A few instances have popped up in the last few weeks, where we know we aren’t being compared equally. It’s all about attention to detail.

Example one… We ask about the thickness of a laminate on a dry wipe board, it comes in two thicknesses – 25 mic and 100 mic. As you can imagine, we know the difference and why you’d use one over the other. And yes, it does affect the costings of the end product, yes the 100 mic, is more expensive and requires different application techniques in production, which are more bench time-consuming. So, for example, one of Apples or Pears.

Example two… We’ve seen various Hoodies and Apparel recently which have made us slightly curdle at the poor quality of the embroidery. We assess every job and ensure that the structure of the image, and logo being embroidered will actually work as you’d expect with edges which are clear and non-raggy etc. Getting this right is important, firstly it’s the quality of the job, it might have more stitches in it, which yes is chargeable. Secondly, a lesser considered or thought through with fewer stitches will wear considerably faster, than one that is properly constructed with the right stitch detail. Key members of our garment print team have been trained by relevant industry suppliers in threads, backings, file construction and associated technologies. Of course, cheaper suppliers have to cut corners to offer cheaper rates. However, you will end up buying twice. Again, are you comparing Apples to Pears?

Example three… Sticking with Hoodies and Apparel. Our DTF Print for garments uses globally recognised ink technology, which has high degrees of stretch-ability, a colour gamut which renders images correctly, and importantly is accountable. We also use industry benchmark heat presses by Adkins, combined with finishing materials which stabilise and provide the right finish to the relevant surface which has been printed on. Yes, in recent weeks we’ve seen Glossy non-finished prints on a Scout Group’s kit, which we know will lift, peel and degrade quicker for lack of appropriate finishing. So again, cutting corners on this is a false economy – so Apples to Pears?

Example four… A print broker who placed regular work with us, whilst under pressure from the client to cut costs, due to funding issues, spread a round of quoting further afield than usual. Please note, this is not us being bitter, but the facts of us losing the job, were purely down to a non-like-for-like specification. The paper we used on the job, was fully FSC accredited from UK merchant routes. However, on finding out who eventually won the job, we lost out to lesser accredited stock (Asian cheap imported, with lesser, if any accreditations), printed using a different method to ourselves. We are aware of caveats in funding for the arts, where a level of responsibility is expected, so care should be taken to ensure specifying meets expectations. Yet again Apples to Pears comparison.

So how do we overcome this?

We have a print audit tool, which for tangible print users, we can identify what matters, and tailor our approach to making your print work harder for you. We can assess ways and means of achieving minor shifts in purchasing habits to maximise how the budget works.

We are a responsible Print Service Provider, signed up to TwoSides and the industry body for a better understanding of the use of paper and board products.

We exist as a proper face-to-face print service provider, as this relationship between you and us, allows us to understand you and equally achieve what you want.

Like all things you pay for what you get, if you cut corners, then specification, and service will diminish. We describe ourselves as a “proper” print service provider. Based on honesty and realism within what we do and deliver.