I often find myself trying to be more “green” in my own home. I carpool and recycle and conserve wherever I can. However, recently there has been a lot of focus put on the total impact of an action rather than one specific part of it. To give you an example, a car such as a Mini Cooper may have a lower environmental footprint through the lifetime of the car, including assembly and disposal, than a hybrid or electric. The creation and disposal of the lithium battery in these cars can be incredibly taxing on the environment. While the emissions during the lifetime of these cars are lower, the overall carbon footprint is greater than the Mini.

As many people have told me, printing is basically ink on a substrate. More often than not, that substrate is paper. Be it gallant shimmering lustro bond or down-and-dirty newsprint, the industry would not function without this most used and processed commodity.

As a printer, or someone who is involved in the industry, I’m sure you’ve heard all the tricks of the trade.

Metrix is an imposition software, but it’s unlike any other imposition software I’ve ever dealt with.

While I have many good things to say about Metrix, I should note it’s not the perfect software, and it’s not for everyone. For those of you who are currently using an imposition software that is integrated with your workflow, I would advise you to think about not only the cost of the software, but the costs of training your employees and the lost production efficiencies that come along with a system change. This goes for any system really, not just imposition. That being said, if you are looking for ways to improve productivity in the long run, software is certainly a place you can still find great bang for your buck.

Getting back to Metrix, there is one huge selling feature as far as I’m concerned – the automatic layout feature. The system offers you the ability to input multiple items at multiple sizes with multiple quantities and will then produce the most efficient layouts possible. As someone who used to do this all manually at various points in my career, this is an amazing achievement in technology.

Gallery: Metrix screen captures (click to enlarge)

There aren’t too many companies where this sort of combo running would be enough to make or break a business, but for those who do a fair bit of this, the software pays for itself relatively quickly. The downside to this is that in previous versions of the software it was unable to calculate forms in various printing methods. All the items were laid-out sheetwork, work and turn, or perfecting. You could not have three forms sheetwork followed by the fourth work and turn. Of course, for Web printers, this would not have any impact. The other shortfall is that the system will always put one item on one form and not take into account that you could have the same item on multiple forms to reduce the length of a print run. But that being said, the system makes short work of even the more complex layouts. Even if the presented layouts aren’t always exactly as desired, they are a marvelous starting point if nothing else.

Many of you might look at this tool and think that it almost sounds more like a planning and estimating tool than layout software. I would argue that it’s equal parts of both. An estimator can use the tool to create a layout for an estimate or a production coordinator can use it to produce a layout concept for prepress; there is a minimal amount of time and energy required to create a proper, workable prepress layout. Now, in most cases, it actually would be counterproductive to have an estimator use this tool for every estimate as most estimates don’t become jobs. But, for those jobs that could employ the use of Metrix, the bulk of the work for a proper layout is already done. In fact, using the software takes a little more time than actually drawing a layout freehand.

While it’s great on production, there are a few more concerns on the prepress side of things. For one, the files are fixed when they come to prepress, so a Mac operator would not be able to change them on the fly, unless he/she has a copy of the software and training. I have also heard that there is no apparent time savings on placing files into a Metrix imposition as opposed to more traditional imposition software. In addition, the files are exact when they come to prepress and, as a result, must be made perfectly. In order to do this, whoever is creating the files must know the exact dimensions and orientation of the file before beginning the process. In essence, the file must be reviewed and documented before it can be planned. However, the onus for layouts, marks, and just about everything in regards to imposition is no longer the burden of prepress.

Small shops, digital shops and those doing repetitious work should not investigate this software though. But, for those shops looking for a leg up on impositions, Metrix just might be the software.

For more information on the software, visit Lithotechnics.

When JDF was originally rolled out in 1993 by Heidelberg, it was received much the same way most things are in the print industry – with optimistic caution. It sounds wonderful, it’s a brilliant concept, and it will change how we do business, but when?

True to the status quo of the industry 16 years later, JDF is still not all we were led to believe. I’m not here to bash JDF though. In fact, I am more a believer now then I have ever been in the concept and true functionality of JDF.

Like most things in life, JDF isn’t perfect; it has taken time to grow, mature and improve. Sixteen years is a lot of time, but we have seen monumental improvement. And it seems 2010 will be the decade for JDF. I truly believe that companies that take full advantage of hardware, software and MIS that are JDF compliant will excel in the uncertain printing world of tomorrow.

The one thing that always kills printers is errors. Whether human, mechanical, acts of “you know who,” or otherwise, any instance where parts of a job must be processed multiple times is a waste of resources. The resource can be something as small as five minutes of time, or as expensive as three days on press. These loses always add up, and the more steps taken to ensure they don’t occur, the better.

