Standard Finishing
4Over

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kodak vs. Fuji plates

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kodak vs. Fuji plates

    Hello all. I am dealing with a manager that wants to take out the Fuji/Screen set up that we have and put in Creo/Kodak. Any pros or cons you can offer would be great. I am very pro Fuji as we have had very poor experiences with Kodak in the past, but am open for any feedback out there.

    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks!
    Aimee

  • #2
    Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

    We have been using Fuji plates/Fuji T9000 (DS Screen) platesetter for over 4 years with very few issues. We average an output of 2200 plates/month. The equipment is very robust and Fuji's service has always been exemplary. No problems with plates either. Even before CTP, we were using Fuji conventional FTP plates. Tests with other plate types did not give us any real impetus to change brands. Our evaluation of Creo's technology vs Fuji (Screen) in '03 showed us that the Creo Trendsetter was more $, output fewer plates/hr, and could not be outfitted with an autopunch for the press. We ended up buying a Nexus workflow hooked to a Fuji T9000 with autopunch, conveyor, Fuji processor and a Nita stacker, all in line. So far - no regrets!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

      We were a Kodak shop for 25+ years and as of March 1st switched over to Fuji. We had some major issues with service and their plates. Pressman were never happy with their sword plates and we had tons of issues. They had a problem delivering their plates flat and we had to end up getting skids of plates which was a PITA due to space issues. We have 3 different size 40" plates and we had to make room for 3 skids in our plate room area. That's just one small issue. So far pressman are happy they say they have to use less water on press, I also had a big issue with hot spots on their plates which their answer was to get a Magnus which in reality works around the hot spots but does not resolve them. I have not had a single hot spot yet and we've been running 24x7. Kodak is not what they used to be, and so far the service we are getting from Fuji is excellent, something like what we use to get from kodak a while back. anyhow didn't mean to vent but just wanted to share our experience... good luck...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

        Good Luck Aimee! You will be sorry!
        Agfa I would understand but Kodak? I am using Fuji Javelin with Fuji plates since April 2004 and I have never had any issues.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

          You will regret if you switch from Fuji to Kodak plates. Why your manager want to switch to Kodak plates? What kind of Fuji plate you are using now? If you go for Kodak, this will be your result: Much higher cost to maintain especially the processor and chemical, much less quality from the output compare to Fuji, bad services!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

            We are a Kodak Sword (G33, not ultragrain which has no durability) shop right now and I am in the process of researching going to Fuji or Agfa. I have worked with Kodak Sword for the last 7 years and can say that their technology is about par but nothing special. As others have eluded to Kodak plates will generally cost you more per sq. foot, the chemistry costs more and only lasts about 10,000 sq feet vs. Fuji and Agfa at 20,000 sq feet per change over. Kodak plates will use more water on press, our recent test has shown that Fuji LHPJ's can run with almost 20 points less dampening on our presses.

            In the no bake - medium run length segment, Fuji LHPJ and Agfa Energy Elite are far superior products. I have also worked with Creo Trendsetters, and Magnus Platesetters for the last 10+ years and can attest that they are very solid machines. However todays market demands more automation, and that gets expensive when you call on Kodak. Screen platesetters have much higher throughput and seem to be on the cutting edge of technology, I can't attest to reliability but I bet others can.

            Kodak really needs to pick up the pace or they may find themselves putting all their money into digital presses as no one will be buying their plates anymore.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

              Thank you all very much for your input. I too am thrilled with the quality and service that we haver received from Fuji. They are reliable, durable and consistent. I am also very happy with their technicians and the level of product that they keep on the floor for us. I just really wanted to see if the same issues we dealt with in the past with Kodak were still there and still things that you all might be dealing with. It seems from the responses received that they indeed are.

