What is killing offset printing?

[JPK]

I am relatively young in the industry (mid-30s) yet all around I read the phrase “Print is dead” and if you grew up in this industry like me, it hurts. But I will not deny it, I hear about it every day at my job: Offset printers are closing at an alarming rate in most markets. Print-shop after print-shop they are shutting down, laying off people, destroying dreams and inundating the market with used machinery that sometimes seem more like museum pieces nobody really needs or wants nowadays.

The perpetrator of this crime goes under different aliases: The PC, the internet, the smart-phone or the tablet. All labels and avatars for the digital age we live in, a world that is insidious and inescapable, yet also incredibly convenient and alluring. Make no mistake: The digital age is here to stay and will only grow larger in the coming years.

But let's s think for a moment: Is printing really being completely replaced by shiny screens displaying colorful apps? Not entirely, what I see around me is that while a large part of former offset printing territory is now entirely digital, another part of the niche is being filled by the new “physical” printing generation, such as the Indigos, iGens and other digital commercial presses available today.

These machines are fairly different from one another in many ways and there still is no “digital printing standard”, but they all have something in common: Convenience. Year after year, generation after generation they are getting easier to use, even by non-trained workers.

I moved to Germany 18 months ago after working in Latin America for many years. While I had been coming to this country for trainings and seminars and I knew it relatively well (it is after all the land of my ancestors), working close to the German printers and having former offset machine operators as work colleagues opened my eyes. Just like the famous eureka moment, it struck me: German engineering is killing offset printing. Well, at least part of it, please allow me to explain why I think so in the next few paragraphs.

I believe the offset printing press has been and will remain a quintessential German piece of engineering (calm down Komori fans, Japanese offset presses are just as good but they have undeniably followed the blueprint of German presses) Unlike most of the world, the offset press operators in Germany are highly trained workers that have studied and practiced at dedicated schools for two or more years before joining the workforce. As part of the German “dual” education that combines study with work (US-President Obama praised this system during a recent speech), they graduate with the equivalent of an Associate Degree in offset printing. No only do they know about water balance and plate registry, they also are experts in color spectrum, graphic design and basic engineering. In other countries this level of preparation is reserved for a small “printing elite” that has either collected this practical knowledge over years or attended one of the few colleges offering a printing related degree. Even so, how many Rochester graduates can claim to have operated a press while studying for their next Chemistry exam? Therefore, the machine press manufacturers in this country have designed the machines thinking and assuming that the operator in other places will have a similar level of education.

I know: This high level of complexity in offset printing is not new. Offset printing machines were never easy horses to ride yet they became popular worldwide. However, before the new generation of digital printers came along the rest of the world learned how to use it because it had no other choice. The would-be printers were willing to endure long hours learning its secrets, doing mistakes, repeating jobs... All that has changed. Time, which was always limited for the printer, has become an even more scarce item. Most young people need a month or more to learn how to decently handle an offset press, but if you give them a touchscreen with an intuitive set of icons they can master that Xerox in a week. Here the clear winner is the modern digital press. I think most print-shop owners and managers that have made this comparison will agree.

To be fair, this has already being noticed by the press manufacturers and they have scrambled in the last decade to include touch screens and friendly icons in their presses. However, they made what in my eyes was another mistake: While the controls look and feel modern, the press is over-engineered (Or should I say “über-engineered”?). I know some of you will hate me for saying this, but do we really need 40 tons of steel, bearings that could be fitted on a fighter jet and engines strong enough to move the Titanic? In today's ever changing world we do not need machines made to last 20 years when in 5 years they will be rendered obsolete by whatever is out there. It feels as if a 19th century piece of machinery has been equipped with 21st century electronics. The result? A machine that costs as much as 10 to 20 of its digital counterparts. Good for the big corporations printing cereal boxes in the millions, but unattainable for most mid size and small printers.

Your thoughts?

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Just like the famous eureka moment, it struck me: German engineering is killing offset printing.



