Six different Digital Proofing Systems from three different techniques have been evaluated as totechnique, printing quality, economy and usability. Digital proof from two paper qualities, coatedand uncoated, has been compared with references printed in offset, to see how good they match eachother. Only two Proofing Systems manage to print on reference paper. The other Proofing Systemsuse special paper for digital proof.Measurements and visuell judgement show that the Digital Proofing Systems visualise referencepictures with quite good quality. Proof optimised for coated paper visualise the colours with goodresult. Proof optimised for uncoated paper shows higher quality than the references, which depends onthe surface of the proofing paper. Comparison between reference paper and proofing paper has takenplace as to differences in colour and paper quality.The Digital Proofing Systems are fully automatic, which demand a quite comprised education forcorrect handling. The purchase price and printing costs vary considerably between the ProofingSystems.

It always has been a need for the abiltiy to create color proofs. When an error occurs late in the production process, itis allways complicated and difficult to correct the error. In this project, digital proofs been made and discussions havebeen held with several people in the printing industry, in order to examine how well excisting digital proofs, meet thedemand of the market. And how close the digital proofs can come to the actual printsheat from the press. The study hasbeen shown that the one thing that has had the most influence on the outcome for the quality of a digital proof, is theprintshop operator’s knowledge about color management and proofing systems. Many advertising agencies in the graphicindustry think rasterised proofs are not necessesary and expensive. Therefor they prefer a cheaper alternative, whichdoesn’t show colors as well as the rasterised proof, but well enough to be content with it. There are a good awarenessconcerning lack of communication between printshop, reproduction and advertising agency. Advertising agencies thinkthat printshop rarely listen to what they have to say, while the printshop think that the advertising agency doesn’t understandwhat they are trying to tell them. The outcome of the printed proofs in this study can’t be representive for howgood digital proofs are conducted in regular basis in the industry. The divergence between the print press sheat and thedigital proof that was made was bigger than expected. This shows that implementation of ICC profiles in a color managementflow, not alone is the answer to making perfect digital proofs. There are so many other issues that has to be examined,like color management software, measure tools and correct color management module. In order to make a perfectproof, you have to look at the whole picture. In the end, the human eye finally has the last word on wheather theproof is good or not.