Processless, Chem-free, low chem plates – who cares?

[gordo]

I just saw the Xingraphics no process plates at Print '09 - zero processing, looks like the Kodak thermal direct plate (low contrast image after exposure) however, nothing is removed or processed on press. Literally expose, mount on press, and run. I also (impressively) saw the new version of Agfa :Azura, which is faster than the previous version and uses a simple(?) wash-out/gumming unit after exposure (I was also shown that a spit-moistened finger would also "process" the plate).

So, does anyone really think there is a need for absolute no process plates? Or is a quick, unplumbed, plate finishing operation acceptable?

best, gordon p

 

[SteveAgfa]

Can I vote?

(great to see you, Gordo)

 

[Lukas Engqvist]

I like contrast on the plates and the Azura 2 is great compared to the original Azura, I can even measure dot on plate. Rather hava a gum to protect, and like the washing away of unfused particles so that there is no "imaging" if the printer leaves the plate in an inapropriate environment.

 

[Robbie]

process-less plates have one huge added advantage...it removes a variable in the plate making process, and guarantees a more consistent dot.

 

[jlind]

I think readout is very important for the operators, the guys that hang 20 sets of plates a shift. As long as you get rid of the pH12 developer and replenishment process, that's green enough. I hate to see those guys/gals don those elbow length rubber gloves every week and scrub the processor. Oh, and the cost of that chemistry, origination, shipping, disposal.

John Lind
Cranberry Township PA
724-776-4718

 

[gordo]

process-less plates have one huge added advantage...it removes a variable in the plate making process, and guarantees a more consistent dot.

My question was more about the level of processlessness. The Xingraphics plate truly has no processing at all. The Kodak has a bit of a quick wash out on press using press mechanics and chemistry, while the Agfa has a quick washout off-press using a bit of chemistry/water.
The feeling that I got at the show was that printers did not seem to care to much about going for the absolute - "holy grail" - as represented by the Xingraphics plate. Processless, chem-free, low-chem etc. was seen as pretty much all the same. The concern was more about issues like cost, run lengths, resistance to on-press, etc.

best, gordo

 

[maxon]

does anyone really think there is a need for absolute no process plates?

I don't. The key advantage of chemfree plates is they take out processing variability, I don't mind dipping the plate in soap, gum, lemonade or whatever cleaning fluid after imaging as long as I don't have to deal with pH monitoring, replenish rates, scrub brush pressure, machine cleaning et al.
I see processless plates as a mere cosmetic step forward in technology. Lukas has made his point already about supplying a clean gummed plate to the press.

 

[Green Printer]

If you would do 50 plates a shift. What happens to the coatings that have been removed by the dampner and inker. I would think that there is a magic number of plates per day for any given press water circulator that once that is exceeded all hell would brake loose. If you can go for extended periods of time say over 6 months and not have to dump your fountain solution would you have to change it our every couple of weeks using the process less. If that is the case you are just moving what needs to been cleaned from prepress to the pressroom.
If your are using any type of filtering on your press water circulator wouldn't they clog sooner. If your are using a system such as Flo Clear what happens with it?

There are a lot of variables that need clarified before you switch over to the process less develop on press plates.

 

[maxon]

zero processing, ... nothing is removed or processed on press.

Could be some sort of surface treatment reminding me of the so-called miracle plate, but that kind of 'exposure' uses hugely expensive femtosecond pulsed lasers and it's in early experimental stage.

 

[maxon]

Correct, Green Printer.

 

[KevinC@EFI]

If you would do 50 plates a shift. What happens to the coatings that have been removed by the dampner and inker. I would think that there is a magic number of plates per day for any given press water circulator that once that is exceeded all hell would brake loose. If you can go for extended periods of time say over 6 months and not have to dump your fountain solution would you have to change it our every couple of weeks using the process less. If that is the case you are just moving what needs to been cleaned from prepress to the pressroom.
If your are using any type of filtering on your press water circulator wouldn't they clog sooner. If your are using a system such as Flo Clear what happens with it?

There are a lot of variables that need clarified before you switch over to the process less develop on press plates.

