Remote Proofing is Outtasight

Summers—With high-resolution thermal transfer, is it reasonable for each location to have $250,000 in capital equipment? It becomes a cost/performance decision. Does it make sense to make proofs in one location and ship to others? Inkjet systems will not provide laminated proofs on a substrate. Thus, they will not match the exact appearance of the substrate. With high-resolution thermal transfer, you can proof on the final substrate, and there is a sharper halftone dot for extremely high linescreens. They can also reproduce metallic and opaque dots well. There are some distinct advantages of thermal technology. The extended capabilities of a thermal system are the ability to output on the substrate, print metallics, and create a halftone dot exceeding 175 lines per inch. However, an inkjet is 10 times less expensive to operate. So, the question is: Is cost control most important for a remote system? Many people say that for 10 percent of the operating costs of a thermal system and $12-15,000, they will give up metallics. If you don't care about costs, then thermal is OK. You're paying much, much more on multiple remote thermal systems. Is it practical? Probably not, unless you have some very, very critical work.