? Best Means To Create Equal Ink Dwell Time with a Printing Machine ?

[Green Printer]

I think having INGEDE perform the test would provide a valuable comparison to validate that all parties have similar results. If the result are the same great if not the test should be ran again.

 

[D Ink Man]

I happily share knowledge that I have. They want confidential information that I'm not allowed to share. I'd rather quit this thread than this forum.

Schnitzel, you and Benny should not quit; not as long as the $$$$$$ keeps rolling in.

That's the bottom line, correct?

D

 

[Green Printer]

I think having INGEDE perform the test would provide a valuable comparison to validate that all parties have similar results. If the result are the same great if not the test should be ran again.

Having 2 test performed sounds like a good idea

 

[D Ink Man]

No tests are necessary. It is well understood what this unnecessary print process could do to our planet.

And that my friends....is the BIG PICTURE.

D

 

[Green Printer]

No tests are necessary. It is well understood what this unnecessary print process could do to our planet.

And that my friends....is the BIG PICTURE.

D

I will be devils advocate. What scholarly articles can you present to back your conclusions?

 

[Schnitzel]

Schnitzel, you and Benny should not quit; not as long as the $$$$$$ keeps rolling in.

That's the bottom line, correct?

D

Yes, that is correct. Every R&D project needs money, especially since up to not long ago, Benny funded this project from his own pocket.
Unlike Heidelberg, by the way, which I heard found a way to fund their R&D using chicken eggs (medium size) and bat droppings. No money or investors needed!

So you're trying to attack this project on the grounds that someone is investing money in it. Please, think before you write.

green print he cannot back up guesswork with scholarly articles, since he doesn't know how the process works. All he can do is use weasel words such as "well understood" and other authoritative rhetoric, but that's it.


This is really getting tiring. I think I'll be leaving this before it becomes a mega-thread of personal blows between me and D Ink Man. You can have the last word, I know it means a lot to you.

 

[D Ink Man]

No scholarly articles to present here, however I will present this as follows.

Offset lithography, letterpress, flexographic, intaglio and gravure to name a few are the "scholars". These are the professions, print processes that have driven us quite comfortably to where we are today. Unfortunately, at least from my perspective, these same processes have been efforted towards diminishment due to man's insatiable appetite to push technology beyond what is "necessary". Does this space age technology like nanographics improve mankind and further does it improve our planet Earth. My feelings and hypothesis are NO.

The print processes mentioned are governed by "people" in order to make them work. If you want to squash mankinds ability to support themselves and kill off jobs in the printing profession, than carry on, but realize the major ramifications and long term impact on people and our globe.

This post started off with the subject that entailed brainstorming within our community about ideas how to better improve an already proven print process that has supported mankind, enabled families to live comfortable lives with the possibility of our children having a fair chance at a good living. A tweak, an idea was presented for all to entertain. In review, the measurement of surface printed area and specialized litho inks to adjust for changing forms is a viable and earth friendly suggestion that could be researched and developed "without" the loss of already established business employment for our species. Combining this with good ideas like the ink transfer blade, strategic color take off bar placements could improve the offset process with the sacrifice of the ability on a man/woman to support themselves. It is very wide reaching trade globally that should be refocused upon.

Computers, digital, cell phones, tablets, printers and now nanographics are well in position to decay our planet going forward to a point of no return. These electronic gadgets and men who develop and produce them are creating a zestpool and a poor sustainable future for our environment and planet. And that will affect our successors, such as our children and grandchildren going forward. Is this what we truly want for the future? I ask you all whole heartily that question.

So when a leech jumps into this thread and tries to defend an overly promoted, non producing, capital robbing pie in the sky print entity that is only pursued for the short term gain of a few, I get pizzed off. No answers to the question of deinkability, no answers for the job loss potential (promoted that a chimpanzee could push the buttons for operation), no production and profit from the contraptions prototype to the investors, poor print quality and then I am sure more promotion to follow to grab more wampum at the world's biggest print show.

So this is my take and I do not worry about myself as some do through greed and ignoring the long term implications of a process that can very potentially wreak havoc of man and the planet futuristically. The short term gain of a few is a poor avenue for the long term demise of many. Think about that.

Contrasting views will be heard from responsible spokesmen.

D Ink Man

 

[Alois Senefelder]

Gentlemen,


"What gunpowder did for war...... printing did for the mind"


Regards, Alois

 

[aqazi81]

No scholarly articles to present here, however I will present this as follows.

