The global digital textile printing market is on track to reach $85.4 billion in retail value by 2029, according to Keypoint Intelligence’s 2024-2029 Global Digital Textile Forecast. Asia Pacific is expected to generate more than $53 billion of that total.
When The Cannata Report last covered this topic in September 2025, Konica Minolta’s O’ROBE inline pretreatment ink had recently been announced. The company’s NASSENGER digital inkjet textile printers, already deployed in major textile manufacturing markets across Asia and Europe, appeared to signal a potential U.S. dealer opportunity. Kyocera and Ricoh were also named as OEMs with ambitions in textile printing. At the time, the developments suggested that the technology was moving closer to the U.S. market. The question seemed to be when, not if.
However, one year later, the timeline looks different for North American office technology dealers. The region’s retail value in digital textile printing is declining at 4.7% annually, making North America the only major market with a negative growth rate.
Konica Minolta’s NASSENGER printers are available in Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Vietnam, and Turkey because those markets have something the U.S. does not: the infrastructure to support large-scale textile production from printing through finishing.
“You can go in and print textile, and the technology is available,” said Frank Mallozzi, president of industrial print and production, Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A., Inc. “But then you’ve got challenges related to finishing, which is sewing. That’s still a big manual process, which requires cheap labor.”
Dan Marx, a content director at the PRINTING United Alliance, agreed. “The simple truth is that production is limited by the slowest part of the process. That, today, is largely finishing. The graphics industry is hard-pressed to find staff experienced in sewing, and that is for relatively basic work compared to sewing clothing.”
Cutting presents the same challenge. “Other finishing steps, like the cutting of printed pieces, require significant firepower to keep up with high-production printing systems,” Marx said.
Mallozzi pointed to the OEM side, as well. Companies such as EFI Reggiani, MS Printing, and Konica Minolta itself have been slow to build a U.S. footprint. “There really is no infrastructure here from manufacturers. They don’t have sales infrastructure, they don’t have the post-sales infrastructure that you are familiar with in other industrial segments.”
What exists instead are resellers, distributors, and agents. This is distinct from smaller-format garment technologies, such as direct-to-film (DTF) and direct-to-garment (DTG), that are already gaining traction in the U.S. (see sidebar). Those technologies serve a different market and require a very different production infrastructure.
A textile tale of two I’s: infrastructure and ink
So, when does the United States catch up? Mallozzi said, “I think we’ll start to see some shift and change, but anywhere from five to eight years away.”
Marx went further. “Any meaningful moves into digital textile printing will not be an upsell add-on to the business, but instead part of an effort to go big in that space. For that to happen, one of two things will be required: significant capital investment or a significant acquisition from the textile industry.”
Mallozzi also pointed to the growth of micro-brands. “You go on Instagram, you go on Amazon, you look at the advertising, you’ve got a lot of micro-brands out there. These micro-brands are quite successful. They are make-to-order.” Their emphasis on short runs, fast turnarounds, and personalization could create more demand for onshore digital textile production. Could the pressure that fast-fashion brands such as H&M and Zara face to turn over styles monthly, rather than seasonally, be a factor?
New pigment ink formulations are also addressing one of the challenges of printing on natural fibers, particularly cotton. Mallozzi said traditional cotton textile production involves extensive preparation, dyeing, and washing, creating a more complex and resource-intensive process. New pigment inks, however, use a binder that helps the pigment adhere to the fabric and can be cured through steaming rather than a traditional dyeing process. The fabric can then be washed to soften it, without the same dye-related wastewater that is generated by conventional textile production.
Mallozzi described the development as “groundbreaking,” noting that companies including Konica Minolta and EFI Reggiani have solutions using the technology. But the technology alone is not enough to accelerate U.S. adoption. The manufacturers still need the sales and support infrastructure to bring those solutions to market, while the U.S. lacks the scale of textile production needed to create broad demand.
Mallozzi said a bigger issue is that dealers are overlooking what is already available to them.
“I don’t think [dealers] took advantage of what’s available to them at the very core,” he said. “There’s a ton of technologies at their disposal, even from the manufacturers that they buy their core products from, that they’re not really leveraging.”
Labels top his list (also see page __). “Our label devices are based on toner engines that they sell all day long,” Mallozzi said. “I’m simplifying it, of course, but the only difference is it’s a roll-fed system with some finishing. And yet the majority of dealers have not embraced it.”
Marx shared the same view. “I think label printing and embellishment are much closer to the core of what those dealers have traditionally sold. It adds to the technologies and end products they currently understand.”
Marx urged office technology dealers to do their research to better understand how massive the textile printing space is on a global scale. “Understand the applications that make direct or adjacent sense and then target the technologies and materials that will serve them,” he said.
Industrial textile printing is a legitimate long-term opportunity for U.S. dealers, but it isn’t necessarily the opportunity to pursue today. For now, labels, embellishment, direct-to-garment (DTG) and direct-to-film (DTF) technologies offer more realistic entry points into adjacent markets.
The Closer Opportunity: DTG and DTF
While U.S. infrastructure for industrial textile printing is still developing, another part of the garment printing market is already gaining traction in the dealer ecosystem. Direct-to-garment (DTG) printing alone is a $14.4 billion global market, according to Keypoint Intelligence’s 2024-2029 Global DTG Forecast.
Konica Minolta’s Mallozzi, who recently visited approximately 25 mid- and small-size commercial printers, noticed something consistent. “Almost every commercial printer, to some extent, is offering some garment customization, hats, a lot of the tchotchkes, and premium products. And I’ve also seen quite a few of them offer direct-to-garment to their clients.”
Marx has noticed the same. “What we’re seeing is more commercial printers seeking additional revenue and a stronger connection with customers offering DTG, DTF, and other solutions.” He pointed to how wide-format printing entered the commercial print environment as a comparison. “These are the areas you could see office technology dealers serve, not unlike them selling entry-level wide-format printers for basic signage applications.”
Brother International recently launched the GTX300 Hybrid Garment Printer, a compact system that handles both direct-to-garment and direct-to-film workflows in a single machine. The ability to switch between DTG and DTF without additional equipment lowers the barrier for print shops exploring garment printing without a full production commitment. That flexibility also makes the technology easier to position as an incremental addition rather than a wholesale move into garment production.
“It is a far cry from full-scale industrial textile printing operations,” Marx said. DTG and DTF work because they fit the workflow that dealers already understand: short runs, customization, and quick turnaround, in a footprint that sits alongside existing equipment without requiring a major overhaul.
For office technology dealers, DTG and DTF are the more realistic near-term entry points.