Quite simply, Green, the answer is "it doesn't happen". With the >1000 sites running Kodak Thermal Direct we don't have any cases of real press contamination, despite the FUD from our competitors (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt). Yes, press contamination has happened in the past with other DOP technology (3M's chemically-developed DOP analogue plate, Agfa's Thermofuse particle Thermolite plate, and so forth), but Thermal Direct was designed to avoid the mechanisms that cause those risks and failures. We don't suggest any changes to the normal press maintenance procedures or timing because of Thermal Direct.

1) Thermal Direct is not chemically developed - it is a physical process (removes chemical variation from plate making). Thermal Direct coating does not "dissolve" into the press chemistry or inks
2) The coating is physically removed by the tack of the ink after being wetted by the fount - and is deposited on the paper to be removed from the press
3) The coating thickness is much thinner than normal plates, so that it's easier to remove and to ensure there's no residue to get into the press
4) The coating chemicals where fine-tuned to ensure that they couldn't affect the press chemistry pH/conductivity/etc. - the main culprit of this is the dyes typically found in plates. Yes, unfortunately this gives it lower contrast than a processed plate.

I'll say it again - we have customers running tons of short-run jobs a day using Thermal Direct, and even they haven't had problems with press contamination. It's a myth propagated by our competitor(s). Maybe it happens with other plates, but I assure you not with Kodak Thermal Direct.


Kevin.

 

[SteveAgfa]

Actually Kevin - I've heard more of this concern from customers,
than "competitors".

It seems that this thread surrounds driving-out variables.
With a white-light sensitive on-press clean-out plate,
there are new variables to be aware of... amount of time in
white light, amount of time in a dark bag/box awaiting on-
press clean-out, amount of dampening prior to the application
of ink...

As Gordon learned, Azura removes the variables of exposure
fluctuations, no issue of normal exposure to white light -
before or after clean-out, and removes the uncertainty of
mounting a low-image contrast plate on press.

Azura delivers certainly to the broader process, rather than variables.

Sorry I wasn't able to see your technology at the show.

Regards,

 

[Santa]

Quite simply, Green, the answer is "it doesn't happen". With the >1000


2) The coating is physically removed by the tack of the ink after being wetted by the fount - and is deposited on the paper to be removed from the press

Kevin.

Kevin my one question to this is what happens to the coating that falls outside the sheet? We run many different size sheets. 12.5 x 28 for 6 pagers,
17.5 x 22 for non bleed work, 19 x 25 for text bleed work, and 20 x 26 for cover bleed work, but we only have one plate size for that press which is 28 3/4 x 25 5/8?

 

[TheProcessIStheproduct]

processless, no thanks

processless, no thanks

I ran Fuji Pro-T for a year, and if you run smaller than full format the coating gets on the back cylinder and is super hard to clean, also it does build up on the edge of the rollers, vendors can say what they want but it does build up, not so much in fount solution (although we had really bad blinding issues), but rollers and back cylinders absolutely. I think if you have new rubber on your press you can get good results for a short period of time, but older dampening systems don't waste your time...

 

[KevinC@EFI]

Actually Kevin - I've heard more of this concern from customers,
than "competitors".

It seems that this thread surrounds driving-out variables.
With a white-light sensitive on-press clean-out plate,
there are new variables to be aware of... amount of time in
white light, amount of time in a dark bag/box awaiting on-
press clean-out, amount of dampening prior to the application
of ink... <snip>

If you make that "prospects" rather than "customers" I agree there are always questions... but not from users. As I said, we've not had any case of actual press contamination globally - Thermal Direct is designed to simply not do that.

Driving out variables is certainly the goal - as well as driving out cost and complexity (which we think Thermal Direct does a much better job of due to the total elimination of processor/chemistry/energy/disposal/cleaning/maintenance/etc.). White light, dampening, and so forth are not a "variables" in that sense - they don't affect the dot percentages on the Thermal Direct plate. TD has a very wide latitude for press conditions, and in most cases the normal startup procedures on press are more than adequate to ensure proper operation.


Kevin.

