Would you recommend?

[Ear]

Frailer: Putting the F in XMF. 

[DCurry]

I say "Putting the MF in XMF."

I interpreted it as the OP is using Esko currently and considering the move to XMF.

I am right.

[Ear]

Thanks Dan.  :grin:

[impodave]

We have been running XMF for 19 months now.  This is a single shift operation in south-central Missouri, running about 900-1000 plates per month.

I'm not sure what you mean by a larger sized shop. You can refer to our equipment list below and compare.

I have been happy with the XMF server for the most part.  The telephone support has been very good most of the time. They have upgrades at least once a year, which are no charge if you buy the support contract.

The user support here on B4Print has been very good also.  Frailer was a big help when I first got started. Now I'm pretty much sailing on my own, but I still check regularly for new posts.

[impodave]

I forgot to mention that we ran Esko Nexus Pageflow and then went to their PDF Processor for a short time.  Our biggest issue was a lack of a decent attitude from the support staff.  My boss finally decided to pull the plug and move to Fuji XMF.  As with all new installs, the road was a bumpy one for a while.  After the first 60 days or so, things smoothed out.

[frailer]

Forgot to mention you in despatches, Dave. Sorry.   :embarrassed:   >>>   

[impodave]

My feelings aren't hurt too badly, I guess  :cry:

[frailer]

My feelings aren't hurt too badly, I guess  :cry:

                 :laugh:

[m2r]

I would recommend shopping around, know exactly what you want, spell out exactly what your are expecting, see everything working as you expect it.

My question to you would be "What does XMF offer that you are currently not getting from your existing system?"

We have been running XMF for 6 months or so, pretty much a train wreck from the beginning.
I am sure most of our issues, were exactly that "our issues" - lack of experience with a Modern Workflow, but we were also pointed in the wrong direction on $everal thing$, that has left a very bad taste in our mouths.
My experience with support is - they are friendly.

Is there anything specific you looking for?

[frailer]

So, extra functionality that you then had to pay for, later?   :undecided:  It's hard asking all or most of the questions up front.
The hardest part for us was getting used to the GUI/windows/menus. Once you're changing gear without looking at the gearstick, becomes a lot easier.
I know some people here in OZ took on the 'lite' options, but then decided they needed the other stuff after purchase.

[m2r]

So, extra functionality that you then had to pay for, later?

Not exactly. We were told (sold) that it does everything our existing setup did, but in reality, it does not - well not for free.
Finding b4print.com has put us on the right track, and have found ways to make it work, still a lot to re-learn though.

Yes, we find that the GUI is not very efficient, actually labor intensive to what we were used to.
Looking back at the Demos and Training we had, we now realize that the more tricky layouts were just glazed over for that reason.
Hind sight is 20/20.

Now, I have no other experience with other Workflows, except for our previous Harlequin / Pyramid setup, so it's hard to say if we were expecting too much.

[Farabomb]

I kinda had the same experience with Prinergy. We were sold a line about it "reducing clicks" and "workflows will make jobs process faster". In the real world I'm clicking more, workflows really don't work for what we do and it's actually more work to process jobs. That being said Prinergy works very well 95% of the time and I spend less time troubleshooting problem files that are doing funky thing in the rip. In the end I guess the tradeoff was worth it.

[m2r]

That being said Prinergy works very well 95% of the time and I spend less time troubleshooting problem files that are doing funky thing in the rip.

With our XMF, when funky things happen in the RIP, it's "usually" caught on Press.
Our XMF just passes the PDF to another RIP for proofing, which always looks good / correct. That part I just don't get.
Though with a few suggestion from members here, those are becoming less frequent.

[DCurry]

Our XMF just passes the PDF to another RIP for proofing, which always looks good / correct. That part I just don't get.

You need to make it so that raster data gets sent to your proofing RIP. If you feed it a PDF, then the proofing RIP is interpreting the data differently than XMF (hence the problems you see). If you can make it so XMF rasterizes the data, then you'll have a more reliable workflow because the engine that rasterizes for plate (XMF) is the same engine that rasterizes for proof. The only way that sending a PDF to your proofer will work is if it is raster data in a PDF wrapper, though it doesn't sound like that is the case in your scenario.

I'm not familiar with XMF so I don't know if that ability is already there for you or if you have to pay extra.

[m2r]

I'm not familiar with XMF so I don't know if that ability is already there for you or if you have to pay extra.

With our package, you can only output a Raster PDF to one device, we chosen to do that for our Layout / Bindery Proofs for now.
I don't remember the issues that brought us to that, but a Raster PDF to the Proof RIP was an after thought from FUJI.
I think it was issues with Spot Color Proofs, pieces would be missing due to layering or something like that.