ART PROOFS and SEPARATION PROOFS FOR THE SAKE OF THE PROCESS

[Dottonedan]

We all know we need to do art proofs of a design and get it approved. If not, we learn by getting bit!
Art proofs are a must have in the process. We can even provide and all will benefit from a separation proof for - solid spot color separations, but did you know....

ART PROOFS and SEPARATION PROOFS FOR THE SAKE OF THE PROCESS:
It’s rare that a customer will ask for a separation proof but it happens now and then. These types of customers probably order screen printed garments frequently and those are good customers to keep happy. If they ask for a separation “proof”, it’s more than likely, they have been bitten themselves once or twice, and now know to ask for this. Perhaps they have been cheated on color count, (paying for something that wasn’t used), or an important PMS color was not used. But did you realize, that requesting a “simulated process separation proof” does not benefit representing how the print will come out?

I used to say, "Don’t let your customer assume that the way a digital jpg or pdf of a simulated process print will look exactly like that". It would be inaccurate. But in reality, most won’t ever look at it all that closely. They may count colors and confirm the use of certain pms colors and move on.

Even showing the customer the separation file on screen, will not be accurate. These Digital files to an inkjet printer, or on screen, are not true hard proofs of separations.

Separation “proofs” come from the use of hard proofs on high quality paper stock (for paper printing). It’s often carried over to screen printing by a customer that has been in that paper printing environment. They assume Paper is the same as garment material when it comes to proofs.

I get asked for a separation “proof” of my simulated process separations every now and then and it’s a bit disheartening. The only benefit that it provides is that you are in fact using the colors the customers are being charged for. That, I can understand. So that is the whole reason the whole benefit for requesting and sim process separation proof file. For this reason, I remove any reservations of getting asked for sep proofs and don’t go into detail and explain. Just provide them with what thy asked for and move on.

Habbit:
I totally understand the confusion since we all always need art proofs as part of the process of design. The customer has to approve the look of the art. Therefore, they believe that they should then also request a separation proof.

They do not need to have one, but they don’t know that...and it takes too long to explain and likely they won’t understand anyway. They can’t understand what is going on in those separations and the production details that comes after. Like mesh, ink types, print stroke speed, how that gets affected by shirt color and shirt material.

Still, it can get frustrating because people don’t understand that an art proof (of simulated process or 4 color process - separations) don’t and won’t represent exactly how the print will come out. It’s a “production file”. Production files don’t look the same as art when it’s sent to be produced.

When you have 4-5 or 12 colors in file with colors blending into one another to create another color, you don’t see that in advance, exactly the way it will happen on press. You can’t. The inks aren’t wet, the inks aren’t soft, the inks aren’t blending like they will, it won’t represent the ink in a 156 mesh versus a 305 mesh and it won’t represent how the inks will fade away into the shirt color like it will on press.

But for the benefit of the process, it’s something we must do. Another one of those wasted efforts for the sake of the process.


Dot-Tone-Dan Campbell
Dot-tone-Designs
Art@designsbydottone.com

[Larrymuh]

Hey everyone nice forum

[tonypep]

And that Dan is where money is often left on the table. Sometimes necessary but usually not charged.

[Dottonedan]

Thanks!  We try to be helpful and pass on what we have learned over the years and we rely on each other to correct ourselves. Sometimes we aren't totally right.

[Dottonedan]

And that Dan is where money is often left on the table. Sometimes necessary but usually not charged.

Very much so. Seldom charged for.

[tonypep]

What? Never! I just like to know there is not a 24 pc order behind all the process. Sometimes you need to walk.

[ABuffington]

Good info Dan.  Thanks

[tonypep]

Also good info!

[3Deep]

I've learned over the years to tell my customers what you see on paper will not be exactly the same on the shirt but close, for one we are using two different styles of inks and printing process, so far they seem to understand that, without me going into a long explaining the process LOL

[kidink]

Dan how are you supplying the proof if you're asked to provide one? I've tried to find a way to save out the multichanel separation as a composite and i've never been able to find a way. Are you just providing a scerenshot?

[whitewater]

My goal is to not print for anyone that wants a "Separation Proof"

[Dottonedan]

THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.


Screen shots are fine but controlling the size and resolution of those can be challenging.
There are two things I do.


First let me say, I'm not a believer in any benefits of providing a proof (of the sim process seps). Mainly for the reason that the actual production seps do not full represent how it will print on apparel. We have dot gain compensation built in, colors will not be accurate and channel blends and color solidity will not be accurately represented. Therefore, a proof of actual production seps does not really look like how it will print, thus making a Production proof futile.
Most customers will never understand that and won't know what they re really looking at.




A, IF, the customer is print savvy (like another printer), and they really want to see a composite of the seps, you can do this in Photoshop.


1, Make sure you are in RGB.
2, Change the resolution of the file to 150ppi to provide a smaller files size.
3, Fill the background with the shirt color (or, take a screen shot of the shirt or open an image of the shirt) and import/drag and drop the shirt in the RGB sep file onto a layer.
4, Scale that up so that it's extending way  beyond the file boundaries until. the shirt texture fills up enough space to be the full size imprint area without any part of the shirt like sleeves or collar. Paste.
5, Go to Channels window, Hold down on the shift key and click on each sep channel to have them activated.
6, In the channels window, go to TOP RIGHT fly out/drop down window and click on MERGE SPOT COLORS.


This is a full color composite of the actual seps. This to me, can look "closely" to the original art but not 100%. The customer, will not know to understand the differences or be able to detect (if) the sim process is not correct or something. The only benefit would be to show if the type or an area is not an actual color that it was supposed to be (like if you accidentally made a YELLOW line of type Purple) when it should have been Yellow.




B You can simply open the Original RGB art, turn off/hide the shirt or background color, and then MERGE VISIBLE. Then, SAVE AS a transparent PNG.   This transparent PNG can then be laid over/placed/drag and drop onto a photo image of the shirt (sized/scaled down accordingly) and then saved as a jpg. The jpg will have a white background behind the shirt photo, so be sure to have the photo smaller within the document size. This will be your Proof/Mockup. Same thing can be done during the approval process of the design. Easy to do for changing out multiple shirt colors if you keep the proof file (in layers) but save as a jpg copy when done.

@whitewater. LOL!  So true, but some good customers feel they know a thing or two, so we may want to accommodate them.