To be fair, this has already being noticed by the press manufacturers and they have scrambled in the last decade to include touch screens and friendly icons in their presses. However, they made what in my eyes was another mistake: While the controls look and feel modern, the press is over-engineered (Or should I say “über-engineered”?).

I basically agree but i would add that not only is the press over engineered but it has been poorly studied scientifically and this is very surprising since science is normally done at such a high level in Germany.

There is a big difference between engineering and science. To advance a technology one needs both and unfortunately the Germans have decided to not ask the questions that science would have required. They have developed the most expensive and finest engineered "model T Fords" one can buy. Refinement of an existing concept instead of innovation.

Of course, that is just my opinion.

 

[unoprint1]

Aiea Copy Center took out offset printing about a year ago. For our operation, digital B&W and Color equipment is more productive and cost effective. One person can run multiple machines at a cheaper price when labor if factored in. The only 2 strong points for us was single color printing and envelope printing. When we gave up offset, we gave up single color printing and jobbed out envelope printing. We have since added 2 PSI (Oki Bases) envelope printers to bring envelope orders back in house. The PSI units also give us cost effective full color envelope printing. In hindsight, I sould have gotten rid of the presses sooner and got the envelope printer sooner.

 

[jbeniston]

They have developed the most expensive and finest engineered "model T Fords" one can buy. Refinement of an existing concept instead.

Well said Erik
You already know my views on this.
And not a mention of the ink ductor mechanism or inking unit design.

 

[rich apollo]

German engineering is killing offset printing.

Nope - it's Godzilla.

 

[Dan Roll]

From my perspective, presses have been designed to appeal to the people who purchase them, and since I entered the industry in the late 1960's, this group of people has changed from mostly printers to almost exclusively administrators. The admin guys love floor space to imp/hr ratios, ever larger formats for efficiency, they buy presses for work they don't have, and believe the manufactures who tell them 'automation can replace a skilled and responsible pressman'.

Are modern presses capable of better printing than presses of the 1950's? They are faster, but often this means capable of producing more waste. The controls allow a bad decision to be put into effect in a fraction of a second, when in the old days we had to walk all the way back to the units to do much, giving us a chance to see what was happening before we did anything (and giving us time to think about it).

I do believe modern presses often come equipped with accessories that add little of any value to the machine, but add significantly to the cost, reducing the ROI and lengthening the time a press must be kept in service to break even.

 

[maxon]

Wish I could give five 'likes' on this.

 

[Keith]

Let's not forget the other offset killer- price wars. A lot of these online print companies keep getting cheaper with tighter margins which requires greater volume for these ever increasing press costs, size and automation. I used to run a press but not anymore. All digital. And it frustrates me that I can't print metallics and huge quantities. But then again, what customer is ordering that kind of stuff anymore? They are all hooked on this cheap printing from these unaffordable presses. But I'm doing ok printing short run full color digital for people that are in a hurry.

 

[stu]

Offset presses are designed to run at high speeds for many years. In that time cylinders and rollers have to be highly engineered to keep these leviathans in tolerance. You only have to look at the raw materials that go into manufacturing a 10 colour press to see that it is an expensive machine to build. An inkjet machine doing the same job (possibly at a lower print quality currently) has hardly any moving parts and weighs 10% of it's offset equivalent.
Manufacturers are keen to produce digital machines of whatever type, they can control the consumable ink (the cash cow) and it's easier to engineer improvements. and tempt customers into upgrading with better quality and roi models.
Whatever improvements you make to a litho press it is a very expensive beast to manufacture!

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Thinking about performance of technologies and systems. Cars, airplanes and computers come to mind.

We drive cars that are mass produced but there are race cars and specialty cars such as the new electric versions being developed. Some people "pimp" cars and take a normal car and add performance to it.

There are all kinds of commercial aircraft but there are special experimental versions that are built by small companies and military aircraft that perform at the boundaries of technical performance.

There are common computers we all use and then there are custom built computers and research computers that have incredible performance.

With printing presses, one only has commercial versions. Not too many people are "pimping" presses to make them perform better than the stock versions. There are no racing versions of presses that manufacturers use to advance the technology. Not much use of new materials to make components at lower cost.

Why is it that we can't pimp a press? One very strong reason is that the industry does not believe it doing it. Another reason is that basically no one knows what should be done to improve performance. It is that lack of knowledge that prevents risking resources to make an attempt to innovate to gain higher performance.

Those other industries know what they are doing. The printing industry is clueless. So the printers and press manufacturers stay with what they know. A good recipe for killing the offset process. Don't do anything new. Don't try new ideas. Don't think. Don't learn.

 

[stu]

People 'pimp' cars, planes etc for profit or bragging rights. Nobody would 'pimp' a press unless they had a guaranteed roi on it.

 

[Deleted member 16349]

People 'pimp' cars, planes etc for profit or bragging rights. Nobody would 'pimp' a press unless they had a guaranteed roi on it.

Thanks, that proves my point.

 

[Lukew]

Thinking about performance of technologies and systems. Cars, airplanes and computers come to mind.

We drive cars that are mass produced but there are race cars and specialty cars such as the new electric versions being developed. Some people "pimp" cars and take a normal car and add performance to it.

There are all kinds of commercial aircraft but there are special experimental versions that are built by small companies and military aircraft that perform at the boundaries of technical performance.

There are common computers we all use and then there are custom built computers and research computers that have incredible performance.

With printing presses, one only has commercial versions. Not too many people are "pimping" presses to make them perform better than the stock versions. There are no racing versions of presses that manufacturers use to advance the technology. Not much use of new materials to make components at lower cost.

Why is it that we can't pimp a press? One very strong reason is that the industry does not believe it doing it. Another reason is that basically no one knows what should be done to improve performance. It is that lack of knowledge that prevents risking resources to make an attempt to innovate to gain higher performance.

Those other industries know what they are doing. The printing industry is clueless. So the printers and press manufacturers stay with what they know. A good recipe for killing the offset process. Don't do anything new. Don't try new ideas. Don't think. Don't learn.

Eric I know you have a vested interest and possibly a solution to help the offset press progress, but comparing pimping cars & aircraft to such a machine is a little far fetched if your pimping is aimed to altering the actual physical build of the press itself.
Companies spend millions on such machinery with the belief it is coming with the latest long term tested technology available. Why do you think they would then have a though about "pimping" it?
A lot of other industries with their machines & equipment, do you think they purchase it then think about pimping it? not likely

Offset is dieing due to the digital revolution. Simple.
Food & pharmaceutical packaging still progresses as digital can't touch it yet, in terms of quality & speed.
Those left printing commercial offset through are left to fight amongst themselves for what ever is left. digital swallows up the rest.

The companies that are smart look at the full cycle of print & change their manufacturing processes of offset printing to reduce overall cost of manufacture.
A few steps can save millions.
Factory set-up & layout (reduction in electricity, phone, gas, employee's/time - per job, paper waste, press time)
Im-positioning & job layout (reduction in overall press time, consumables, ink , chemistry ,paper, plates, finishing time)
Chemicals & ink ( Reduction in electricity, gas, press time, inventory, insurance, paper waste, plates, finishing time, press wear, purchasing cost)

Many print firms purchase the latest equipment with the desire to gain market share & reduce press time. very few look at the whole picture. Designing & implementing processes that work together at reducing the overall cost of manufacture.

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Why do you think they would then have a though about "pimping" it?
A lot of other industries with their machines & equipment, do you think they purchase it then think about pimping it? not likely

.

How many industries have you worked in? I have worked in several different ones. It is very common that manufacturing companies develop their own processes by buying equipment to their specifications or modifying them.

Equipment suppliers do not have the budgets to develop many of their own technologies but use their relationships with end users who do make those improvements to advance concepts. Often the development process is funded by large end users and after some period of time, the supplier is allowed to sell the technology to others.

