NEED HELP - Fuji PJ plate vs Azura plate

[SteveAgfa]

Prepper -

You've brought up some good points.

<snip>
Azura is slower, 200mj/cm2 vs 120mj/cm2 for the LHPJ, will this make much difference on your machine, I don't know just something to consider.
<snip>

Emulsion speed vs. platesetter throughput are related, but are not quite as significant as you might think.
On some devices, there is little to no difference in throughput between Azura TS and a traditional thermal plate. With which device do you need to image, or, how many plates per hour do you need?


<snip>
Azura "chemistry" is just gum, LHPJ chem is like most thermal chem, so I'm told, around 12pH so can't be disposed of until neutralized? or has to be hauled away? (We are really low usage so for us that would mean about 12 gal Agfa vs. 42 gal Fuji to dispose of and the biggest reason is because the Fuji holds 7 gal in the machine).
<snip>

The difference is greater than you think. Azura's gum is "consumed" or applied to the plate during the course of operation, so when you get to about 1/3rd left in the jug, you remove, rinse, and replace with new. So, for a 20L jug of gum, you'll be left with about 7L (1.6 gallons) to dispose of properly. The gum has a neutral pH of about 7.

<snip>
Azura and other "process-less" plates don't have quite the resolution that the LHPJ does, and probably other conventional thermals too?
<snip>

What resolution do you need? Azura TS is rated at 2 - 98% at 200 lpi for 100,000 impressions. We have customers using Azura TS for FM20, although at run lengths typically no more than 50,000 impressions.


Good luck in your continued quest.

[hazzmatte]

Steve,

During my print test with the Azura plate we tested a job that we printed using the PJ plates. After comparing the 2 there was a difference in the low screen areas. The Azura had a slight "model" look in a graduated screen. The PJ plates printed smooth. My salesman said that this could be the screening used by the shop that did the Azura test plates.

What I am thinking is the Azua plate may have resolution equal to the PJ the plate itself may not be able to hold the same, clean dot as the PJ. My results are yet to be determined but it is a concern that will be looked at closely when the equipment is installed.

[Prepper]

Hazzmatte,

Looks like we will be going with the PJ, not definite yet, so maybe we can check back with you later to see how it goes for you and us?

[vansrv8er]

In my humble opinion, I would look at the entire picture. As far a Saphira, its an Agfa product offered by Heidelberg. This said Agfa WONT offer Heidelberg any support so you will have press mechanics working on this thing. How far away are they when you need them? How quickly can they respond? How many people do they have? Same questions for Agfa and the same questions for Fuji. I believe the support network is more important than the mechanics. With anything mechanical the wheels can and will fall off. The real question is who do you want to help you when this happens? I believe Fuji has the most resources from the pressroom to prepress to the latest in technology.
Again IMHO

[SteveAgfa]

vansrv8er:

Perhaps you have had direct experience with Fuji, and less so with Agfa. If you are located in the North American market, you might be surprised to learn that Agfa and Fuji share similar market share. I'll leave details to our annual report. As well, if you looked at quarterly and annual results, again you might be surprised at the performance of Agfa Graphics, vis-a-vis our worthy counterparts. I suggest that the overwhelming posts from satisfied Azura customers point to our ability to support the product in question.

Regards,

[has-been]

My how some things never change!
It has been quite a while since I have followed up on this forum but I see that Steve is still at it.
I think it wise to pay close heed to vansrv8er's comments.

Murray Billinghurst
Ind. ConsultantMSN.com

[cmitchprint]

vansrv8er:

Perhaps you have had direct experience with Fuji, and less so with Agfa. If you are located in the North American market, you might be surprised to learn that Agfa and Fuji share similar market share. I'll leave details to our annual report. As well, if you looked at quarterly and annual results, again you might be surprised at the performance of Agfa Graphics, vis-a-vis our worthy counterparts. I suggest that the overwhelming posts from satisfied Azura customers point to our ability to support the product in question.

Regards,

I acknowledge that companies can change and many do so quickly and for the better. But our shop is in the N. Alabama area and I haven't seen an AGFA rep since '94, probably because of the multitude of problems we had at that time of image falling off the plates. AGFA never found a solution, never admitted wrongdoing and hung us out to dry on thousands of dollars worth of plates that we stored and rerun, in which we had to remake with Kodak Polychrome. Kodak was replaced with Fuji and that is what we use now. We've, to date, had zero issues with Fuji plates. While I despise Fuji's customer service, they do make a good product.

[PKS]

Another point to consider is a thermal chemistry plate requires water so the processor will need to be plumbed. Water usage is also quite high. The Saphira Chemfree clean out unit does not require water and therefore no plumbing.

On our Suprasetter A52/A75, we run at engine speed with both plates.

On the Suprasetter, the Saphira Chemfree is rated to 250 line hybrid screen whereas our chemistry based Saphira Thermoplate PN and the PJ are rated to 400 line hybrid screen.

And as stated, Chemfree maintenance is a dream compare to conventional processors

Regards,

Mark

The Azura and Saphira Chemfree are the same plate, both manufactured by Agfa. Likewise the Saphira Thermoplate is also manufactured by Agfa. Regarding a comparison to the Fuji LHPJ plate, run length, resolution and press conditions should also be considered such as running with UV.

[Yager2007]

In regards to effluent waste with Azura TS it is minimal to none. Minimal meaning 1 quart for each 300 - 400 sq. meters of plate material processed. Please note this system requires no water wash. Therefore, your sewer rates also decrease. This system by fare is the most reliable and consistent sytem I have seen in my 31 years of plate manufacturering and technical support.

[has-been]

I acknowledge that companies can change and many do so quickly and for the better. But our shop is in the N. Alabama area and I haven't seen an AGFA rep since '94, probably because of the multitude of problems we had at that time of image falling off the plates. AGFA never found a solution, never admitted wrongdoing and hung us out to dry on thousands of dollars worth of plates that we stored and rerun, in which we had to remake with Kodak Polychrome. Kodak was replaced with Fuji and that is what we use now. We've, to date, had zero issues with Fuji plates. While I despise Fuji's customer service, they do make a good product.

You talk about remaking plates because of image loss and not getting answers from AGFA
At the same time you mention re-running plates after storage.
If the image loss is after storage, it is most likely "not" a plate problem. This is generally caused from improper treatment of plates before storeage.

Personally I would not store plates for re-runs as I discovered, many moons ago that the down-time, on press, caused by improper storage proceedures cost far more than remaking the plate in the first place.

I am not defending the AGFA product as I technically represented FUJI plates in Canada for 26 years.

If Steve reads this he will probably remember me.

Murray Billinghurst
Ind. Advisor