+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 111

Thread: What screen you use? AM, FM, mixed, concentric...

  1. #31
    Moderator super silja will become famous soon enough super silja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    172
    Thanks
    48
    Thanked 40 Times in 29 Posts
    Printers have a lot of trouble to get consistent output.
    ... Fountain solution, blankets, paper type, ink air humidity....
    Especially if they don't use instruments they have a lot problem to print and/or to repeat job.

    With FM screen, because 2D of non linearized plates is not same, you can't print with proper press linearisation.
    Also color space is different , not so much, but is visible. All this things make presroom operator life harder.

    If you have system under control non periodic screening (FM, Staccato, Specta, Stohastic,) give better output. Old fashion printer company with visual control, better to stay with periodic screening.

    I could not say that is not possible, but avoid CTF, Violet CTP, old type of Creo.

    Concetring screening is Esko marketing stupid trick. They say that with screening of this type you will print without dot gain! (something like Kodak square spot)
    Also CS is not easy to control. Setup require additional step, and for this step you visualy judge what is good or bad.

    FM printed stuff allways looks better. Finer gradation, finer details.

  2. #32
    Donor Pathma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    18
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
    Hi I am using eleptical dot for my screen printing. Can anyone suggest the best angle to be used for screen printing.

  3. #33
    PRC Member mao72 will become famous soon enough mao72 will become famous soon enough
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    221
    Thanks
    1,941
    Thanked 124 Times in 55 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by leila View Post
    I use AM screening too... I really would like to use FM screening, but I still work with films + plate copy, and FM screening is very difficult to copy correctly on a plate
    which are the difficulties?

  4. #34
    PRC Member saifou will become famous soon enough
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    216
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 61 Times in 51 Posts
    ok
    AM for general prupose printing
    FM for hight end printing (need more care for registration need better quality plate)
    hybrid for flexo
    mixed AM FM used when we use gradient spot to prosses to prevent moire

  5. #35
    PRC Member MrApogee will become famous soon enough
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    228
    Thanks
    140
    Thanked 87 Times in 67 Posts

    AM , FM , HybridScreening

    My first use of FM was in 1993!!! with a Agfa SelectSet7000 and a MAN Roland, oh my good CTF and FM Screening called cristal raster fom Vignold it was a horror because using CTF and than copy to a conventional plate.
    In 2003 I was one of the first users of Sublima and CTP and I was shortly before killing my life. There was no ISO Standard, no good calibration and so on...
    In 2006 I tried CristalRaster from Agfa again but now with CTP, but the pressroom Guys get horrible, because washing and washing and washing the Mashines.
    In 2010 I tried MagnumX 32 Micron and 21 Micron and this is much better. It looks a little bit like Staccato Screening.
    BUT calibrating and calibrating and calibrating the CTP curves to have a good result.
    I made a special Workaround for me to handle this Jobs, because not only the calibration of the curves is important...
    So every company has to make their own workarounds to handle FM jobs. This is a horror job for the Administrators in the prepress, so the guys in the pressroom have nothing to do, because they are to stupid for this. Up the plate into the mashine and if the result is not good, always the prepress is guilty.
    This is a very good prepress forum not a pressforum, if think no printer is looking in a forum like this, to learn something new for better printing results.
    (Ask your Printers for the ISO 12647, or a Paperclass e.g. PT1 or Fogra Standard e.g. 45L. You will get no answers)
    Printers be sorry, but i have a long expierence with you:
    THE PREPRESS IS ALWAYS GUILTY
    Have a nice day all Forum users
    MrApogee

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MrApogee For This Useful Post:

  7. #36
    Junior Member sweiss105 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    26
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    I work at a flexo printer and we use EskoArtwork, with that said we are using their new HD screening technology that inserts "support dots" in with the 1% so that dots are not washed off the plate. We also are in the testing phase of HD2.0 that uses a micro cell in the solid areas to make your SID greater.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to sweiss105 For This Useful Post:

  9. #37
    PRC Member DoctorBlade is on a distinguished road DoctorBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
    I have tried both Maxtone (hybrid screen) and Staccato (FM screening) from Kodak. For offset printing, I would say FM works better and had very good results. Others say that it is hard to print FM screening but I think otherwise.

  10. #38
    PRC Member DoctorBlade is on a distinguished road DoctorBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by super silja View Post
    Printers have a lot of trouble to get consistent output.
    ... Fountain solution, blankets, paper type, ink air humidity....
    Especially if they don't use instruments they have a lot problem to print and/or to repeat job.

    With FM screen, because 2D of non linearized plates is not same, you can't print with proper press linearisation.
    Also color space is different , not so much, but is visible. All this things make presroom operator life harder.

    If you have system under control non periodic screening (FM, Staccato, Specta, Stohastic,) give better output. Old fashion printer company with visual control, better to stay with periodic screening.

