them during the printing process. It is similar to the way offset printing is done.

You probably have noticed the term CYMK in your graphics programs...this refers to the 4 "process" colors which are C=cyan Y=yellow M=magenta K=black. Screenprinters that use this method use four screens (one for each color) and seperate the image they want to print in Photoshop (the old way) or with software designed specifically for this process. You end up with 4 screens that, when done properly, allows the CYMK colors to overlay one another in such a manner to produce all colors, shades, etc in the graphic.

As mentioned earlier these inks are much thinner, and are translucent, so the "hand" is very slight. The best results are on light colored shirts, but it is done on dark shirts as well using an underbase.......which is a topic for another day.

Conceived and executed on the working waterfront of Portland, Maine. www.jayallen.biz

[ABELnyc]

JayAllen, thank you so much. So I just need to find a screenprinter using 4 color process CMYK inks. So obviously, this process is slightly more expensive...are there sites to check for equipment, inks, printers as well as those providing this service (in nyc)?

I'm looking to conceive and execute on the working waterfront of New York, New York.

~multiflavored RodLavers~

http://abelnyc.com

ALPHA/BRAVO/ECHO/LIMA

[Jay Allen]

If you are new to screen printing 4 color process isn't where you start. You need seriously good equipment, and some real experience printing spot colors before attempting process work. I'm sure there are hundreds of printers in the NYC area. I would start in the yellow pages.

An online resourse is www.screenprinters.net. They also have a great forum section where you can post questions, or just lurk. You can't come up with a question that hasn't been asked on those boards.....just do the search.

Good luck!

Conceived and executed on the working waterfront of Portland, Maine. www.jayallen.biz

[ABELnyc]

I'm not new to screening, but so far all i've done is the one ink at a time, one color one cost two color diff cost etc. but using this method, if i were to try to replicate a photo, i'd essentially be getting charged for a thousand different color changes on the 4-head machine.

for one or two color shirts, it's fine. but for photo to cotton shirts, i need the CMYK thing you mentioned.

will check out the site. thx

~multiflavored RodLavers~

http://abelnyc.com

ALPHA/BRAVO/ECHO/LIMA

[homi29]

these pieces just dont do much for me, while they make be harder to manufacture, i think they just look busy

and like bad ripoffs of traditional chinese garb

[Kane]

There are different ways of getting photorealistic prints on T-shirts. Jay's mentioned the new direct print-to-fabric printers/technology earlier in this thread. I haven't seen samples in the flesh, but from the pictures I've seen, and testimonies, they're pretty impressive. However, if washability is an issue, then I can not attest to their durability. As I've mentioned before, I'm pessimistic, but I reserve final judgement or opinion until I actually see some of these garments.

Another option that's more feasible are printing transfers from an inkjet or laser onto special transfers that can fit into home/office printers. There are specific transfers for white/light garments, and transfers for black/dark garments.

Depending on the quality of the transfer and the ink/printer used, YMMV. I've seen some laser ones that were transferred onto mousepads, and they lasted quite well considering they were repeatedly used for a year or two. Inkjet transfers may look better at the beginning, due to printing technolgy (ie 1440 dpi vs 600 dpi); however most inkjet inks are water soluble. I think epson and canon have new water-resistant inks... but once again, YMMV.

Typically, commercial screenprinters will stay away from inkjet simply because it's not very production-friendly. It'd be like $2.00 and 3 minutes per T-shirt, and you can't get larger than a 8.5" x 11" print. Compare this to say $0.50 a T-shirt and about 30 seconds to print on a press. Over 100, 1000, and 10,000 units, this really adds up.

My suggestion: If you really want to look into this, go around and make inquiries to the various kinkos, etc service bureaus where they do this as a service. See what they use, and what kind of 'guarantee' they have.