How to create CIP3 in Prinergy Evo ?

[Bojan_Libra]

How to create CIP3 in Prinergy Evo ?

 

[SpNac]

You must have the Printlink license for the output format that you need.
If you have the license, then you can check the printlink operation in a output template for generate the PPF/CIP3. This option probably is more expensive but it is more integrated in the workflow.
If you haven´t the license there are systems that they can generate CIP3 from the information of the VPS files.

Regards,
Nacho

 

[Bran]

You must have the Printlink license for the output format that you need.
If you have the license, then you can check the printlink operation in a output template for generate the PPF/CIP3. This option probably is more expensive but it is more integrated in the workflow.
If you haven´t the license there are systems that they can generate CIP3 from the information of the VPS files.

Regards,
Nacho

Correct. Ink coverage information can be calculated from VPS too. You need a press interface to transfer this information to a console. There are companies offering the system. Visi Printflow s.r.o_Anglicky for more details.
Bran

 

[Ultimate]

InkReady, made in Canada, will output a CIP3 PPF and a printed report to set keys/fountains. Our solution for Windows also has hot folders to automate, dot gain correction and more. At only $1495, it pays for itself in no time.

Complete evaluation version is available for FREE. (time limited license)

Ray Duval
raymond @ imposition.com
Ultimate Technographics

 

[Bran]

InkReady, made in Canada, will output a CIP3 PPF and a printed report to set keys/fountains. Our solution for Windows also has hot folders to automate, dot gain correction and more. At only $1495, it pays for itself in no time.

Complete evaluation version is available for FREE. (time limited license)

Ray Duval
raymond @ imposition.com
Ultimate Technographics

That´s O.K. However most older presses do not have press interface ready to accept PPF format data. In order to preset ink fountains they need to invest either in a press interface from a press manufacturer or a company that produces alternative press interfaces to those from press manufacturers. Printflow is one alternative.

Bran Sulla
[email protected]
Printflow

 

[Deleted member 16349]

InkReady, made in Canada, will output a CIP3 PPF and a printed report to set keys/fountains. Our solution for Windows also has hot folders to automate, dot gain correction and more. At only $1495, it pays for itself in no time.

Complete evaluation version is available for FREE. (time limited license)

Ray Duval
raymond @ imposition.com
Ultimate Technographics

Dot gain is not directly related to ink volume.
Do you have a rational for saying dot gain correction is used?

Curious to understand your approach.

 

[Ultimate]

Correct, for older presses, InkReady prints a detailed report with a complete details to do the make ready. No needs to configure complex software, cables, cards, etc.

 

[Bran]

Correct, for older presses, InkReady prints a detailed report with a complete details to do the make ready. No needs to configure complex software, cables, cards, etc.

Yes but that´s just ink coverage information. This information (according to our experience) should be optimized for a press which ink fountains are to be preset as well as paper and ink so that it would help printers presetting as accurate as possible. A press interface allows printers almost an automatic ink preset which significantly saves makeready time.
Bran

 

[KamilT]

Yes but that´s just ink coverage information. This information (according to our experience) should be optimized for a press which ink fountains are to be preset as well as paper and ink so that it would help printers presetting as accurate as possible. A press interface allows printers almost an automatic ink preset which significantly saves makeready time.
Bran

We have clash of sales managers here .. . btw, "optimization" as PrintFlow does /or should we rather write InkZone? / is little bit coarse ... weak price/performance ratio for today's challenging times. Just my opinion (but based on real experiences).

Regards,
Kamil

 

[Deleted member 16349]

The test to see if a presetting system works well would be to start the press and see if it can go to the density target ranges without the operator or a closed loop control system make any ink adjustments . If the system is not able to do that, it is not capable and the people who designed the system do not understand the problem.

 

[gordo]

The test to see if a presetting system works well would be to start the press and see if it can go to the density target ranges without the operator or a closed loop control system make any ink adjustments . If the system is not able to do that, it is not capable and the people who designed the system do not understand the problem.

In my experience, the methods used in ink key presetting systems are based on the same principle used intuitively by press operators. I.e. eyeball the ink coverage in each ink zone and estimate the amount the keys need to be opened in order to deliver the needed amount of ink.

In that context ink key presetting systems are much faster and more accurate than the press operator. Some solutions can also "learn" by comparing what was predicted vs what was actually needed and modifying the algorithms accordingly.

And in that sense it is capable and it doesn't matter if the people who designed the system understand the problem or not.

