“We wanted labels that felt as joyful as our prints,” says Mei, Design Lead at KokoKids, a children’s apparel brand operating across Singapore, Manila, and Jakarta. “But we also needed them to survive laundry day.” As their design partner, I’ve learned that joy and practicality rarely shake hands at the first meeting.
To ground the concept, the team sourced templates and sample labelstock from onlinelabels—useful for benchmarking home-print expectations and ink compatibility. It sounds simple: make labels that look good, feel kind on skin, and stay put. In reality, the work gets technical fast—substrates, inks, finishing, wash tests, and the emotional layer of a parent trusting the tag against their child’s neck.
The story below isn’t a neat sprint. It’s a series of candid conversations with the people who touched the project—design, press operators, and even a few parents. Some choices were near-perfect; others were compromises. That’s where the craft lives.
Company Overview and History
KokoKids began as a tiny online shop in 2016 with three SKUs and a desktop inkjet. By 2023, they had a 120-SKU catalog and regional retail partners. Labels moved from a nice-to-have to a core part of their identity—hangtags, washcare, and name labels that had to feel playful and trustworthy. Their brand voice is light-hearted, but the operational needs are exacting.
“We sell color,” Mei reminds me, flipping through swatches. “If our orange drifts toward pumpkin after two washes, kids notice.” The team set a clear expectation: clothing labels for kids must hold color through 20–30 wash cycles, stay soft against skin, and resist fraying. It’s a family product, which means decisions stretch beyond the pantone book—think adhesives that don’t irritate, and coatings that don’t feel plasticky.
To learn what families actually wanted, we mailed a sample pack of free labels to 1,800–2,200 households across the region. Some parents turned into micro-testers. They ironed, washed, scratched, and even tried printing at home. Their feedback shaped the next round: simpler language on care tags, gentler edges on die-cuts, and clearer guidance for home-printing templates.
Quality and Consistency Issues
Before the switch, the press room wrestled with color drift across Labelstock and PE film. ΔE swings sat around 4–6 on multi-material runs; ISO 12647 targets had us aiming under 2–3. “We could hit it on Monday and lose it by Friday,” says Jin, their senior operator. Different liners (Glassine vs. film) and humidity shifts in Manila didn’t help, especially with Water-based Ink on highly absorbent stock.
Durability was the second headache. Name labels peeled on high-friction areas, and washcare tags felt stiff after lamination. The fix wasn’t one silver bullet. Low-Migration Ink became a non-negotiable for skin contact, UV Ink took the brunt of rub tests, and adhesive selection moved from a single SKU to a matrix: cotton blends, polyester sportswear, and the odd textured hoodie. “Kid elbows are brutal,” Jin laughs. “UV Printing and a light Varnishing finally kept the art where it belonged.”
Consumer feedback added a curveball: parents asked how to print labels at home. Many searched for “onlinelabels promo code” and “onlinelabels com coupon code” before reaching out. Our takeaway: home-print is a valid entry point. We built simple inkjet templates (300–600 dpi guidance, bleed lines, and caution notes on heat setting), then aligned our pro presses to visually match the DIY look as closely as possible without compromising durability.
Technology Selection Rationale
Digital Printing took the lead for Short-Run and Personalized name labels—variable data at friendly speeds. The team kept offset out of the equation for labels due to frequent changeovers and multi-SKU chaos. For rugged name tapes, Thermal Transfer earned a lane: crisp text, simple ribbons, and stable results on synthetic blends. “It’s not glamorous,” Mei admits, “but it’s the kid-proof channel.”
Substrate pairing mattered. Standard Labelstock with Glassine liners balanced die-cut control and peel behavior; for sportswear, PE/PP film handled sweat and abrasion. We selected Low-Migration Ink where skin contact was likely and kept Water-based Ink in the mix for vibrant colors—matching press profiles to maintain a shared ΔE target across both systems. Compliance stayed front-of-mind: EU 2023/2006 for good manufacturing practices and FSC sourcing on paper components where possible.
Finishes had their own story. Lamination offered protection but felt too slick in-hand; Spot UV gave pop but introduced edge stiffness. We landed on light Varnishing and tight Die-Cutting radiuses for comfort. “Soft-Touch Coating was beautiful,” I’ll admit, “but tiny fibers clung to it in laundry tests.” Not everything can be art-forward; some parts have to be laundry-forward.
Commissioning and Testing
We ran three pilot rounds across Jakarta and Manila—wash tests at 20–30 cycles, rub tests simulating collar friction, and color checks on day-1, week-1, and month-1. The home-print kit included a step card: basic Inkjet Printing at 300–600 dpi, let the sheet rest 10–15 minutes, and heat set with a warm iron for 8–12 seconds if the substrate allows. The pros matched the look while improving resilience, so parents saw continuity between DIY and retail.
Press-side, FPY% went from roughly 82–86% in early pilots to 90–93% after we tightened profiles and humidity control. Changeovers dropped from 22–25 minutes to 15–17 minutes with better job ganging and a simplified file handoff. “Our operators stopped fighting the queue,” Jin says. “Less panic, more flow.” Payback landed in the 7–10 month window, depending on SKU mix and seasonal demand.
Quantitative Results and Metrics
ΔE stayed under 2–3 across Labelstock and PE/PP film for the core palette, and defect ppm dropped from about 1,200–1,600 to 500–700 on name labels. Throughput went up 15–20% with tighter profiles and digital-first scheduling. It wasn’t a clean line—rainy season in Manila nudged humidity, and a few runs showed light banding—but the team caught patterns early via a shared dashboard.
Waste Rate moved from roughly 7–9% to 3–4% after we refined die settings and liner choice. Energy per thousand labels fell 8–12% by consolidating runs and avoiding late-night restarts. We also tracked consumer sentiment: return requests tied to label issues dipped by 1.5–2%. One fun surprise—parents liked our template aesthetics enough to request seasonal designs as free labels for birthday packs.
What matters most to Mei? “When a child sees their name in their favorite color and it still looks great after soccer practice,” she says, “we did our job.” The next step is expanding clothing labels for kids into swimwear with higher abrasion scenarios. And yes, we still keep onlinelabels in the moodboard for home-print expectations—we design for the shelf and the kitchen table.
