On May 16, 2010, at 1:45 PM, Roy McCoy wrote:

> Then I still have the same question as before: can I count
> on a gray or paper box knocking out underlying (1) master page text,
> and (2) released master page text.

This reminds me of a problem I had back in the mid-90s. I sent the printer a 300-page book laid out in PageMaker. Each chapter was a different file. The printer imaged it to a filmsetter and sent us blues. Well, as we were approving the files (I read them and then passed them to the editor), the editor noticed that in one chapter, letters were missing in word and the space was closed up, making it really had to detect "ad" for "and" and similar problems. After carefully re-reading the blues, we determined that the problem happened in only 2 of the 8 or 9 chapters.

The editor flipped out and got all paranoid about what had happened. I checked our files and verified that they were in good shape, so obviously something happened at the printer's end when it was being imposed or imaged. I called the CSR and explained what we found. The CSR said they would examine the blues and the RIPped files an call me back. I overnighted the marked blues to them. Two days later, they said they had determined something happened in the imposing--all their fault, nothing in the PM files or our fonts--and the ran a new set of film and blues, sent them to us, and we approved the second set.

Nonetheless, the editor was still very fretful, worrying about unseen things that might screw up the job. We had two nets under us on the high-wire: we would still see f&g's for approval and, in any event, the printer was entirely responsible for fixing everything at their expense. So, worst case scenario, they'd print a bad book and then have to reprint it--not the best, but at least we didn't have a drop-dead delivery date (a class, a presentation or conference or such) that we needed the book for.

Several times during the 90s when I worked as the design director of a large department at UNC that published 15 books a year, I entertained the idea of sending books out on an entirely no-proof basis. I talked to a printer's sales rep about it at least twice. The issues came down to this: We had to guarantee that our files were entirely complete and perfect for printing, and they had to agree that they would completely and exactly reproduce our files. He told me that his people had nagging doubts about committing to a project without the client getting one look at proofs, and on our side, some of our editors and the publication director were a little leery about letting the printer work without seeing at least one proof. (BTW, "proof" originally meant "test the truth of," not "verify the truth of"; from Latin, "to test.")

I take a phlegmatic view of things like this: At some point in the printing process, you have to surrender control to someone else and rely on that person to fulfill his responsibilities. At some point when you step into the boat, you're not standing on the steady dock and before you land, you're expecting the boat to be stable and watertight. Every decade or so, the boat will wobble and I'll get wet. I can dry off, so I don't get too terribly worried about the very small possibility of a gremlin attack.


| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Bradypictures-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



--
This list is a free service of LassoSoft: http://www.LassoSoft.com/
Search the list archives: http://www.ListSearch.com/InDesign/Browse/
Manage your subscription: http://www.ListSearch.com/InDesign/