shipping prints?

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
8:59 AM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,288
Location
true north strong & free
View My Gallery
thinking about putting a print up for sale in our new 'print' section of the classifieds...but have a very basic question...i assume shipping is done in a mailing tube?
i looked at the canada post website for an idea of what shipping a mailing tube might cost and it's giving me a ridiculous number...cheapest is $23...(to new york) that seems a bit high to me...any canucks have experience with this?
any other helpful hints/tips appreciated.
 
I don't like cardboard tubes. I have never successfully rolled a print to go in one without kinking or damaging the print, and have never received a print rolled in one that was not damaged.

I keep my prints flat, as they should be, at all times. To protect the print, I put it on a piece of foamcore (not mounted, just laying on it) and place that inside a print bag. Art supply stores sell self-sealing archival plastic print display bags (actually they're more like envelopes). These are great because they protect the print if the box gets wet in shipping and they keep it free of dust. This package goes in a box. for shipping. I have never, ever had a print damaged in more than a decade of shipping prints this way.

This is a more expensive way, the foamcore costs money and shipping rates are higher for a flat box than for a tube. When I'm charging what I do for prints, you don't worry about saving pennies on shipping costs. Just send it right so the buyer will get a flawless print.
 
Lflex said:
Certainly; I think you owe everyone an apology 😉

I just recieved two 11x14 FB prints rolled up in a tube. Sent from Oregon to Europe, arrived with no damage. I seem to recall that the printed stamp said something like ~13usd. I was surprised it wasn't more.
Click to expand...

That's great if it worked for you. Like I said, it has never worked for me, either sending or receiving. I used to participate in print exchanges online, and never will again because virtually none of the people cared enough to package the prints right and 95% of them went right in the garbage. Even one little crease or kink makes a print absolutely worthless. Even if it was by Ansel Adams. It pissed me off because I went to the expense and work needed to ensure that every participant got a flawless, archival, exhibition quality print. These were people getting essentially free prints; my paying customers are even more important. Sure, it wouldn't cost a lot to make and ship a new print if the one they buy comes in damaged, but the damage to my credibility would be enormous.
 
Shipping is expensive.. I've sent and received A3+ prints in tubes and avoided crease damage by placing the print on a larger sheet of heavy duty paper (>300gsm) and using the paper to roll the print. This method evenly distributes the pressure.

However unrolling a print sent this way requires very careful handling and re-rolling to flatten it, using the same technique. It's not ideal and the safer option is to just to send it flat in the first place - I'd prefer to send any high-value prints flat if possible.
 
I can see Chris' point, even if he is being a bit tough on people who don't match his own high standards. If you're flogging prints then it's important that the punter receives what he's paying for in tip-top condition. A few bob on top of the price of a print is worth paying if you think the price for the print is right in the first place.

Joe, just add the maximum shipping cost to the price of the print and proclaim 'free posting within the continent of Northern America' 🙂
 
I have shipped prints (of sufficient size) on plastic 'paper' like Canon's "Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss" in mailing tubes without any problem. But it never even occured to me to ship fibre prints rolled up. That seems to me to be asking for trouble. I've always flat-packed those and used real couriers rather than trusting to Aussie Post (some of their staff appear to regard "do not bend" as a challenge to their authority).

Not that I've done this for a living or anything, but I have printed a fair bit for family and friends and the occasional person who wanted a print (of theirs, that I've worked on, or of mine).

...Mike
 
Purchased four prints from Becca Globe whilst in the Isle of Harris. Photorag 308 gsm. Transported all the way from the Outer Hebrides to Greater Manchester in a Mini Convertable, stuffed with other luggage, two adults and two kids.

No damage sustained.

Just sayin'.
 
Last edited:
I have never shipped a rolled print.
I ship prints mounted on 11x14" foamcore and matted. If it's only one print, I put an extra piece of foamcore.
Acrylic storage bag and brown shipping paper (no envelopes).
If I recall, it costs about $10US to fly that across the USA.

The one time that I shipped framed prints, I made my own box of thick cardboard.
That got heavy and cost me about $35US. Won't do that again.
 
Oy this is a tough one, especially for Canadians. I had prints packed in a plastic sleeve between two, thick, hard, cardboard pieces in an envelope marked "fragile - photographic art print" and a Canada Post delivery person managed to fold it in half and stuff it into a client's mailbox. I FedExed another copy (it was a paying customer) and enclosed a prepaid self addressed envelop so I can get the damaged print back and destroy it. It was an expensive affair. The ExpressPost is insured and you can fight it, but at the time I had no energy, time or will to do so. All this to say - FedEx it if you can. Less headache. Canada Post is just one of those mind boggling companies that do everything they can to make themselves hated. A bit like Air Canada, in fact.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I don't like cardboard tubes. I have never successfully rolled a print to go in one without kinking or damaging the print, and have never received a print rolled in one that was not damaged.
Click to expand...

Are you rolling the print(s) with heavy weight packing paper?

We ship thousands per year all over the world from 11x14 - 30x60 and as yet have had no complaints..
 
interesting conversation and like most topics around here never without a bit of controversy.
i'm thinking of doing this simply...start with one image, sell only 8x10 or 8x12 digital lab produced copies, sent in a 2x24 tube.
i thought i'd choose one of the more popular images from flickr stats.
 
Agree with Chris totally.
The way you package your prints reflects directly on who your targeted market is.

If your buyer likes your image enough, they will not mind paying for a foam backed print.
Be sure to let them know that their money goes to take a good care of the prints they are getting.

The tube is fine when you get your commercially printed copies. I've done that when I want to frame the print myself.
But I never use it to send my darkroom prints anywhere, let alone to a buyer.
 
I've received prints in a tube from the UK and the print was in excellent shape, if I had to ship in the future again that's my way to go

I can't recommend the cardboard option, I've done it twice with Canada post with labels and clear markings "DO NOT FOLD", once to Germany once to the US and they both tried (and failed) to fold the envelope but successfully crumpled the cardboard and the print
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Prints showing poor washing.
Replies
2
Views
842
Freakscene
Freakscene
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Cartridge Format. Part 1: Drop-in cartridge film formats: Prioritizing user convenience.
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
neal3k
neal3k
J
35mm Still-Picture Photography: It began with scale focusing cameras! Back To Basics. Part 1, From the first to half-frame 35s of then and now.
Replies
10
Views
1K
Jason Schneider
J
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
J
  • Article Article
The Rise & Fall of the Kodak Empire:Part 1: How Kodak came to dominate the photographic industry
Replies
10
Views
3K
rick oleson
rick oleson
Back
Top Bottom