PDA

View Full Version : Top Ten Prepress Pet Peeves


rgoodman
07-19-2006, 06:31 PM
The following express my views and opinions only and not that of my employer or co-workers.

My Top Ten Prepress Pet Peeves:

Client submits a job on disc - WITHOUT HARD COPY!

Client gives Salesperson job on disc - WITHOUT HARD COPY! Salesperson A) doesn't care B) afraid to ask client for hard copy for fear of losing client or C) when they do ask and the client says that don't have hard copy, the salesperson says: "Duh, okey dokey" and does not stress how important it is for the client to supply hard copy with a job.

Client submits a job on disc, with hard copy - BUT HARD COPY IS NOT OUTPUT AT 100%!

Client submits job via the internet (email or FTP) - BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE A PDF!

Client submits native files. They supply only the bare minimum Type 1 Printer Fonts, but the Screen Fonts are the complete family. WHATEVER COLLECTS FONTS IN THIS MANNER DRIVES ME CRAZY!

Client does not supply fonts with native files.

Client submits THEIR ENTIRE FONT LIBRARY with the native files.

Person designs something using inDesign but fails to use the programs built-in pre-flighting ability that can check for the color space of images (RGB vs. CMYK) or their effective resolution.

It's the year 2006 and the Macintosh operating system is now more Windows-like in that it's important to start using file name extensions. So why aren't people using them?! Quark 5 and below is ".qxd"; Quark 6 and above is ".qxp" (Part of this problem is Quark's fault). And you gotta love the people who think changing the file name extension on a file AUTOMATICALLY changes the type of file it is.

Trans-F'n-parency!

Thank you for letting me rant.

dwyers
07-19-2006, 11:06 PM
Fellow workers eating over the keyboard and leaving the nice clear sided G5 keyboards full of crumbs and peanut shells.

Dennis Wyers.

rhodar
07-20-2006, 12:45 AM
* Using tansparency (mostly drop shadows) in Indesign without checking that any text near it is brought to the front to avoid rasterizing bits of words.

* Supplying spot colour jobs with CMYK pictures (or RGB for ven more fun)

* Not putting bleed on the file (especially if it is a client you have been dealing with for years)

* Anything that any bugger did in Word or Publisher or Excel or Powerpoint and expect to come out with no trouble and looking wonderful on a commercial press

* Multi-page documents in Illustrator (a program I hate anyway and more that one 'page' makes it a blighter to impose)

* Freehand deciding that while the font you opened has the right name, it is not the right font so no error will bisplay but it will use times or courier instead

* Sales reps who, when you tell them that they have just given you a low res, RGB PDF with no bleed to output so no you can't use the file, go 'Can you fix it?'

* Press-touch not saving the file when you tell it to, then crashing and trashing the file so you have to RIP it again.

That is a few of my favourite annoyances.

Dave Salmon
Toolbox Imaging
New Zealand

peterk
07-20-2006, 03:03 PM
The fact that customers can sign off on proofs and the problems that are in the files and proofs that were poor design and just blatant lack of proofing some how always become the pre press departments fault.
We get no hard copy 75% of the time, we get pdfs only 50% of the time and yet we're blamed almost 100% of the time for things we should catch and fix even if it's nto possible.

mark_jetzer
07-20-2006, 04:48 PM
1. 72 dpi RGB JPEGs submited as "Final Art."

2. Requests to Make MAJOR Changes to 10 year Old 4/c Copydot files.

3. EPS DCS files from Artworks Systems.

4. Customers that think I KNOW EXACTLY what the contents of their job is and if it is correct both Legally and Sales wise.

5. Customers that think I KNOW what the UPC number is for EVERY PRODUCT EVER MADE.

6. Requests to Make Text edits to jobs supplied with Outlined Fonts.

7. TRANSPARENCY, especially when mixed with Spot Colors

8. Sales and Customer Service people who refuse to understand 1up Workflows (ROOM).

9. Clients that are to cheap to pay for a Kodak Approval or any other proof and then complain about the quality of the printing, ect.

10. Sales and CSRs that don't follow proceedure then blame/get angry at you when you tell them they can't break proceedure.


Do I have to let this to only 10?

rob.morgan
07-20-2006, 05:16 PM
Interesting list...one thing that would make it even more intersting (at least for me) would be to brainstorm some ideas for solutions to these problems. (Hiring thugs to break kneecaps of careless designers is out of the question) :-)

Regarding the "lack of hard copy" issues - I think this is only going to get worse as more and more jobs get submitted electronically. Many times you can do the whole job in the time it takes to send a courier across town with a print out. What are people's thoughts about using a tool like InSite that can take a clients file and automatically create a PDF and say to the customer "This is what its gonna look like if we print what you sent me - is that correct?"

This tool (and similar tools from other vendors) exists right now - what are the barriers to such tools?

Cheers,
Rob

jwardlow
07-20-2006, 06:44 PM
Same barrier as any proof: The client is so positive that what they sent was perfect, there is no need to carefully look at anything. OBVIOUSLY any error is the responsibility of the prepress department, right?! Even our own salespeople know that!

jon
07-20-2006, 07:20 PM
The only one I can think of now that has not been said is getting final artwork as a flattened RGB photoshop file that is to be spots + black and diecut. As an additional peeve, when will photoshop have spot layers and for that matter filter layers? And when will Illustrator have multi-ink support and view separations? And how about viewing separations in Quark? And...(shouldn't have got me started) >:( <=hate those things!

rob.morgan
07-20-2006, 10:00 PM
Same barrier as any proof: The client is so positive that what they sent was perfect, there is no need to carefully look at anything. OBVIOUSLY any error is the responsibility of the prepress department, right?! Even our own salespeople know that!

