Flexo ctp

[OSS]

Going to invest flexo ctp , could some expert can share ur experience and views abt esko cDi, KodakNx, Xeikon.

Regards
OSS

 

[Armya Inc]

Going to invest flexo ctp , could some expert can share ur experience and views abt esko cDi, KodakNx, Xeikon.

Regards
OSS

Go for Esko CDI. Quality machine . ESKO Artworks is a great company to work with. The sales Reps and service people at Esko are your business partner and will help you to grow. The Laser is easy to Align and they made everything simple.

 

[OSS]

I need some comparision points - Esko CDI / Xeikon & Kodak Nx

 

[Dersu]

I need some comparision points - Esko CDI / Xeikon & Kodak Nx

If you really want to compare, get some benchmark plates > print and check. Otherwise you will hear lots of speculative comments.
We are using four Esko CDI 5080. Two of them HD certified&Pixel+ installed. Just remember, all kinds of CtP hardware needs rip or workflow solution. Esko has strong software solutions for flexo. NX still driven by prinergy afaik...

 

[Stephen Marsh]

If you really want to compare, get some benchmark plates > print and check. Otherwise you will hear lots of speculative comments.

I agree 100%.

Have benchmark or trial plates supplied, work with the vendors, follow their advice to optimise print quality with their plates, don’t think that all plates are the same and that all plates should be printed the same.

For prepress, take note of the RIP time, exposure time, processing time etc. For press, take note of the makeready time saved, the substrate saving, the stability through the run, the ink saving of one plate to the other etc.

Modern flexo is not just about a plate, it is about an entire system that is used to produce a plate. Examine each step in each competing system, look for the pros/cons in each and take this into account in evaluating the entire process.

NX still driven by prinergy afaik…

AFAIK this has never been the case.

We have customers that are producing the 1 bit plate data in their Esko system, then they send it through to the Kodak TIFF Assembler front end for output to the NX setter, where they may or may not apply DigiCap screening to the plate data. We have other customers that use Prinergy to produce the 1 bit data before sending the data through to the TIFF Assembler.


Stephen Marsh

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Going to invest flexo ctp , could some expert can share ur experience and views abt esko cDi, KodakNx, Xeikon.

Regards
OSS

Just for clarity. Can you confirm that this is for flexo and not dry offset.

 

[OSS]

Flexo only. what abt Xeikon ?? Any advantage or drawback from Xeikon side

 

[Ritchiec]

ESKO in my opinion is too expensive. Once in you never will stop spending money on Software. They seem to change/upgrade software like underwear.

Consider a Screen FX. Runs 2400/2540/4800 dpi at 4 squares per hour standard whatever size plate. No change in speed with a partial plate. And you can retrofit the machine to make litho plates in limited quantities.

We are getting better results with a normal round dot at 4800 dpi then we ever did with HD screening on an ESKO. And we have more room to play.

If you need plugins for Illustrator why not look at PaSharp from founders. Pretty close to what ESKO offers with less investment. But all your choices should be made keeping company size and mind. Many operators and high plate output you may be better off with a workflow.

Between ESKO automation and Prinergy, I prefer Prinergy as it is far less complex than ESKO automation. You end up using 30% of ESKO package which is a waste. Again it depends on size of department. In some cases ESKO is the right package but in our country its over kill.

NX if I am not mistaken holds you to one supplier of consumables, perhaps restricting your options. Screen and ESKO can run any plate.

Hope this helps. Colin

 

[Kiltie]

You should also look at the Luscher flexo options. With internal drum on the Xpose! or flatbed on the MultiDX! The material the be exposed remains stationary while the optics move, simple but very effective. Resolution of 2400 or 4800 and up to 8000dpi. When imaging step and repeat the XSkip! option jumps across blank areas to greatly increase productivity. For even greater flexibility they have hybrid machines where you can have UV or Thermal for conventional / litho plate production at 2400dpi in combination with 4800dpi Flexo. An easy soft reboot between modes takes a few seconds. Incredibly easy to operate and fantastic quality. Have a look at their webside at luescher dot com.

 

[FlexoGrunt]

It was easy to say ESKO or KODAK a few years ago but I think the competition has really picked up the pace in this sector. If I were looking today I would say it really depends on what you are printing and how you are printing it.

Someone printing unsupported film @ 133-150lpi is going to have different needs than someone printing labels @ 220lpi.

