Entering the CTP Market

NAP001

New member
Hi All!

I've never been part of a forum before, but I'm overwhelmed at the amount of information out there about ctp devices and workflows, so I
felt the urgent need to join and need some help!!

We have decided to purchase a ctp device and the necessary workflow (we are a small shop doing about 150 plates/month, but spend too
much time running around to pick up negs/ strip them up / burn and develop them and then back again if there are errors)

I also spend too much time impositioning jobs and manually trapping files.

I want to be able to impostion and trap and then use the same ripped file to output to an epson proofer and the ctp device.

We have two options and I need some input as to which route to go....

1. Brand new PlateRite4300S platesetter and Trueflow Rite from Fuji
or
2. Used 2000 CreoScitex Lotem 400VA Platesetter and Brisque 4 /ScenicSoft Preps v4 Software


I've been reading about Brisque and the "no support" that goes along with it, but I'm being told by others that this is a great workflow and will do everything I need and it's not worth spending the extra for a new system.

Will option one work for me and get me through the next 5 years?
or
Is it worth spending more now and not worrying about support etc....


Any advice will be greatly appreciated!
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Well, as the self-appointed Apostle Of Trueflow, you probably can guess where I will come out.
I had a Brisque from 1997 to 2004. Loved it. Love my TrueFlow even better.
The support issue is big. Can a Brisque handle spot colors and transparencies? I cannot answer that.
I do know that in 2004 (CS1 if I recall) we were starting to have issues with the above. Now that we are on CS3 I cannot imaginge that
Brisque can handle that. However, I could be wrong - I mean, I am the guy that took a job running an Agfa Apology 3, so I do not know if I would trust
me or not...;)
Then, blessed be the day that they took that piece of crap out the door and put in my beloved Screen

Edited by: Chris Prough on Mar 14, 2008 2:32 PM
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Brisque is EOL, you will get no support from Kodak. The Screen devices are probably the best ctp devices on the market. I have an 8800 and run appx
4000 40" plates through it a month and have yet to have a service call on the device. As far as feeding the platesetter, look at Rampage as it is totally open. They play nice with any output device out there and the support is second to none. Also support is only $1750 a year. Ask Kodak what their support is for Prinergy and you will have a heart attack.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

My only caveat to what you are saying is this. If you go rampage you are not going apples to apples. You will have to make a 1 bit tiff.
If you go Screen to Screen you avoid the 1 bit tiff.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Chris,

What is wrong with making a 1 bit tiff? I have never heard of anyone say this is a bad thing.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Rampage talks directly to the screen device. No one bit tiffs at all.
The only device that Rampage has to send a 1-bit tiff to is a Kodak/Creo device as they don't play nice with competitors.
Just to clarify No one bit tiffs. It talks to the device in its native language.

Edited by: macphenom on Mar 15, 2008 9:35 AM
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

In our experience, there is no difference in quality from direct connect to a CtP or sending a 1 bit tiff to a shooter. With direct connect, a bit map still has to be produced. We do offer MetaDimension with direct connect to some of our CtP systems and we also connectivity via 1 bit tiff to a Metashooter. We have found if a rip is direct connected to a CtP, it is usually govern by how many pph the CtP can output. By have a separate, offline MetaDimension Prep rip generating 1 bit tiffs, it is not governed by the CtP device. With this scenario, we have been able to generate up to 50 8 up flats per hour, The control of the CtP is handled by the Metashooter (our definition of shooter is different then Rampage, our shooter is an intelligent Tiff catcher that also control the CtP and automation but does not generate the screening). So for the highest degree of productivity, or driving more that one CtP, we would recommend a system generating an offline 1 bit tiff to a shooter via hot folder. If very high production is not needed, we can provide the direct connect. The MetaDimension direct connect can also be upgrade to be offline with a shooter if production needs increase.

By the way, 1 bit tiff has become one of the secure standard output format. Many large publishers require supplied files to be a 1 bit tiff because they are secure.

Regards,

Mark

Edited by: marktonk on Mar 15, 2008 1:11 PM
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

There is absolutely no reason to be corralled into a a workflow because of you choice of CTP. As stated, every CTP device can be setup to take a 1-bit TIFF from just about any workflow. Why pay for a software workflow that does not satisfy your production needs.
That said, I would encourage you to look into the EskoArtwork workflow solutions. Our products are all about relieving your current "pain points" in your production environment, and adding more ease of productivity on top of that. There are some really cool options.

Check it out at: http://www.esko-artwork.com

If you have any questions let me know. Good Luck - peter
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Find the workflow and front end that is going to meet your needs and budget, then shop for the output device. Just about any vendor is going to have an output device to meet your needs, but the workflow is what you will have to work with on a day to day basis.

Make a list of the products you want to demo and get as many demos in as possible, see if you can get into shops running those workflows and talk with their operators, find out what works and doesn't work for them.