    I could not say that is not possible, but avoid CTF, Violet CTP, old type of Creo.

    Concetring screening is Esko marketing stupid trick. They say that with screening of this type you will print without dot gain! (something like Kodak square spot)
    Also CS is not easy to control. Setup require additional step, and for this step you visualy judge what is good or bad.

    FM printed stuff allways looks better. Finer gradation, finer details.
    I agree that it is improper for Esko to claim that there will be minimal dotgain if you use concentric screening. However, Kodak did not advertise that there will be minimal or no dotgain if you use Square Spot. If I understood correctly, Square Spot is to image the smallest possible dot on plate, like 10 microns when used with Quantum machines. They use it for 10 micron Staccato printing.

  11. #39
    Junior Member sunsailor is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Peru
    Posts
    14
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 16 Times in 5 Posts

    the many Harlequin screens

    Maxtone and Staccato are Kodak (Creo) names for Harlequin's MicroScreening and HDS (Harlequin Dispersed Screening) (2nd order Stochastic).

    Right now for Harlequin you have the choices:
    - AM traditional with various shapes, it's supercell technology
    - HLS = line screening (similar to Scitex Geometric Dot)
    - HDS = FM 2nd order
    - Microscreening = hybrid but without minimum dot limit, replaced by HXM
    - HXM = cross-modulated hybrid, like Agfa Sublima, which minimum dot limit
    - Digital Modulated (DM) = this is a plugin by Hamillroad, also OEMd to ECRM ; similar to FM but with different patterns, looks like 1st-Gen CrystalRaster but works.
    - Spekta (1st gen and 2nd gen) = proprietary from Screen, excellent, similar to some 2nd order FM but with more defined structure and very differentiated between colors; only runs on Screen rips.
    - Lucid Dream's hybrid, an external plugin

    any other??

    If someone can upload installer for latest Screen HQ rip + Spekta Plugin, and indicate dongle serial number and Spekta installation code, maybe a friend of mine can try to make emulator with that dongle serial number...

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to sunsailor For This Useful Post:

  13. #40
    Donor antonioruiz is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kospe View Post
    I use traditional AM screen for offset printing.

    But I think that with FM screen the result on gradient is better.

    Any experieces about? Does someone use the ESKO concentric screen? With what result?
    I use Hybrid Screen 300lpi for almost every work in Coated Paper, for Uncoated Paper I prefer AM Classic Screen 200lpi

  14. Your ad here

  15. #41
    Junior Member splashrip is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    21
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    i use for standard EllipticalP 175 lpi or 200 lpi AM screening at c15 m135m y0 an B75.

    FM ist only used on 5% of jobs (furniture an textiles)

  16. #42
    PRC Member inkytoy is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    53
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
    The printers I work with are unfortunately reluctant to adopt FM screening. Usually AM @200 lpi/2400 rd or el. I've seen amazing results with FM screening on rich detailed hires photos, especially skins. I recommend the reading of the heidelberg introduction to screening.. really worth it !
    HTTP://www.heidelberg.com/wwwbinaries/bin/files/dotcom/de/prinect/expert_guide_screening_tech.pdf
    cheers

  17. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to inkytoy For This Useful Post:

  18. #43
    Member josemapenta is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    45
    Thanks
    34
    Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts

    Cool Taffeta

    I'm sure all (almost) of you know staccato, well taffeta is the fujifilm version, better than, fm screening with minus problems for printers by it's modulated dot size, so take a tast to the fuji screens (taffeta and cores, this for 300lpi at 2400dpi or 200lpi at 1200).

    You can read a brochure of the FujiFilm screens (Taffeta and CoRes, how they works) [URL="http://www.fujifilm.com.sg/Documents/products/graphic_systems/pdf/workflow/ff_gs_cores_taffeta.pdf"]here.[/URL]

    Regards.
    Last edited by josemapenta; 06-13-2011 at 08:49 AM. Reason: add info

  19. #44
    Junior Member splashrip is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    21
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    thanks @inktoy for this interesting link.

    excellent brochure.

  20. #45
    Junior Member lululoft is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
    almost all printer dislike FM screeing because they are so busy
    to produce an acceptable print result with AM screens.
    for most of them is this heavy enough ...


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Spooler for SCREEN 4300S
    By elchib in forum PDF & Workflow
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-16-2016, 07:27 PM
  2. Screen Trueflow SE 6.0
    By worker in forum Full Software
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 09-18-2012, 08:53 PM
  3. Spooler for SCREEN 4300S
    By elchib in forum Requests
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-25-2011, 06:47 AM
  4. SCREEN PDFTrap Editor
    By duninda in forum Recycle Bin
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-03-2011, 11:59 PM
  5. Dot Tiff Controller - Screen
    By tuoigin in forum Requests
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-17-2010, 03:50 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts