Re: He ain't Epson, he's my Brother...
Posted: 23 Nov 2010, 11:26
Has anyone tried using Brother printers for dye-sublimation?
It seems odd that Sawgrass only support some Epson and Ricoh printers. Epson printers, with their tiny ink tanks, require the fitting of a CISS with great ink tubes flapping away all over the place.
Brother printers, like the Ricoh, have their inks remotely mounted. The printers are invariably cheaper than Epsons (my MFC-5890CN cost about the same as a B1100 but it comes complete with scanner, card reader, colour screen, fax and all manner of other things).
Also, there are third-party refillable cartridges for some Brother printers (such as my MFC-5890CN) that can hold 80ml of ink (not the tiddly 9ml of Epson printers). A printer with remote-mounted 80ml cartridges would do away with any need for the square-peg-in-round-hole nature of a CISS.
Oh, yes, and before you ask, I've just had confirmation back to an enquiry I sent to Brother - and they replied: "Our inkjet machines use the piezo type of printhead." So the printhead is the same type that's used on Epson printers.
There seems no logical reason why Brother printers should be ignored. Does anyone know if any tests have been done on Brother printers and if there's a reason why they're not used for dye-sublimation?
It seems odd that Sawgrass only support some Epson and Ricoh printers. Epson printers, with their tiny ink tanks, require the fitting of a CISS with great ink tubes flapping away all over the place.
Brother printers, like the Ricoh, have their inks remotely mounted. The printers are invariably cheaper than Epsons (my MFC-5890CN cost about the same as a B1100 but it comes complete with scanner, card reader, colour screen, fax and all manner of other things).
Also, there are third-party refillable cartridges for some Brother printers (such as my MFC-5890CN) that can hold 80ml of ink (not the tiddly 9ml of Epson printers). A printer with remote-mounted 80ml cartridges would do away with any need for the square-peg-in-round-hole nature of a CISS.
Oh, yes, and before you ask, I've just had confirmation back to an enquiry I sent to Brother - and they replied: "Our inkjet machines use the piezo type of printhead." So the printhead is the same type that's used on Epson printers.
There seems no logical reason why Brother printers should be ignored. Does anyone know if any tests have been done on Brother printers and if there's a reason why they're not used for dye-sublimation?