There’s no doubt about it, the bindery is moving toward all-digital, all the time. And as the proverbial loop closes to contain this exclusively digital workflow, it expands productivity and raises the stakes on profit potential.

The overarching aim then is a seamless, digital progression that starts at the desktop and ends as a finished document–the highly valued whole that, for customers, is far greater than the sum of its individual paper parts.

Facilitating this progression are trends in equipment development for this “downstream” domain. The bent is toward shorter and shorter run lengths, higher levels of customization (and the associated plunge in customer tolerance for spoilage), as well as a cycle that distributes, then prints, marking a shift away from its forerunner, print first, distribute later.

And while the debate over the benefits of inline versus off-line finishing continues to be waged, the view of most pundits is clear: customer appetite for inline solutions will continue to be “hearty,” comments Mark Hunt, director of marketing for Standard Finishing Systems, a supplier of print finishing systems and reprographic equipment in Andover, MA. Those on the inline side of the polemic believe the technology delivers greater document integrity because everything’s connected. Inline, they say, offers faster turnaround and results in less paper loss and labor intervention.

“We’ve recently seen a real drive towards inline finishing solutions for continuous digital printers,” says Cheryl Chan, director of marketing for Stralfors International Inc. in Downers Grove, IL. “People want to get as close to producing a finished product as possible–minus the manual processes traditionally associated with offset.” This, Chan believes, is also enabling shorter runs and helping customers to realize the value of digital, on demand printing solutions.

On the flip side, fans of off-line bindery equipment say inline systems are more complex, tend to cost more, “and are inclined to be less versatile because the technology requires a dedicated line for end use,” explains Jules M. Fried, vice president of marketing and business development for Roll Systems Inc., a paper handling equipment manufacturer headquartered in Burlington, MA, adding, however, that as volumes on specific applications go up, so does the likelihood of a dedicated line making good business sense.

Simultaneously, buyers are beginning to recognize some of the inherent advantages attainable when finishing is taken off-line from the printer. For instance, a system that let’s them upgrade workflow configurations as the need arises and, depending on the choice of equipment, the ability to do so with less capital outlay.

But as the debate ensues, a market like this one that makes available both inline and off-line choices may at least allow customers to answer critical questions more easily: Can I afford to own a piece of capital equipment that costs more because it’s uniquely designed to work inline with the printer? Or is there some other combination of products I can buy to satisfy my needs off-line?

Speeds and Feeds Matter

Another important point is that inline equipment is not perfectly speed-matched to the device it’s hooked up to. Experience tells Don Schroeder, vice president of sales for C.P. Bourg, a manufacturer and distributor of collating products in New Bedford, MA, that the trend in the variable-data, continuous-feed digital printing market is toward print engines that are running “faster and faster.” As a result, Schroeder says, the binding industry is trying to “keep pace” with higher output speeds for inline solutions.

And while ultimate success for manufacturers of finishing equipment is clearly tenable, Schroeder says that at present economics are an obstacle. In order to achieve commercially viable results with a continuous high-speed binder that works inline with a printer running in excess of 1,000 prints per minute, the cost, he believes, would be “significant.” Significant enough, in fact, “that a customer doesn’t really want to invest that dollar amount in one printer.”

Cheryl Chan agrees. “Most binders run at slower speeds than digital printers.” Therefore, it’s typically more effective to go as far as possible in the process–that is, get the product through the printer, have it cut, collated, stacked, and ready to go to the binder. “Then you’ve reduced the job’s manual requirements to just one step,” Chan says.

Throw color into the inline finishing mix and the business landscape shifts still further. According to Mark Hunt, it’s hard to justify cost when you talk about inline binding and color toner. In the finishing world there are industrial-duty solutions that provide professional-class results. “And those are only the most easily justified at output rates of between 60 to 100 pages per minute and above,” Hunt says. Below that speed, “it’s awfully hard to defend any other equipment choice but an inexpensive bookletmaker.” But the latter will give users sub-professional results, as well as a dilemma, he believes, because–especially when it comes to color–print-on demand technology can’t afford quality comprises in an environment where the finished document must compete against offset.