Best practice for leaving same comment across multiple Workfront proof pages | Community
Skip to main content
A
arodri17
Level 2
February 28, 2025

Best practice for leaving same comment across multiple Workfront proof pages

  • February 28, 2025
  • 2 replies
  • 829 views

Hi there,

 

I would love to get some insight into how other marketing/creative teams handle leaving the same comment across multiple Workfront proof pages as a best practice. Particularly for longer proofs with 10+ pages.

 

Current issue:

  • Attached is an example of a proof with 10+ pages that has 1 proof comment made and boxes drawn to each applicable spot across all pages (Ex. change on to with). 
  • The creative team would prefer to have each page marked up with the change to make it easier to connect the dots between all of the pages in the proof that need the edits and all of the pages in the working file that need the edits.
    • Currently, the proofing tool doesn't show all the pages linked to the 1 comment
  • Our reviewers would prefer to not have to copy and paste the comment on each page

 

How do your proof reviewers leave comments applicable to multiple pages in a long proof with several pages?

  1. Leave a global comment that says something like "applicable to all pages or X pages"
  2. Leave the same comment on each applicable page
  3. Use the markup tools to connect the comment to each applicable location/page

 

This post is no longer active and is closed to new replies. Need help? Start a new post to ask your question.

2 replies

Sven-iX
Community Advisor
Sven-iXCommunity Advisor
Community Advisor
February 28, 2025

@arodri17 
There is no way to modify how the proof viewer works. I found that the data I can get in WF Fusion doesn't include all the pages that are linked to a comment, just the first one. 
BUT:
In the PDF proof summary you will get the comment duplicated on each page - have the creatives tried using that? 

 

 

A
arodri17Author
Level 2
February 28, 2025

Thanks for flagging this as an option!

 

We would like to avoid having the creative team take extra steps outside of the proof viewer to view feedback for a more streamlined experience, but good to know in case we need to export a PDF proof summary

Sven-iX
Community Advisor
Sven-iXCommunity Advisor
Community Advisor
February 28, 2025

Well you asked about "best practice" 🙂 
Sadly we can't modify the viewer. 

skyehansen
Community Advisor and Adobe Champion
skyehansenCommunity Advisor and Adobe Champion
March 3, 2025

Speaking as a proof reviewer AND as a (past) member of a creative team: 

 

* as a reviewer, I'm likely to mark up on multiple pages, if I can say one thing about the markups that makes it easy for the creative member to find it. e.g. "search and replace - use 'with Workfront' rather than 'on Workfront' ". 

 

* as a designer, what I am looking for (or doing) with my markups is the following.

 

1) I pick ONE way to make my markups and stick to that throughout the proof. I usually pick "look at comments from oldest to newest" but sometimes I do go from Page 1 to Page 10. It depends on my reviewers.

2) As I make each change, I mark each comment as resolved, so if I lose my train of thought I can go back to where it was.

3) When I get to a multipage comment, it will be labelled "multipage" and there will be a blue arrow at the bottom of the page. I'll switch to correcting the markup on that one page, then clicking the blue arrow to go to the next page. When I get to the last markup, I will click to resolve and move on.

 

All this to ask: maybe your creative team needs to learn a little more about Proof and figure out a new way to work within the tool? It really sounds like they are used to getting comments in a different system, and wanting to bend Proof to work like the old system worked.

 

The other thing I see is that no matter WHICH markup I click on in a multipage markup, it brings up the same comment, so effectively, the comment IS on all the pages? I don't get it (unless they want to be able to click "resolved" on every single markup which is a bit too much handholding -- see below paragraph).

 

I would say a fair solution, given the paragraph above this one, would be they ask the reviewer to review a new draft if they are that uncomfortable with the risk of missing something, and if the reviewers do not want to copy and paste the same markup.

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement

    Loading footer...