Hello,

I'm just about ready to purchase an edible imaging set-up but want to be sure that I will be able to cover my costs when I sell my products. I make custom sugar cookies with glace icing. I have looked into purchasing images online, but the cost per cookie is simply too high for my clients to absorb.

Has anyone calculated the cost per sheet when printing from a home set-up? Although I will be getting multiple images per sheet, I could use a full-sheet cost and just divide it up.

Also, as I will be using smaller portions on cookies, does anyone have experience using Friskars circle cutters (or similar) for cutting the sheets? Seems more economical to print on full sheets and cut than to use the pre-cut 6 image/sheet icing sheets.

Thanks for any help...

The cost of printing, without refilling is 2.32". If you refill it is $1.32. This is printing with our spongeless ink tanks. If you use sponged cartridges, the ink cost will increase about 40%. The icing sheet is only $1.16 of the cost assuming you are buying them with out any bulk discounts. (ie: 4 pack of premiums is $100 which will bring the paper cost down.) This is a conservative estimate for you. We could max things out, but I try to give people realistic numbers. Now the cost will also decrease as that is the cost per 8.5x11" print. You would divide out the number of circles printed on that same sheet. The precuts are advantageous if you are using that particular size as we put on the icing sheets as many as we can. Remember if you cut them yourself, there is the cost of labor... your time is not free either.

I hope this will help you

I have never used the corn syrup glaze personally, but I have read that people do. Anything wet works, my guess is the stickiness of the glaze assists more. You must realize that though the icing sheet will adhere to your decoration, it still is white and unless you perfectly match the color, you will be able to see it on your decoration. Many people choose to pipe around it. I usually fill my images with color so that the image is only seen, no boardering icing sheet.

If you purchase from us it would take about 60 prints charging $10 each to completely pay for your printer. This is very conservative as most people will pay for it quicker. We charge a lot more for our images so its all relative.

What a non sense ... my wife started to make photo cakes and asked me to do cost estimate for her prints ( I  am printing department manager for 20 years ) .. she showed me this article about cartridges she just got  and I  just could not stop laugh to explanation  offered from  Icing Images " experts " about 40% savings printing with " sponge free " cartridges ....that particular poor imitation was invented in China as cheap replacement for original and genuine  Canon product .

Since there is nothing to hold ink pressure on print head ( except very small sponge at ink exit hole , so much about "sponge free " term ...)  ink would just FLOOD  print head and saturate printing sheet almost twice as required THEREFORE HAVING A YIELD IN REALITY TWO TIMES LESS THAN STANDARD DESIGN WITH WHAT THEY CALL SPONGE (a mixture of polymers with fibers )..not to mention that print head will last much less time having so much liquid pressure that is not designed for ....my darling last comment was about " bacteria contamination "....that was moment when I got really mad ,not on her ...TO  PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE SHAME OR BRAIN TO CLAIM SUCH STUPIDITY ABOUT BACTERIA FREE WHEN THEIR CARTRIDGES HAVE SAME SPONGE ON BOTTOM WHERE INK COMING OUT ..LIKE MICROSCOPIC BACTERIA CARE FOR SIZE OF SO CALLED SPONGE .... After finding out how much they charge for this cartridges and false claims I am seriously thinking to file a claim with Health Department and BBB ....

Michael Beach

General Manager @ North Michigan Print Labs

My wife never tried any other sheets or ink , that is not a point ! It's about misleading and false information .  If you are in printing industry and claim such non sense you would be ignored and out of business in few weeks since you obviously don't know what are you doing .

It's not important company name or brand , it's about facts .

Would you buy your medicine from me if I tell you I have cure for cancer . My guess is you would , I am just sick of seeing so many  companies taking advantage from their customers , companies that don't have any background in printing or engineering .   Idea behind this is that anything written on internet become true ...

If you publicly display something , prove it ..

After all , my wife said it does not matter for her , she just want to make cakes ...that is exactly what everyone doing ..they know no one will pay attention to facts !!

For that reason I am going back to my work , don't want to hate anyone ..don't want to argue with my better half ( I love my personalized cupcakes )  ,she enjoy her hobby in any case ...

A

AWeird... editor is screwed up on my android!

