I bought a direct thermal printer last month, a brand new MFLABEL DT426B. While a budget option, it was quite well reviewed. The latest drivers installed painlessly on my desktop it's connected to via USB in the shipping area for my home business, and it prints white 4x6 labels that appear PERFECT.
I have had nothing but problems with barcodes scanning at the post office (two different post offices as of today too.) Maybe 2 of 20 have scanned properly. I thought I'd post up before I attempt potentially futile communication with the ebay seller I now see is in China, or the manufacturer I believe whose customer service also is, or file a replacement claim with my protection plan yet. If nothing else, I'd rather not be THAT customer returning things that don't need to be, and I'm outside (at least Ebay's) return window anyway.
Per some googling, I've tried:
Printing Preferences Adjustments
-Darkness settings between 8 and 15, I believe 8, 11, 12, 14 and 15.
-Printing speeds of 2, 3 and 4 in/sec,
-Dithering off the whole time
Print Preview Settings
-Scaling the label as small as 65%.
Strangely, it didn't seem to actually shrink the label at all if changing the scaling in print settings to anything above 70% (confirmed with multiple prints, not just viewing the preview in Firefox, I'm printing labels through Pirateship.) I found a forum post that suggested scaling down to about 85% for similar issues, and labels did seem to scan better at 65-70%, again, despite the label appearing full size or close to it. This was tested with a couple scan attempts with some random package tracker and barcode scanner apps, as of course my Pixel 3A can't get the USPS app proper, for a proper test, as it was "made for an older version of Android" and I don't own a barcode tester.
All I can think of at this point is substandard or defective scanners at three different workstations between two post offices or it being the free labels it came with. On the latter note, it's been awhile since I've worked in any industry that deals with them when they're not already on the box, can anyone speak to how opaque they generally are? I reuse a lot of shipping envelopes boxes, and when unable or unwilling to rip off the old one, I have to put as many as three blanks down, and then my label, to not see the original one. Just wondering if they might be a cheaper brand and other brands might be a little less see-through. A return label for a shipment at work today seems to be about as translucent when stuck to the corner of a sheet of white paper with some text on it, so leaning away from this being the culprit now, but will try my other label roll and even buy another.
Additionally, given I still have the issue after slapping on 3-4 blanks before the label proper, wouldn't I be seeing some serious fading or other obvious issues if the paper was too thin and the machine was improperly calibrated thickness wise, if that's ever even necessary with direct thermal machines? I come from a high end commercial printing background ironically in the labeling industry where transfer pressure is quite important depending on stock thickness, texture etc, something tells me barcode labels are a pretty different, much similar beast.
Thanks in advance for any assistance!
I have had nothing but problems with barcodes scanning at the post office (two different post offices as of today too.) Maybe 2 of 20 have scanned properly. I thought I'd post up before I attempt potentially futile communication with the ebay seller I now see is in China, or the manufacturer I believe whose customer service also is, or file a replacement claim with my protection plan yet. If nothing else, I'd rather not be THAT customer returning things that don't need to be, and I'm outside (at least Ebay's) return window anyway.
Per some googling, I've tried:
Printing Preferences Adjustments
-Darkness settings between 8 and 15, I believe 8, 11, 12, 14 and 15.
-Printing speeds of 2, 3 and 4 in/sec,
-Dithering off the whole time
Print Preview Settings
-Scaling the label as small as 65%.
Strangely, it didn't seem to actually shrink the label at all if changing the scaling in print settings to anything above 70% (confirmed with multiple prints, not just viewing the preview in Firefox, I'm printing labels through Pirateship.) I found a forum post that suggested scaling down to about 85% for similar issues, and labels did seem to scan better at 65-70%, again, despite the label appearing full size or close to it. This was tested with a couple scan attempts with some random package tracker and barcode scanner apps, as of course my Pixel 3A can't get the USPS app proper, for a proper test, as it was "made for an older version of Android" and I don't own a barcode tester.
All I can think of at this point is substandard or defective scanners at three different workstations between two post offices or it being the free labels it came with. On the latter note, it's been awhile since I've worked in any industry that deals with them when they're not already on the box, can anyone speak to how opaque they generally are? I reuse a lot of shipping envelopes boxes, and when unable or unwilling to rip off the old one, I have to put as many as three blanks down, and then my label, to not see the original one. Just wondering if they might be a cheaper brand and other brands might be a little less see-through. A return label for a shipment at work today seems to be about as translucent when stuck to the corner of a sheet of white paper with some text on it, so leaning away from this being the culprit now, but will try my other label roll and even buy another.
Additionally, given I still have the issue after slapping on 3-4 blanks before the label proper, wouldn't I be seeing some serious fading or other obvious issues if the paper was too thin and the machine was improperly calibrated thickness wise, if that's ever even necessary with direct thermal machines? I come from a high end commercial printing background ironically in the labeling industry where transfer pressure is quite important depending on stock thickness, texture etc, something tells me barcode labels are a pretty different, much similar beast.
Thanks in advance for any assistance!