Good point. Its hard to change people's behavior, especially when they are the ones paying the bill. Does implementing the Processing Control feature i.e. the one that prevents plates from being output until the client has looked at each page in SmartReview and marked them as "Approved" help? Or is there "no time for that" (but always time to do it over)?

How about things like automatic Preflight when a client submits a job. The jokers that send in RGB images would get an e-mail notifying them of their mistake and the ones who do send in "perfect" pages would not get hassled.

Cheers,
Rob

mark_jetzer
07-21-2006, 12:37 PM
We have InSite. I love it, I think it's great, needs a little refinement but it's a great product. But.....


1. It hard to manage, especially for our Computer Illiterate CSRs, so I have to manage everything on InSite. But we are using Brisque right now, but switching to Prinergy.

2. We have a hard time getting customers computer systems up to snuff to use InSite. It would be nice if there was a separate program, or link that could check their system and updated it to the requirements. We spend ALOT OF TIME being IT support for customers to get InSite to work.

3. It built to much for Regular Customers. It would be nice to have a simple way to set up Temporary or One-time use accounts/jobs.

Now on to the new peeves


1. Quark Express 6+ and Fonts.

2. Customer that can't seem to figure out how to supply a PDF1.3 file and keep giving me Acrobat 7 PDFs. To many customers think a PDF is a PDF is a PDF.

wendytf
07-21-2006, 04:03 PM
2 matchprints and 2 polas later - "We want it to look like it does on our screen."
I told the salesguy to bring me in their monitor.
sheesh.

robert.hammen
07-21-2006, 04:43 PM
How about things like automatic Preflight when a client submits a job. The jokers that send in RGB images would get an e-mail notifying them of their mistake and the ones who do send in "perfect" pages would not get hassled.

This would be AWESOME. Extensis used to have an online preflight tool, and I think we were their first (and only?) subscriber. If Kodak ever works on this, keep us in mind - I'm sure we'd make a good beta site :-)

--Robert

rob.morgan
07-21-2006, 05:24 PM
Hi Robert,

Have you got your InSite server set up yet? With Insite and Prinergy, you can set up something similar - the uploaded PS or PDF files can be directed to a Prinergy hot folder that does Refine and Preflight. Prinergy's Advanced Preflight option is similar to PitStop in that it does its checking on PDFs and not native files but other than that, I think it stacks up well to what Extensis used to do.

If you call the RC or your local applications person, I'm sure they can help you set this up. You'll need a licence for Advanced Preflight if you don't have it already.

Cheers,
Rob

aoswood
07-21-2006, 06:09 PM
PC Pagemaker. Need I say more.

robert.hammen
07-21-2006, 06:25 PM
PC Pagemaker. Need I say more.

You can take the "PC" off there - just PageMaker in general. Microsoft Publisher is right behind...

robert.hammen
07-21-2006, 06:26 PM
Hi Robert,

Have you got your InSite server set up yet? With Insite and Prinergy, you can set up something similar - the uploaded PS or PDF files can be directed to a Prinergy hot folder that does Refine and Preflight. Prinergy's Advanced Preflight option is similar to PitStop in that it does its checking on PDFs and not native files but other than that, I think it stacks up well to what Extensis used to do.

If you call the RC or your local applications person, I'm sure they can help you set this up. You'll need a licence for Advanced Preflight if you don't have it already.

Cheers,
Rob

Yes, we have InSite 4.5 and we also have a license for the Advanced Preflight option. I'll look at this more closely when we get our upgrade from 3.0.3.0 to 3.1 installed in the next few days... not sure how to automagically email the PDF of the preflight report to the customer...

rdisanto
07-21-2006, 08:40 PM
* Anything that any bugger did in Word or Publisher or Excel or Powerpoint and expect to come out with no trouble and looking wonderful on a commercial press


Dave Salmon
Toolbox Imaging
New Zealand


One of the best contributions a previous manager had was to put a PC on the floor that was right out of the box with the Microsoft applications already installed. We keep the PC as is. No one is allowed to install any software on this PC. All we use it for is to open Word, Publisher, Excel files, write out a postscript file and distill it to a PDF. It works like a charm. 90% of these jobs run fine. The other 10% are the ones where the customer wants spot colors. Then the fun starts.

rob.morgan
07-21-2006, 10:53 PM
Yes, we have InSite 4.5 and we also have a license for the Advanced Preflight option. I'll look at this more closely when we get our upgrade from 3.0.3.0 to 3.1 installed in the next few days... not sure how to automagically email the PDF of the preflight report to the customer...

You can make it so the Preflight report gets routed to the job's Web Downloads folder but to get an automagic e-mail when there's a problem, you'd need to set up an RBA rule.

Rob

rgoodman
07-25-2006, 04:26 PM
Interesting list...one thing that would make it even more intersting (at least for me) would be to brainstorm some ideas for solutions to these problems. (Hiring thugs to break kneecaps of careless designers is out of the question) :-)

Regarding the "lack of hard copy" issues - I think this is only going to get worse as more and more jobs get submitted electronically. Many times you can do the whole job in the time it takes to send a courier across town with a print out. What are people's thoughts about using a tool like InSite that can take a clients file and automatically create a PDF and say to the customer "This is what its gonna look like if we print what you sent me - is that correct?"

This tool (and similar tools from other vendors) exists right now - what are the barriers to such tools?

Cheers,
Rob

The major problem with inSite would be the education of the client. Some of these "old dogs refuse to learn new tricks".

Cross reference the thread I started concerning "Low Res PDFs for Dummies". Even when instructing clients how to view their PDFs with "overprint" turned on seems to be a hardship. Or getting them to upgrade their Acrobat.

Todd.Keffer
08-16-2006, 01:39 PM
These are all good reasons why we still have a job.