Opening Lines
Man versus Machine
By Jennifer Kwok, Managing EditorAccuracy is important to an editor when it comes to the written word. That’s why I became interested in a company called Global Vision, which I ran across at the recent EastPack trade show in New York City.
Global Vision markets software that can be used to proofread copy on packaging. At EastPack, the company was promoting the newest version of Digital-Page, an automated artwork comparator. Digital-Page digitally overlays two files (for instance, a master and a proof) and identifies graphical and textual changes between the two. It can detect deviations in font, color, registration, and broken type. It can even check for errors in multiple languages and Braille. According to Kim Quelch, marketing coordinator for Global Vision, Digital-Page allows consumer goods manufacturers to proofread from the design stage, significantly reducing the chance of errors down the line.
I can see how such software could be valuable to packaging professionals. One instance would have to do with packaging inserts that are printed with product information. Thanks to global marketing and government regulations, the copy on these inserts is often multilingual and long. A single printing error in the ingredients listing could result in a multimillion-dollar product recall.
I asked Holly Young, president and CEO of Hirschhorn + Young, whether this type of automated technology would be useful to someone in her profession. (Hirschhorn + Young is a graphics studio that provides design solutions, especially regarding regulatory graphics, for packaging.) Young’s company has used a light box to overlay files and to manually proofread them. “We would have use for Global Vision’s technology if it were going to streamline our services,” she says.
Just when I started to wonder whether a technology like Global Vision’s could ever end up replacing my magazine’s valuable and beloved proofreaders, Quelch said this: “The technology does not eliminate the need for proofreaders; it is a tool for them,” she said. “The system requires operators to judge whether an error is acceptable or not. Also, the system does not make the change for you. The proofreader must understand the changes and still communicate them through the proper channels.”
It’s nice to know that there is still a need for human judgment. But that doesn’t mean that we all couldn’t use a little technology to help get a job done faster—editors included.