Guy Gleysteen, Vice President Paper & Digital Development at Time Inc. recently made some bold statements in an article for Folio Magazine. Time Inc. converted Time, People, Sports Illustrated and Entertainment Weekly to 100% virtual proofing in 2005. By the first quarter of 2007 Gleysteen says Time Inc.'s monthly titles will all be converted to virtual proofing.
"Virtual proofing is a better predictor of color than hard proofs. That’s a bold statement, but here’s why it’s true. In the real world, publishers receive all sorts of advertising proofs. Many are of the highest quality, but even in that group a significant number will be submitted on commercial grade stock. That limits their effectiveness for publication printing. Some proofs come from systems that were not calibrated, or are such poor quality that they actually present a hindrance to successful color reproduction. Worst of all are the proofs that were generated from a file other than the one submitted for publication."On the editorial side, printers face many of the same issues. In the publication pressroom, it’s the printers who struggle to match that variety, and every time they do so they are passing a subjective judgment on what they think the color should look like. Virtual proofing eliminates the variation, and presents the printer with a single reference for color, or a better predictor than the mishmash of hard proofs." SEE FULL ARTICLE
Discussion
By GRS Sign Company Ltd. Blog on Nov 13, 2006
Colour Matching I think, speaking from experience as a layman and as someone involved in the industry (now), that we tend to take colours for granted. Biologically speaking it is difficult to work out how many colours we can actually see...
By Ed Cobb on Nov 15, 2006
Any proofing system serves as a filter through which a file is passed in order to create a visual prediction of how that file "wants" to print. How accurately it predicts the press result is the measure of how good the filter is. While crucial from the point of view of workflow, the platform of the filter is irrelevant as pertains visual accuracy. Whether the proof is hard copy (digital halftone, digital ink jet, photomechanical) or virtual, the fact remains that it can be either well or poorly made, properly or improperly calibrated. A more accurate statement would be that a good proof is a better predictor than a bad proof, irrespective of platform. Choice of proofing platform is a business decision each must make for the good of his own operation. The best proofing solution for one is not necssarily best proofing solution for all. Remember, they are only solutions if they work.
Discussion
Join the discussion Sign In or Become a Member, doing so is simple and free