SGIA Journal Graphic November/December 2016 - 70

Enhancing the front end
of screen printing (screen
making), to counter laid-back
production, will considerably
improve operation efficiency
and profit margins with lower
quantity work.

hyped that printing just an hour a day
will pay off a significant investment in
just a few months. Like most things taken
to the extreme, such may occur in rare
instances and certainly not with credible
companies making an honest living from
mainstream printing.
These sellable amounts have since
nosedived significantly, in quoted form
and in actuality for both roll and flatbed
systems, thus pushing amortization further
away from reality. Other than with certain
niche markets, rapid turnarounds and
outputting multiple locations, the scenario
may well create difficulties in making
PUC (print unit cost) more attractive to
win profitable business. Regardless, the
outcome of trying to lower PUC across
the board forces digital providers to be
shrewder and more creative with their
business model to turn a profit. Higher
output digital systems can help to lower
PUC if competitively cost-effective - and
so will screen print if allowed. Enhancing
the front end of screen printing (screen
making), to counter laid-back production,
will considerably improve operation
efficiency and profit margins with lower
quantity work.
Is It Qualifying or Quantifying
Volumes?

It cannot be stressed enough:
speed is money in printing.

68 | SGIA Journal

■

Much has been publicized recently about
digital taking on noticeably larger volume
of work from what the process typically
supported from its inception. One
recognizes inkjet technology and digital
platforms have advanced considerably,
particularly as it relates to increased
output rates. After all, it cannot be stressed
enough: speed is money in printing.
While these advancements translates into
handling more productivity during the
same working day, providing there is
enough jobs to take advantage of the higher
output, actual PUC may not necessarily
be lower due to heftier investments that
typically comes with the latest and greatest
systems. In fact, PUC could conceivably be
higher if calculated void of bias.
Be mindful that systems are often
sought to handle increasing workloads
and not necessarily to reduce PUC. In
other words, advancement in digital
output rates may well come at a price -
regardless of other desirable equipment
features might be thrown in the mix.
Nonetheless, that is not the crux of the
issue here, but rather the sensibility in
quantifying lower volumes profitably
with screen as opposed to higher PUC for
similar volumes with digital.

November/December 2016

It has been touted for the longest time
that the arrival of digital will bring about
the demise of screen print, yet the reverse
is fact. Screen clearly holds its own in
the business of large volumes and special
demands at any quantity. Its prowess is
getting stronger than ever and in more
diverse marketplaces, as well as creating
numerous new ones. This is largely due
to its innovative adaptability to go way
beyond the ordinary realms of applying
just a color or image.
On the traditional commercial front,
many screen production lines have been
replaced en masse with digital systems,
as if it were going out of fashion, since
it makes good business strategic sense
when catering to an increasing surge of
smaller quantity volumes. This is an area
where screen cannot hope to compete
due to excessively high PUC, particularly
with four-color process/multicolor work.
Escalating the situation further, print
buyers have largely gravitated towards
smaller quantities, and a larger mix of
varying sizes, despite such practice is at the
expense of increased frequencies.
Fierce competition in the world of
screen has always been abound; the
playing fields of business has become more
overwhelming to shore up the bottom
line. Digital has demonstrated itself to
be a very convenient all-round provider
at almost every turn. Nonetheless, when
one hears digital print volumes are
continuously increasing in leaps and
bounds, no doubt at the expense of screen
in most instances, one has to wonder
why - the underpinning reason of this
article. This is not a screen vs. digital or
digital vs. screen debate on the pros and
cons, but a practical review of where the
"volume" problem can be considerably
eased by simply increasing overall print
"speed" - effectively the driving force
that ultimately reduces PUC.
Digital has made a profound entry in
the printed imaging world by impressively
delivering multicolor prints of almost any
size, all without the significant upfront
hefty prepress charges that screen entails.
However, digital systems, substrate
compatibility or ink technology issues are
not under discussion here, nor are market
specialties, physical image sizes, finish
quality or contractual obligations, per se.
The only missing criteria is print quantity
or volume. Due to the high cost of screen
making, it is not profitable (never was)
or even desirable for short-volume work
when digital perfectly fulfils this role
and then some. There are exceptions, of
Visit SGIA at SGIA.org
SGIA Journal Graphic November/December 2016

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of SGIA Journal Graphic November/December 2016
