We have a digimaster 150 for our monochrome work and we need to back that machine up from time to time but also want to add color to our print offering. I have met with Kodak and HP as well as Xeikon.

Kodak has the ability to just give us an older 9110 to back up our existing machine.
The Indigo flys when printing one color... though paper costs might be an issue.

By far the samples presented by HP were the best and most photo realistic.
Kodak had a poor presentation bordering on tacky but a few pieces that consisted of graphics were nice.

HP's maintenance and click charges are pretty simple to understand.
I am waiting to hear what Kodak's plan is.

We already outsource allot of spot color work that I know the Kodak and Indigo can handle no sweat but we also want to enter the photo book business and so far I have yet to see a nice photo print by Kodak (compared to the Indigo).

Also of concern is that we have heard that the HP has problems with picking, consistency and maintenance issues. A UV coating for HP prints is an absolute need it seems. Primed paper (not saphire coated) is supposed to be the new thing and does not yellow and Asian and European substrates are I am told acid free and inexpensive for our monochrome backup (Indigo).

I have sent a file of 10 images to Kodak and HP to see which I like best, haven't gotten anything back yet but would like to hear what others have to say. I am hoping Kodak can keep up because I feel comfortable with them.

Your thoughts please

Jorge,

first of all: if you feel comfortable with Kodak this should be a very important point in your thoughts. I think this is a point hardly anybody takes into consideration when thinking in investing in such a expensive machine.

With the NexPress you can print on pretty much any litho substrate. There is no need 'special substrate'.

There is also a pricing model for black & white jobs only running on a NexPress.

When it comes to spot color printing I think the NexPress has the more intelligent solution compared to the HP-Indigo. With only three additional colors (red, green and blue) you can achieve up to 86% of the Pantone spot colors. That means you only need three additional colors on stock for a wide range of PMS colors. With the HP-Indigo you need to a lot more colors on stock (expensive). Furthermore I think the swapping of the colors is much faster and easer on the NexPress.

Talking about photo book business there is a LOT you have to think about in advance. It's not easy to enter that kind of market if you haven't been there ever since. Kodak offers a really great photobook software where you actually can create all of your products (calendars, photobooks, cards etc.) yourself and put that all into a photobook client for your customers to download. There is also a complete webshop and backoffice coming with it. The big advantage compared to the HP-Indigo solution is that you can do everything by yourself and don't need to pay extra money or have to wait until some one else created your products.
The additional red, green or blue could also increase the output quality when talking about the photo market (RGB images; wider color gamut).

The NexPress prints have much more details compared to a HP-Indigo but of course the HP-Indigo has this nice and shiny look. But hey, just take the NexGlosser for glossing (or watermarking etc.) and your clients will love all photo books ;-)

Just my two cents ...


Cheers,
deltaE

Hi deltaE,

I hate glossy photo books!!!

... but anyway the detail from the Kodak samples did not even come close to the Indigo. I hope to see better quality when they print the photos I gave them. Whoever created the Kodak presentation should be fired!

The photo book software solution is from a partner of Kodaks and licenses at 18K. I downloaded it and played around with it a bit but was not that impressed, it's not worth the price tag so we will write our own.

HP has a one color, two color, three color pricing (click) plan and it seems to be better than Kodak's. They both cap at certain points and HP's cap seems to be much lower and drops fast with volume. Got to verify that because if I understood right your looking at .0038 for a 8.5 x 11 page (one color) which is pretty low while Kodak caps at .01 for monochrome (not sure if they based that on 12 x 18 or 8.5 x 11) and holds regardless of volume.

... but HP has to prove to me that we can do our backup monochrome printing on cheap paper (they say acid free Asian paper) and I REALLY want to hear about reliability issues and quality of service as well. I already know that if I call Kodak for service, they will be come within an hour or two.

Thanks for your comments

Which country are you from?
Can you provide me with a link for the Kodak photobook software you downloaded (I think we mean different solutions)?

Write your own for less than 18K? Wow, not bad. I would love to see/test it.


Cheers,
deltaE

Jorge,

Sounds like you have a big decision in front of you. We currently have Nexpresses and a Digimaster. We use the Nexpresses when necessary as a backup or additional capacity for the Digimaster.

One good advantage of the Nexpress is that though there is a max "click" they do not price on the click in the traditional sense. Low area coverage, highlight color, etc. can be very effective with the orc pricing model.

How much color volume do you anticipate?

We have been very please with the high end quality capabilities of the Nexpress. We do a significant amout of high end agency and photo book production and have had wonderful results.

I share your dislike for glossy photobooks. We have had some customers use the clear toner as a protective coat which mimics an aqueous coat.

Would you be willing to upload a couple of the images / files that you asked be printed as samples?

I am from the USA
The Kodak solution as per Kodak's photo book specialist is from Digi Lab. If there is another one I dont know about it.

I have already assembled a team of programmers. We are mapping out what I think is a much more elegant solution. I have used various photo book softwares myself as I am a photographer on the side and have not liked any of them. We can do this without too much expense as many of us are programmers.

We might make it available as a service, in other words, instead of a printer paying 18K to license the software we would let them use if for free. When a customer orders a photo book, sort of like a click charge, we would get a small cut, like .050 or so. Not sure about that yet though we may not release it at all.

Hi
HP has a similar plan. It's pretty straight forward, still waiting on Kodak's plan in writing.



We outsource about 400K 8.5x11 images right now, so that would be a start but I doubt we will go far over a million per month for the first one or two years. Mostly we would focus on servicing our present client base.



That is good to hear. I am almost pacing the floor waiting to see those sample images. I am told I will see them early next week. I have a meeting with HP, they are bringing over the samples today.