I will admit that I have made a few mistakes in my printing business lifetime that have ended up costing the company money. Every person, every out-of-date system, every flawed process, every under-cared-for machine is a potential loss waiting to happen. Some of these we can’t control, or can’t change, but we can always try to limit the amount of interaction with these things to keep the potential issues to a minimum. That’s really all JDF is – a minimizer.

The concept of JDF is greater than the tool itself, and if you’re not onboard, you’re going to have a hard time keeping your financial head above water.

The basic concept of JDF is to minimize the amount of physical document handling necessary to produce any given job by increasing the amount of digital information transferred to various components of the entire print shop. When I say “physical handling,” I am not just referring to someone picking up the docket from his/her desk and carrying it to prepress or the bindery; I am also talking about the amount of information that has to be manually transposed by individuals from the docket to their station, or from one resource to another. This functionality of the software not only saves time by minimizing the amount of time needed for physical information transfer, it also reduces the total amount of time needed by each person when handling the job. Without going into too much more detail, it’s plain to see that devices and software that save you time will end up saving you money in the long run.

Alright, for the flip side of the coin: what are the downsides? Well, for starters, you have to integrate the software into your current shop. That means investments in upgrades to existing machines and software to JDF compliant versions, or investing in new software or hardware that is JDF compliant. Then, you’ll need to invest in changing your process to take advantage of the full power of the resource.
I am in sheer awe of places that have invested thousands of dollars on software or hardware and don’t at least try to take advantage of all the wonders that they have to offer.

Finally, because all the data does carry through so well, there is now a huge burden put on entering the information right the first time. Not that there isn’t in a normal workflow, but in a JDF workflow, getting it right the first time is especially important.

With all those cons in mind, I still think the benefits far outweigh the costs, especially when you consider that the costs are often one-time heavy expenditures, but the savings are present from then on.

Many companies that sell JDF related products report that their products can pay for themselves in anywhere from two years to six months. Taking all that into consideration, I’d say that the concept and the notion is nothing less than JDF’ing great!

If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me johnathonanderson@graphicartsmag.com

Over the years, I have enjoyed the opportunity to work for a few different types of printers. I have also been fortunate enough to view business environments outside of the world of print, and I have to say that we do a great job of trying to further our industry. Perhaps, one of the greatest opportunities for us, as printers, to reduce our environmental footprint would be in our offices rather than in our plants.

Now, I’m not naive enough to think that the plant isn’t a much larger consumer of energy and resources, but the plant is also something you keep constant tabs on. The plant is something that you and your customer focus on, and the efficiencies that you achieve there show up in your bottom line. In short, the plant is a place that cannot be overlooked. The office section, however, is an overhead cost that is often overlooked. Some simple energy and cost efficient decisions up front can save your company hundreds or thousands of dollars a year.

Let’s start with all the simple stuff that I’m sure you’re all aware of, but I’ll mention anyway. Turning off lights, computers and printers at night and on weekends adds up on your power bill over a year. Machines that are asleep still draw power on a continuous basis, and unlike your home that may have two computers, your office would presumably have a few more. Lights can be set on motion detectors to help keep power consumption to strictly what is needed. These can be particularly great in low traffic areas, such as storage rooms. Something a little more drastic, but along the same lines, would be removing all the fluorescent lights from the office section and replacing them with more energy efficient fixtures. Taking this one step further would be increasing the amount of natural light in the space by using skylights or opening spaces up with more exterior windows.

Reducing your paper consumption is another great way to decrease the amount of waste your office produces. Now, I know as printers that point goes against absolutely everything we stand for. But, if you think about it, most companies have their own in-house desktop printers or copy machines, and this sort of printing is no longer commercial or purchased from “printers.” So, while the sentiment is understandable, it’s time that we moved past it when it makes economic sense for us.

Now, if you don’t have the time or the resources to reinvent your workflow to reduce the amount of printing that needs to be done on the office copier, then simply printing items double-sided where applicable should reduce the amount of paper consumption. Can’t print double-sided? How about switching to a stock that is 100% recycled or at least has a hefty recycled content. The paper itself may actually cost a little more, but it is something you can point out to clients when they come for a visit, and even something they might pick up on and purchase from you in the future. This notion can be carried forward onto your business cards, envelopes and virtually any paper product you choose to use in the office. I think the best way to reduce this part of your footprint is to minimize the dependency on paper altogether.

