(published in the August 2003 issue of Wallace’s customer e-newsletter, Beyond Ink)
Still asking your print provider for a “Matchprint proof” for a job on which you’re only checking content? If you are, you may want to explore the possibilities of switching to digital proofing.
More...
The 3M Matchprint is a popular proofer used for conventional proofs (also known as analog, manual or film-based proofs). Conventional proofers create the proof using the same film that will be used to make the printing plates. Digital proofing, on the other hand, skips this step by creating the proof from digital data on output devices such as the DuPont Digital WaterProof, Kodak Approval, and Iris 4Print.
Both methods have their uses, but as the printing industry moves toward the computer-to-plate (CTP) process, it would be more to customers’ advantage to start requesting digital proofs, according to Lynne Andrews, Systems Manager at Wallace’s Elk Grove Village, IL commercial print facility.
The Advantages of Digital Proofing
“Digital proofing is normally faster than conventional, because you can create an actual proof in roughly the time it would take you to create and check the film for a conventional proof,” Andrews said. “So although the price is relatively the same for both methods, digital proofing actually saves more, because time translates into money for a lot of people in this industry.”
Another advantage to digital proofing, Andrews said, is that if the customer wants to make changes to the job – which is very common during the pre-press stage – the printer won’t have the added expense of creating a new set of film.
Customers who prefer conventional proofs usually do so out of habit and because they’ve built up a certain comfort level with them, according to Andrews. “They usually feel that conventional proofing is infallible; they feel that human error doesn’t enter into it; and they feel that the equipment used for it is very accurate,” she said.
“All of this may have been true several years ago, but now they’re misconceptions,” Andrews continued. “Customers who still prefer conventional proofs have usually been burned once using the digital process – such as signing off on a color proof that couldn’t be matched on press because the printer was using an older proofer. However, the new digital proofers available today usually have problems such as color drift under control. So even customers who may have had a bad experience with digital should give the advanced technology a try.”
The Way of the Future
One more reason for customers to move toward digital proofing, Andrews said, is because that’s how the printing industry is moving as the ability to incorporate an all-digital workflow makes computer-to-plate technology (CTP) a more viable pre-press option.
With the CTP process, also known as direct-to-plate, plants are able to go from digital files to directly imaging the printing plate. This eliminates the costly and time-consuming steps of outputting and stripping film, then imaging and processing the plates.
An increasing number of customers are seeing the advantages in cost-savings and turnaround to be gained from CTP. For example, the Grainger Industrial Supply catalog, one of the largest industrial catalogs in the United States, is produced at Wallace’s Hillside, IL facility using CTP.
“Computer-to-plate is the way of the future,” Andrews said, “and the whole advantage of CTP is that it doesn’t use film, just like digital proofing. Customers who want to utilize CTP or computer-to-press in their print jobs, but continue to ask for conventional proofs, are asking for an extra, non-automated step in an essentially automated process.”
As digital technology evolves, it’s even possible that manufacturers may stop supporting certain conventional proofers. For example, Andrews said that DuPont is curtailing support for its Cromalin conventional proofer, which uses powders to mix spot colors, in favor of its WaterProof model, which uses ink.
“While DuPont isn’t throwing out the Cromalin, at the same time they’re not releasing any new powders and they’re raising the price on it, because in the future they will be making toners for it only in very limited capacities,” Andrews commented. “So it’s always a good idea to find alternatives.”
When To Stay With Conventional Proofing
There are a few instances in which conventional proofing is still the best option, one of which involves the issue of size.
“Right now, the CreoScitex Spectrum conventional proofer is the only proofer that can handle color that’s larger than 4 pages,” Andrews said. “If you have a 30” x 40” poster, for example, you would need to run two digital proofs. In this situation, it would be cheaper to go with conventional.”
The other circumstance that would demand conventional over digital proofing, Andrews said, is a job with a lot of spot PMS (Pantone Matching System) colors. (Digital proofing uses only four-color process.)
Tips On Choosing Your Proof Options
- If the proof is strictly for content (the text or layout of the piece), always go digital. There’s nothing to be gained by requesting a conventional proof for content except more time and possibly extra cost if changes are made.
- For color (contract) proofs, use conventional proofers only if spot PMS color is being used or if the piece is larger than 4 pages.
- For most contract proofs, color accuracy can still be maintained with digital technology by requesting an ink draw-down – an ink sample on the same paper stock that will be used for the finished piece. Once the correct color is achieved, it can be canned for future use on the job.
- For jobs with spot PMS color, stick with conventional proofs to be on the safe side.