The aqueous coating is nice, is that an expensive treatment? I had assumed it would cost next to nothing but HP is telling me it's like .08 cents per sheet. Gotta ask Kodak about that today.

The glossy photo book was cheesy, I can't believe that is part of the demo samples.



Sure, they are my images so no problem. Do you mean hi res versions, they are probably around 5MB each for the Jpgs.

Jorge,

Yeah, the high res would be great. I am just curious to take a look and play around on our equipment.

I do not recall the site limits for uploading files, but would you mind including them in a post. If the limit is too low, let me know and I will provide an alternative.

Cheers,
John

Jorge,
Kodak announced another tool in EAMER (Kodak NexPress Photobook Software).


Cheers,
deltaE

I will do a google on that photo book software. I wonder why they didnt mention it to me.
Thanks for that.


Rugby148, Download the sample images here. It's about 29MB
Images

HP delivered the prints on my images today. I gotta say they were excellent.

Jorge,

here is a link:

http://www.printingtalk.com/news/etm/etm173.html

There is no official information available at the moment.
They launched it for EAMER. Most probably this is the reason why the U.S. guys didn't mention it.


Cheers,
deltaE

Hey, thanks for that. It makes sense, I could not believe they did not offer their own solution. We already got started on something and it looks really cool so we will go ahead and finish it.

take care,

Jorge

Hi again,

I just wanted to report the Kodak Nexpress sample came in today.

Hard to believe, but Kodak actually edged out the Indigo on most prints. Kodak game me uncoated and coated (not high gloss) samples. The uncoated sample were preferable to me. The gloss coat is nice for mail pieces.

The Kodak is about 120K more expensive. I am going to see what they can do about that.

The Kodak is not as nice for backing up the monochrom, they cap at .01 so I guess we might get that down to .075 but they will throw in a 9110 to take care of that. This is not as nice as having the color machine do the backup because the maintenance plan is another 800-900 per month on the 9110

Kodak caps higher than the Indigo for color prints but with care you could probably get that cost down and they hinted at some new technologies in the works to keep lowering that cost. Year 2008 could see costs droping by 50% according to Kodak plus a substantial improvement in image quality, I believe them.

I asked about the photo book software, yes, they announced it in Europe. Price or release date is unkown for the USA. I am well along on my own software anyway so I am not going to worry about that.

Thanks for your help

Jorge,

just curious of your decision?


Cheers,
deltaE

We went with the Indigo. HP impressed us more than Kodak, they are really on the ball.
I think it was the correct decision.

Jorge

Could you elaborate a little on why you went for the Indigo and how it's been going since you got it? We are thinking about investing in one and would like to know what others think about it.

Found some old prices for the 5000, link below, are they still intact? Can't seem to find any public info anymore.

archive.org

The decision between going with HP and Kodak was never clear cut however the only area that I felt Kodak won out was in substrate selection. I can't recall the details but Kodak's click "cap" plan did not appeal to me, you have to buy your ORC's up front ... big deal breaker, Kodak's larger format is still short of being able to print 2 up legal brochures so no advantage for us there and our experience with the Kodak Digimaster has mainly been positive but full of workarounds and reactive service calls which because of poor diagnosing skills usually require multiple call backs before the problem is fixed completely.

When comparing prints from pictures I submitted, the quality was comparable though HP could print my photos and express return them within a couple of days, it took Kodak several weeks. I had several sit downs with HP and Kodak. HP has a simple easy to understand plan with a good presentation. Kodak provided ugly presentation materials, seemed out of touch with what is going on out in the real world (you know how it sounds like when your just hearing sales talk) and I literally had to spend allot of time figuring out their numbers.

After a couple of million clicks we have yet to encounter any major issues with the Indigo and quality is consistently excellent. Once you get used to the Indigo, it's really great. If they had more affordable substrate options available, I would use it for all our monochrome work as well at 16,000 8.5 x 11 pages per hour it's almost twice as fast as our Digimaster. The Nexpress was initially cheaper than the Indigo but if you hold the line HP will negotiate, the money is in the consumables. I believe price for a Base Machine (4 color/std rip) is between 430k-450k with about a 20% markup.

Kodak needs to work on their service plan, who needs all the confusion. HP needs to improve toner adhesion or provide cheaper primed substrates. The reason I would go with HP again is they demonstrated a high degree of professionalism and organization. Also I have been to continuing education on the Indigo a couple of times now and had the chance to meet and speak with other printers, most on their 2nd and 3rd machines but some with as many as 10 and everyone pretty much faced the same decision and is happy with their choice.

I wish I could be more specific but I am already onto new projects. My best advice is pay attention to the company behind the product because that is where the difference is most visible.
Good luck
Jorge P.

Sorry for the delay; but thanks for the reply! It helps a lot in convincing myself that Indigo is the way to go.

Some great stuff here form everyone. I am in the same boat. We are a direct mail house moving from offset to digital. So mostly postcards and other mailable material.

I am down to deciding between an Indigo 7000 and NexPress 3000

I have been down to Atlanta and was VERY impressed by HP's presentation, print quality and dedication to buis development.
I have yet to visit Kodak

Numbers are close, I think the Kodak will be less of a hit up front, but the decision will come down to what fits best for our production/operation.

HP prints will need to be coated - added expense, and step
I have heard that the 5th color unit in the 3000 is the equiv. of a coat?

Any other input other than all the good stuff I have heard yet so far?

HP or KODAK?

Yikes...

Yes Christian you're correct about the 5th color imaging unit, which can be used for a 5th color, or clear dry ink. So you can flood or spot coat or color, and do things like watermark and security stuff. Then there's also their Nexglosser which is an offline fusing unit (runs at half-speed of the printer) which basically melts the clear ink to a high gloss.