The one last office location that you’ve probably overlooked is the kitchen. Most medium to large-size shops tend to have a lunchroom, but how environmentally-friendly is the room itself? A bit of an odd question, but think about it. The majority of the garbage from your office area is from the lunchroom. People purchase lunches or bring in plastic bags, and it all ends up in the dump. Certain things you can do to reduce the amount of garbage is to ensure that there are properly marked and easily identifiable recycling containers for all recyclable products, including styrofoam.

Next, would be to provide employees with dishes, cutlery and mugs as well as a dishwasher so that disposable items are not used. Providing a fridge to keep leftovers and microwaves to heat them up is another way to ensure less waste. Barring all that setting trash and garbage goals, or having a trash-free lunch day (much the way some schools do) is a great way to encourage people to get involved and aware of some of the environmental issues that we will all have to deal with.

While none of these ideas are groundbreaking or mind-blowing, I hope that they have made you aware of some of the simpler ways we can all help make our offices a little greener.

Whether you are a simple copy shop or the most sophisticated web printer in the world, all printing types have one thing in common – bindery or finishing. The finishing can be something as simple as putting sheets into a box, or as complex as a double perfect bound book with magnets used to hold the spines together (laugh if you want, but I actually quoted this at one point!).

Bindery is in a bit of a predicament though, as the world begins its gradual, yet eventual move from print-based media – bindery is becoming an afterthought.

Often, when I meet people new to the industry (and new to estimatation), they make the mistake of assuming that bindery departments or trade shops have the ability to work with whatever is given to them. Jobs are planned or estimated in a way that is most efficient for the plant, without much consideration for the bindery.

While sometimes this is the most cost effective way to do things, often it is not. Bindery has seen the least innovation of any section of print. The majority of the equipment has not seen a major change in decades, and handwork is still a staple for many complex projects. Having said that, this lack of innovation may actually be beneficial to the job market in Canada; the Bureau of Labour statistics projects the following through 2014:

5.6% growth in production jobs;
9.6% growth in supervisors and managers;
8.1% growth in job printers;
14.2% growth in bindery workers.

As you can see, print is the sector that will experience the most growth by a large margin over the next six years or so.

Because bindery is nearly forgotten, there are rarely a vast number of people applying for open positions. Not only are there few people applying, there are even fewer who have experience, especially to work on the more complex machinery.

This may eventually lead to a shortage of skilled workers in the field of bindery. If such a shortage occurs, trade binders will be inundated with orders due to shops being unable to finish products on their own premises. Skilled workers will command larger and larger salaries, and shops will be at wits end to keep workers who are headhunted by the top shops. In short, the bindery end of things will be a train wreck.

Okay, so after all the doom and gloom, let’s look at the positive side and evaluate what we can do to move forward. If the situation does become desperate, companies will be forced to hire workers and train them, bringing more people into our industry and reinvigorating the working pool. The attention may bring print into the spotlight again, and help us gain better training programs through the government and various other outlets of education.

We should begin the process now so that we are proactive. While the labour isn’t skilled, the machinery is. Now may be the best time to find a piece of bindery equipment on the cheap, and train some people in your plant on how to use it. While you may want to avoid training your workers on live jobs, training isn’t the worst thing to invest your money in, given the slow pace of the industry at the moment. For any enterprising bindery shops, or institutions of higher learning out there, starting a training program to supplement your income might not be the worst idea in the world. Simple workshops and various other short, low cost training programs might help those looking for work find something in our industry; this may also appeal to shops looking to train their own employees.

Regardless of the scenario we find ourselves in, the industry will adjust. But, it’s important to note what a vital part of our industry bindery is; not giving it the credit it deserves is a sure-fire way of compromising the strength of our industry as a whole.

Conventional wisdom dictates that there are limitations to each of the individual printing processes. Web is geared for long runs on only a few substrates; Sheetfed is only economical between 1000 and 50,000 impressions, or when the substrate can’t work in a web machine; Flexo is a packaging process; Screen printing is limited to very short runs on ridged substrates.

Flatbed machines are an extension of digital printers, but their limitations have been the lack of economies of scale on longer print runs and the inability to print on more difficult substrates. While the first issue remains the same, UV flatbed printers have virtually eliminated the second issue. These innovative machines can print at a rate of 4000 sq. ft/hr and can get you up to 1000dpi on the sheet. However, the best part of the technology is that it’s not limited to sheets. UV flatbeds can print on certain kinds of vinyl, PVC, styrene, lexan, foam, corrugates board, card stock, metal, polyethylene, polyester and acrylic surfaces. Notice the word “certain” in the previous sentence. That’s because while this technology has made great leaps and bounds, there are still only a limited number of those types of materials that are approved for use in UV flatbed machines.