We purchased our workflow about a year before we purchased our actual CTP unit.

Of your 2 choices I would take a hard look at the screen solution. Brisque is a dead product, no sense in investing money in that.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

I realize that Screen makes a 1 bit in the background. I also understand that 1 bit is accepted and there are no known problems.
My issue is one of integrity of the file.
Scenario that DID occur at our facility that cost us $10,000.
AGFA Apology - CMYK sent to 1 bit on Monday. Plated successfully. Wednesday, while on press at 9am we discover that it said 2006, not the year
20007. We fix in Quark, re-rip, and resend the black plate. Now, there are FIVE 1 bit tiffs on the platesetter. The person who sent the new black output the
correct black plate, we press check and run.
THEN, six hours later, a 2nd pressman comes in and finds a black plate 1 bit tiff. There are 200 files siting there and guess what? He outputs the wrong
black plate. We now look like idiots to the customer for having "caught" their error, fixed it, and then screwed it up all over again.
Riddle me this.
Why is it that 1 bit tiff catchers are not smart enough to know that I already have a black plate over there with the same name? Are they keeping it on
my tiff catcher just for fun?
Part 2 - Why would a front end unit (Heidelberg, Agfa, etc) allow a 1 bit tiff catcher to NOT overwrite the old file?
Old school time here - in 1990 if you had a piece of film that said 1990 on it instead of 1991, and it was caught at press, would you NOT throw that
piece of film in the trash? Why would you EVER need it again? You would not.
So, fast forward 18 years. My $3,000 Dell box that runs my platesetter has complete control over my Rip Once Output Many workflow. All of the hundreds of
thousands of dollars on front end equipment is worthless because of a 1 bit catcher that is stupid.
Just my two cents worth. I have been asking workflow retailers this same question for 4 years. Nothing has changed.....except that we got rid of ours and went to a
seamless 1 bit in the background.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Chris,

Surely, this problem is just lack of housekeeping at the catcher. We get numbering at the end of the files so the new black has an 01 while the original has an 00 so simply delete the 00 file and you protect the next operator from trouble. Just make it an SOP. Done!

John W
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

I agree. However, in a real world, tell me WHY I need to do this? Why can't the tiff catcher do it for me?
It all comes back to the integrity of the file - and the issue that started this thread.
What "dummy proofs" my platesetter? Trueflow (and I guess Rampage because it avoids a 1 bit).
All I have ever said is this. I think that the front end should match the back end.
Ever try and call for help when there is mis-matching? Front end blames back end and vice versa.
If you get the same moniker on the front end as the back they have nowhere to run.
BTW, I do knot know how your CTP works, but in our old scenario, the 1 bit tiff catcher was 45 feet away.
The person who sent the 1 bit to it had to get up and walk over and then find and delete that file?
WHY - WHY WHY would you EVER want an old outdated file on the tiff catcher?
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

We have to keep old files for exact reprints over and over to maintain integrity of the original ROOM workflow. But we change the dkt slug as a super onto the black plate (requiring a merge or double exposed plate). Our tif catcher is also 45 feet away from the originator but the plate guy knows to use the newest file (highest version file) &/or the rip operator deletes the old file directly over the network.
This has been life since the beginning of time whether it was film, artboards, ctf or ctp.
But I get your point just that there is no money in it for the vendor to rewrite the software and then have to patch up everyone (at least not in the opinion).
Ciao,
John W
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Heidelberg Prinect Metadimension also overwrites older 1bit tiffs... Never had the problem you mentioned
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

In our shop we NEVER use the one-bit tiff over again. If the Press needs a new plate. The plate is sent from Preps, screened, and sent to the platesetter. This takes care of the problem, so the newest file is always used.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

There are a number of small commercial printers who are using CTP and workflow solutions by ECRM. I would invite you to consider the advantages of ECRM's patented flatbed violet laser imaging technology. This bundled with WorkMates, an entry-level digital prepress workflow, has been a fantastic solution for printers with your production requirements to jump to a digital prepress. Our website can direct you to customer reference sites along with a value added reseller in your geography who bundle our product with one of the many violet plates on the market. (http://www.ecrm.com)
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

@ Chris,

As a former product marketing manager at Agfa, I believe the product was called "Apogee".

I have no idea what happened with your experience with Agfa, do not know if you had a bad install, got bad training (or no training) or what it is that disappointed you, but in all honestly Screen was about 3 years late to market with its Trueflow workflow, used all the same concepts and ideas put forward by Creo and Agfa, used all the same OEM partners (Adobe, Enfocus, etc..) and more or less - all vendors now incorporate the same approach - that is, either convert PostScript or existing PDF files to a display list, render it to a CT/LW intermediate file to screen later - or screen it directly and send it to a marking engine.

@ North Alliance Press Limited (NAP001)

There are advantages and disadvantages to both methods (Rampage/Brisque vs Creo(now Kodak) Agfa, Fuji, Screen - whatever).

