An important part of the review process for any creative team is to be clear on who has what responsibility. It’s an often contentious subject with regular confusion on who should be doing it.

These responsibilities could be for numerous things including commenting, copy editing, inviting new collaborators, requesting changes, uploading files and signing off work.

Online proofing simplifies this by allowing the sender to assign roles to collaborators so that the software manages their responsibility. Here’s an example of a role structure.

Observer
Someone who can view proofs but not make any comments or join in the conversation.

‍Reviewer
Someone who can view proofs, make any comments, @mention others and upload files.

‍Gatekeeper
The person with the most responsibility who has the same profile as a Reviewer but can take the extra steps of adding new collaborators, requesting changes for new versions and sign proofs off.

Collaborator roles play a major part in keeping reviews on track with full accountability throughout the creative journey.

One of the biggest advantages of online proofing is having just one proof that everyone looks at and comments on, rather than separate copies being routed around on emails or print-offs.

Based securely on the web and accessed via a browser or mobile app, the proofing interface may vary in terms of features and layout but the fundamental purpose is to allow collaborators to review the proof and express their opinions as easily as possible.

It’s vital to give collaborators the most effective ways to convey their thoughts and make comments with pinpoint accuracy.

Designers can then clearly understand what the feedback is and importantly where it’s taking place on the proof.

Here are some of the features you should expect to see in the collaboration zone of a proofing system.

Collaborator status
It so useful just to know who has actually Seen or Not Seen the proof, regardless of whether any action has been taken on it.

This is something that online proofing can easily track as part of the current status display of the collaborator, with other examples being Finished, Requested Changes or Signed Off.

Proofing tools
Online proofing is a huge leap forward from confusing long-hand statements written in the body of a separate email along the lines of ‘that round image needs to be smaller and less obvious’.

Look out for the following proofing and mark-up tools: Box, Highlight, Draw, Strike, Pin, Zoom, Question, Ruler, Arrow, Check, Cross.

Commenting
Using comment threads next to the proof, collaborators can easily see who’s saying what and inspire each other to produce the most amazing creative results.

Using @Mentioning is a great way to engage with each other and speed up the review.

Copy editing
A big barrier to efficiency within the proofing process comes when edits are required to the copy on it.

Traditionally, a copywriter or collaborator would have to email the copy separately on an email or attached Word document, which the designer would have to cut and paste and reformat into the proof document.

Online proofing software makes this process easy by allowing editors to submit copy in the same way they would make a comment, cutting out extra work and time.
‍
History
Reviews regularly go through a number of versions until one is approved for sign-off. Seeing the history of comments and comparing previous versions with the existing one is an essential part of this.

‍File sharing
To keep things simple and in one place, online proofing allows everyone to share files when making comments. This could be anything from a replacement logo, to an instruction video or a spreadsheet of financial information.

‍Proof Status
Online proofing helps to clarify the key stages or milestones of work as it moves through the creative journey. It’s done by collaborators with the relevantly assigned role placing the proof into a specific status such as In Review or Changes Requested.

This way everyone can see that a new version is currently being created or that the review is still open for comments.

‍Printing
If a hard copy or screen grab of the proof with comments displayed is still required for traceability or procedural compliance, proofs can be printed off to paper or PDF and archived away.

In a similar process to sharing and sending proofs out for review, there are two main ways for creatives to receive feedback from reviews and take action on them.

‍The collaboration zone
The most common method where creatives track the comments being made next to the proof and then work out what needs doing.

Once a proof has been marked for a new version to be produced, the creative sets to work on the source file (normally an Adobe Creative Cloud one), referring back to the proofing software throughout the process.

‍Directly from inside their Adobe apps
This is where maximum productivity is achieved for creatives.Using an extension that sits inside the Adobe app, creatives can receive all the comments, changes and files right into their document or video side panel.

It means they don’t need to jump out of Creative Cloud to get at the feedback and can see it exactly in context, page by page. And they can just hit ‘Apply’ to place copy edits directly into the document.

It saves hours in rework time and reduces cut and paste errors. It’s an insane benefit and should be top of the list when considering online proofing software.

The creative produces the new version of the proof inside their design software and then follows the same process as before to share it for the next review round.

Note that it’s key to find an online proofing software provider that does not limit the number of proofs you can send out to encourage maximum collaboration returns.

Proofing software helps to streamline the new version sharing by remembering the settings from the previous review. These could be handy automations like adding the collaborators involved and allocating a new version number to the proof to make it easy to trace.

Alongside this, insights are generated through reporting engines to help creative teams to evaluate how much time is being spent on changes and rework which can be used to measure output against forecasted time.