EnCore Modules:
Dispelling The Myths Of Digital Corrugated Printing BY BEN GINESI
In recent years, the corrugated industry has experienced a surge in demand for short and medium runs of high impact packaging, driven by growth in sectors such as the thriving craft beer market, where new product development generates a virtually constant stream of box de- sign variations. As converters explore the prospect of investing in digital
Customer Care Portal
Quality Management
printing equipment to keep up with demand and drive business growth, there are often miscon- ceptions about the economics and practicalities of running a digital printing process for corrugat- ed packaging – viewed through the lens of the conventional technologies converters are familiar with today Myth #1: Digital Is More Complex Than Tradi- tional Printing Methods Why does that myth exist? This primarily
TopGun
ScrapTrakker
Ben Ginesi
Sign & Drive Visual Analytics
comes from the beliefs held by converters who have experience and confidence working with traditional printing methods and processes. Flexographic printing (flexo) works well for high-volume, uncomplicated prints across a range of substrates. While lithographic printing (litho) has predominantly been used for high-quality prints with complex details. The fact that converters have printed in the same way in the corrugated industry for decades and are well versed in the process has led to the belief that the transition to digital will be difficult and burdensome – as may be expected when stepping away from the familiar and embracing a completely different process; but this is not necessarily the case. In theory, the digital printing process is simpler and shorter than both flexo and litho: you take the digital artwork, send it to the machine, and the machine prints it – which, if everything is set up correctly, is both far easier and more efficient than a traditional process with printing plates that require time-consuming mechanical setup. But just as with any oth- er piece of equipment, you need the right processes and people – ful- ly-trained people – to operate it. Myth #2: Digital Printing Consumables Are Too Expensive It is true that ink for digital presses can be more expensive than con- sumables for flexo or litho print, and many converters are in the mindset that the cost of ink per litre should be below a certain threshold for them to run a viable process. However, the cost of ink per litre can be a mis- leading indicator of the total running cost of digital printing equipment. Ink that may seem expensive at first glance often proves better val- ue at the bottom line, as better coverage of the substrate reduces ink consumption, lowering the cost per square metre of print. The need for primer as a consumable also feeds into the running cost, and inks that do not require pre-coating may deliver considerable savings. Once digital press users realise this, they can move from short and medium runs to longer runs, which increases the use of the press, and further enhances return on investment. Myth #3: Digital Presses Have A Large Footprint And Require A Spe- cialised Space Corrugate converters researching digital printing presses are often concerned about the size of the equipment and wonder if they have the space and resources to be able to create an environment in which CONTINUED ON PAGE 16
Advanced Planning Board
ScoreKeeper
Corrugator Scheduling
Automated Performance Costing
Partner Integrations:
14
www.boardconvertingnews.com
July 8, 2024
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online