In six months, BeeWell Foods moved from unpredictable label supply to a steady, measurable process. The team standardized artwork, simplified SKUs, and shifted short-run work to Digital Printing. Early on, we asked one simple question: can this scale without breaking the changeover schedule? The answer became clear once we tracked FPY, waste, and changeover minutes across 20+ SKUs.
We partnered with onlinelabels for the pilot because the scope matched our need: fast turnarounds for seasonal jars, consistent color targets for brand tones, and clean variable data for barcodes and batch codes. It wasn’t flawless. The first two weeks exposed gaps in file prep and liner compatibility. But the data told us where to tune, and we did.
This is a practical, numbers-first account from a production manager’s angle—what held us back, what we fixed, and what still needs watching when you move a label portfolio to a mixed workflow of Digital Printing and Thermal Transfer coding.
Success Criteria and Baseline
BeeWell Foods sells specialty spreads in glass jars, including seasonal SKUs that spike around holidays. The label mix was messy: different suppliers, mixed liners, and inconsistent die libraries. Before the project, FPY floated around 86–88%, scrap hovered in the 7–9% range, and average changeover took 42–48 minutes for label jobs with artwork swaps. For a team running two shifts, that volatility caused scheduling headaches and unplanned overtime.
We defined three success criteria: stabilize FPY above 94% on regular runs, cut waste below 4%, and hold changeover to under 35 minutes without adding headcount. We also set a color target: ΔE under 3 for brand-critical tones using a G7-calibrated Digital Printing workflow and Food-Safe Ink. Why Digital? Short-Run and Seasonal patterns made it hard to justify long plates and extended make-readies; we kept Thermal Transfer for lot/date codes to maintain flexibility at packing.
Packaging scope covered primary Labelstock with a Glassine liner, semi-gloss face, and a clear Varnishing step to resist condensation on chilled items. We tested a small-batch size for mini jars using avery 2 inch round labels to pressure-test curvature and adhesion on a tighter radius. That trial flagged one adhesive that underperformed in cold-chain—useful data that saved us from a larger setback later.
Quantitative Results and Metrics
Fast forward six months. FPY stabilized at 94–96% for our standard runs; waste trended at 3–4% for most SKUs. Changeover time settled in the 30–34 minute range for artwork swaps once we standardized die sizes and pre-flighted files. Throughput rose about 18–22% on the label cell simply by cutting unplanned stops. None of these numbers are magic; they’re the product of consistent inputs: one calibrated Digital Printing profile, a single Labelstock spec, and a repeatable Varnishing recipe.
Barcode accuracy mattered for inventory and retail scanning. We used the onlinelabels barcode generator to create GS1-compliant UPC and QR (ISO/IEC 18004) assets. That step cut remakes tied to barcode failures from roughly 900–1,200 ppm defects to the 300–500 ppm band. It’s still on our watchlist; distorted artwork or over-inked areas can push quiet zones below spec, so preflight rules remain strict.
Cost and energy data rounded out the picture. Label material waste dropped by about 20–30% in linear footage terms after die and SKU consolidation. kWh per thousand labels improved by around 5–8% once we eliminated idle dwell between changeovers. Payback? Given the mix of Short-Run and Seasonal SKUs, our internal models show an 8–12 month payback period for the workflow changes and operator training—not guaranteed for every plant, but directionally solid for our volume and complexity.
Lessons Learned and Practical Recommendations
Here’s where it gets interesting. Our biggest early miss wasn’t hardware—it was file prep. We underestimated how much preflight discipline matters for Digital Printing. Incorrect overprints and untrimmed dielines caused two full-day delays in week one. We fixed it with a print-ready checklist and a color-managed template library. Small investment, big headache avoided later. On materials, one adhesive looked fine on paper but slipped at 4–6°C on chilled jars. We swapped to a cold-chain-rated spec and kept the same die to avoid a new tooling lead time.
Supplier-wise, the brand partnered with onlinelabels for pilot and seasonal volumes while we maintained an in-house lane for steady SKUs. That hybrid kept our schedule flexible. We also locked down a procurement rule for promotions: the team could trial new SKUs using an onlinelabels discount code to keep pilot costs in check before committing to larger runs. For food gifting sets, we tested honey labels with a softer touch varnish to balance shelf appeal with the stickiness of high-sugar surfaces.
We fielded a common question from small teams: can you print labels at UPS? In our experience, retail shipping centers are fine for shipping labels and quick office needs, but they aren’t built for brand-critical color control, specialty die shapes, or food-safe varnishes. If you need UPC/QR compliance, consistent ΔE, and repeatable die-cutting, stick with a calibrated Digital Printing provider or a proven converter. Final note: Thermal Transfer remains our go-to for variable data at packing—fast, reliable, and easy to service without disrupting the main production rhythm. And yes, we’ll keep onlinelabels in the mix for agile launches and barcode assets where speed matters most.