              Thank you all again!
              Aimee

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                I can understand comments about Fuji vs Kodak plates where experiences are very different. But about speed? throughput??? Get serious...
                People asking opinions here should be aware that most purchasing advices are coming from biased dealers. I can understand they are trying to promote the products they sell...but stop throwing out nonsense... it won't help anyone, nor increase your sales.
                Does anybody think that RRD, Quebecor World, Quad Graphics, Transcontinental, Cox and all the other major printers are plain stupid going with Kodak/Creo CTP's?
                Dealing in the past with Kodak? What Kodak ? This is a completely new company - it now means Creo, Versamark, NexPress, Scitex etc...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                  IMHO, the printers you mention all suffer from LSM. LSM? Large Shop Mentality.
                  Marketing and price seem to have a large effect on LSM shops. For example, I am aware that Kodak made several very sweet deals for the volume LSM shops.
                  Having said that, an LSM will always defend their decision on equipment and consumables and let's face it, they generally do not want to dabble in mix and match systems because they don't have the time, patience for that.
                  Secondly and historically, the Japanese are last to market but best to market. If these LSM's were early into ctp (and most were), the Japanese may not have been there for them at that early point so they chose what was best at the time in their opinion.
                  Times change. Most of the posters here agree and that is pobably the key point.
                  My 2c's
                  John W

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                    I am NOT a dealer and I don't sell any consumables or prepress/press equipment. Hey, I can give you my Dupont Waterproof system for FREE...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                      I'm not a reseller or sales too. I don't earn any money or commission. My goal is find the best solution and the best quality without paying a lot of money to do it. Believe me, I deal with those big printer a lot and they are the one who always left behind, who always think they are the best when they are still asking us to provide PDF X1A file which is 8 years old technology. I always have trouble with them to rip my customer files since all my customers using CS3 with all kind of amazing transparency effect. To compete in this very tight market, we always say Yes to the customer and find a way to make it happen!

                      Like Microsoft Windows is not the best OS out there but it is the most people use platform so as Kodak/Creo maybe widely used by all major printer, are they really the best product? I really doubted!

                      Luckily, there is always a better company out there and they always come up with a better product.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                        I am with you Uncle. I hate those PDF X1a or TiFF/IT files! Believe me that they are still people that only believe in matchprints!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                          Hi,

                          I am using Fuji LH-Pie with a screen 8600, artworks Odystar / Nexus on the front end. Very robust combination.

                          Previously used Creo Brisque 4.1 with a Lotem 400 then 800. Had a mass of technical issues. I would have been screwed only I knew the engineer well.

                          A.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                            Brisque/Lotem are ex-Scitex products, they were just branded Creo after the aquisition. All old Scitex machines used fiber optics heads with much lower image quality and speed compared to Creo- based machines. They were popular among small shops with low volume. Only Quantum version of Lotem had a Creo thermal laser inside but everything else was the same.
                            It's unfair to compare these to a new Screen machine.
                            Kodak has today a very wide range of machines, some of them competing to each other.
                            If you never had a Trendsetter it's hard to to choose against Screen.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kodak vs. Fuji plates

                              We have a Screen Plate Rite 4000 with full automation, with 2 Nexus 8.5 RIPS on the Front end. We burn about 150-200 plates a day. I used Kodak Swords for 5 years. Fuji kept knocking on the door and I wanted nothing to do with them. I'm the kind a person who gets set in my own ways and I don't like change. Well, my boss said we were going with Fuji last year and in they came. Well, the first things I noticed is my new Fuji plates (LH-PJ) burned clean. I had major problems with Kodak not burning the edges all the way. I set the calibration and checked it every day for a week with no changes. I still check it every other day 10 months later with no changes, all within 2 percent! You will never do that with Kodak. I chased the calibration (on Kodak) on every chemistry change for a week, then changed after 2 weeks...it never stopped. On top of it all I really thought the Screen Autoloader was junk. Constant miss feeds and service calls. (Static!) It all ended with Fuji. They use heavier slip sheets. Thats all Kodak had to do? Line screens are much cleaner with Fuji and your optics stay much cleaner. Take it from me, DON'T do it! You will spend more than what ever you are saving if you use Kodak. I don't mean to knock them but, the difference is night and day.

                              Comment

                              UltimateDuploSmartsoft (Presswise)Standard FinishingKBA4Over
                              UltimateDuploStandard FinishingKBAKBA GTIChili publish4Over

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 4724 users online. 104 members and 4620 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 6,151 at 11:36 AM on 11-17-2017.

                              Working...
                              X