Proofreading
Smoosed Ant
have an idea of what I'm talking about.
Let me explain my situation. I'm a graphic artist in a small silk screen
shop and have been working here for the last 10 years. (Our problem is
this old!) One of the biggest problems we have during the busy season are
errors slipping by and ending up on the shirts, towels, etc. For a shop of
our size, even 80 misprints can hurt. At the moment there are only 4 of
us. The boss who makes screens and prints, 1 other printer, 1 person to
"catch" the shirts off the dryer, and me... the artist.
The way we have production set up right now is like this:
1. I get the order for artwork on paper (could be anything from the back
of a scrap piece of paper to a napkin... only from a select few customers
do we receive what could be called an "order form".
2. I do the artwork, proof while going over the order and use the
spellchecker (proofing myself does work MOST of the time, but not EVERY
time, which is why I'm writing).
3. I put the finished artwork + a copy of the order to be used as proofing
reference (I keep the original after we started losing orders when they
left my hands) on a clip board for the boss.
4. She (the boss) will make the screen (called "burning"), dry it and then
set it up for the job. She or the other printer will then print the goods.
5. The catcher stands at the end of the dryer - sorts, folds and boxes the
goods, getting them ready for shipping.
NOW, during the course of 10 years there have been many, MANY disscusions
about me having to proof my own artwork even harder, often having to
suffer comments about me "batting a thousand today" in front of the other
employees or having the blame focused mainly on me in front of the
customer when something goes wrong. (back in the day, I often had to hear
that I'd be made to pay for the goods that got screwed up even though they
passed through at least 2 other people.)
On the other end of the spectrum, I've tried to stick to my guns, telling
her that it's impossible to proof my own work with any amount of accuracy.
(I know how to spell "car". If my brain had registered that I spelt it
"cra", I would have caught it and corrected it myself!) But often she
claims that she is too busy and doesn't have the time to proof. In this
case the blame is still focused on me.
OR, she will admit that something needs to be done and she'll proof for
awhile before burning, but then 4 months down the road it will be
neglected and I end up looking like an ass again or deal with the
comments.
What I'm looking for is an even more creative way of addressing the
problem. Is there another system of makeing sure things get out correctly
that we have over looked that is not obvious to us? Or should I "suggest"
(loudly if I have to) that facts are facts and if she doesn't want to send
out "damaged" goods or have to eat the costs to replace them then she
absolutly, positively NEEDS to take out 10 secs to make sure everything is
right? Or does the blame lie with me?
Mike
Shelle
====snip====
>What I'm looking for is an even more creative way of addressing the
>problem. Is there another system of makeing sure things get out correctly
>that we have over looked that is not obvious to us? Or should I "suggest"
>(loudly if I have to) that facts are facts and if she doesn't want to send
>out "damaged" goods or have to eat the costs to replace them then she
>absolutly, positively NEEDS to take out 10 secs to make sure everything is
>right? Or does the blame lie with me?
Mike:
It's time to get to the basics. Get a printer in the shop good enough
to do a basic paper print for proof and send it to your client for
approval.
Once they've sign off on it, it isn't your problem or fault any more.
Even if you print 600 bad ones, the blame and extra charges to correct
then will be their headache.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shelle Feigen shelle AT enteract DOT com
shelle AT shelle DOT com
www DOT shelle DOT com
"I alienate more people before 9:00am than Congress can do in
an entire session"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RichJr
I totally feel for your situation.
I am (actually was) the artist/sikscreener for my Dad's
business. Often I would not go to great
lengths to proof my work wich would
end up in misspellings. You have to show other
people your work, trust yourself only for the art.
Even then what I would do is treat the jobs as if
you were a freelance artist and have your client
sign off on each piece. This way two people have checked
your work and you get out of being blamed for it, signing
off on the art ensures that the client will know what they are
getting no matter what. If it's gets screwed up, it can't be the
art, it had to be the printer's fault or who shot the screen.
Being solely responsible for spelling is pretty irresponsible
on your boss. I could see if you blindly handed in art without
it going through anyone else's hand.
--
Richard Testani
graphic designer / illustrator
ric...@javanet.com
Hope this helps
----------
In article <finelineNOSPAM-...@ip20b.borg.com>,
finelin...@borg.com (Smoosed Ant) wrote:
Annette Gallagher
them see it before the screens are burned. The customer has to sign off on
it before this is done!! Your contract should state that the customer is
responsible when they sign off on the comp, and if they don't you are not
responsible for typos.
