Technology Comparison: LTP vs. Traditional Printing Processes
The following comparison shows at a glance how LTP performs compared with traditional screen printing and modern inkjet printing. In our detailed comparison we evaluate the technologies in four important categories: process, precision, cost effectiveness and environmental aspects. The star ratings (★) give you a quick guide, while the explanations clarify the specific advantages and differences.
| Category | Property | LTP | Screen Printing | Inkjet |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Process | Digital flexibility | ★★★★★ • Fully digital process • Any layout can be printed on any form of glass at any time | ★★☆☆☆ • Analog process • Requires physical screens for every design | ★★★★★ • Digital process • Flexible designs possible |
| Process steps | ★★★★★ • Few process steps • Direct from design to printing | ★☆☆☆☆ • Lots of process steps • Screen has to be produced | ★★★★★ • Few process steps • Direct from design to printing | |
| Process stability | ★★★★★ • Climate-controlled system • Consistent results e | ★★★★★ • Consistent results | ★★☆☆☆ • Susceptible to environmental influences • Monitoring system possible | |
 Precision | Intricate patterns | ★★★★☆ • Lines up to 150 μm wide • High aspect ratio possible | ★★★☆☆ • Limited capability for intricate patterns • Limited accuracy of detail | ★☆☆☆☆ • Problems with fine lines • Droplet formation at edges |
| Layer thickness control | ★★★★★ • Precise control through laser power • Variable layer thicknesses possible | ★☆☆☆☆ • Only one layer thickness possible • Limited adjustability | ★★☆☆☆ • Limited layer thickness control • Several passes necessary | |
 Cost effectiveness | Ceramic pigments | ★★★★★ • Processes ceramic pigments in original size • Optimum adhesion and durability | ★★★★★ • Processes ceramic pigments • Proven longevity | ★★☆☆☆ • Limited for ceramic pigments • Requires special formulations |
| Small batches | ★★★★★ • Cost effective even in the case of individual pieces • No setup costs for new designs | ★★☆☆☆ • Uneconomic for small batches • High initial investment | ★★★★☆ • Acceptable for small batches • High ink costs n | |
| Setup/tooling times | ★★★★★ • Immediate change between designs • No tool changes necessary | ★★★☆☆ • Long setup times • Screen change and setup | ★★★★★ • Immediate change between designs • No tool changes necessary | |
 Environment | Running costs | ★★★★☆ • Low running costs • Minimal maintenance | ★★☆☆☆ • Screen manufacture and storage • Cleaning costs | ★★☆☆☆ • Expensive print heads with limited service life |
| Material efficiency | ★★★★★ • Precise use of material • Minimal waste | ★★★☆☆ • Material loss during screen fabrication • Excess ink | ★★★☆☆ • Moderate material use • Cleaning cycles use up ink | |
| Waste avoidance | ★★★★★ • No waste due to screen fabrication | ★☆☆☆☆ • Screen disposal • Chemicals for cleaning | ★★☆☆☆ • Blocked print heads produce waste • Ink waste from cleaning |
The chart makes clear the difference between traditional screen printing and LTP technology. Whereas screen printing requires a complex workflow with numerous manual steps, LTP reduces the process to the essentials.
The Result
With LTP you not only save valuable time and resources but also gain the flexibility of being able to adapt designs at any time without additional tooling costs or long setup times.
Error: No download form found [168391]