FM and Sword Plates... Anyone else having issues?

[longlimb]

Anyone else using the Sword P45 plates and running staccato?

Here is our issue. We recently upgraded from Brisque to Prinergy and in the deal, switched from Fuji PJ plates to the Sword P45 plates. We could run the Fuji plates all day long with no issues. We running about 99% FM.

Well since the switch the Kodak plates we've noticed a lot of inconsistencies about these plates. We can run a job today and a month later if we have a re-print of the same job, the color is way off. I have had to adjust the plates curves a number of times because the magenta would be through the roof or the cyan would all of a sudden be dropping out.

Then we started getting some kind of contamination on press. These weird worm looking patterns in the background screens (even happened when a Kodak tech was here, he had no idea what it was).

I know the press can be the issue, but it seems we had no problems with the Fuji plates (or they are just a lot more forgiving).

I have an ICPlate 2 reader and when I read my plate control strip, they can read 3-5% different from one day to the next or from morning to afternoon. Should I be getting readings this inconsistent?

Anyone else having problems with like these??

The plate manager thinks it's the synthetic gum that's used in the processor. He thinks it doesn't store the plates well and if a set of plates sit in the plate drawer for a week before printing the job, the gum has blinded the screens some.

HELP!! I feel like we are getting no help from Kodak. I find something and they say, nah that's not it.

 

[gordo]

What size dot are you using for Staccato - 10, 20.1, 20, 25 or 36?

 

[longlimb]

20 micron for coated and 25 for uncoated.

We dont run a lot of uncoated so we have been noticing this with the 20 micron.

 

[gordo]

OK, since the plate is qualified for 20, if you haven't already done so, you should go through the Kodak response center. If they cannot help you directly using the immediate resources they have, they will be able to escalate the issue to those who should be able to resolve your problem.

That's about the best I can do. gordo

 

[longlimb]

Thanks Gordo. But I have done all that. I have a plate specialist, sales rep, field tech's all telling me they are on top of it and still have no resolution.

Was mainly wondering if any fello prepress guys/gals have had any issues like these. I tend to trust other users more then sales team.

 

[mamarcus]

Longlimb I would like to discuss this in more detail offline, we are having the same problem but with a different Kodak plate.

Andy Marcus
706 776-7493 x8174

 

[rich apollo]

I ran Kodak Sword Excel plates for about a year. Eventually switched to the LH-Pj. The Sword plates required a LOT more energy to image. Made the plate appear to be a low-resolution product - never could run stochastic with the Sword; or even a hybrid screen. Was not a good fit for my platesetter at all. Depending on your platesetter, you might try slowing the drum speed. This will give you more energy at the plate surface, should open your exposure window, but will slow production.

 

[UncleSam]

Fuji vs Kodak plate again

Fuji vs Kodak plate again

Any reason why you switch to Sword plate from Fuji plate? I did a test on concentric screening on the Sword plate and the plate never can deliver the consistent result. It is really a piece of trash if you want to print something over 200 lpi or smaller than 20 micron. Fuji LH-PJ do much better job in this category.

 

[seejay]

Have you checked that you are now using the same flavour of stochastic screening. e.g. when upgrading from Brisque to Prinergy has the screening software changed?
this may account for the reason that you are now seeing 'worms' in the screens.

 

[gordo]

Whoa!
UncleSam writes: "It [Sword plate] is really a piece of trash if you want to print something over 200 lpi or smaller than 20 micron."

Don't blame the plate if it is being used for screening that it is neither designed nor qualified for.

seejay writes: "Have you checked that you are now using the same flavour of stochastic screening. e.g. when upgrading from Brisque to Prinergy has the screening software changed?"

This is possible but unlikely. Scitex never fully released their version of FM screening "Fulltone" When Creo purchased Scitex, Fulltone was retired and replaced by Staccato - "worms" and all.

longlimb originally wrote: "We can run a job today and a month later if we have a re-print of the same job, the color is way off. I have had to adjust the plates curves a number of times because the magenta would be through the roof or the cyan would all of a sudden be dropping out."

There are so many variables that could cause longlimb's issues - from plate imaging to pressroom that, IMHO, he needs to go throught the proper channels to identify and isolate the source of the problem - whether it's a plate issue, a processing issue, or a press issue.

This is why I recommend that printers always have a "golden" reference to use when making a change in their process or when things start to go sideways. A golden reference is simply a set of plates, a proof, and a press sheet - all fully documented - that represents a snapshot of when thing were working correctly. Then, when things go awry, the golden reference can be rerun and used forensically to figure out what has changed that could be causing the problem.

best, gordo

 

[UncleSam]

We tried everything

We tried everything

Gordo,

I'm saying in my experience and I think I was not alone. We tried many different ways and eliminate all other control issue. Call service to calibrate our Screen platesetting, clean the lasers, clean the processor, use new chemical....

