Let the debate begin.
I understand both are part, but which is the most significant to the process?
Let's say as compared to Letterpress, Gravure, Flexography, Intaglio, Digital Ink Jet and for giggles we'll include the great fantasy of Nanography.
MECHANICAL or CHEMICAL? Let's break this down. Thank you in advance for all your inputs.
I feel there is no absolute right or wrong answer here.
Please opinionate.
D Ink Man
IMO, it is mostly mechanical. Even the so called chemical aspect is governed by physical chemical properties and not chemical reactions. At least to the point of putting the ink on the paper. The drying part of the process will surely have chemical reactions.
If one looks at waterless offset, where there is no water used, there are basically the same issues of consistency but they are not as severe. The physical chemistry of the ink and the silicone surface of the non image area of the plate are very important but I would not say that it is a chemical process because there are no chemical reactions but there are physical conditions. It is well known in waterless printing that if there is a variation in temperature control of the ink fountain roller, that will cause density variation. That is a mechanical problem.
I can accept that people will call physical chemical issues as being in the field of chemistry and of course it is at fundamental levels. But dealing with forces resulting in physical chemical conditions can also be viewed as mechanical. I tend to view physical chemical properties as being mechanical. It is just my perspective based on my particular education in mechanical engineering. Mechanical engineering is not about machines. The term mechanical is much broader than machine design. Mechanical is used to describe the transfer of energy from one form to another.
It really does not matter to me how most people view the process so I comment and don't want to debate. What I am interested in are solutions to problems. If people view a problem in the wrong context, then there is less likelihood that they will come to a fundamental and practical solution. Viewing offset lithography as a chemical process for the last hundred years has resulted in many fundamental problems not being solved. Problems that are fairly easily solved when the mechanical issues are corrected.
Chemistry is very important in developing the inks and fountain solutions for this process but chemistry is also important in developing materials for many other processes that people do not think of as chemical processes. Just because chemistry is used to develop the materials does not mean the processes are chemical processes.
The debate can be interesting but it is not so important. What is important are solutions to problems. I solved the ink water balance problem related to density control a long time ago but the continued belief that the process is a chemical process makes it hard for people to think that a simple mechanical explanation could be true.
I hope you get lots of discussion but this will be my only comment. I have made too many comments over the years already.
