The Contract Proof and 3DAP – magazine article

The Digital Data Distribution for Australian Publications (3DAP) committee launched Version Two (V2) of the proofing guidelines some months ago, with events in both Sydney and Melbourne. The committee is often questioned why the recommendations are called ‘guidelines’ as the proof is used as a ‘contract proof.’ A topical question indeed, given the outcome of the recent Craft Printing-v-Print Management Australia case.

3DAP is a voluntary non-commercial group with no promotional budget. It relies on goodwill between competing magazine publishers and printers who saw the advantage of a CtP workflow in the mid 1990’s. The benefits were particularly attractive to the advertising community, an important source of revenue for the publishing and print industry. Australia pioneered CtP production of mainstream colour magazines.

The committee is endorsed by the Magazine Publishers Association of Australia and the group formed with two core objectives.
  • Establish a ‘contract’ quality digital proof for magazine advertising.
  • Establish a reliable file format for CtP file production.

    Topics on the agenda for review in 2006 include:
  • File format-vs-ISO standards.
  • Virtual proofing
  • Other paper stocks for V2 proof

    Press sheets rule—ok?

    The file format changed from a separated postscript file to PDF some years ago, however the original proof (V1) target has remained up until now.

    V2 proofing offers a closer match on press to the proof. This is due to a change in the reference colour space from analogue Cromalin chemical proofing (V1) to reference press sheets, produced from controlled print runs on Australian heatset web offset presses. The print runs were conducted using a paper stock similar or identical to what is used by the largest segment of the Australian magazine industry.

    The 3DAP proofing guidelines rely on ICC profiling techniques to establish and calibrate endorsed proof engines. However, the proof producer does not need to delve into the arcane workings of colour profiling to produce valid proofs from CMYK files. This task is undertaken by the proof solution suppliers, who work closely with the committee.

    The committee needed to develop a digital proof that the market could adopt easily. The solution involves similar process rigour as that required to make accurate proofs using the now superseded analogue proprietary ‘contract proof’ systems.


    What is, or was a contract proof?

    This term has a proud heritage in the print industry; however the expectations of how close a printer can or should match an off-press ‘contract proof’ is still a matter for debate. It is fair to say we have the technology and means to achieve a far better match than was available ten years ago! There are many interpretations of what a ‘contract proof’ is. For the record, below I offer my summary view of what a contract proof is, as used in the print industry:

    A ‘contract’ proof is like any contract: it has three basic criteria—offer, acceptance and consideration. The offer is that the proof supplied is a ‘close match’ or ‘final proof’ of what the printed result will look like. Acceptance is by the printer that the printed piece will actually ‘look’ like the proof supplied. Consideration can be the cost to either party if the proof does not meet expectations.

    The recent Craft Printing case is of particular interest, the result potentially setting a major precedent for print buyers. Craft Printing

    No single proof ‘standard’ can cover the entire field of printed products. 3DAP V2 covers a large segment of the magazine market. It works due to cooperation by the major heatset web offset printers adjusting their individual process to achieve a ‘commercially acceptable’ result. Now we have at least one court willing to place the responsibility of what is ‘commercially acceptable’ with the printer. The decision suggests that most jobs printed in Australia may need the client to attend the press and interpret the result on press.
    One would think the print industry should be aiming to make the purchase and consumption of print easier for the client by having a proof that printers agree they can match within reasonable limits.

    The alternative of endless press approvals would seem to be a backward step, to the dim dark ages where many jobs were ‘press proofed’ prior to printing. Surely our process control has advanced since then! l

    Bruce Sinnott is co-founder and former director of pre-media house Sinnott Bros; the originator and a founding committee member of the 3DAP initiative and holds a Bachelors degree in business management and marketing. He pioneered CtP for heatset web in the 90s and, until this year fulfilled a general management role with IPMG. bsinnott@optusnet.com.au