What might be more amazing is that this process uses the same ink for all the substrates mentioned. Unlike screen and many other types of printers who change their ink types depending on the substrate, the UV flatbed process uses the same inks for all substrates. While this helps explain why only a limited number of the substrates work with the process, the fact that it all uses the same ink means there is no wash-up or changeover time lost and ordering inks is a no-brainer.

Production range, however, is still limited. The optimum range of printed pieces for this process is 25 - 1000 impressions. This technology seems to work best in a screen shop as a complementary piece of equipment, and it works with the printer’s current product offering. Not only would the machine be able to contribute its own business, it would work as a one-off proofing system, mimicking the actual output of screen press on the same substrate.

The equipment is not abundantly expensive, nor is it cheap. A basic 6-color inking system sells for under $200,000.
Ah yes, but what about training? Most retailers of this technology feel that individuals with good basic computer skills can master the inkjet software in a matter of weeks with little-to-no additional training. If you want to invest in training (always a good idea in my mind), one week or less of onsite training should be sufficient.

So is this technology the last hurdle that has to be cleared in order for digital to become THE printing process? Obviously there are still many issues that have to be addressed. The run length is still the one factor that keeps people from using the process for a huge majority of print jobs, but the increasing ability to print on a multitude of surfaces means that the factors that draw people away from digital processes are being diminished. It may be years away, but it does look like digital will be the technology used on the bulk of print jobs in the future, and the UV flatbed is just one innovation that is helping to move business in that direction.

There are a number of reasons why digital and offset don’t work together more often. The speeds, costs, and production of both processes are completely dissimilar, and there are few areas of overlap—except for variable printing done on offset pieces.

The higher cost per unit of variable data printing is often outweighed by a greater return on investment (ROI), which can be as much as three times greater than that of a traditional static-printed page. Specific and targeted prints are thought to be far more effective, more appealing, and more able to draw in consumers than their mass-printed counterparts. Printing variable elements on offset-printed pieces is a hybrid printing technique with much potential, but too often it fails—not because of the technology, but because of the data we are putting into it.

As the old adage goes, “garbage in, garbage out”. Companies frequently “data mine” in an attempt to extract subtle nuggets of information from extensive generic databases. While the effort is commendable, the results have been dismal. One major problem with data mining is that none of the information discovered is truly factual. The inferences made about what men, women, teens, seniors, Ontarians, and Canadians want are just that—inferences. Pre-existing databases were not set up to be used for variable data print. Data may also be out of date or contain conflicting information from merged databases.

The solution to such database problems may seem to be creating new data yourself, but do you remember the last time someone called or emailed asking you to take a survey? Did you do it? I didn’t think so. The largest problem with getting new information is that, in an age where an increasing amount of personal information about us can be located on the Internet and the incidence of crimes such as identity theft and fraud are rising, people keep their information close to their chests. Consumers are simply reacting in a logical way to the environment that they find themselves in.

Faced with survey non-completion, companies can choose instead to keep tabs on consumers with or without their knowledge. Websites make this particularly easy, as companies can see what you looked at and bought, when you bought it, what else you looked at, and much other information. However, website tracking may alienate patrons concerned about their privacy. Being open about tracking may lead the odd customer to browse elsewhere, and secret tracking can become the target of legal action if there aren’t proper disclaimers.

So what is the best course of action for making your variable all it can be? I have always been a proponent of honesty as the best policy. Try sending an email or letter to all your loyal customers, informing them of your desire to serve them better by making sure they only receive the information they want in the format of their choosing. Use a one page multiple choice survey to start and then adapt it as need be. Offering small, nominal compensation for the completion of the survey isn’t a bad idea either. If people don’t fill it out, you’re no worse off than you were before you sent it out. If people respond, you are getting the best kind of information possible with the potential of getting more. Just don’t ask too much too soon, or too often. The perception of “company that cares” can quickly turn to “company that’s prying.”

Without information well-suited to the devices we have, variable data printing will not live up to its potential. While it may be years or even decades before we finally come up with the absolute best technology and data—and the programs to make them work together—we can still harness what we have now to the best of our abilities. So start digging deep into your data!

As always, send questions and comments to johnathonanderson@graphicartsmag.com.

The currently-forecast economic slowdown is the perfect time for businesses to seriously consider lean manufacturing. A slow season is an ideal time—though any time is good—to figure out how your company can do more with less.

Before lean manufacturing the traditional way to look at your bottom line was “Cost + Profit = Price”, but these days, consumers have a pretty good idea of what they think the price should be, which means that “Profit = Price (fixed) – Cost”. The only true way to increase your profit today is to decrease your costs; that’s not easy in our industry, but it is doable.

