CTP Thermal plates advice

[bluekivi]

I didn't know about the smell problem. I wasn't here for the actual processing of the plates and I heard no complaints (although our plant has farms all around it so the whole place smells from time to time).

We have run Gold plates without the post-bake when the motor on that unit goes down and the only thing we notice is we get fewer impressions before wear begins to show. We are a heat-set web shop and some of our runs are pretty long. I wish I could give you numbers but I am out of the loop. :roll:

[zox]

Thanks bluekivi.

[bluekivi]

Glad I could help.

[GinSu]

We are using Fuji LH-PJ plates and are satisfied with quality.

We are going to start using Concentric screening soon and our test plates were absolutley marvelous. Even our platesetter service tech was surprised at how well he had it dialed in, we were holding the 1x1 (2438dpi) test grid without visible patterning on plate or press.

[pworlledge]

Originally Posted by zox

I know about POO48, they call it poo 48

Problem with that plate is smell.
Apparently when it bakes, some smell is coming out and people really hate it.
I even heard of some calling it poisonous.
Kodak has another plate in works to replace this one for this particular reason, I believe.

Thanks for suggestion, though.

I also heard that you can run Kodak Gold without post bake, anyone with experience there?

Let me weigh in here on this. We are a full time 20 micron shop and migrating more and more to 10 micron. We have used the POO plate since it came out last year. We chose this plate since it was based on the original 3M patent and had used this technology going all the way back to Spectratech then Mirius when Creo bought them out. I can tell you for sure the POO is based on that patent but it is a different plate for sure. We have fought that plate and had nothing but problems with it. It will be out of here in the next 60 days or less!!! Our pressman HATE it! We have a local competitor using that plate and they too are looking at going away from it. We also know of a couple of other similar situations not in our state. We tried the Fuji plates for a period and loved them. Let me also point out that according to Kodak technical release on 4-07 that the LH-PJ is certified for 10 micron. That is good if your aware of what goes into a plate to make it certified. For us we can deal with 1 oven if we must but I definately dont have room for 2 ovens. Why should you use 2 or even 1 for that matter when you can do the same with no ovens. We were interested in looking into the PTP plate but that will no longer be an option by 2008. There is new no bake hi-resolution technology Kodak is introducing soon.

[zox]

Thanks guys

[PantherMac]

I've been happy w/ the Thermal Direct plates from Kodak, and have run 100m impressions on 175 LPI jobs. Prior to that I worked at a shop where we ran the Gold and SwordExcel's. I definitely like the no-chem situation, and the pressroom has had nary a complaint.

- Mac

[Mickyj07]

For what it's worth, we use Fuji on our thermal platesetter and have been pleased with them, though any aluminium beats the polyester plates we were using before.

[Fatboysmart]

We also use Kodak Thermal Direct plates and so far we love it. No more chemicals, no baking, nothing... The only drawback is the slow speed of the plates, but for us it's fast enough to keep up with our presses, so no problems there.