In any case, no, I would not buy the cure for cancer from you or anyone else. I am a born skeptic and would have to see it work before my eyes. JUST LIKE DEBBIE'S INKS! I watch them work, and they are the best! That is all I care about.

print master,

i am paying attention and am interested in what you are saying  but need some clarification

i appreciate the facts very much!!!!

so are you saying:

1. the sponge breeds bacteria and is bad news health wise
2. the sponge is designed to keep the ink from flooding out the icing sheet because twice as much ink as is necessary is released during printing with this design
3. since twice as much ink is used the cartridges last half as long as possible and therefore is not as advertised
4. the cartridge is subject to a short life due to this over-flowing design
5. your wife is a great/happy baker and despite all these technology issues you love the cupcakes she makes for you anyway (how cool!)

do i have that correct??? and are you aware of any other brands that are the same or better???

thank you!!!

I'm curious also, what printer etc. would the husband (Print Master) recommend?

As person who spend so many years in printing I would say that Canon printers are an excellent choice . They have thermal printed head , comparing with Epson Piezzo Electric impulse head . Japanese technology is superior in printing world ( Rolland ,Mimaki , Mutoh ,Canon , Epson ,etc..)

Since you guys are not using those machines for intended inks Canon is best for several reasons .

1. Low Cost

2. High Print Quality

3. Excellent Print Driver

4. Color Manipulation

5  Canon Quality Thermal Print Head

6. Layout printing software

If you ever take a look into genuine Canon design you'll find same sponge inside cartridges . This sponge will not only elevate pressure and ink balance , it will also hold much more ink than empty container ( please make test with your paper towel and you'll know what I'm talking about ,after all you ladies should now that better than anyone ) . In same time there is another sponge at bottom to filter inks acting as protector ( damper ) from larger particles to avoid clogging ( not visible with naked eye ) ..Inks will disperse with heat electronically generated inside print head ..Print head will never touch any SHEET , PAPER OR ICING when printing .

All that said is only to understand way this machine work , it is not designed to be used for  inks without dampers ( sponges) ... now if you tell me that you didn't have any problems with nozzles ( clogging ) I'll find this hard to believe . I'm sure Canon would pay a lot to learn that their design suck .

Best way to use this printers with edible inks would be  print head modification . In our industry we use special liquid coatings , not sure if anyone using it in your type of printing .

Hope this helped a little , I really don't want to argue or discus any more , since this look like Ford guys against Chevy fans ......

I just found that this forum is censored ...hmmmm ,money wherever and whatever you do ....
 

thank you, print master

for what it's worth i do have canon but it's not because i knew what i was doing  but it's an inkjet oh well

thank you for sharing your invaluable expertise with us

best of the best to you

i'm dumb as a rock about the internal workings of a printer but wouldn't a thermal printer melt the product we are printing on????

i don't know

i need one of those cupcakes we been talking about

Uh, a thermal printer (whether it uses heat-sensitized paper, like a traditional fax machine, or a thermal cash register printer, or a thermal theatrical ticket printer, or whether it uses a thermal ribbon, like the old ALPS MicroDry system) is a completely different animal from a thermal inkjet head, which uses heat to force the ink out (apparently by boiling off some of the solvent).

At any rate, I'm perfectly content to continue outsourcing edible printing, optical media printing, and any other printing that has to use inkjet technology, because I refuse to own an inkjet printer, or permit one in my home.

When I did the Leland Awards cake, I used an ordinary (but very clean, the same pair we keep in the silverware drawer, for opening food packages) scissors to trim the picture of the trophy to the very edges of the trophy itself, removing all background, and the International Printing Museum logo to its outline. I did the same with the speed limit sign on my parents' 55th anniversary cake.

Since it wouldn't be very practical to do the same with most of the images I have planned for my own 55th birthday cake (public domain photographs of Squad 51 and Engine 51 from the old Emergency! TV series, and my own photograph of Los Angeles County Fire Station 127, which was used for all the Station 51 exteriors), I plan on just trimming them to the very edges of the photographs, and maybe piping a border around them.

As to an ink tank with a sponge holding more than one without a sponge, that flies in the face of the laws of physics: matter takes up space. And two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time. The only exceptions I know of are cases in which molecules fit together (e.g., if you combine a liter of 200 proof ethanol with a liter of pure water, you get slightly less than two liters of 100 proof ethanol), or where a gas dissolved in a liquid takes up less space than the same amount of gas can be safely compressed into by itself (e.g., acetylene tanks are filled with a porous wadding that is soaked in either acetone or dimethylformamide, because acetylene explodes spontaneously under high pressure)