Offset lithography, letterpress, flexographic, intaglio and gravure to name a few are the "scholars". These are the professions, print processes that have driven us quite comfortably to where we are today. Unfortunately, at least from my perspective, these same processes have been efforted towards diminishment due to man's insatiable appetite to push technology beyond what is "necessary". Does this space age technology like nanographics improve mankind and further does it improve our planet Earth. My feelings and hypothesis are NO.

The print processes mentioned are governed by "people" in order to make them work. If you want to squash mankinds ability to support themselves and kill off jobs in the printing profession, than carry on, but realize the major ramifications and long term impact on people and our globe

May be this is the disadvantage of technology. As a person from a developing country, we don't have problem of job loss in print industry due to technology. We are still using 20 to 35 year old equipment, few exceptions though. On a 4 or 5 color press we still have 3 to 4 people working and on a 1 or 2 color press we have 2 to 3 people mostly. A reason for this is cheap labor too.

Another scenario, When my father started his profession as a press operator around 50 years ago, this industry was one of the highly paid industries at that time but now it is the most underpaid industry here. What is the situation in your countries?

 

[joyce]

green printer, green print, joyce; Keep an open mind for the man upstairs sake! I never said that this was developed, no not nearly at all has it been developed. The pigment strength loads for changing forms is a complete unknown. Much research and development would have to be executed to drive it to fruition. The strength differences may be subtle, however the goal or target would again be to deliver the SAME INK FILM, the SAME INK RESIDENCE TIME in/on PRESS to create a lithographic utopic situation. This project would require capital, dedication, great ink technology as well as fount to try to embark on. It would be a wonderful project for a well endowed entrepaneur to strive after. An institutiuon like the Rochester Institute of Technolgy would be a wonderful setting for pursuit of a project such as this. No one has invested in it or pursued it. Only the brainstorming and logical suggestion has been presented and has so far mostly hit a brick wall with 'why it cannot be done' or compression in understanding the benefits.

This world and country was not founded and nurtured by people who found reasons why something could not work. The pioneers found the passage and the way to get it done.

Now if you want to latch onto something like the Benny project, than more power to you. I am not saying absolutely sure that this nano technology will or will not work. But we might all be worm dung in my opinion if it were ever come to fruition. Just my thoughts.

Remember, we are much more than half way there!

Respectfully,

D Ink Man

The big thing will it save production cost? If it does how much? A percentage point or 2 is insignificant unless you are a very big player. If it can improve quality would you even be able to notice a difference unless it is standing next to a piece printed printed at 175lpi? Points to ponder.

 

[D Ink Man]

Improving production, no matter by what percentage would be a positive gain. Whoever can produce the best ART will be the recepient of the best rewards in the long run. You have to sell that ART however, by first producing it and being one step ahead of the competition. Human beings like quality, there is no denying that. And it all depends upon what you are printing, naturally.

And the post suggestion still keeps PEOPLE employed; just allows them a better, easier achievable operating window to produce.

If you operate on a cost/price first competition platform, rather than QUALITY, the complete chain of producers to end users suffer. Understand that. This country needs to get back to innovation and QUALITY. I stand firm on that declaration.

And any gain made in the interests of quality is the right direction to be headed. Especially in this day and age of POOR quality and poor servicing that exists in all sectors of business, not just the printing sector.

And that my colleagues are your D Ink Man tips for the day.

D

 

[Deleted member 16349]

The big thing will it save production cost? If it does how much? A percentage point or 2 is insignificant unless you are a very big player.

It might not be as small as you suggest. A reduction in cost will affect margins and it could be significant depending on how large your margins are. If your margins tend to be small, a reduction in costs directly affects margins more. A 2% reduction in cost might mean a 20% increase in margins if your margins are in the 10% range. Even higher percentage if your margins are much lower. Might even move one from a small loss to a small profit.

In a highly competitive climate, that might be the difference between success and failure.

One should not underestimate the value of reducing costs but of course one needs valid methods to do that.

You have a business. If your major costs were reduced 1 %, you could calculate how much that would affect your operation. That would be interesting.

In the Quality Movement of the past (not Lean) the idea was that improving quality in a proper way also resulted in lower costs. Today, people still think that it costs more to increase quality. Wrong thinking in my mind because it misleads the direction of thinking about the problems. In the Quality Movement, the aim was to design causes of variation out of the system instead of leaving the causes in and trying to address the symptoms of those causes, which is the normal approach used in the printing industry.

 

[D Ink Man]

Peace to our Planet and Goodwiil to all men.

D Ink Man