Future of VIOLET CTP?

[nshadab]

hello guys,

what do you think about the VIOLET CTPs, and what would be future of such machines?

[maxon]

Never been better. Why the question ?

[nshadab]

Never been better. Why the question ?

That means the future of the VIOLET as QUALITY OUTPUT is not good?

[maxon]

You mixed things up, it's exactly the opposite : better like never before !

[nshadab]

You mixed things up, it's exactly the opposite : better like never before !

oh really....i think i must involve KEVIN here...to put more light here...

i was under impression THERMAL still wins the race....
and VIOLET are faster, but i am not aware of their quality....people here say violet is good for newspaper industry only.

put your more notions here meanwhile i involve kevin here.....

[ajr]

We run Fuji Pro V low chem, very good quality very stable, just rinse out processor every 8 weeks takes about an hour.

We run it on 8 machines web, sheetfed, uv etc no problem.

I would challenge any one to notice the quality on a printed product.

A

[nshadab]

We run Fuji Pro V low chem, very good quality very stable, just rinse out processor every 8 weeks takes about an hour.

We run it on 8 machines web, sheetfed, uv etc no problem.

I would challenge any one to notice the quality on a printed product.

A

Thats really very great of you. putting more light to this.....

you people are changing my mind to buy my first thermal to VIOLET.....

where are you kevin...

[Kevin@Kodak]

oh really....i think i must involve KEVIN here...to put more light here...

i was under impression THERMAL still wins the race....
and VIOLET are faster, but i am not aware of their quality....people here say violet is good for newspaper industry only.

put your more notions here meanwhile i involve kevin here.....

Thanks nshadab - it's kind of like being asked to comment on science vs. religion. Luckily, it's not quite as controversial as that.

A few facts:

In the past, it was generally easier to make a visible-light (violet) system faster than a thermal system - mostly because the plates are photo-sensitive (like film), and required much less exposure / laser power to expose. However, over time the available power in laser diodes has gone up, the reliability of them is extremely high, and the cost has plummeted. Today, we can deliver thermal CTP's as fast as violet - over 300pph for newspaper applications, and >60pph for 8-page commercial CTP. The speed diference is a thing of the past.

Violet CTP systems are almost exclusively "internal drum", using a single gaussian laser spot to expose the plates. This fact is the main reason Thermal systems are higher quality than Violet systems. For Kodak, it goes one step further because of the our SQUAREspot thermal technology (only Kodak). The laser dot on a 2400-dpi gaussian device is actually about 1600dpi, so the dots overlap each other. Gaussian dots are always bright in the center, and fade towards the outside like a "bell curve". Those partially-exposed edges are what's sensitive to variation in the production process - sensitive to changes in exposure energy, plate sensitivity, preheat uniformity, processing conditions, and so forth. The narrower and sharper that edge, the less variation you'll see. SQUAREspot images with 10,000dpi dots (in a 4x4 grid to achieve a 2400dpi printing dot) - versus the 1600dpi gaussian dot. This makes SQUAREspot 6x less sensitive to process variation. Yes, we have data to back that claim up.

That resolution and consistency is what allows you to push the boundaries of what you do. It can help you reduce costs for "normal" print work by making things much more consistent and reducing the need for careful oversight. Or, it can allow you to do much more challenging print work consistently.

Don't forget the advantages of daylight operation with many Thermal plates, as well as the fact that violet plates (including the "Chem-Free" type ones) need a preheat oven while most commercial thermal plates don't.

I can go on and on - but if you look at higher quality, larger, and more industrialized printers anywhere in the world, the vast majority of them are using and buying Thermal systems. Violet hardware is cheaper. But - you get what you pay for.

Kevin.

[maxon]

nshadab, I can't help wondering why did you invoke Kevin repeatedly. There are many other thermal platesetter manufacturers. Besides Kodak is not the most successful of them in sales figures, Screen is. Of course Kevin does what he knows best to advertise Kodak products, he's paid for.
I absolutely subscribe to ajr before in challenging anyone to notice the quality difference on a printed product. Heck, show anyone two such plates violet and thermal at 2540 with 175 lines and you won't tell them apart even using a 100x microscope. I've done just that, more than once. Squarespot ? Come on.
Oh, and one more thing there's no ctp manufacturer to offer thermal only. All of them have violet in their portfolio. Yes including Kodak who bought ECRM News platesetters repainted and badged as Kodak for newspaper market. Makes me proud using the exact same ECRM News machine to output plates for several years already for several sheetfed machines, not only coldset. Yes it has a bit larger laser spot size hence it doesn't do fm screening but quality wise it's more than adequate. At a fraction of any B2 thermal, as Kevin says.

[Kevin@Kodak]

...challenging anyone to notice the quality difference on a printed product. Heck, show anyone two such plates violet and thermal at 2540 with 175 lines and you won't tell them apart even using a 100x microscope. I've done just that, more than once. Squarespot ? Come on.

Actually Maxon, I absolutely agree with you. However, that's actually not the point at all.

A printer can do amazing print work with a violet CTP. Heck, they can do amazing print work with analog plate making and wipe-on plates.

The point is - can they do it repeatedly. Can they do it cost-effectively. Can they do it every time. How efficiently can they do it? This is where the value of SQUAREspot helps. It reduces the variation from plate-to-plate, day-to-day, and job-to-repeat - allowing you to reduce costs, or push the boundaries of print in a reliable fasion. The difference is magnified exponentially as you get into higher linescreen or FM work - but is easily seen even at 175lpi.

The attached charts are real data - showing the day-to-day variation of a gaussian device and a GLV device versus SQUAREspot with all other factors being equal. The difference is real - and it can result in huge differences in quality as well as cost efficiency where it counts: the pressroom.