LETTERS: COLOUR REPRO COSTS; Publishers’ scam

campaignlive.co.uk, Friday, 08 December 1995 12:00AM

With reference to the news story ‘Repro demands from papers anger industry’ (Campaign, 24 November), I would like to underline Tim Hannon’s point that there is absolutely no technical or financial advantage to the client when publishers refuse to accept film from outside sources.

With reference to the news story ‘Repro demands from papers anger

industry’ (Campaign, 24 November), I would like to underline Tim

Hannon’s point that there is absolutely no technical or financial

advantage to the client when publishers refuse to accept film from

outside sources.



When we conduct audits, we often see the production costs included as

outside costs from publishers as extra to requirements and stupidly

priced compared with the agency figures.



Agencies have worked hard to reduce the excesses of the past and to

achieve good deals - publication costs negate this effort and reduce

commercial choice.



The whole industry should unite and say no to egotistical and greedy

publications that insist on pursuing this line.



Jeremy Reed suggests that ‘quality’ and ‘consistency of colour

reproduction’ is best left in the hands of the publisher. God help us if

it is.



Bob Holt, Production Link International, London SE1



This article was first published on campaignlive.co.uk

X

You must log in to use Clip & Save

Before commenting please read our rules for commenting on articles.

If you see a comment you find offensive, you can flag it as inappropriate. In the top right-hand corner of an individual comment, you will see 'flag as inappropriate'. Clicking this prompts us to review the comment. For further information see our rules for commenting on articles.

comments powered by Disqus

Additional Information

Campaign Jobs