EskoArtwork did many extensive test on their Concentric Screening on many different plates, and they also found out Sword Excel is not a good plate to hold small dots. Kodak Thermal Gold will do the job great, but not Sword Excel. I got mad with Kodak product is because they are not cheap product, expensive plate and expensive chemical, why can't they do a better job when Fuji can do it?

Many people got the Sword Excel plate have the same problems. Sometimes, we got to admit there is a better option out there compare to what Kodak offer when Fuji plate also designed up to 20 micron and it works!

Please see:
Kodak Sword Excel plate - opinions

 

[longlimb]

Thanks for all the input guys. Sorry I haven't responded. My email notifications must be off. Didn't know I had so many replies.

We switched to Kodak Sword plates because we worked out a deal with upgrading to Prinergy from the Brisque .I liked Prinergy better then what Fuji was trying to sell, Rampage. Even though I know there are a lot of Rampage lovers out there and if I knew what we were getting into with the Sword plates, I would have probably taken Rampage to keep the Fuji plates.

Anyway, I were running the Fuji PJ plate and staccato all day long. Had a Trendsetter 400 Q and never had any issues with inconsistency. So when we took the deal with Kodak, we got all new hardware and software (Magus 400 Q, Prinergy Server, Insite Server, etc) Well the Magnus has the same head as the Trendsetter we had so I'm pretty sure that's not the issue. We have checked all our pressroom chemicals with Kodak and they said everything is fine. We have had plate specialists, techs, sales reps, all in there looking over the processor, Magnus, press, and they can't find anything that is wrong.

The two things I think it is, is the processor replenish rate or the scrub brushes in the processor. Those are the only two inconsistencies in the whole line. Everything else has been checked. OR it's the plate. We have been chasing this invisible beast for 6 MONTHS!!

Did a press test again yesterday. My dot gains were off by up to 10%!! That's insane!!

I'm with you guys. If you have Fuji PJ plates and run staccato, stick with them!! No matter what deal you may get on Kodak plates.

 

[longlimb]

Hey Gordo. Are you a Kodak employee? Not being a smart ass. Just wondering. You seem to be sticking up for the Sword a lot. I like the plate when it's running. It doesn't stay put is all.

And that thread you have supplied a link to doesn't mentioning running staccato with the Sword plates.

 

[gordo]

Hi longlimb,

Until Dec 1, I am an employee of Kodak (it's never been a secret).
I didn't post a link to any thread - I think that was UncleSam.
I wasn't sticking up for the plate at all. The plate is qualified for 20 micron Staccato - not any finer screen.
I was sticking up for a logical process to resolving your problem.
In your last post you wrote: "Did a press test again yesterday. My dot gains were off by up to 10%!! That's insane!!" Well, IMHO using the dot gains you get on press to determine variations in your plate imaging is suspect to say the least.
So, When you say: "I like the plate when it's running. It doesn't stay put is all." I find that statement confusing. Perhaps you need to measure each plate as it comes out of the processor, using a proper plate reader. Then chart the values and variations over the course of a week or even a month. That will give you some indication as to if it's the plate imaging that is varying enough to go out of spec.
The idea is to try and isolate, measure and monitor each component of your print process to help determine where the problems is originating from.
Provide that data to the response center folks.
You should also, as I mentioned, always have a a "golden" reference. A golden reference is simply a set of plates, a proof, and a press sheet - all fully documented - that represents a snapshot of when thing were working correctly. It's a "stake in the ground." Then, when things go awry, the golden reference can be rerun and used forensically to figure out what has changed that could be causing the problem.
BTW, you also have access to the Kodak Graphic Users Association forum which gives you the ability to ask your questions to other printers with similar configurations to yours.

best, gordo

 

[longlimb]

Sorry Gordo. I really didn't mean that to sound rude. Just curious.

I have been recording my plates as they come out the processor. Twice a day, everyday. My readings are up one day, and down the other. I just started doing this at the beginning of last week with an ICPlate 2 reader. I'm trying to isolate the problem and so far it's been pointing to the plates. We have 3 presses and they are all showing the same issues with inconsistency. We have a processor guru coming down tomorrow to check out the problem, Steve Scartuchi (sp).

I honestly think it could be the replenishment rate. That just seems like such a pain in the ass to set. (And our anti-ox pump was installed backwards so it was sucking developer into the regenerator jug).

But I really wanted to hear if anyone else was having this issue with the Sword plate and is sounds like they are.

Just curious, how is a plate qualified for staccato? Who qualifies it?

