　　The arguments surrounding which type of ctp technology to choose have raged longer than most printers care to recall. What is undeniable however, is that ctp has speeded and smoothed the workflow and equally, neither violet nor thermal will ever be a panacea for every situation.
　　Keeping a hold on what is important is all about keeping distractions in perspective and with ctp it has been especially difficult to keep distractions at bay.
　　Over the last couple of years the thermal versus violet arguments have created more noise than most printers would care to hear. Of course, the arguments matter intensely to the developers, since their livelihoods depend on evangelising and promoting the one or the other, so it is understandable. Perhaps more important though is to keep in mind the objectives for ctp in the first place. For most jobbing printers, getting more out of the workflow is their top priority.
　　Little has changed
　　Despite advances in technology, little has really changed when it comes to deciding why to make the move to ctp. Ctp technology was invented in order to get more plates on press faster. It removes a step in the workflow, so that plates can be produced more economically and more quickly. Removing the film imaging stage means one less step for production and one less set of consumables costs. The time taken for imaging film and plate drops dramatically and plate quality is much enhanced, since direct to plate imaging creates a first generation dot and so minimises the risk of dot gain in prepress. For high volume plate producers these benefits were, and remain, the drivers for considering ctp in the first place.
　　Many high volume printers have also found they can come up to colour more rapidly with ctp imaging, and that it has greater stability and more precise dots on press. They have also seen a drop in the number of plate remakes, which means less expense. Ctp's precision and small dot size also make possible a greater range of screening options, which means some value added and even a competitive edge. Perhaps the most important benefit of ctp is the fact that it makes possible substantial production automation and streamlines prepress to be more efficient overall.
　　Such efficiencies are, however, not purely a function of ctp technology, but rather of workflow. One of the biggest problems for ctp production has been proofing, because the loss of a production stage also means the loss of a point at which errors can be spotted before the cost of correction starts to be painful. Successful ctp production lines are heavily dependent on accurate workflow management and proofing, and this has had an overall ameliorative effect on throughput efficiencies.
　　Suppliers of ctp technologies have generally offered Rip and workflow solutions tuned for their ctp output engines. However, recently there has been a gradual move in Rip development towards tighter integration with different types of workflow system. For example, Fuji has added technology to its Valiano Rampage Output Director so that its Luxel engines can be used with automated workflow management systems. CegWay makes it possible to drive the Fuji Rip and platesetter from non-Fuji workflow management systems such as Agfa's Apogee or Creo's Brisque.
　　Workflow improvement is one means of gaining greater productivity in plate production. There are basically three ways of upping plate production volumes, with improving workflow processes at the top of the list. Once the workflow is tight, adding shifts and working days is the next step, followed by additional plate lines, either with new or secondhand imaging engines.
　　Buying the best
　　All of these improvements are seriously enhanced if the platesetter purchased in the first place is the at the top of the productivity scale. Buying the best in class engine for the particular commercial printing application simultaneously provides the capacity for growth and a competitive advantage through the use of leading edge technology. It is also likely that by the time the workflow and output lines are running at full capacity around the clock, seven days a week, the engines will be fully amortised and due for replacement.
　　Any ctp and workflow conversation has to begin and end with JDF, even if there are no JDF implementation plans on the horizon. JDF is gaining considerable attention with publishers and print buyers alike, so at the very least printers should be aware of its main benefits. In ctp applications JDF can help monitor device usage and performance, feeding information back to other systems. It can, for example, report on processing problems, helping to identify possible problems with a device, or for tracking machines that consistently produce imaging errors.
　　JDF as load balancer
　　JDF can also be used as a means of load balancing across multiple engines and in large volume plate production environments this could be extremely helpful. JDF has the added benefits of providing management reports, perhaps based on production volumes for cross checking consumables usage, or even as support information for consumables contract negotiations. JDF can also provide reports on device usage for comparing productivity across lines or shifts. However, for many printers deciding what engine to purchase begins and ends with a conversation about plates. According to suppliers, although the market is still tough, ctp plate sales are on the up. Agfa, KPG and Fuji pretty much dominate the UK digital plate market for commercial applications, and Agfa is the only organisation offering plates based on three different technologies.
　　The Lithostar is an aluminium-based visible light technology, the N91 is Agfa's photopolymer option, and the company's preferred option for very long runs is Thermostar a polymer-based thermal plate.
　　Fuji is seeing rising sales as well with consumables and engine sales revenues for the first quarter 2003 rising. Revenue was up 8% for ctp related products with the Brillia LP-NV violet ctp plate doing particularly well. Sales of the Fuji thermal plates have also been healthy. There are three thermal and three violet plates in the Brillia line up, and Fuji has recently announced that both ECRM and Esko-Graphics have undertaken to endorse Fuji's violet plates.
　　There are many reasons for high volume printers to take the plunge with ctp and suppliers can answer most of their concerns.
　　Anxieties answered
　　Anxieties about such niceties as changing plates on press and staying in register, or combining plates imaged on different devices in the same run have largely been answered by the development community. The plate one chooses should only be about the printing job the plate has to do.
　　Quality is an obvious criterion but it is also a highly subjective one. Run length, speed of plate imaging on a given device, cost of the imaging engine and overall cost of ownership are all important factors to consider. As to the violet versus thermal conundrum high speed imaging and a longer laser life make violet attractive for many applications, but bakeable plates for really long run lengths and general all around robustness make thermal the obvious choice for others.
　　In the end it comes down to understanding what the day to day performance needs are for the plate and the imaging engine in a given situation. Unfortunately, there is no generic answer to that question.
　　Ctp engines
　　Ctp engines come in many flavours and these days high volume printers have plenty of options from numerous suppliers many of whom offer devices on an Oem basis. There are several high profile companies to start off with. Creo has long waxed if not lyrical, then definitely loud about thermal imaging. The company's eight-page Lotem and Trendsetter platesetters are acknowledged as highly precise, if not sizzlingly speedy engines. They combine Creo's Squarespot thermal imaging and a special thermal compensation system to ensure registration accuracy. These engines have the added attraction of being able to produce halftone contract proofs as well as plates.
　　When it comes to speed and quality Screen is probably one of the best places to start. The PlateRite 8000 is a thermal ctp engine that includes a range of engineering additions designed to optimise accurate throughput.
　　These include such things as an advanced clamping system and auto-balancing. This device can image up to 12 eight-up 2,400 dpi plates per hour and supports a wide range of plate sizes up to its maximum format.
　　Agfa is the only techno-secularist when it comes to imaging engines, since it offers technology for fans of both thermal and visible light imaging.
　　Agfa has done amazingly well with its Polaris device and there are hundreds of these engines installed around the world. Polaris is available in green (FD YAG) and purple versions in a range of configurations and speeds of up to 350 plates per hour at lower resolutions.
　　Fuji's Luxel devices are highly productive. The T-9000 eight-up thermal engines are able to image 12 plates at 2,400 dpi per hour, and the high speed option around 20. The company also has a violet technology, the Luxel Vx9600 engine.
　　Fuji has recently embarked on a quest to raise its ctp profile, based on the rising market acceptance of its products.
　　Heidelberg is another major supplier of ctp with both violet and thermal options. The Topsetter devices are based on Screen's technology but Heidelberg also has its own Prosetter violet engines. The base unit is a four-page internal drum device capable of imaging either silver halide or photopolymer plates up to a top resolution of 3,386 dpi. At 2,540 dpi the Prosetter F74 can image up to 24 plates an hour but this depends on the type of plate.