Re: [PPLetterpress] thin lines are curling and plates too soft
We run a plant on a daily basis turning out quality work, and efficiency is
extremely important to us. We use KF95 plastic backed plates for our
printing exclusively. As a processor of both plates, I know that we have not
sacrificed hardness/detail/quality in this choice. The polymer behaves the
same (or better) as the equivalent KM95 steel-backed plate during processing
and on press.
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Fritz Klinke <nagraph@...> wrote:
> Several of the commercial printers I work with who prefer the steel backed
> plates and the higher quality bases like the Bunting will not use the
> adhesive backed polyester plates for the hardness and detail reasons. And
> this is both for the stationery trade and longer run "other" work. These
> folks running plants on a daily basis turning out some very nice work using
> mostly Heidelbergs and some Vandercooks, and to a large extent, doing the
> deeper impression work. They need to be efficient, not have to remake
> plates, and move on to the next job, and in most cases, have their own
> processors but buy out the film.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gerald Lange" <Bieler@...>
> To: <PPLetterpress@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 7:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [PPLetterpress] thin lines are curling and plates too soft
> > Hi Scott
> > Well, nothing is ever equal. Foundry type vs Monotype vs Linotype;
> > Copper vs zinc vs magnesium plates; etc. But they all have their
> > appropriate application and purpose.
> > I don't know that their is a perceptible difference in detail rendering
> > between a KF95 and a KM95 plate, but it really isn't a matter of that. I
> > will far more often than not recommend that folks buy into the Boxcar
> > system, it's a matter of economics usually and a judgment based on the
> > type of work they expect to do. I've convinced one of the institutions I
> > teach at to switch over to the Boxcar bases and am trying to get another
> > to do the same. Students like the polyester backed plates and they do
> > very good work with them.
> > The kind of work that I usually undertake, however, requires a different
> > approach. I don't do cards or stationery; most of my work is relatively
> > large format and clarity of letterform or imaging is quite important. I
> > can't trust a mechanism that depends upon an adhesive interlay, whether
> > it be a Patmag or Boxcar base, or that has a less than absolutely less
> > than dense and rigid structure, and I certainly do not want to add that
> > concern to the presswork. Steel-backed plates on an industrial magnetic
> > base are extremely reliable and precise. From my experience I cannot say
> > that about polyester-backed plates. You can take that as pure prejudice
> > or just personal opinion. It may very well be a combination of the two.
> > Still, I had to run several large format prints today, which took up the
> > entirely of the bed on my Vandercook; lots of fine detail as well as
> > areas of solid, and I can assure you I would not have wanted to approach
> > this job in any other way.
> > Gerald
> > http://BielerPress.blogspot.com
> > Scott Rubel wrote:
> >> Gerald:
> >> I didn't know this. I have never used the polyester-backed plates,
> >> but had always thought that they were considered an equal to steel-
> >> backed. When people ask me what system to get into I have told them
> >> that it probably doesn't matter. My steel backed plates always amaze
> >> me the kind of detail they hold. Are you saying that the other kind
> >> just can't do it? When you look on the Boxcar web site they make some
> >> incredible claims as to the detail they can hold.
> >> --Scott
> >> On Feb 21, 2009, at 7:35 PM, Gerald Lange wrote:
> >>> Rob
> >>> The 94FL are Jet plates. You might want to upgrade to the Toyobo KF95
> >>> (.038" thickness). A bit harder of a plate and likely to hold details
> >>> better. Boxcar sells these as well. These are probably the "blue"
> >>> plates someone mentioned. More like a blue-green.
> >>> Tell the truth, I process both polyester-backed and steel-backed
> >>> plates for folks and I teach students how to use both, and I suspect I
> >>> have seen it all. Never in a million years would I print my own work,
> >>> or work for others, on a polyester-backed plate. But it definitely is
> >>> a nice easy button for folks who prefer the easy button.
> >>> Gerald
> >>> http://BielerPress.blogspot.com
> > ------------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> Yahoo! Groups Links
501 W. Fayette St. #222
Syracuse, NY 13204
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Well then, since I was at it long before you (and gave you a ton of
advice), perhaps you are competing against me? Sort of a straw dog
though. Or maybe I should start thinking of myself as the alternative
> We compete Gerald. Simple as that. You sell a competitive product.. . .
> > Harold and I are not in competition. I serve a very small local
> > community of clients (by default) and can only do a limited amount of
> > processing and I am certainly not looking to expand on that. I'm the
> > only guy here and I have lots of other stuff to do during the day.
> > Harold is a very valuable asset to the letterpress community and we do
> > business back and forth on a regular basis. Any information he could
> > provide regarding this phenomenon would certainly benefit us all.
> > Gerald
> > http://BielerPress.blogspot.com