Make sure you map out your current state as well as where you see yourself in 5-10-15 years. You can then buy the format to upgrade down the road

 

[kaiserwilhelm]

We bought a Screen 1200 about 8 months ago. VERY happy. MUCH cheaper than Esko. As stated above, we get 4800 dpi without having to play the "buy different optics" game.
We live in an Indesign world. As such, Trueflow (or Equios) from Screen was perfect. We do not have to come out of Indesign and then into Illustrator. In fact, the fact that Esko has told us that an Indesign plugin is "vaporware" was the final nail in the coffin.

Truth in advertising - I do NOT work for Screen. However, I have used Trueflow in the conventional world for a decade. About 300,000 plates under my belt on my Screen conventional platemaker. I would put total downtime in that 10 years at less than 15 working days. That includes PMs btw

 

[Chief_1975]

If you really want to compare, get some benchmark plates > print and check. Otherwise you will hear lots of speculative comments.
We are using four Esko CDI 5080. Two of them HD certified&Pixel+ installed. Just remember, all kinds of CtP hardware needs rip or workflow solution. Esko has strong software solutions for flexo. NX still driven by prinergy afaik...

Do you believe Pixel+ really make that much difference if you already have HD flat top dot capability ?

 

[Armya Inc]

We bought a Screen 1200 about 8 months ago. VERY happy. MUCH cheaper than Esko. As stated above, we get 4800 dpi without having to play the "buy different optics" game.
We live in an Indesign world. As such, Trueflow (or Equios) from Screen was perfect. We do not have to come out of Indesign and then into Illustrator. In fact, the fact that Esko has told us that an Indesign plugin is "vaporware" was the final nail in the coffin.

Truth in advertising - I do NOT work for Screen. However, I have used Trueflow in the conventional world for a decade. About 300,000 plates under my belt on my Screen conventional platemaker. I would put total downtime in that 10 years at less than 15 working days. That includes PMs btw

On top of this you will get strong and exceptional support from Esko Artworks Global support. Go for it!!!!

 

[Dersu]

Do you believe Pixel+ really make that much difference if you already have HD flat top dot capability ?

Pixel+ option optimize the laser power output by using different pulse amplitude. In fact, HD flat top dot and pixel+ option are two different things. You can create flat top dot plates by using different techniques. But if you want to use finer micro cells for density, you need to have pixel+ (for Esko workflow ofc.) We done more than hundred benchmark prints for different printers and print conditions. Pixel+ option boosts density significantly. Sometimes more than %40 density increase, which is way to high for some printers. Good thing about pixel+ is, you have lots of options and micro cell structures to create printer specific targets.

 

[Bill W]

Pixel+ option boosts density significantly. Sometimes more than %40 density increase . . .

Greetings,

Could you please be more specific of the print package(s) that showed increased density. Semi gloss, BOPP, water base ink, UV ink, solvent ink???

 

[Chief_1975]

Pixel+ option optimize the laser power output by using different pulse amplitude. In fact, HD flat top dot and pixel+ option are two different things. You can create flat top dot plates by using different techniques. But if you want to use finer micro cells for density, you need to have pixel+ (for Esko workflow ofc.) We done more than hundred benchmark prints for different printers and print conditions. Pixel+ option boosts density significantly. Sometimes more than %40 density increase, which is way to high for some printers. Good thing about pixel+ is, you have lots of options and micro cell structures to create printer specific targets.

Am I right that Pixel+ is the same as Microcell but for finer screen ruling, microcell I believe is for corrugated ?

 

[Dersu]

Greetings,

Could you please be more specific of the print package(s) that showed increased density. Semi gloss, BOPP, water base ink, UV ink, solvent ink???

Semi Gloss, bopp, water base & solvent inks. Our test runs for uv inks does not show enough density increase.

 

[Dersu]

Am I right that Pixel+ is the same as Microcell but for finer screen ruling, microcell I believe is for corrugated ?

You're right, with pixel+ option we can create much finer microcell screenings. For an example; MC16 microcell screening creates 16pixel size microcells, with pixel+ you can create 1pixel size microcell screening. It's not for corrugated. For corrugated (especially post print) you don't need microcells. But flat top dots helps to eliminate flute effect, even with B flute..

In addition we couldn't detect any benefit using finer microcells for paper.