In other manufacturing industries, production equipment is being modified all the time. This is normal. It is the printing industry that is quite unique in not being able to know what kind of modifications are needed. They wait and hope the suppliers will provide something and the suppliers are happy to provide basically the same thing as before except for some expensive adds on that are bandaid solutions for existing faults in the design of the process.

Yes, I have a vested interest. What does that have to do with the problem? Are you saying that people that feel they have solutions should not be listened to because they have a vested interest? What kind of logic is that.

 

[Lukew]

How many industries have you worked in? I have worked in several different ones. It is very common that manufacturing companies develop their own processes by buying equipment to their specifications or modifying them.

Equipment suppliers do not have the budgets to develop many of their own technologies but use their relationships with end users who do make those improvements to advance concepts. Often the development process is funded by large end users and after some period of time, the supplier is allowed to sell the technology to others.

In other manufacturing industries, production equipment is being modified all the time. This is normal. It is the printing industry that is quite unique in not being able to know what kind of modifications are needed. They wait and hope the suppliers will provide something and the suppliers are happy to provide basically the same thing as before except for some expensive adds on that are bandaid solutions for existing faults in the design of the process.

Yes, I have a vested interest. What does that have to do with the problem? Are you saying that people that feel they have solutions should not be listened to because they have a vested interest? What kind of logic is that.

Most certainly not saying that anyone with a vested interest shouldn't be listened to.
But a company spending millions on a press will normally expect it has come with the latest technology available.
Apart from the idea that you have designed & now is in testing & modification phase, what other alterations to the offset press do you feel companies could do to "pimp" their press that would see a considerable reduction in manufacture cost?

 

[Deleted member 16349]

Apart from the idea that you have designed & now is in testing & modification phase, what other alterations to the offset press do you feel companies could do to "pimp" their press that would see a considerable reduction in manufacture cost?

There are three issues that can be addressed with existing equipment related to reducing manufacturing costs in offset.

One is positive ink feed. The second is a reliable zero setting capability. The third is accurate presetting calculations for ink keys. With these three issues addressed, it is my opinion that makereadies with respect to target densities, can be within the 50 impression range going from job to job. This would be for sheetfed and for web presses. All three of these issues are not addressed properly today.

Plus after the ink feed issue is corrected, there is the opportunity to remove the existing dampening system from the press, which can cause issues on its own, and replace it with a simpler method to introduce water into the roller train. Studies have shown that water can be introduced into the press in many ways and at many locations.

Of course I have my own views on how these issues need to be addressed on existing presses and it is relatively low cost.

What is also of interest is what can be done if there is an interest to redesign the press concept. This can result in further performance improvements with technology that costs less. Improves the performance/cost ratio which would make it easier to sell products and gain market share. Critical at this time for press manufacturers who seem to think their only option is to downsize instead of gaining market share with technology that has a better performance/cost ratio for their customers.

If the press manufacturers had moved in these directions years ago, the digital presses would not have gotten such a foothold into the market. Now they are running scared and their only options for survival is to try to make their operations more efficient instead of move to innovate new concepts. They have a hard time innovating because they did not what to learn what the rules are that govern the process. Engineers need rules to follow when designing technology. Without rules they are forced into a trial and error approach which is expensive and does not normally result in significant innovation.

Think of a combination lock. It is hard to open if you do not know the combination but it is easy if you do.

 

[TheProcessIStheproduct]

All of these posts miss the point... Press manufactures are purely reactive to the market, offset is not dying because they cannot engineer faster more efficient presses, it is dying because the market has fundamentally changed. 10 years ago when I would try to push digital color on customers they would say, no quality sucks, per piece price is too high let's run it offset. Today people come in with really good static offset jobs and want them digital, even if it costs more, they think they can get it faster. So it may take some time for disruptive technology to get a foothold in the market, but once it does you are pounding sand to try and stand in front of it, even if you are xerox or h-burg. Don't blame the manufactures for killing offset, blame your customers...

