Reference Glossary
Soft proofing
Soft proofing is reviewing how a print job will look on a calibrated, standards-compliant monitor before committing to a physical hard-copy proof or a press run.
Why it matters in a DAM
DAM-hosted approval workflows increasingly happen entirely on screen, but an uncalibrated laptop display makes a soft proof meaningless for color-critical print work. ISO 12646 defines the display and viewing-condition requirements — including two conformance levels, Class A and Class B — a monitor must meet before a soft proof can be trusted as a stand-in for a physical proof.
A worked example
Common mistake
Approving a print job's color inside a DAM's browser preview on a standard, uncalibrated office monitor, then discovering the actual press output doesn't match because the approval was never a real ISO 12646-compliant soft proof.
Soft proofing is the practice of judging how a print job will actually look on paper by viewing it on a monitor instead of, or before, producing a physical hard-copy proof. It’s only meaningful if the monitor itself is calibrated and the viewing conditions are controlled — otherwise, what someone sees on screen has no reliable relationship to what will come off the press. ISO 12646 is the international standard that defines exactly what a display needs to meet — chromaticity, luminance, uniformity, and the surrounding ambient light — for a soft proof to be considered trustworthy, with two conformance levels, Class A and Class B, covering different levels of rigor.
This matters directly for DAM-based approval workflows, which increasingly happen entirely through a browser preview rather than a printed proof passed around a room. A stakeholder clicking approve on a color-critical asset inside the DAM interface is implicitly soft proofing, whether anyone calls it that or not — and if their screen isn’t calibrated to anything close to ISO 12646, that approval isn’t a reliable signal that the printed result will match.
None of this means every DAM approval needs a color-calibrated monitor — for most day-to-day marketing assets it doesn’t matter. It matters specifically for color-critical print work: packaging, brand color-sensitive collateral, anything where a visible shift between the approved screen version and the printed piece is a real cost. For those cases, the DAM approval step should be flagged as requiring proper soft-proofing conditions, or backed up with a physical hard-copy proof before the press run is committed.
ISO 12646 evaluates a display across several dimensions before a soft proof can be trusted:
- Chromaticity — color accuracy of the display
- Luminance — brightness level and consistency
- Screen uniformity — no drift between edges and center
- Ambient light in the viewing environment
Frequently asked
What's the difference between soft proofing and hard proofing?
Soft proofing reviews color on a calibrated monitor; hard proofing produces an actual printed sample on the intended (or a proofing) substrate. Hard proofs are generally considered more reliable for color-critical decisions, but soft proofing is faster and cheaper when done correctly.
What does ISO 12646 actually require of a display?
It specifies requirements for chromaticity, luminance, uniformity across the screen, and the ambient viewing conditions around the monitor, along with two conformance levels (Class A and Class B) depending on how strict the soft-proofing use case demands.
Can a standard office monitor be used for soft proofing?
Not reliably for color-critical work — a standard uncalibrated monitor's color output can drift significantly from a properly calibrated, ISO 12646-compliant display, making any color judgment made on it unreliable for a print decision.
Does approving an asset in a DAM's browser preview count as soft proofing?
Technically it's an informal version of soft proofing, but it only meets the bar of a real, trustworthy soft proof if the approver's monitor and viewing environment are actually calibrated to a standard like ISO 12646 — otherwise it's just a visual glance, not a reliable proof.
When should a hard-copy proof be required instead of relying on soft proofing?
For color-critical decisions — packaging, brand-sensitive materials, anything where a visible mismatch is costly — a physical hard-copy proof is the safer standard, especially when the reviewing monitor's calibration status is unknown or unverified.
Is soft proofing relevant for digital-only assets?
No — soft proofing specifically addresses the gap between screen color and printed color; digital-only assets viewed only on screens don't have that translation step, so soft proofing in the print sense doesn't apply.
Sources
- ISO 12646 specifies display requirements — chromaticity, luminance, uniformity, and viewing conditions — for soft proofing, with two conformance levels, Class A and Class B; the current edition is ISO 12646:2015. checked 2026-08-07 — International Organization for Standardization, ISO 12646:2015