Industry standard name for inkjet proof??

[zcto7]

Just wondering if there is an industry standard for an highres inkjet proof used to simulate the press output?

I have been using high res proof, the shop i'm at calls it a proofer proof, as opposed to a laser copier proof.....

 

[PreStressed]

Yes it's gotten a bit confusing with high res, low res, inkjet, laser, Kodak Approval, etc. We use the terms "Contract Proof" and Content Proof".
Since our inkjets and presses are profiled to match a G7 standard we now refer to them as "Contract Proofs". Meaning they are for color match. The content proofs are for text and graphics placement only (like the old blue lines).

 

[gordo]

Yes it's gotten a bit confusing with high res, low res, inkjet, laser, Kodak Approval, etc. We use the terms "Contract Proof" and Content Proof".

I totally agree with PreStreesed. The important thing is not how the proof was done - it's what its function is in the production process. It is also the expectation for performance that the proof is intended to convey to everyone in the process. Which is why it is also a good idea to explain these points on the tag that should be affixed to the proof that the customer signs before presswork proceeds.

best, gordo

 

[Ian Mackenzie]

I have heard it referred to as:

"Contract Proof"
"Certified Proof"
"Epson Proof"
"Digital Matchprint" (I think....gordo?)

Vendors try to brand their names and their proof verification processes with back-printed, logo-ed inkjet paper, too. To a certain extent, CGS and GMG have succeeded in doing this by approaching brand owners and agencies on a global level.

I believe that in order to really develop a dominant brand a la Matchprint, Chromallin and Approval, there would need to be a print media campaign done by a major player. The problem is that there just isnt the revenue in it anymore at the scale there once was. Hence any significant "pull marketing" is thwarted by the realities of limited budgets.

 

[gordo]

I have heard it referred to as:
"Contract Proof"
"Certified Proof"
"Epson Proof"
"Digital Matchprint" (I think....gordo?)
Vendors try to brand their names and their proof verification processes with back-printed, logo-ed inkjet paper, too. To a certain extent, CGS and GMG have succeeded in doing this by approaching brand owners and agencies on a global level.
I believe that in order to really develop a dominant brand a la Matchprint, Chromallin and Approval, there would need to be a print media campaign done by a major player. The problem is that there just isnt the revenue in it anymore at the scale there once was. Hence any significant "pull marketing" is thwarted by the realities of limited budgets.

I disagree. With the old proofing systems the vendor controlled the color not the user. So, from the same original - film - a Fuji proof would show a different color than a Matchprint or Chromalin or Approval proof. In that world vendors could own the color in certain market geographies based on the number of their installs.

However, today, in a CtP environment, the color represented by the proof is controlled by the user. Being an Epson proof does not tell the person signing off on it that it has any validity.
As far as a "Certified Proof" is concerned - who does the certification? It's a meaningless qualifier.

Because it sets expectations and mitigates liability a proof is a communication tool between vendor and buyer.

Contract or content is what the vendor and customer need to agree to.

best gordon p

 

[zcto7]

Thanks guys, that makes a lot of sense!

Would a composition proof be the same as a content proof? I have heard that thrown around before and I took it as showing where everything is placed but is not the final simulated color.

 

[Ian Mackenzie]

Original question = "Just wondering if there is an industry standard for an highres inkjet proof used to simulate the press output?"

My compnay has been dedicated to selling inkjet RIPs, paper and training and support (for contract proofing)for 6 straight years through a network of 80 resellers and 2500 customers. (Until our recent merger with a softwrae compnay.)

Yes, Gordo, I know you disagree.
But, debate as you may, the answer to the question remains the same and can be "verified" simply by reading the web sites of customers who advertise "Epson Proofs", "inkjet proofs", etc. in the context of their product offerings in prepress.

Now, you are correct. In theory and in a perfect world, buyer and provider SHOULD just agree on 2 simple terms: contract and content proof. That would be nice and very easy and actually is done by many. BUT, that's just not the case.

"Oris Certified proof" has some brand equity.
"Monitor proof" has some recognition.
"Epson proof" is widely used by mid-range printers.
"Certified proof" as it relates to G7 and proof verification tools like EFI Color Verifier and GMG something or other.

If you go to a global ad agency in NY, they will have 2 kinds of proofs: Approvals and inkjet. As Europe has wisely moved past Approvals over the past few years, the European RIP companies, like GMG and CGS, have made great strides in standardizing these agencies on their proofing systems. No, it was not Kodak!! Also, these same RIP compnaies have landed monster CPC deals like IKEA and others where their brand is being used to describe a "contract proof".

And to answer the latest post, there are other terms as well:

1. "Digital blueline" is an inkjet proof done on non color critical matte coated paper that also is, yes, a content proof.
2. These are also called "FPO proofs" or For Position Only.

I wish there were only 2 terms that could represent today's proofing situations. It would MUCH, much easier. But, there arent.

 

[gordo]

To Ian: Yup, I agree.

best, gordo

 

[Luc St-Pierre]

In the flexo industry, things have been taken care of by the FTA (Flexography Technical Association) and we call the proofs pretty much as Gordo's. Contract proof when the proof is a scientifically achieved and color managed press prediction, Target proof when the proof is high-end but color management is not TOTALLY feasable for different reasons and Concept proof (or Copyproof), when only contents, dimensions, copy and descriptions are reliable.

 

[ajr]

Dare I say a "GMG"!

A

 

[Arthaven]

I try and keep it simple (even with certification).

FOR CONTENT AND IMPO:
Imposition Proof or Content Proof


FOR ACCURATE COLOR:
Color Match Proof or Match Print (still translates)

From a customer perspective, most don't care or even know what a Gracol7 Certified proof is (pick any of the fancy names). All that they care is that this is what their finished piece will look like. You can explain to them all day about your certifications and what not, it may impress them and have more influence on where they go to get their printing done. But in the end, it's still a color proof and a content proof and they expect their delivered product to closely (or exactly 8O) resemble those proofs.

 

[oxburger]

We rarely run imposed Hi-Res proofs, We usually output single pages to our high res proof (Contract Proofs) and send them out for an ok. When it comes back approved for imposition, we call the imposed proofs Digital Dyluxes.