Obviously, your "boss" does not know how to proof, so it is essential that
the customer comp must come BEFORE it hits your boss.
Remember....you are the art/design part of it...the rest are merely
PRODUCTION.....BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!!!!
Annette
Smoosed Ant <finelin...@borg.com> wrote in message
news:finelineNOSPAM-...@ip20b.borg.com...
John Jordan
First, use the spell checker *every time*. But beyond that, I think
you need to get a printer in your shop -- I mean one of those
inexpensive dot matrix things -- and then fax or somehow transmit the
laser as a proof to the customer. Then have the customer sign off on
the proof. There is no reason for your shop to eat the cost, and for
you to have to suffer complaints about it from your boss.
NOTICE: The e-mail address is deliberately incorrect. Make the ISP
read "spiritone.com" by adding an "e."
lfidallas
Smoosed Ant wrote:
> Hi, I need help...
> I'm surprised that a 10 year old company has gotten away with no client
> sign-offs on proofs. It's the only way to go, and is standard practice in
> the industry. The other posters affirm that.
SR
that way. It will only add a day or two if necessary to the total job, and
saves you the headache of being humiliated. BTW, if you feel so humiliated
by what is said about your proofing skills, have you thought of looking
elsewhere for employment?
Smoosed Ant wrote in message ...
>Mike
White Horse
solely responsible for getting all of our information for the data for our
product catalog in electronic form. So if there is a screw up it is my
fault. How ever several people do proof it so mistakes are few but in the
end our marketing agency always sends us a completed proof of the ultimate
product catalog and if our company signs the ok form and later finds a
mistake, then my company has to eat the cost of fixing it. My company sees
this as only being fair to both parties involved and keeps the legal bills
to a minimum when there is a problem.
So you should send a sample artwork to your customers and have them approve
it before proceeding. Also, another benefit of proofing is that customers do
change their minds. Because your company chooses not to send out proofs and
goes directly to print your customers do not have the option to convey
changes so it may appear that they do not need or want this option available
to them. Also, you can charge extra for changes from the original design to
recover addition time costs if not make a profit in doing so.
Rose
SR wrote in message <7ikpvq$ffk$1...@remarQ.com>...
Oldmaninahat
copy writer or artist can be responsible for anything more than an INITIAL
proof reading. Any error becomes visually accepted by our brain after
seeing it in context numerous times during composition.
For example: Is there another system of makeing sure things get out
correctly . . .
The customer MUST sign off on the artwork or proof BEFORE printing starts OR
take responsibility for the end product. No IFS, BUTS or MAYBES!
Oldmaninahat
that we have over looked that is not obvious to us?
Smoosed Ant <finelin...@borg.com> wrote in message
news:finelineNOSPAM-...@ip20b.borg.com...
Mark Farrall
on the proofing of those involved in the artwork process it's a complete cop
out to say that the originator of the artwork is any more or less
responsible for proof reading than others in the process. It's a matter of
how important is it to have the artwork right. (There's this nice little
story about what's the acceptable level of errors in packing parachutes that
fits in here).
There are ways to trick your mind into disregarding the context that you
build up by creating the artwork. Also the others in the process have their
own context and will miss things. Some of the techniques proofreaders can
teach you involve reading backwards, reading the first two words on the
right of one line, then the two words on the left and so on. It's a matter
of discipline and skills and it can be taught.
The other thing you learn when proofreading becomes a hot topic is to get
all involved to acknowledge where the responsibility actually lies and what
the proofreading is supposed to achieve (from the original scenario it
sounds like both are a bit vague). As with the other posters I'd strongly
suggest that getting customers to sign off proofs is the most effective
method for solving your individual problems.
Oldmaninahat wrote in message <374f4...@news.isdn.net>...
George P. Dowden
pharmaceutical validation protocols for many companies, most documents are
signed off by no less than three people, a form of "proofing".
John Styles
have used a simple rubber stamp which the client MUST sign acknowledging that
proofreading is always and only the client's responsibility.
Works perfectly. When they have to sign it, all of a sudden they and their
secretaries and the family dog all get involved in proof reading.
"Mark Farrall" <no...@nowhere.com> postulates: