Posted By: La Toya Hodge (6/22/2009)
Comment: The J Zarwan and Partners report "The Environmental Impact of a Printing Plate" is sponsored by Fujifilm UK, FujiFilm Canada and Kodak. Just a bit of food for thought...

Posted By: Derek Awalt (6/9/2009)
Comment: John, I have never questioned the explanation of Azura plate technology, but I do challenge the positioning of Azura plates as "chemistry free". With the press coverage of the Fujifilm announcement in changing their "chemistry free" plates to "low chemistry" plates and the recent blogging on PrintPlanet.com, I hope that my rationale is now understood. If not there is an article on WhatTheyThink.com http://members.whattheythink.com/home/tribute090609.cfm called "Clarifying CTP Terminology" that Andy Tribute wrote on this subject. I think Andy and I see eye to eye on this-

Posted By: John (6/7/2009)
Comment: Here is Agfa's response to your statements (clipped for brevity) the full text is here: http://printplanet.com/forums/computer-plate/17562-azura-plate-cleaner-solution Quote: Once again we're getting into semantics. ...due to its inherent features and benefits, about 80% of the "processless" plates from the Big 3 are Agfa plates. True - the clean-out solution of our original Azura is/was more like a detergent than gum, our new clean-out solution paired with Azura TS is more like a gum - it even smells like gum arabic. Our new Azura TS gum is brownish, has a neutral pH of 7, has an anti-bacterial agent, an anti-foam agent, and the plate protective gum. Plain old gum arabic it's not - but to use common parlance, it's a gum. As we had to coin a new genre for this technology, chem-free was chosen. The aim was to denote that there was/is no developer... that the image was defined and formed in the engine... the unexposed areas remained to be cleaned-out. We chose to do this off-press - given all the benefits. Steve Musselman, Agfa Graphics - USA Senior Corporate Account Executive

Posted By: Derek Awalt (6/5/2009)
Comment: John, For an objective view on the subject I would recommend that you download the J Zarwan and Partners report "The Environmental Impact of a Printing Plate". This report looked at the processing of plates and the three primary consuming resources including: chemistry used to develop or process the plates, energy to run the processing unit, and the water used to rinse the plate, dilute the chemistry or clean the unit. The report grouped plates into 4 categories: conventional chemically processed, reduced chemistry, "chemistry-free", and processless plates. To show how these different types of plates consumed these resources calculations were derived based on published product specifications and supplemented by customer data. Both Agfa Azura and Fujifilm Brillia HD PRO-V or Ecomaxx-V, categorized as "chemistry free" plates, consumed chemistry to produce plates. Studies like have cleared up a bit of the confusion around the use of the term "chemistry free" and have lead to Fujifilm changing their description of their plates that clearly use some form of chemistry. The results speak for themselves.

Posted By: Dr Z (6/5/2009)
Comment: well, yes, John. However, Agfa also advertise :Azura as chemistry free (and have said in their ads they are the ONLY chemistry-free plate). BTW, there's no gum in their gum.

Posted By: john (6/5/2009)
Comment: I don't think Agfa is misleading anyone. They are quite clear about the chemistry-free aspect of there process. From their website: "During imaging, Thermofusable particles within :Azura TS are fused together by the thermal laser to create an image. A physical process then bonds the image to the substrate, with absolutely no chemical processing involved. A dedicated cleaning unit uses gum to finish the plate and clean the un-fused areas, leaving a press-ready :Azura TS plate." Note their claim: "absolutely no chemical processing involved" Agfa is consistent with that caveat in their marketing. I don't understand your problem with what they say.