Best Thermal Platesetter?

[jsnkiefer]

Our company uses a Rampage/Preps workflow, Epson 9600 & 9800 inkjet proofers, a Fuji
Sumo film recorder (for backup) and a Screen 6600S thermal platesetter with 3 drawer multi-loader and in-line punching (primary).

Within the next year we will either relace the Sumo with another thermal device OR replace our current CTP and keep the Sumo as a backup.

Unfortunately the Screen has not been reliable for us (as it has for so many) so we are looking at different manufacturers. I'm aware that the Agfa is just a re-badged Screen
and have picked up some info @ GRAPHEXPO on Heidelberg Suprasetter, Kodak Magnus,
and Presstek Compass.

Would anyone like to share their informed opinion on the Heide vs Kodak vs Presstek?
Any replies are greatly appreciated. Thanks, all.

 

[gordo]

When you say: " Best Thermal Platesetter?" what would qualify it as best in your opinion?
What specific features or specs are you looking for? Throughput, resolution, thermal correction, laser focussing, footprint, internal punch, etc., etc.

 

[jsnkiefer]

Sorry, gordo, I guess I could have been more specific.

How about reliability and % of uptime?

 

[gordo]

Sorry, gordo, I guess I could have been more specific.
How about reliability and % of uptime?

Unfortunately there is no independent organization that tests CtP vendor offering for reliability and up time. And people will have a good experience and some bad with any vendor offering. So user experience may not be a useful indicator of reliability.

So, maybe take a different tack.

It would be interesting to ask what service calls to the CtP vendor are most frequent? (e.g. plate jamming, hot spots/focus issues, etc.) to see if there is any pattern of issues or weaknesses with specific devices.

Another tack might be to make reliability part of your purchase contract.

After all, as they say everything, is negotiable.

Why not share the cost of the service contract with the vendor?

For example, something like:
The first year the service contract is at zero cost. Since the vendor's product is reliable this will not cost them anything, nor will it cost you - and you get peace of mind for the first year.
Year Two, you pay 25% of the service contract. This reflects the wear and tear of the first year of reliable operation.
Year Three, you pay 50% of the service contract.
Year Four, you 75% of the service contract.
Year Five, you pay 100% of the service contract.

A number of years ago I actually purchased a film setter that way. One vendor agreed to the arrangement the other did not. Guess which one I bought from?

Of course the vendors could always make you a counter proposal. You've got nothing to lose by asking.

best, gordon p

 

[jsnkiefer]

Excellent points and suggestions. Thank you, gordo.

Are their technologies that much different (Heide/Kodak/Presstek)?

 

[gordo]

Are their technologies that much different (Heide/Kodak/Presstek)?

Well, Presstek sells rebadged Kodak CtP - so, if you are not considering Screen, then you'll end up comparing Heidelberg vs Kodak.

The technologies are indeed different. For one example: The Suprasetter imaging head uses high depth of focus to compensate for unevenness in the plates while Kodak would use dynamic auto-focus. So from that point of view the Suprasetter imaging system would be less complex and hence potentially more reliable. Kodak might argue that using depth of field means that the laser is not really in focus at any point during plate exposure, that in turn could result in hot spots or an inability to reliably run finer than 175 lpi screens or use FM screening.

I think reliability is a certainly criteria you should take into account, however, I think that it would be wise to broaden your scope of requirements. Reliability of the device should not be the only criteria. For example, if you decide on Kodak CtP then maybe Presstek might be the better choice to buy from e.g. they may be more open to negotiation, or their service support might be more responsive in your location. On the other hand Heidelberg CtP might be the better choice if you have HD presses and want to go the single vendor single point the finger of blame direction.

It's complicated. :-(

But I'd start with the business objectives first, then look at what features and technologies are offered in the solution that will help you meet those objectives.

Some technical CtP tips here: Quality In Print: Search results for aspects of ctp
Some decision making tips here: Quality In Print: Effective purchase decision-making and here: Quality In Print: Believing is seeing - improving the decision-making process

best, gordon p

 

[marktonk]

Hi Gents,

Thanks Gordo, a little clarification. A narrow depth of focus can lead to hot spots with just a small piece of dust on the drum or plates that have burrs from bad cuts/manufacturing (I think you will remember that time slice). We had a narrow depth of focus on the Topsetter and therefore designed the Suprasetter laser with a large depth of focus to address this problem.

Our laser is rated up to 400 line screen and can image 20 micron stochastic with 10 being optional. I think you will agree that this is a high end laser. We do not offer a low quality laser.

Another benefit is our laser is only on when imaging plates. I have a screen capture from one of our demo Suprasetter where the CtP was on for 9152.2 hours yet the laser was only on when imaging plates for 733.11 hours. We also require less electricity. Some thermal lasers are on when you turn the CtP on and is only turned off when the CtP is shut off....yes, the laser is on even if you are not imaging. That is like the Double YAG laser we had in the Linotype Hell Gutenberg vintage drupa 1995. By the way, our laser system does not have one moving part.

And if you have seen the size, it is a small laser, about 4.5 " x 2.5" x 2.25" (I carry one in my brief case so I just pulled it out and measured it). This also leads to a smaller optical path and when you are talking thermal, more efficient. I could go on and on about the laser and then the Suprasetter it self but I will leave this with an Andrew Tribute quote from an article he wrote for the last Drupa:

"Heidelberg’s Suprasetter, the CtP engine with probably the most advanced thermal imaging technology has substantially increased its market position and it introduced a number of new larger and faster engines at drupa."

Best regards,

Mark

 

[gordo]

Thanks Mark - good on you for responding with useful information.

best, gordon p