UV printing vs. conventional printing

[kroe]

Is there a reason I would want to print anything "conventional" if I have access to UV interdeck dryer presses at my printer? Isn't UV printing superior?

[heatset]

Actually UV printing typically results in higher dotgains than conventional printing. As long as you are compensating for the additional dotgain in pre-press the results should be comparable. Most guys who are experienced running UV would never go back to conventional if they had a choice seeing as how they don't have to deal with all the problems associated with conventional inks.

[jlind]

Karen:
I think "superior" is maybe the wrong word. This assumes that the operator and materials are finely tuned to the substrate. Otherwise, UV has it's own set of problems. The inks can be under cured and over cured. They can smell funny and offend some people. UV is great for plastic printing, more worry free than conventional, but there is always the potential for something to go south. Finally, I would think that you, as a buyer, would pay more for the job. Pros and cons.
John Lind
Cranberry Township, PA
724-776-4718

[kroe]

Hi All,

I am buying printing on paper rather than plastic for the most part. Any one else out there have an opinion? Thanks in advance.

[rich apollo]

The only advantage to you would be the gloss of UV coating. UV printing would cost you a significant amount more than non-UV.

rich

[PRINT]

Hi Karen,

The major difference between UV & Conventional is as follows:

- With UV there is no substrate limitations i.e. paper, plastics etc.
- Definitely the quality is superb if the process is used properly particularly in Pre-press(higher dot gains), press(interdeck dryers control)

Along with above also consider Hybrid inks & technology if you planning to go for UV. Costs are bit higher than conventional but it is worth if can enter the right segments of the market.


Regards,

Print

[Avisciciulli]

From what I've seen on our UV web, the main disadvantage to UV is that you have a very small window for emulsion on press compared to conventional inks. It makes life a bit more difficult for the press operator. Let's face it, the most important fundamental operations in press operation is paper feeding and ink and water balance. Anybody can be mechanically gifted, but those are two core disciplines. And that ink and water is no small task.

Our experience has shown us, and maybe it's just our press, that it can take its toll on the blankets, rollers, and even plates and wear those items down faster than conventional. Even when the products are specified for UV use.

The main benefit of UV for us ( an in-house direct mail plant) is that it comes off press completely dry/cured so it can go right into finishing and get mailed the same day. Without UV, we'd probably be seeing an extra day of drying for our mailing products. With UV, we come right off press and directly into finishing.

That, and durability of the ink on the substrate (you're basically building a plastic coating on top of the paper) are the biggest product reasons I can think of. It's also got some environmental and press design gains vs. conventional methods.

It could be that your product doesn't really benefit you to be UV. A lot of the advantages are specific to the operations of the printer. Given that you're saying it's only paper substrates, then I'd guess your products don't provide you or the printer much reason to use the benefits of the UV if the cost is much higher. Plastic/synthetics would be a different story. Keep in mind, the UV press may cost them much more to operate than a traditional ink press, and that may be coincidentally the actual press, not just because of the UV ink used.

The other factor could be, and I only mention this because of where your profile says you work, maybe their UV production doesn't meet certain FDA approvals vs. conventional inks. It may not apply to what you're ordering, and I kind of doubt it would be the case, but who knows? If it does have something to do with the decision, it could just be that they simply aren't "approved", even though the process may be just fine for that use. I'm not sure how all that food stuff works.

Lastly, the decision to stay away from one vs. another could be based solely on profit margin. The conventional may have a higher margin for them. Who knows? That's one question you'll never know the answer to.

[fasteddy]

This is a very good question. In our shop, you could devide the jobs I run into 3 catagories: jobs that run much better in UV, jobs that run better using conventional inks, and those jobs that could run fine using either technology. I'm sure the decision whether to run UV or conventional will vary from printer to printer. Your Planner or CSR should help you decide which technology will best fit your objectives.

[kroe]

Thanks for the reply! Can you explain what you mean by the problems with conventional inks that pressmen may have?

[speedrcer1]

Conventional inks can also track through a web press. If you are running heavy coverage this could be a problem running conventional inks. UV (for the most part) is cured by the lamp and ready to be processed immediately.

You also want to avoid going back and forth from conventional and UV as the rollers need to be conditioned going back and forth. Very time consuming and opens up a world of potential print issues.

Edited by: Don Geiger on Jul 1, 2008 1:18 PM