 

[SteveAgfa]

Kevin:

Perhaps I'm still a bit foggy from the show, but I need clarification:

<snip>
White light ... and so forth are not a "variables" in that sense - they don't affect the dot percentages on the Thermal Direct plate
<snip>

I forget the specs for your plate, but I recall a 4 hour maximum of white light exposure before on-press clean-out. Are you then saying that the dot percentages are still there, but with exposure to white light in excess of specification, it's just that TD won't print right, but the dots on the plates still look good?

In addition to driving out variables, Azura attracts new users due to its process simplicity.

Heck, just ask Gordo! (smile)

Regards,

 

[marktonk]

From the Thermal Direct brochure:

"Safelight
The plate can be handled before and after imaging safely for up to 1 hour under white light and 4 hours under yellow light."

Kevin, I have been told by a TD user that if the plate is out longer, it requires a longer dampening cycle to loosen the emulsion. So please confirm so we do not have any FUD.

To quote you:

"2) The coating is physically removed by the tack of the ink after being wetted by the fount - and is deposited on the paper to be removed from the press"

Santa brought up a good question too...where does the emulsion go if the sheet is not full size?

Regards,

Mark

 

[beermonster]

ok you sales folks and people attached to the vendors can argue the toss forever - and you will - but thats YOUR problem

us users on the coalface have our own views and experiences - and to be brutally honest I get a little bored seeing the crap about "terminology" and stuff being rolled out thread after thread - all i see is rival vendors petty bickering - good advertising guys - whichever bright spark started the big row just pisses us users off

i chose azura <now on ts> for a few reasons.

firstly literally NO on press changes - just mount plate and run
clean plate made anything up to a few weeks in advance (sometimes board is very late and jobs come forward and jobs go back) so the plate is safely stored in normal light - no issues whatsoever
being a clean plate we can double check stuff on it - varnish free dots for example - very small - we can lay a trace cutter guide over plate and check stuff
also we have ONE plate size but varying board sizes - we shut the door on kodak and fuji because they could not, at the time, answer what happens to coating outside the substrate area
we wanted a huge drop in chemical usage in prepress, and the gum can actually go down the drain, so environmentally it is nice and "green"
i now have a maximum of 15 kinda half tubs of used/watered down gum waste a year - read it - a YEAR

yep - there's cheaper plates around, but using abrasive solutions for clean out and demanding long hours cleaning - we clean our gummer once a month - well - we hit the rinse button with a tub of water on - ten mins later all is good again - then next time round we remove rollers and clean - takes about 45 mins - and thats probably about 4 times a year

its not all roses though - excessive driers in some inks reduced run length considerably - we worked with ink manufacturers and solved that

with metallics its not so good length wise - maybe for us we get about 50k per plate

deletions (yes we have varnish dots etc so if you understand packaging you know why) were a pain - the agfa pens were crap but press guys found some pen and all is good again

and for the bloody life of me i cannot undo the damm filter on the gummer to rinse it - best of luck to the engineer on the next service....

azura works - end of story

 

[gordo]

Gee, I never thought I'd be used as a reference by Agfa for their plates! LOL!

My original question was not so much about the difference between different vendors' technology, but more about printers not seeming to care to much about going for the absolute - "holy grail" - as represented by, for example, the Xingraphics plate. Processless, chem-free, low-chem etc. seems to be seen as pretty much all the same. The concern was more about issues like cost, run lengths, resistance to on-press, etc. What are the compelling reasons to switch from a conventional CtP plate?
Is there that much variation in plate imaging that removing it by eliminating processing is a compelling argument?
Is the environmental/greener angle the compelling argument?
Is it space issues?
Is it lower cost overall?

etc.

best, gordo

 

[beermonster]

good points - for me/us reducing chemistry was a must - it also reduces man hours (££££) cleaning processors, also reduces waste - which as part of a lean manufacturing programme we were very interested in

i cant comment on other plates as i've used azura since we moved from ctf to ctp - but space, consumables, power consumption and waste have been reduced massively - so for us that has been a compelling reason to change and has been a huge success