Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
- Thread starter Chris
- Start date
Jackie
Well-known member
Re: Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
Hi Chris, we actually ended up switching to Sword Excel, processor and all. We found that the plates were too light sensitive, impossible to proof or read with any sort of densitometer, scratched easily and really didn't carry water well on the press.
Supposedly they are fixing the lightfast issue and will have a device capable of reading the plates. But I've been told that it's about a year away from release.
We are trying to aim towards being a Greener shop so we installed a Metafix unit on the end of the processor to help neutralize the PH in the developer.
Sorry I don't have any info on the Azura plate.
Hi Chris, we actually ended up switching to Sword Excel, processor and all. We found that the plates were too light sensitive, impossible to proof or read with any sort of densitometer, scratched easily and really didn't carry water well on the press.
Supposedly they are fixing the lightfast issue and will have a device capable of reading the plates. But I've been told that it's about a year away from release.
We are trying to aim towards being a Greener shop so we installed a Metafix unit on the end of the processor to help neutralize the PH in the developer.
Sorry I don't have any info on the Azura plate.
Re: Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
If you print with metallic inks, I have heard that these plates do not stand up too well; that 10M run will be all you get before the metallic ink chews them up. This from a user that switched to Kodak.
We are, as of today, using the Fuji, Pro-T. I have been warned that it too will not give the 100M impressions when printing metallic ink; that the Pro-T should however, last 50m. We'll see.
Our first job today printed like a million bucks. Sorry, I am having trouble containing my exhuberance. New platesetter too.
Hope this info helps you.
John W
If you print with metallic inks, I have heard that these plates do not stand up too well; that 10M run will be all you get before the metallic ink chews them up. This from a user that switched to Kodak.
We are, as of today, using the Fuji, Pro-T. I have been warned that it too will not give the 100M impressions when printing metallic ink; that the Pro-T should however, last 50m. We'll see.
Our first job today printed like a million bucks. Sorry, I am having trouble containing my exhuberance. New platesetter too.
Hope this info helps you.
John W
Fatboysmart
Well-known member
Re: Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
Nothing interesting to tell... they just work fine. Just don't leave them out in white light for too long (max. 1 hour).
Nothing interesting to tell... they just work fine. Just don't leave them out in white light for too long (max. 1 hour).
Jackie
Well-known member
Re: Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
Hi Chris, we were using the Thermal Direct plates for about 6 months, just too many problems. I never encountered the metallic issue that John was referring to but we are more of a short run shop anyway.
They wash up on the press fine, we noticed no contamination of the fountain solution. But you have to carry more water on press so you have longer makereadys and all the other problems that you can encounter because of that as well. Not much of a grain on the plate.
Hi Chris, we were using the Thermal Direct plates for about 6 months, just too many problems. I never encountered the metallic issue that John was referring to but we are more of a short run shop anyway.
They wash up on the press fine, we noticed no contamination of the fountain solution. But you have to carry more water on press so you have longer makereadys and all the other problems that you can encounter because of that as well. Not much of a grain on the plate.
PantherMac
Well-known member
Re: Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
Ditto what FatBoy said. Great plate. Awesome to work w/, compared to anything w/ a processor (or rinse-gum for you non-processing pundits).
I shoot 'em, lay 'em down, and stick 'em in the plate cabinet. That's it. Press runs the plates wet for a few before putting the ink rollers down and going on impression. I've been there for make-ready. 5th sheet's readable for getting fit, density rolls up at the same speed as before (from what I hear). I have heard you have to run wet to begin with, but it settles down during the run. We've done a handful of 100m sheet runs on these, w/o issue, but most of our work is much shorter runs.
Would recommend this plate to anyone not doing metallic inks, but I'd be baking them if I were printing that stuff en masse
- Mac
Ditto what FatBoy said. Great plate. Awesome to work w/, compared to anything w/ a processor (or rinse-gum for you non-processing pundits).
I shoot 'em, lay 'em down, and stick 'em in the plate cabinet. That's it. Press runs the plates wet for a few before putting the ink rollers down and going on impression. I've been there for make-ready. 5th sheet's readable for getting fit, density rolls up at the same speed as before (from what I hear). I have heard you have to run wet to begin with, but it settles down during the run. We've done a handful of 100m sheet runs on these, w/o issue, but most of our work is much shorter runs.
Would recommend this plate to anyone not doing metallic inks, but I'd be baking them if I were printing that stuff en masse
- Mac
SteveAgfa
Well-known member
Re: Users of Kodak Thermal Direct plate, please reply!
Hi David: (AKA mtnman)
I'm glad to hear that you are doing well;
I had once visited your facility.
For clarity's sake, the Agfa product you were
using was not Azura, nor any other similar
ThermoFuse product. In fact, the product
from which you switched is no longer
promoted by Agfa in the US and Canada.
I checked with sales management in Canada,
and I have been told that we now have over 75
Agfa Thermofuse (Azura, Amigo) installations,
and every one is doing well, and none have
been "tossed".
Today, the best fit for your print requirements
would be our InterTech award-winning Energy
Elite plate.
No one plate is a best fit for all print requirements.
However, Azura and Amigo, our no-chemistry and
low-chemistry offerings, are doing well in Canada,
and world-wide for that matter. Azura was never in your plant.
[Well, I did have some business-card sized Azura
plates I carry in my briefcase for Mr. Wizard-like
demonstrations. (smile)]
Again, I'm glad you are doing well.
Regards,
Hi David: (AKA mtnman)
I'm glad to hear that you are doing well;
I had once visited your facility.
For clarity's sake, the Agfa product you were
using was not Azura, nor any other similar
ThermoFuse product. In fact, the product
from which you switched is no longer
promoted by Agfa in the US and Canada.
I checked with sales management in Canada,
and I have been told that we now have over 75
Agfa Thermofuse (Azura, Amigo) installations,
and every one is doing well, and none have
been "tossed".
Today, the best fit for your print requirements
would be our InterTech award-winning Energy
Elite plate.
No one plate is a best fit for all print requirements.
However, Azura and Amigo, our no-chemistry and
low-chemistry offerings, are doing well in Canada,
and world-wide for that matter. Azura was never in your plant.
[Well, I did have some business-card sized Azura
plates I carry in my briefcase for Mr. Wizard-like
demonstrations. (smile)]
Again, I'm glad you are doing well.
Regards,
Similar threads
PressWise
|
A 30-day Fix for Managed Chaos
As any print professional knows, printing can be managed chaos. Software that solves multiple problems and provides measurable and monetizable value has a direct impact on the bottom-line. “We reduced order entry costs by about 40%.” Significant savings in a shop that turns about 500 jobs a month. Learn how……. |