 

[maas]

What is hurting this industry more than anything is our own prediction of its demise, the market is constricting, there is competition from other forms of print, investment and upgrades are not guaranteed but what i see coming of the press fills me with a tremendous sense of satisfaction and pride, i swear our old presses have a soul that allow a tradesman to extract quality beyond what was thought capable 2 or 3 decades ago when they were new, there is still profit all be it less than years ago but my sense of satisfaction is no less than when i started nearly 30 years ago.

 

[Green Printer]

This industry is thriving and consolidating.
The press manufacturers have dug their own hole with the tremendous increase in productivity. What use to take 3 or 4 presses can now be done with ONE. Lets face it they don't have to make as many machines to do the same amount of work.

Second the water problem was solved over 2 decades ago and as usually very few listen and the rest ignore it. Those you have listened and embraced it are thriving and profitable.

The ink feed problem was solved in the 50's and as usual it was ignored and disappeared.

The biggest problem of all is that there are way too many pressroom consumable suppliers selling virtually the same products they did 30 and 40 years ago. They say it is new and improved. If you check the formulas and MSDS virtually nothing has changed. This virtual sameness of chemistry from many many suppliers has the industry in a " I don't believe the salesman when they say it is new" funk. Different percentages of petroleum distillates is still that, a big bowl of petroleum distillates. Saying it is a new technology is BS.

 

[jbeniston]

Well, I think the printing industry is pretty spectacular. It has managed to mass produce all kinds of printed materials and get it into the hands of the user with phenomenal 'ease' for a very, very long time. No one thinks what it takes to get the morning newspaper on the breakfast table day in and day out or how the worlds libraries are so stacked with books or even how that can of baked beans got a label on it or how the box of cereal was created. It's a performance second to none. No matter what people say about automation if you don't have a skilled man to operate the equipment then all you have on the shop floor is a chunk of iron. Despite the much vaunted methods of automobile manufacturers they still have not matched the performance of the printing industry. Silly comparison really but what the heck. The problem with Lithographic Printing, partjcularly in North America is the lack of adequate training facilities and the necessary will to finance them, send trainees or "apprentices" to use them. There will always be a need for skilled operators, just the same as there will always be a "Pilot in Command" on the flight deck of our much automated airliners. Would you fly with no one at the controls. I damn well wouldn't.
Automation will help us do our jobs better. After all what are we Lithographers or paper handlers or press mechanics? So let's concpentrate on what it is that we do best, be printers and leave all the mundane stuff to the helpers, acolytes and 'so called' managers. I have read many times how the Digital onslaught is going to put us all out of work, that's nonsense. What we have to do is get better at what we do. I have been in the business all my working life about 50 years to date. I started in Europe and had the benefit of all that training. But the methods we used back then and still pretty much use today have got to change and change now. Lithographic printing is a beautiful subtle process, but unfortunately the business part of the process has not seen fit to embrace a culture of change. Tradition is cool but somewhere along the path we must get more efficient and make better use of the equipment we have. I for one think we have been a bit let down by the press manufacturers. We seem to think they are some kind of God and look to them for innovations etc. We let them drive the industry instead of the industry telling them what it needs and driving them. For example take the Ink Ductor Roller the mechanism, such a key factor for controlling ink and therefore color, was designed in 1860 and is still the same with little in the way of change since then. Why? It's the key to consistency and as Erik Nikkanen would say predictability
Does no one care to ask why anything is like it is? Why do side frames have to be made of iron why are the cylinders not made from synthetic materials. Why do I need a press that will last 25 years. It's not efficient and not driving our industry forwards. We are stagnant and that is what is giving the digital machines the opportunity.
Lack of change and lack of the will to drive it is chasing the industry into panic mode. It's time to get k to the drivers seat make demands, embrace new methods and stop being afraid of shadows
If we had done this as a continuous part of our evolution we would not be facing this nonsensical digital craze.
Don't tell me we cannot do very short runs because I know different and. I have seen first hand just how much money can be made by getting the general act together.
Anyone else got any ideas feel to join in.