The system may not be optimal, but it appears to be sufficiently better than eyeballing the plate. At least until a better method is developed.

best, gordo

 

[Deleted member 16349]

In my experience, the methods used in ink key presetting systems are based on the same principle used intuitively by press operators. I.e. eyeball the ink coverage in each ink zone and estimate the amount the keys need to be opened in order to deliver the needed amount of ink.

In that context ink key presetting systems are much faster and more accurate than the press operator. Some solutions can also "learn" by comparing what was predicted vs what was actually needed and modifying the algorithms accordingly.

And in that sense it is capable and it doesn't matter if the people who designed the system understand the problem or not.

The system may not be optimal, but it appears to be sufficiently better than eyeballing the plate. At least until a better method is developed.

best, gordo

I would ask you. Do you understand the problem? If you don't then you would not know what was wrong. You would also not know that self learning algorithms are not workable with this type of problem because for each new job, the problem to solve is different. The idea of iterative adjustments does not work even though it might appear to have some improvement. One could do a series of jobs as a test that would totally screw up any self learning algorithm.

The solution to the presetting of ink keys is not directly related to the image coverage area, so even if the computer accurately calculates the image area instead of the eyeball approach, it only means that the calculation is a more precise calculation of the wrong data.

I am not saying that an incorrect algorithm is useless. Even poor algorithms are better than what the operator can do. That is not the point. If one does not care about accuracy then I would agree with you that what exists is sufficient, but unfortunately I do think accuracy and better technical solutions are important.

I am a little surprised at your satisfaction in aiming low. The calculation for ink key presetting does not requires high precision but it does need to be accurate.

The presetting capability going from eyeballing the plate to measuring the image area has been in use for about 30 years. Presetting is not a new technology and one should expect that the knowledge would have advanced. Knowledge does not advance when people are satisfied with mediocre performance. When satisfied, there is never the need to be curious about what would work better.

So if one is happy to have a press where expensive closed loop is needed or where the operator needs to make adjustments that results in extra paper being printed instead of the job going directly to the target densities, it is hard to argue with that reality.

Gordon, let me add an additional comment.

I would guess that the engineers at Creo that you knew, would not be happy or satisfied if they thought an algorithm was not good enough. Users of an improved technology might not think that is an issue but for those who design the technology, knowing that it could be better will bother them. It is the knowing that it could have been better that will drive a designer crazy. It can be viewed as a lost opportunity instead of the success that the market might see it.

 

[SilvaJr]

Backing to the original question, Bojan, do you have Printlink License in your Prinergy? If yes, we can post some screenshots to show you how to setup Process Plans or Process Templates, which is pretty simple, by the way.

 

[gordo]

Ink key presets

Ink key presets

I'll be brief as this is off the OP's original question. To a few of your points:

The solution to the presetting of ink keys is not directly related to the image coverage area, so even if the computer accurately calculates the image area instead of the eyeball approach, it only means that the calculation is a more precise calculation of the wrong data.

I am a little surprised at your satisfaction in aiming low. The calculation for ink key presetting does not requires high precision but it does need to be accurate.

I would guess that the engineers at Creo that you knew, would not be happy or satisfied if they thought an algorithm was not good enough. Users of an improved technology might not think that is an issue but for those who design the technology, knowing that it could be better will bother them. It is the knowing that it could have been better that will drive a designer crazy. It can be viewed as a lost opportunity instead of the success that the market might see it.

It's not about being satisfied with aiming low. Ink presetting software performs better than eyeballing plates. This has been shown in tests and reported anecdotally. Until someone comes up with a better mousetrap - this one works better than the alternative. So, until someone comes up with a better mousetrap this is the best.

Engineers that I've worked with who work for a company are required to create a business analysis and plan which includes an ROI for any new product or service that will be proposed to management. In my experience products and services are not created just because there may be a market (customer or application) need or because the solution is "better" than other solutions. I've seen many proposed products not developed because the business case did not provide an ROI to the company sufficient to warrant pursuing the product's development. It's unfortunate but that's the way it is.

To their credit, Creo did have an initiative that attempted to deal with that barrier to innovation. Depending on their previous contributions to the company, a few engineers were given complete freedom, time (a year I believe) and resources to develop a product without a business analysis, plan and ROI. Some companies like XEROX with PARC, have a kind of "skunkworks" division to do the same thing.

Bottom line though, in the majority of businesses, it's the ROI that determines what products are going to be developed.

best, gordo

 

[souravpaul]

In our plant we have Kodak Prinergy Evo workflow in which we can generate ppf files.In our production section we have Goss M500 press with Omnicon Console.Now can I need any other software to convert these ppf files for ink presetting or this Omnicon console can convert this by itself for ink key presetting?
Please suggest.

 

[Raymond Ramirez]

Did you get this redolved?