Best Practices: Balancing Act

With inkjet and toner digital presses occupying floor space in a growing number of label printers’ and converters’ shops, deciding which press to use is part of every workflow. It used to simply be a matter of run length, usually filtered by qualifying limitations such as substrate or finishing requirements.

But as digital systems have become more sophisticated and better attuned to the needs of label and folding carton printers and converters, the decision has become a little more complex. Using digital presses for shorter runs is still common, but there’s more going on. Moreover, there’s no one-size-fits-all metric for deciding which press to use when.

“For us, any jobs under 10,000 feet that do not have special requirements will run digitally,” says John O. Wynne, Jr, CEO at Fortis Solutions Group of Virginia Beach, Virginia, the new branding of recently merged Labels Unlimited and A&M Label. Yet at the same time, the four HP Indigo presses at Fortis also run jobs of more than 10,000 feet that would require significant set-up and makeready on a flexo press—especially with regard to color or multiple SKUs. Assuming prepress work is done correctly, digital presses often let such jobs be produced more efficiently, even though the Indigos run slower than Fortis’s 17 narrow-web Mark Andy and Nilpeter flexo presses.

“We continue to evaluate pushing the 10,000 feet boundary even higher,” says Wynne. “There is, as yet, no clear limit, and it really does depend on the job.”

Numerous other converters also continue to push the limits of their digital machines, both in terms of run lengths and the types of jobs being run. While digital presses are slower, their short makeready times and ability to run multiple jobs essentially uninterrupted are making these evolving systems an essential part of a converter’s offerings.

Major influences

For these and most other label printers and converters, two major influences in run length are the expansion of SKUs and a shift in how large, once-a-year jobs are being produced. In the case of SKUs, run lengths that were once half a million feet may now require copy changes every few thousand feet, demanding time-consuming changeovers on conventional presses. Once-a-year jobs may now be produced in short runs multiple times a year, often involving numerous SKU changes. In this dynamic and hard-to-manage environment, it’s little wonder that about two-thirds of label converters now have some type of digital label press, according to research by InfoTrends.

Also telling is that several companies contacted for this story would not comment on press selection strategies, classifying them as trade secrets. This may be an indicator of the competitive pressures converters face in a highly dynamic marketplace. One converter confided that having a digital press may be coming to be an expected part of a converter’s equipment mix, noting that some RFPs require that a digital press be available, even if one is not specifically needed for the jobs included in the RFP.

Equipment optimization

The bigger picture in many shops is that the digital/analog decision is becoming more about equipment optimization: using the press that makes the best use of resources during a given period, be it a day, a week or longer.

Part of the decision involves the economics and efficiency of a digital press, and some are simply more economical than others. Depending on the equipment involved, a 20,000-foot job with only a few SKUs might be routed to a flexo press, while a job of the same length with multiple SKUs would run on a digital device. However, using a digital press for multiple short runs, even some that total tens of thousands of feet, can free up conventional presses to take on the big, long runs they are designed for—up to 1 million feet or more—making them more productive and profitable.

Optimization is also taking place with digital presses. It’s not uncommon for gangs of short runs, such as 10 versions of one label—at 2,000 feet each—to be produced in a single run on a digital press, adding up to greater effective run lengths. The cost per label or per foot may be higher, but turnaround and time to market are shorter, making the digital option a compelling and cost-effective alternative.

Wynne says Fortis is fortunate to have color management processes that offer the flexibility to run most jobs either flexo or digitally depending on run length and job specifications. “We also review ganging opportunities and lead times when determining which press to use.”

For now, there is still no clear metric for which press to use when. Each converter must develop their own strategy for the mix of run length, job type and operational requirements that will fit the needs of their business and their customers.

“Digital is here to stay and which system to use has certainly become more and more topical in our discussions,” affirms Wynne. pP

To view this issue and past editions in a digital format, please click here.