 

[gordo]

That's good that you are now measuring your plates out of the processor.

Very briefly, plate qualification follows along these lines:

Plate Qualification uses an established framework, with the following characteristics thoroughly benchmarked:
• Sensitivity assessment determines the imaging speed of a given media and device combination.
• Screening assessment verifies the maximum supportable screening. This is done by establishing exposure parameters that provide the best imaging latitude.
• Slip-sheet removal and handling sensitivity assessment determines slip-sheet removal compatibility and identifies the risk of emulsion marking during CTP automation and handling.
• Additional requirements assessment confirms whether there are any additional requirements for using the media.

There are basically three different levels of media qualification.

1. Feasibility:
• Definition - This level includes media that are unproven with Kodak thermal imaging.
• Proof of Concept – Basic compatibility for creating an image has been demonstrated. This verifies that the power, energy and wavelength requirements are compatible with Kodak thermal imaging technology to the extent that solid images can be created. A draft setup procedure is created.
• Testing and Refinement – A detailed investigation of exposure and processing latitude, handling characteristics for slip-sheet removal and scratch sensitivity are assessed. Maximum screening is established.

2. Beta:
The media images well in lab conditions, based on several batches of media. At least three beta sites are secured for a given configuration, defined by Kodak. Imaging performance and device compatibility is verified.

3. Qualified:
The product is supported, possibly with some restrictions, depending on the model. E.g. media may not run at top device speed (depending on sensitivity) or media may not be compatible with CTP automation.

3.1 (Limited Qualification) This status is applied to a qualified media if it is determined that there are additional requirements as a result of increased service issues (such as increased scratch sensitivity and so on). The qualification status is published by Kodak. E.g.:
KODAK SWORD EXCEL Thermal Plate - Kodak's Graphic Communications Group


best, gordo

 

[MC_JerryD]

Since we are on the subject of Stacatto screening and plates, I have a strange problem. We had a consultant help us with some press color issues and after running a 30% press test (30% of all 4 colors), he noticed a weird horizontal pattern on the print test when running 20 micron Stacatto. When running 200, the lines pattern is not there or might not be as visible. We are running Prinergy, using 2540 resolution, and outputting from a Lotem Quantum.

I let Kodak know of the problems I am having so they sent me plates from a different imagesetter (Trendsetter) at 2400 resolution and used Prinergy. When we ran the test plates from Kodak the pattern was still there.

We have placed the test on different presses in our plants and get the same patterns. Does this sound like a press or screening technology issue?

 

[gordo]

RE: "he [a consultant] noticed a weird horizontal pattern on the print test when running 20 micron Stacatto. When running 200, the lines pattern is not there or might not be as visible."
and
"We have placed the test on different presses in our plants and get the same patterns. Does this sound like a press or screening technology issue?"

I have no idea what the cause of your issue is. I doubt it's a screening issue since 20 micron Staccato is a very well established screening technology that is used around the world for all classes of printing on every kind of substrate. Horizontal (across the width of the sheet?) patterns (what is that?) does suggest press issues rather than screening or plate imaging problems.
I'm sure your press consultant will be able to track down the cause. If not, you might consider contacting our Professional Services Group through your sales person. They have the knowledge, experience, and tools to optimize your print manufacturing process - with whatever screening you prefer to use.

best, gordo

 

[longlimb]

Could it be tiling? Funny enough I just learned about this today. But it would be a horizontal and vertical pattern causing a cross-hatch pattern.

Anyways, update time: The Kodak Tech who arrived yesterday has found a number of issues with our processor setup and a minor adjustment to the imagesetter.

Since the adjustments I have been getting good readings off the plates. We are going to keep and eye on it and Kodak will be watching close as well.

Very pleased with the Tech. Smart guy.

 

[gordo]

Could it be tiling? Funny enough I just learned about this today. But it would be a horizontal and vertical pattern causing a cross-hatch pattern.
Anyways, update time: The Kodak Tech who arrived yesterday has found a number of issues with our processor setup and a minor adjustment to the imagesetter.
Since the adjustments I have been getting good readings off the plates. We are going to keep and eye on it and Kodak will be watching close as well.
Very pleased with the Tech. Smart guy.

Excellent!
Staccato screens like most halftone screens are built like a mosaic of tiles. Tiling, where the tiles themselves become visible, is rare artifact, but it does occur on occasion. It usually happens when ink transfer is not optimal. It is typically visible in flat screen tint areas - usually the black printer around the 30-60% tone range. It shows, as you noted, as a cross-hatch pattern with each tile about 1/8th of an inch across.
Tiling, as an artifact, was effectively eliminated with the new Staccato screen design implemented in Prinergy V4.

best, gordo