There are several approaches that you can incorporate to help trim the fat on a process, but be careful that you don’t implement something too dramatic too quickly. These ideas are meant to improve your bottom line, and any movement in the opposite direction should be examined immediately.

Let’s begin with the Kaizen approach, which is simple and easy to implement. The idea is to empower employees to help recognize, identify, and eliminate wasteful behavior. While one would think that employees would voice concerns about waste on a regular basis, it is easy to fall into a routine. Try mentioning the point in a memo or email, and include a small reward for those who find significant savings. Be sure to look at the overall impact of any suggestions and explain why those you reject are not being used. This further understanding of the process in general may improve productivity on its own.

SMED is an approach which emphasizes zero set-up time. In print this seems far fetched—if not impossible—but reviewing all your set up procedures, and the productivity of crews and operators, may be valuable in identifying where productivity is lagging. One of the main approaches behind this method is good ergonomics or space set-up. Eliminating distance travelled or backtracking that needs to be done with materials helps reduce the time needed for the process in general. The movement of materials is also part of the set up. Unfortunately this may not be best observed in slower times, as some operators tend to take their time when they are not rushed, and rightly so. I would much rather take a few extra minutes to get something right than rush through it and have to do it over again.

Poka-yoke is the idea of zero waste. Again not totally possible in print, but certainly an area where minimums can be achieved and reducing waste can save a company hundreds of thousands of dollars in wages, materials, and time. Even the smallest savings here can add up over the course of a year; multiply savings across a few departments and the number becomes very staggering. Poka-yoke can be examined in detail during slower times, as it’s a great time for operators to be meticulous in finding ways of reducing waste. It may be best to attempt experiments of this nature with jobs that are easier to run before gambling on new methods with a critical quality job. Zero waste refers to both make-ready waste and failure waste. Saving sheets on the make ready isn’t saving them at all if they are wasted during the run.

Finally, there is Just In Time or JIT. Many of you are familiar with this idea from Dell Computers, who make PCs to specific specs as they are ordered. JIT reduces the amount of inventory kept on the floor in order to save space and time. Customers are increasing their time demands on the print industry—which makes inventory of standard items increasingly essential—but too much inventory may take space away from other, more valuable things that could be done with the space. JIT would be applied very differently in web and digital shops.

There are several other methods of Lean manufacturing that I have not mentioned, and I encourage you to do your own independent research on the subject. Your plant, your jobs, your customers, and your employees are the forces that will allow or not allow any of these methods to work effectively in your operation. Lean is doing more with less, but you must implement it across the board, and not just in one or two departments. So tighten up those belts—it might be the best thing you’ve ever done.

In 1850, a group of journeymen printers gathered in the Tammany Hall in New York City to listen to the distinguished printer Horace Greeley discourse on training issues facing the industry at the time. “The curse of our trade is the ease of competition,” he said, and what was true then rings just as true today.

In a time when anyone can grab a digital machine and call himself a printer, we must continually defend our craft, and not only to those who would seek to replace print with radio, television, or the internet. We must also defend the craft of print when speaking to those looking to further their education in our industry.

Back when print was in its infancy, printers trained by becoming apprentices, or by working for their parents in the family print shop. From there, trade schools were established, and then college courses, and finally the university undergraduate, graduate, and even doctoral courses available today in the field of print. But is a degree in print the best educational investment for young people today? With so many other avenues available, is print the land of opportunity and creativity it once was?

The answers to these questions are so complex that I would not dream of suggesting that I know the answers, but they are nonetheless important questions to ask. To aid in answering these questions, I am working on a study regarding print workplace satisfaction, in conjunction with the Rochester Institute of Technology, which can be found at the following website: http://tinyurl.com/4dnnr6

I would be delighted to have as many Graphic Arts Magazine readers as possible filling out the survey, in order to help answer many important questions about education for the print workplace.

Once I have completed my research, I will be back with an article on my findings, but in the meantime I need to have findings to report on. If, at first glance, this survey looks similar to something you may have received as a Ryerson University GCM alumni, that’s because it is in fact the same survey. Alumni have received this survey through the Ryerson database, and if you have already completed it I thank you. If you aren’t a Ryerson alumni, I would still appreciate your participation. I want to see how graduates of established programs are doing and how their counterparts who have been educated in the workplace are doing.

We as an industry must understand our current state before we can make improvements in the future, and our education is the foundation on which we will build our future. By participating in this brief survey, you are helping me provide information back to you and to the industry as a whole. I thank you all in advance and I am looking forward to seeing the results just as much as you are.

If there are any questions please feel free to contact me at johnathonanderson@graphicartsmag.com.