Best solution for printing postcards

By the way, if you are interested in page wide HP's then a hp officejet enterprise color x555 (not the Pro) model should be used. THe reason being the Pro models head cleaning doesn't even work (so I read on Russian forums). The Enterprise models have built in hard drive, 1GB memory, Gigabit LAN. Everything to actually print fast the big files with full page images.

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/pscm.../HP_Officejet_Enterprise_Color_X555series.pdf

Only Pigment inks should be used, as DYE kills the head. Proper flushing needs to be done in order to use DYE inks, not just simple refill.

I hope you choose the right printer, and use proper color management to make your customers happy ! And to do this over and over again.

The only problems with using the HP Officejet Enterprise Color x555 is that it can’t take heavy cardstock and it won’t print borderless, so he can scratch that one off his list..

If it were me id start of with a reasonably cheap setup such as a printer with duplex function, which can also printing to card (that will be ideal for double side printing a postcard and should handle most stuff upto around 250-300gsm). Sort out some decent software or templates in software to go with it.

If the idea then takes off and people are throwing money at you then id be looking at more professional gear, wide format printing, guillotines etc.

I guess it depends on budget and how serious the OP is.

Again the problem with that setup is that you can’t print Duplex on heavy cardstock nor can you print borderless in Duplex mode so the OP will have to think of another options, like an A3 printer and trim the cards down to size afterwards..

The Hat said:

Again the problem with that setup is that you can’t print Duplex on heavy cardstock nor can you print borderless in Duplex mode so the OP will have to think of another options, like an A3 printer and trim the cards down to size afterwards..

Click to expand...

Hmm i did not know that the heaviest ive ever tried with my MP610 i think was 180gsm sheet of A4 for duplex printing, that was fine, id guess over 200gsm is when issues you mention start to happen? Also did not know about the borderless limitation.

Perhaps the best if he wants a cheap work around option would be print the generic template for the postcard (IE bit where you write message, place the stamp etc/NON-glossy side) similar to what i posted earlier on all the paper first and then have the customer select image they want on the glossy side. Other than that then yep agreed a more serious printer may be required.

I think we are now getting to the realm of needing to know how serious he wants to be about this. Fully automated is going to need pro gear, a more of a hands on approach and only a 100 or so a day he could probably get away with a cheaper approach.

300 g/m² media is possible to load x555dn printer.
http://www8.hp.com/emea_middle_east...rs/product-detail.html?oid=5377950#!tab=specs

If 300 g/m² is not card stock then what is?

Smile said:

300 g/m² media is possible to load x555dn printer.
http://www8.hp.com/emea_middle_east...rs/product-detail.html?oid=5377950#!tab=specs

If 300 g/m² is not card stock then what is?

Click to expand...

There is nothing mentioned here that supports the 300 gm stock..
-----------------------------------------------------
Media weights, recommended

• 60 to 120 g/m² (plain paper)
  

• 125 to 300 g/m² (photo)
  
  
• 75 to 90 g/m² (envelope)
  
  
• 120 to 180 g/m² (brochure)
  
  
• 163 to 200 g/m² (card)
  
  Media weight, supported:

• Tray 1: 60 to 120 g/m² (plain paper)
  
  
• 125 to 300 g/m² (photo)
  
  
• 75 to 90 g/m² (envelope)
  
  
• 120 to 180 g/m² (brochure)
  
  
• 163 to 200 g/m² (card). Tray 2: 60 to 120 g/m² (plain paper)
  
  
• 125 to 250 g/m² (photo)
  
  
• 75 to 90 g/m² (envelope)
  
  
• 120 to 180 g/m² (brochure)
  
  
• 163 to 200 g/m² (card). Optional Tray 3: 60 to 120 g/m² (plain paper)
  
  
• 125 to 250 g/m² (photo)
  
  
• 120 to 180 g/m² (brochure)
  
  
• 163 to 200 g/m² (card)

Worth noting that card stock vs' photo media with the same weight don't always have the same curve path capabilities.

Bound to be a reason for this that has dropped out of my memory banks, but I have a vague memory of being caught out badly by card media that was the same weight as a photo paper quoted as compatibility and it just would not feed.

So, check that out and keep it in mind when checking compatibility.

websnail said:

Worth noting that card stock vs' photo media with the same weight don't always have the same curve path capabilities.

Bound to be a reason for this that has dropped out of my memory banks, but I have a vague memory of being caught out badly by card media that was the same weight as a photo paper quoted as compatibility and it just would not feed.

So, check that out and keep it in mind when checking compatibility.

Click to expand...

Puts on special science coat but attempts to offer theory in non techie terms .....

Paper is less coarse, but more dense in its construction (smaller particles make it up) Card is more coarse but less dense in construction (larger particles make it up). If you looked at it under a microscope the card would have more air gaps/space between the particles. (think of it like cheap wood and what we call in the UK chipboard and MDF, the MDF is constructed with finer/smaller particles making it more dense).

Paper/card etc is the same. You can have a thick piece of cardboard which is lighter in weight than a piece of paper the same thickness.

If you think of a corrugated cardboard box and how thick a panel of it can be and then imagine a piece of paper the same thickness the paper would weigh more (the corrugated cardboard is as the name suggests corrugated or has a folded concertina sandwich in the middle, which means lots of air which means its light) A piece of paper the same thickness dimensional speaking would be far heavy as its make up is more dense (less air gaps).

The GSM (Grams per Square Metre) for paper technically is not a measure of thickness but weight. Its just normally (but not always) the higher the GSM the thicker the paper/card, though as you have probably discovered at some point that is not always true You would not (and i hope nobody would) try to feed a whole say 0.5cm thick bit of corrugated cardboard through a home and not pro printer although ironically it could be well under 200GSM, so according to some specs it should work but i highly doubt it would in reality .

CakeHole said:

the MDF is constructed with finer/smaller particles making it more dense

Click to expand...

I wonder how many people will now be wondering about the time you said they were made up of "fine" ingredients and realise that you were actually insulting them!

*ahem*

In other news, thanks for the explanation.. I had a hunch that it was something like that but still useful to get the proper skinny and a useful lesson for anyone considering media handling on the GSM value alone..