But lets say that 20 years forward (just please, humor me here) that there will be no intermediate printing plates and inkjet will be used for all printing, and that it will be no harder to print on than 1,000 of the same page. If we can make that leap, arguing about what sort of intermediate file format (CT/LW, a set of 1 bit tiff files) is simply a waste of time - you will always be right and you will always be wrong when you decide on or the other.

Most of the major vendors interfaces have all copied the hot folder or 'pipeline' GUI first shown by Aldus Corporation in 1989.

So, what to do.

1. Is there some company doing similar sorts of work to you, visit them.
2. If you use a lot of consumables, the vendors will all but give the prepress system away in exchange for the software, so leverage that.
3. Hire a consultant to audit your current work type and get their recommendation

It is hard to tell what solution would work best for your type of work. Chris seems to do all sorts of things in Iowa there at [Alaniz|http://www.alanizdirect.com/products.htm] (from Seed packages to Stationary) - if you are like him, you can go with his Manrta and call him with questions. I tried to learn what [North Alliance|http://www.northalliance.com/] does but the web site does not help me much.

I was director of a prepress division for a Gravure and heatset offset printer back when Scitex, Crosfield and Hell were the top dogs - fell in love with PDF and think thats all you need to send to that RIP. So do many members of GWG.

Nobody cares about 1 bit TIFF files or CT/LW files anyway - they just want good pre-media service and of course, that means making your customers become partners so you are not farting around with 1 bit TIFF files and CT/LW files in the first place !

Good luck, but I will refrain from suggesting a workflow as I do not know if you print business cards of complex packaging.
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

As Michael Jahn's reply suggests, there really isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to workflow selection. The most important thing to bear in mind is that CTP is all about automation and automation is all about procedures & processes. Consequently, +before+ you start looking for a CTP/workflow solution, you really need to nail down what your process is now and what about it you'd like to change going forward. Whether you do that work yourself or whether you hire someone to help you do that is up to you, but doing that work will ensure that your transition to CTP is successful . . . and profitable.

Having been an installer, trainer, and support specialist for over a decade, I can tell you that the equipment you choose and the experience of your operators is secondary to understanding your own business model and production procedures. The only right answer is the one that fits your work and production objectives. I've had success training operators who had no computer experience and spent their days burning plates in a vacuum frame and I've endured the pain of trying to train people who were expert Mac operators who liked to fly by the seat of their pants and hated all forms of structure. CTP is just a tool: it's not a panacea. If you don't have control over your process before you go CTP, you won't have control of it afterward.

-----

That being said, my general suggestions (some of which echo others here) would be:
- You don't need to get your workflow & output engine from the same manufacturer.
- Since your workflow will be the heart of your system, start there.
- Include a key operator or two in the selection process (it will smooth transition).
- Since Brisque is EOL, I wouldn't recommend investing it in now.
- I like the Screen platesetters (and I think Agfa does, too <wink>).
- Be sure to talk the the tech/support staff who will have to implement and support your new system since they will be as eager as you to prevent any last minute surprises.
- Be sure to bundle any incidental items (plate readers, spectrophotometers, etc.) in with your lease so you get the most from your investment and don't have to find more money at the last minute to do so.
- Make the most of your training dollars . . . schedule a light production week and give your operators time to work with their trainers.


........
Best of luck,
Michael
 
Re: Entering the CTP Market

Michael,

Maybe I was a little hard on Apogee. I have heard it called Apology and, quite frankly, our experience was not good.
I do not pretend to know everything about workflow. I just simply like things to be the same on my screen as they are on the pdf as they are on the plate.
Simple request, correct?
As I put in my analogy, why don't we put this back into the 1990 paradigm? Fifty years of strippers gave us the procedures to keep film, relabel film, or throw it away?
My point is that with a 1-bit (that does not automatically throw away) then you have an "old" version of the file. Can we agree on that?
I understand that the nature of the business is for a 1-bit to be able to drive any platesetter from any company.
All I asked for was to try and get the redundancy out of the equation.
I guess (??) I am not trying to rail on Agfa, but on the industry (or whomever makes 1-bit catchers). It is absurd to me that the integrity of a $100-$300K system is
dependent upon a $3,000 Dell box that "keeps" old, incorrect files.
If there were some fix that would "re-write" the 1-bit and make it where there was not an old file, then that would be a different discussion.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on PDFs. The more, the better...albeit with one huge caveat. The customer has to come on board and learn to create them.
 

PressWise

A 30-day Fix for Managed Chaos

As any print professional knows, printing can be managed chaos. Software that solves multiple problems and provides measurable and monetizable value has a direct impact on the bottom-line.

“We reduced order entry costs by about 40%.” Significant savings in a shop that turns about 500 jobs a month.


Learn how…….

   
Back
Top