chemistry free plates (research)

[zBret]

Is there any advantages of using chemistry free plates Kodax, Fuji or agfa?
what are the advantages?
will they have any effect on press rollers life?
do the plates scratch easy?
whats the effect on jobs that get reordered time and time again?
how many more make ready sheets will it take to to clean off plates?
do some papers take longer than others to clean up the plates?
Is there a big difference in pricing compared to processing plates?
if anyones has any input I would greatly appreciate it?
Let me know,
Thanks

 

[SteveAgfa]

zBret:

Apples and oranges.

Although Agfa's Azura plates share the same core ThermoFuse technology used in our on-press clean-out DI plates, Agfa's Azura application utilizes a simple gumming unit which removes the un-fused (background) emulsion off press, avoiding the on-press process of clean-out as featured in the Fuji & Kodak alternatives.

The Azura plates themselves have a uniquely and extremely wide exposure latitiude (60 MJ) of "correct" exposure - so day-to-day, or year-to-year exposure variables have little effect on reprints. This, and the regular and simple gumming step removes yet another variable. Too, Azura plates show little-to-no impact due to white light, so the plates can hang around in the pressroom for days - with no latent exposure risk.

Although I'd argue that Azura's high-contrast image is easily read by man (person) and dot-reader alike, users find there is little need to measure the dots after initial set-up, due to Azura's stable imaging and "process" latitude.

I'd suggest a simple search in these archives for numerous posts by Santa and BeerMonster who have been using Azura for several years by the former, and perhaps six months by the latter. No doubt others will likely chime-in as well. Santa too was one of our field test sites for Azura TS - our higher-speed, and even higher image contrast plate.

There's chemistry-free, and then there's on-press clean-out... these are two completely different approaches.

Regards,

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

To see Kodak's side on this topic please see the following link to the Kodak blog Grow Your Business:

Warning: Your Chemistry Free Plate Requires Chemistry

Grow Your Biz - A blog about end to end solutions that help you grow in the graphic communications industry.

 

[SteveAgfa]

Hi Internal...

This too is old news.
The blog was previously debated in the thread....

http://printplanet.com/forums/computer-plate/16238-azura-plate-chemistry-free

Regards.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

zBret

Presstek also has a line of thermal plates marketed as chemistry free. These use a water rinse step in the processor as apposed to washing/developing on press. There lines are Freedom Pro. Anthem Pro. and Aurora Pro.

I can't comment on which manufacturers system is better as we are not using any of these anywhere. Also I do have some concerns over the idea of developing on press and what that does to the water system.

Good luck in your research, I think it will take clear documentable savings without an downsides for the majority of printers to adopt these new plates especially with the current economic conditions. The focus on Green will be important to some but there are not many people (customers) pushing to get inline to pay more for something right now just for some potential green marketing benefits.

 

[Awaltd@kodak]

Hi zBret,

“Chemistry Free” is actually just a marketing term from AGFA – not a technology. Products can be split between “simple process” (like Agfa Azura) and “non processor” solutions (Kodak Thermal Direct and Fuji Pro-T).

Concerning the business benefits, the big difference between both is the processor and yes, the chemistry. Non-process plates like Thermal Direct get rid of both completely – along with the floor space, maintenance, cleaning, and chemical cost (cleanout solution for Azura). For Chemistry-Free, you still have a processor (albeit smaller), energy use, and still have consumables to pay for, clean, and dispose of.

Kodak Thermal Direct plates require no special handling and are resistant to scratching as any other digital plate. The non imaged area or background on a Thermal Direct plate is easily cleaned during the startup of the press. With the ultrathin coating on a Thermal Direct plate, there is no additional effect on the press rollers, never any press contamination, and is entirely cleaned after just a few makeready sheets regardless of the press stock – this is proven by our many customer sites around the world. Because the development on press is a physical process rather than a chemical one, development variation is eliminated – making job re-orders simple and consistent.

Non process plates may (or may not) be priced higher when comparing direct sq/m plate cost, but the savings can be huge from eliminating the equipment, chemistry, and variation in the process. Simple process plates only take a partial step in this regard, and only reduce – not eliminate – any of these costs. Depending on your plate volume the costs of simple process could be equal or greater than process plates. With non process plates these costs are flat out eliminated from the plate making process.

 

[Internal_R&D_Analyst]

Awaltd,

Forgive my ignorance so on Kodak Thermal Direct does the thin coating transfer from the plate to the blanket and then to the sheet as if it were ink on the plate?

For customers that are using this do any of them have a system like flowclear, and do these appear to help with the non process plate?

 

[SteveAgfa]

Awaltd:

<your snip>... Kodak Thermal Direct plates require no special handling ...<snip>

So, you no longer need to handle the plates in yellow light,
nor protect from ambient light prior to clean-out?

Do you now have a recommended procedure for dot reading?
(Aside from using windex to clean out a spot to read?)

True, as I said, chem-free and processless plates are indeed two different beasts, but I would have to question your suggestion that there is no special handling requirements with plates like Thermal Direct or Pro-T.

Let's see what users have to say - therein lies the reality beyond the "marketing term".

And oh... Derek - it would be a nice courtesy for you to introduce or at least identify yourself -
especially for your first post in such an open forum.

Regards,

 

[Awaltd@kodak]

Internal_R&D_Analyst,

A flowclear system or any filtration system benefits the overall printing process but has no direct impact on the Thermal Direct develop on press technology. The ultrathin coating does not mix or go into the fountain solution system. Develop-on-press contamination fears are mostly based on old Agfa Thermolite system, which needed such a filter due to the thermofuse particles getting into the roller trains.

