# Tag less t-shirts - no multiple screens



## acgraphic (Feb 17, 2009)

Hi all. I want to screen print tag less t-shirts. I know I need the watching instructions, size, logo, fabric (100% cotton) and made in ...
 
How can I do this with one screen? I always buy the same t-shirt from the same place and they are always made in different place. 
 
I read on the forum that for the size I can cover the rest and print all the size but don't know what to do about the ( made in) part or the fabric type. Theirs got to be a easier way that having to do different screens.
 
Please help. Thank you


----------



## splathead (Dec 4, 2005)

acgraphic said:


> I always buy the same t-shirt from the same place and they are always made in different place.


Maybe it seems that way, but if you are using the same brand/style, there may be 2, max 3 different countries that might be used. Even 3 is a stretch.

It just means you will need 2 or 3 screens, that's all.


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

3 is not that unusual; Gildan manufacture in at least four different countries. I'd have to check, but I think Alternative Apparel probably use more than three as well.

Still, it's a small line: if you're happy to tape off sizes, you could try doing the same for country of origin as well. It does suck, but on the plus side the shirts normally come in clumps.

It's not what I'd call _easy_, but then I think the ease of printing "tagless" tags in general is severely overstated.


----------



## Tshirtmagazine (Mar 3, 2009)

Does the printer that your using charge less for really small screens? If so, it wouldn't be a big deal to use 3 screens. If not, it may become unnecessarily costly for you to print the tags of these shirts. Sometimes, a printer can use one oversized screen, that has all of the 'tag' images on it, and maybe even one of your designs on it. Then, when printing the shirts, the printer can cover the design areas and only leave one design/image exposed for printing. But this may be risky if there isn't enough space on the screen. You should try to work with your printer on this to get the best deal and results.


----------



## acgraphic (Feb 17, 2009)

Tshirtmagazine said:


> Does the printer that your using charge less for really small screens? If so, it wouldn't be a big deal to use 3 screens. If not, it may become unnecessarily costly for you to print the tags of these shirts. Sometimes, a printer can use one oversized screen, that has all of the 'tag' images on it, and maybe even one of your designs on it. Then, when printing the shirts, the printer can cover the design areas and only leave one design/image exposed for printing. But this may be risky if there isn't enough space on the screen. You should try to work with your printer on this to get the best deal and results.


Thank you guys for your input on this topic. I'm probably going to look for some small screens for this tag less tags. I did some research on google and typed in " clothing stamp" and there's a few websites that make stamps for clothing. (Personalize your clothing with this non-toxic, easy to use customizable clothing stamp. Good for 40+ washings and stays permanent up to 90°)
http://www.rubberstampchamp.com/category.aspx?categoryID=321. This one that I was looking into. They don't offer many sizes but it can work. Any one try this before? If so does it work?


----------



## splathead (Dec 4, 2005)

acgraphic said:


> there's a few websites that make stamps for clothing. (Personalize your clothing with this non-toxic, easy to use customizable clothing stamp. Good for 40+ washings and stays permanent up to 90°)


I hope you are not serious. this is not an option for retail sales. 


Not to mention paying $24 for each size?

While the idea of using small screens sounds prudent, understand that small screens don't necessarily cost less than larger ones and you'll get a lot more label sizes on a larger screen than a smaller one. I use a 20x24 screen and have all 5 sizes on it S, M, L, XL, XXL. That screen cost me $13.


----------



## Solmu (Aug 15, 2005)

I agree with Joe; solutions like this are bad news in my opinion.


----------



## acgraphic (Feb 17, 2009)

Thank you guys. I will go with the 20x24 screen. I think that would be the best bet.


----------

