lindz wrote:Also with the printing you don't have to worry about the colours because you just hand the design in and the printer will match it for you. I know I used to be a printer and that used to wind me up because I used to have to test run 1 copy then send it to the client and it used to go back and forth until they was happy.
My formal graphics training was done by working 10 years in a printshop... which was blooming great! Mainly because designers sometimes don't have the first clue of the print production process and how it works.
However, I now fully understand why printers are so arsey when accepting artwork—and we ALWAYS supply a colour match-proof when submitting work.
Why?
Because: WYSIWYG should stand for...
"What YOU See Isn't What We're Getting"
All computer setups rely soley on the RGB monitor and the user's printer/output device for colour. A printshop has high-end monitors, outputting devices and software, whereas the meagre home-user or design studio has differently calibrated kit.
The mechanism to follow is: either SUPPLY a hardcopy proof which you WANT YOUR FINAL WORK TO LOOK LIKE, or pay the printer £xxx to supply a proof from their system.
No matter how expensive your own printer or monitor is, if it's uncalibrated or you're using a non-industry-standard graphics package, you're going to encounter a lot of problems colour wise.
Saying that, sometimes people strike lucky, and it just looks dandy
PS... Lindz... didn't it used to really hack you off when designers would come in and want to see a print match at the start of a run? Especially when they'd say something stupid like 'can you run more green please so the logo looks richer', and you'd say 'Yes, I can either up the yellow and cyan, or drop the magenta, but then the people's faces won't look right' etc...?