For Thermal Direct, during the startup of the press the dampening rollers are engaged for typically only 4-6 revolutions. The fountain solution swells the non-crosslinked background areas loosening the adhesion bond to the substrate - but does not dissolve it. Next the ink rollers engage for approximately 2-4 revolutions. The ink tack pulls the background emulsion off the plate and onto the blanket, then onto the press sheet and out of the press.

The ultrathin coating is completely removed via the blanket with just a few makeready sheets. The plate is then quickly brought up to color and registration. For presses that have automatic startup its push the button and go. We simply don’t have customer issues with press contamination – proven by the thousand(s) of installs we have globally.

Lastly to introduce myself, I am Derek Awalt, the product marketing manager for non process plates for Kodak Graphic Communications Group.

 

[Vee]

I still wouldn't put that plate on a multi-million dollar press. Why, when I could put a clean plate on that press from one of many other plate suppliers. Just my .02...

 

[VladCanada]

Normally 6-8 paper sheets were enough to remove non-printable part of job, but I've seen some small particles on 15-th to 20-th prints but after - No problem... Dampening system had no contamination. I've been very impressed!
But as my former colleague Steve mentioned before - safety light in pressroom and impossibility to check the image on plate (especially to recognise the color mark) - there are little shortcomings.

 

[30YearsandCounting]

Question for awaltd:
First, thanks for the explanation on how the coating is removed. My question is how does the pressman know which plate he's putting on the press. Is the image obvious enough that you can tell which signature and what color it is before it goes on press? How do you QC the plate before it has the emulstion removed. I don't think think the time to check the plates is when they are already loaded up on a multi-million dollar press. Is that not an issue?

 

[KevinC@EFI]

Hi 30Years -

Attached is an un-manipulated photo (sorry for the dirt on the CCD... it's an old DSLR!), with a grayscale to compare to.

We fully admit it's not measurable with a densitometer. However, I'd counter that the Stability of both the plate reproduction, and the imaging (assuming you're using a Kodak engine of course!) make that immaterial other than the initial one-time setup on press. We find that many of our processed-plate customers don't even own a densitometer these days either, and the ones that do rarely ever use it to meausre plates - because they don't need to.

The contrast, while low, is certainly sufficient to see which job and separation the plate is, to get it on the right cylindar.

Kevin.

 

[30YearsandCounting]

Well we must be the exception I guess. We do own a densitometer and use it a minimum of 2 times per shift. In addition we do a visual check of the wedge on every plate. We very seldom need to make adjustments but this is a requirement of our ISO procedures. Even go so far as signing off and recording that this has been done on a daily basis. From an ISO point of view... how would you QC these plates?

 

[VladCanada]

Kevin, is it quite visible in yellow safelight?
A few pressmen told me they had some difficulties to read plates, probably it depends on personal eye conditions.

 

[Santa]

Internal_R&D_Analyst,

revolutions. The ink tack pulls the background emulsion off the plate and onto the blanket, then onto the press sheet and out of the press.

The ultrathin coating is completely removed via the blanket with just a few makeready sheets.




What happens when I run different sheet sizes than my plates, i.e 17.5 x 23, 19 x 25, or 20 x 26.

My plate sizes are 28 3/4 x 23 5/8, where does the rest of the emulsion go?


And just for full disclosure, I do not work for anyone put my family printing company H&S Graphics, and have been a happy Azura and Azura TS user for over 4 years.

John A Santangelo
H&S Graphics
Lodi, NJ

 

[SteveAgfa]

John:

Have you noticed any difference between the Azura you've
been running for 3.5 years, and the Azura TS you've been
using for the past six months?

Regards,

 

[zBret]

Internal_R&D_Analyst,

revolutions. The ink tack pulls the background emulsion off the plate and onto the blanket, then onto the press sheet and out of the press.

The ultrathin coating is completely removed via the blanket with just a few makeready sheets.




What happens when I run different sheet sizes than my plates, i.e 17.5 x 23, 19 x 25, or 20 x 26.

My plate sizes are 28 3/4 x 23 5/8, where does the rest of the emulsion go?


And just for full disclosure, I do not work for anyone put my family printing company H&S Graphics, and have been a happy Azura and Azura TS user for over 4 years.

John A Santangelo
H&S Graphics
Lodi, NJ

John you bring up a great point on different sheet sizes, (emulsion?)I wish we had more user of the plates giving answers on this post, but I do find some very interesting post here from plate suppliers, I tested the fuji plates a few weeks, Im testing kodak plates tuesday and will run these the next couple of weeks on 2 different presses, Im really not sure if I will make the switch over, contract is coming up and
I wanted to see and test different plates and see if the new pricing is really worth the change, Im sure the plates are going to more expensive so Ive been told anyways, the real question is what happens long term to the press rollers does anyone know, I have not seen any comments on this yet.
zbret

 

[SteveAgfa]

zBret:

This debate has brought us back to the basic philosophical difference between the approach of on-press clean-out plates such as Kodak & Fuji, and off-press clean-out plates such as Agfa Azura: Do you want to use your press as a clean-out device, or use a simple dedicated clean-unit designed for this task?

All three plates can indeed be cleaned-out on press - there is no special "developer" in Agfa's clean-out gum.
But, Santa and Beer have both brought-up their concern about residual emulsion due to smaller sheet sizes.

I suspect you'll find Kodak's plate to be similar in application and performance to that of Fuji. If you do indeed have the opportunity to try Agfa's Azura, you'll see that your stated concerns are not an issue.

Regards,

 

[Vee]

Heidelberg's Saphira Chemfree thermal plate is handled the same way as the Agfa plate, with respect to the process of expose / gum / print.