New PDF Tool Empowers File Validation by CSRs

[prwhite]

A new PDF tool from Enfocus—BoardingPass—allows customer service representatives to validate PDF files for print-ability. Customer service staff does not need any prepress training to be able to provide quick, clear replies regarding PDF job print-readiness.

Integrated with an email client, BoardingPass identifies errors that require a file to be resubmitted & automatically drafts an email reply, providing quick & understandable file feedback for attachments & downloaded PDF’s—quickly checking print job files for issues that would make a job unprintable. When issues are found, a draft email reply is automatically created. Integration with WeTransfer also allows users to drag & drop WeTransfer emails to BoardingPass which will download, open and automatically perform the check.

A stand-alone PDF viewer, BoardingPass points out issues like these, and displays files as they will appear on press:

• Missing fonts,
• Low Image resolution,
• Incorrect document specifications,
• Inconsistent trim size & page orientation,
• Incorrect color space,
• Insufficient bleed, including face trim for booklets.

Find out more about BoardingPass, here: [BoardingPass: feedback in a minute]

 

[chriscozi]

Yes. Nothing against Enfocus. We use and like Pitstop to preflight everything and use it to edit the final PDF's.
It would seem foolish however to allow a 'program', no matter the sophistication, to decide to send an email to your
hard-won client informing them their file is of insufficient quality. Or to recognize the incorrect or inconsistent items on a previously unseen file.
Sigh. That being said we do the same thing but with a human touch.
Methinks Not-Problem meet Not-Solution.
Waiting to be pleasantly surprised.

 

[tngcas]

Yes. Nothing against Enfocus. We use and like Pitstop to preflight everything and use it to edit the final PDF's.
It would seem foolish however to allow a 'program', no matter the sophistication, to decide to send an email to your
hard-won client informing them their file is of insufficient quality. Or to recognize the incorrect or inconsistent items on a previously unseen file.
Sigh. That being said we do the same thing but with a human touch.
Methinks Not-Problem meet Not-Solution.
Waiting to be pleasantly surprised.

It does say "draft an email" not "send an email" - I think you'd have to see it in action in order to know how reliable it is in drafting the email. If it saves time by allowing you to check the file and draft the email. I'm just not sure that this is practical if it's wrong too often, trying to fix a badly worded email would take as much time as just writing it yourself.

 

[abc]

It's a manual email, not automatic.
The idea is that you save a draft of a basic framework so you save a bit of time not having to start from scratch every time.
You can also chose of course not to send the email at all. Whatever works for your production.

 

[chriscozi]

It does say "draft an email" not "send an email" - I think you'd have to see it in action in order to know how reliable it is in drafting the email. If it saves time by allowing you to check the file and draft the email. I'm just not sure that this is practical if it's wrong too often, trying to fix a badly worded email would take as much time as just writing it yourself.

Yes drafting an email is less provocative.
Yes practicality could be an issue - I assume the developers addressed this as well as they were able.

It's a manual email, not automatic.
The idea is that you save a draft of a basic framework so you save a bit of time not having to start from scratch every time.
You can also chose of course not to send the email at all. Whatever works for your production.

And "draft of a basic framework" seems good for A starting point.
Many starting points would be best if they are available?
This could work very well in mostly homogenous environments with web facing portals.
WWGD? (I am coining the term now, 'WhatWouldGordoDo?' )
LOL

 

[abc]

Probably draw a cartoon!