Apogee Tiapan v3.1 to ctp?

dotgain

Member
Hello Everyone,

New to this Forum, thanks for reading this!

We are a small commercial printer currently running Agfa Apogee Tiapan v3.1 with inrip trapping to a SelectSet7000 and we want to upgrade to CTP.

What we want to do is keep our existing front end which has been working fine and just replace the SelectSet with a ctp device. My understanding is that I need to determine whether I can get a one bit tiff from our rip and then we need a “shooter” box to image on the ctp. Being a small shop we want to keep costs down.

I have heard good things about Screen products, PlateRite 4300/Accento/Fuji and also looking into possibly a Suprasetter A74 (however laser upgrade is not available). Looking to run chem free plates.

Any help as to whether this is possible would be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
I thought this would of been a good one? Does anyone have experience with using a Apogee Tiapan to image plates?
 
Hi dotgain,
You need TIFFIt feature for Taipan - so you need your Dongle to be upgraded.
Or you need a kind of WorkFlow (like AGFA ApogeeX) for tiff management.
If you have UPAC not PAC board in PC with Taipan - it's possible to connect AGFA CTP directly to RIP via APIS cable, but not through Taipan - you need the next generation: AGFA Apogee PDF RIP.
So :( some money investment can not be avoided.
All I said is IMHO
 
Last edited:
Hi Agfa-Vlad,
Thank you for the information. Do you know what the cost would be to upgrade to ApogeeX?

Are there any known issues running ApogeeX as a frontend and outputting to say a PlateRite 4300?

My Heidelberg rep. is saying that I need to be concerned regarding troubleshooting saying that the ctp tech may say a problem is software related or software guy may say it is the ctp device? Thinking he is just trying to instill some fear in me so that I buy a full system from them.

Any help is appreciated.:)
 
dotgain...

I believe you'll find the features and specifications of the device you are looking at to be
similar to that of Agfa's Acento II; of course, the majority of Acentos are driven by Apogee X.

Regards,
 
If I get the Tiffit/dongle upgrade do I still require a “shooter” box to the ctp device?
Will I be safe with any ctp device aslong as I have a one bit tiff?

We have been happy ABS and would like to explore FM screening down the road. I also have concerns switching to some other screening as we do a fair bit of repeat work.
 
Dotgain -

1-bit information is how (all?) these marking engines work.
Given some sort of bit bucket in front of the device, 1-bit
should drive the engine, regardless of flavor.

Check with your local Agfa rep. or agent about specific
upgrade opportunities from your Taipan RIP.

Regards,
 
Thanks SteveAgfa… I've been in touch with Agfa and waiting on their proposal.
Sounds like it is doable… I just want to keep costs down as it seems more and more orders are going digital and keeping the presses running is not as easy as in the past.

Would be nice to see equipment cost decrease at the same rate as printing order revenue but still don't think the big boys get this!!

Best Regards.
 
dotgain,

Unless you are committed to one manufacturer for the foreseeable future, you should explore the open ended solutions that are available. Remember that at the core they all use the same process. There are options the are available for less than the 70k plus that Agfa is going to ask for and they are just as robust a feature rich as the Apogee. This will also allow you to pick your choice of ctp and be flexible in future purchases..
 
Thanks DonBlock… We found out yesterday through a dongle scan that our Apogee Taipan supports file out as a one or eight bit tiff. So now we are looking at Xitron Raster Blaster or Agfa Print Drive to shoot the tiff to ctp. So it sounds like we can keep our rip w/o upgrade.

Does anyone have experience with Team EPS? Looking at a Screen PT-R4000. I also have Agfa looking into an Accento II, Heidelberg is in with a new Suprasetter but is proposing a full system including workflow. Yet to see what Fuji is proposing (I have a meetin with them in 1/2 hr.) probably a new Dart w/workflow.
 
dotgain...


All those engines are good.

The question should be not on which configuration saves
you the most pennies, but rather what are you looking for in a
plate technology, based on your pressroom needs. You might find
that you'll save some cash on one proposal, but pay more in the long
run if the plate does not meet your needs or goals.

Have you articulated those pre-press and pressroom goals yet?
 
I have known the owner of Team EPS for about 15 yrs. They are in the thermal market as where we are in the violet market, so we cross paths but don't compete. If you are looking at thermal, they will take care of you. For the price difference as well as future portability, I would go with the Raster Blaster. It will drive almost anything and Xitron is very good about keeping it up to date with the current machines.
 
SteveAgfa… we are running about 300 plates a month so what happens is we may need to get 50-60 plates out and then maybe no plates for 2-3 days but may need to make 2 or 3 here and there. This is making me think chem-free as my understanding is it is dependent on processing. we are running 175 lpi abs but also have crystal raster which we'd like to do some testing with.

DonBlock… Will the Print Drive from Agfa tie me into Agfa only devices?

Thanks for all your help!
 
Good points Steve. At only 300 plates a month, don't expect your ROI to be a short one. And, if you are going to test Crystal Raster make sure your presses are in good shape and they are running optimally. With all of the dots being the same size, you will get a muddy print if your gain and printing processes is not controlled.

As far as Print Drive from Agfa, I'm not really sure. Since I left Agfa 12 yrs. ago and have moved to selling and supporting other branded equipment along with reconditioned Agfa machines we don't utilize the Agfa RIP's or Workflow. I do know that the Raster Blaster is used by all of the manufactures to interface with their ctp's.
 
Dotgain:

<snip>
This is making me think chem-free as my understanding is it is dependent on processing.
<snip>

I suspect you meant that it is "not" dependent on processing.

Many a debate has been waged over the practice and semantics of
chem-free and processless.

With a system like Agfa's Azura, the only chemical is a cleaner/gum solution,
that can sit idle for days. A recirculator will kick on in the unit to keep the
rollers from sticking. Azura is not light sensitive, and has a tremendous
exposure latitude. Chem-free such as Azura has few process variables.

Then, there's processless. Which really means that the press is used to clean-out
the plates, and the plates remain light sensitive and process dependent from out
of the box, while it's being exposed, after it's exposed, and even as it cleans-out
on press. Processless remains dependent on containment of process variables.

I'll let our users (see santa & beermonster) for previous comments.

Regards,
 
Thanks for correction… I did mean “not” dependent.

I don't like the idea of running processless plates on press just doesn't seem right. Are they light sensitive until they are run up on press? Thinking the Azura/Saphire plate is better way to go. I have been told however that the processless plates from Fuji image faster and use less power than the Azura/Saphire plate.

Should device be 16 or 32 diode. Is the only difference speed and the ability to image above 2540dpi?
 
dotgain:

Yes, Fuji's no-process plate is faster,
yet Agfa has shown at Drupa, and at
GraphExpo is launching it's second
generation Azura - Azura TS. It is
quite a bit faster for some of the
engines where it needed more
"melting" energy to properly
fuse the plate/image.

However, even if one plate was
still significantly faster, then that
would mean that you'd have to be
putting them in a box faster. (smile)
 

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